GENDER AND DEVELOPMENT GENERIC CHECKLISTS

FOR PROJECT IDENTIFICATION AND DESIGN

PROJECT TITLE Provision of comfort rooms and lactating space/corner

PROJECT NO. IF APPLICABLE N/A
ESTIMATED COST 49,450.00
OFFICE/SCHOOL Eugenia M. Quintela Memorial High School
PROJECT OWNER/PROPONENT REYNANTE R. VINLUAN
PROJECT DURATION March 11,2024
PROJECT LOCATION Eugenia M. Quintela Memorial High School
DESCRIPTION
.
*Score for an Gender issues
Done? (Column 2) item/element identified
Elements and item/question (Column 1) (Column3) (Column 4)
PARTLY
NO YES
YES
1.0 Involvement of women and men(max score: 2; for each item or
2
question, 1)
1.1 Participation of women and men in beneficiary groups in problem
ü 1
identification (possible scores:0,0.5, 1)
1.2 Participation of women and men in beneficiary groups in project
ü 1
design (possible scores:0,0.5, 1)
2.0 Collection of sex-disaggregated data and gender-related
information(possible score: 0, 1.0, 2.0) ü

3.0 Conduct of gender analysis and identification of gender issues

(max score: 2, for each item, 1 2

3.1 Analysis of gender gaps and inequalities related to gender roles,

perspectives and needs, or access to and control of resources ü 1
(possible scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0)
3.2 Analysis of constraints and opportunities related to women and
men’s participation in the project (possible scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0) ü 1

4.0 Gender equality goals, outcomes, and outputs (possible scores: 0,

1.0, 2.0)
Does the project have clearly-stated gender equality goals, objectives, ü 1
outcomes or outputs?

5.0 Matching of strategies with gender issues (possible scores: 0, 1.0,

2.0)
Do the strategies and activities match the gender issues and gender ü 1
equality goals identified?

6.0 Gender analysis of likely impacts of the project (max score: 2; for
each item, 0.67) 0.99

6.1. Are women and girl children among the direct or indirect
beneficiaries? (possible scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67) ü 0.33

6.2. Has the project considered its long-term impact on women’s

socioeconomic status and empowerment? (possible scores: 0, 0.33, ü
0.67)
6.3. Has the project included strategies for avoiding or minimizing
negative impacts on women’s status and welfare? (possible scores: 0, ü
0.33, 0.67)
7.0 Monitoring targets and indicators (possible scores: 0, 1.0, 2.0)
Does the project include gender equality targets and indicators to
measure gender equality outputs and outcomes? ü 1

8.0. Sex-disaggregated database requirement (possible scores: 0,

1.0, 2.0)
Does the project M&E system require the collection of sex- ü
disaggregated data?

9.0. Resources (max score: 2; for each question, 1) 1

9.1. Is the budget allotted by the project sufficient for gender equality
promotion or integration? OR, will the project tap counterpart funds
ü
from LGUs/partners for its GAD efforts? (possible scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0)

9.2. Does the project have the expertise to promote gender equality
and women’s empowerment? OR, is the project committing itself to
invest project staff time in building
capacities within the project to integrate GAD or promote gender ü
equality? (possible scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0)

10. Relationship with the agency’s GAD efforts (max score: 2; for
each question or item, 0.67) 0.99

10.1 Will the project build on or strengthen the agency/NCRFW/

government’s commitment to the empowerment of women? (possible
ü
scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67)
IF THE AGENCY HAS NO GAD PLAN: Will the project help towards
the formulation
10.2. Will it buildofon
thethe
implementing
initiatives oragency’s
actions ofGAD
otherplan?
organizations in
the area? (possible scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67) ü

10.3 Does the project have an exit plan that will ensure the
sustainability of GAD efforts and benefits? (possible scores: 0, 0.33, ü
0.67)
TOTAL GAD SCORE FOR PROJECT DEVELOPMENT STAGE 13.98 GENDER SENSITIVE

Budget Attribution 49,450.00

HGDG Score Description Corresponding budget
of the program that
Below 4 GAD is invisible/ not available 0% no amountmay be REYNANTE R. VINLUAN
may be attributed to the
attributed
4.0-7.9 Promising GAD prospects GAD budget
Equivalent to the PROGRAM OWNER/PROPONENT
percentage score of the
8.0-14.9 Gender Sensitive agency on the HGDG
assessment
15.0-20.0 Gender Responsive
 GENDER AND DEVELOPMENT (GAD) ATTRIBUTION TOOL
NAME OF SCHOOL/OFFICE: Eugenia M. Quintela Memorial High School
TITLE OF ACTIVITY: Provision of comfort rooms and lactating s
BUDGET ALLOCATED: 49,450.00 GAD SCORE: 13.98
SOURCE OF FUND: Division/ School MOOE

Salary (per No. of

PARTICIPANTS Salary (per day) Attribution
month) Participants
TEACHER I 25,439.00 1,156.32 -
TEACHER II 27,608.00 1,254.91 -
TEACHER III 29,798.00 1,354.45 -
HEAD TEACHER I 32,321.00 1,469.14 -
HEAD TEACHER II 35,097.00 1,595.32 -
HEAD TEACHER III 38,150.00 1,734.09 -
HEAD TEACHER IV 41,508.00 1,886.73 -
MASTER TEACHER I 45,203.00 2,054.68 -
MASTER TEACHER II 49,835.00 2,265.23 -
MASTER TEACHER III 55,799.00 2,536.32 -
SPET I 32,321.00 1,469.14 -
SPET II 35,097.00 1,595.32 -
SPET III 38,150.00 1,734.09 -
SST I 29,798.00 1,354.45 -
SCHOOL NURSE 35,097.00 1,595.32 -
ASST. SCHOOL PRINCIPAL II 49,835.00 2,265.23 -
PRINCIPAL I 49,835.00 2,265.23 -
PRINCIPAL II 55,799.00 2,536.32 -
PRINCIPAL III 62,449.00 2,838.59 -
PRINCIPAL IV 69,963.00 3,180.14 -
ADMIN AIDE VI 16,877.00 767.14 -
ADAS I 17,889.00 813.14 -
ADAS II 18,998.00 863.55 -
ADAS III 20,340.00 924.55 -
LIBRARIAN II 35,097.00 1,595.32 -
REGISTRAR I 25,439.00 1,156.32 -
ADMIN OFFICER II 25,439.00 1,156.32 -
GUIDANCE COOR II 35,097.00 1,595.32 -
GUIDANCE COUNCILOR I 25,439.00 1,156.32 -
GUIDANCE COUNCILOR II 27,608.00 1,254.91 -
GUIDANCE COUNCILOR III 29,798.00 1,354.45 -
EPS 69,963.00 3,180.14 -
PSDS 69,963.00 3,180.14 -
CHIEF-EPS 88,410.00 4,018.64 -
ASDS 100,788.00 4,581.27 -
SDS 113,891.00 5,176.86 -
TOTAL -
No. of Days of
Activity 5
Salary Attribution -

0.5
Budget Attribution 49,450.00
Total Attribution 49,450.00