Feminist Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability, and Learning: The Praxis of Women's Rights and Women-Led Organizations in Conflict, Crisis, and Humanitarian Settings [EN/FR/NE]

Introduction

In 2024, CARE and the United Nations Women’s Peace and Humanitarian Fund (WPHF) carried out a joint qualitative research project on feminist monitoring, evaluation, accountability, and learning (MEAL) in six countries - Colombia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Haiti, Nepal, Nigeria, and Ukraine - and involving ten women’s rights organizations (WROs) and women-led organizations (WLOs). The objective of this research is to i) understand and document how these organizations see and use feminist MEAL approaches; ii) enhance understanding of feminist MEAL’s most important aspects; and iii) share with actors at all levels how to conduct and support its approaches more effectively.

For the purposes of this paper, the authors recognize the various definitions and terminologies used by grassroots, feminist, and women’s rights and women-led organizations as well as global experts in this area, and have summarized the term feminist MEAL as the multi-faceted, context-driven, and inclusive processes used in monitoring, evaluation, accountability, and learning with the key objective of using data for advocacy and transformative and long-lasting changes while ensuring Do No Harm approaches are applied.

Feminist MEAL is an approach that is not new.
However, its widespread use by WROs, WLOs, and others has varied – sometimes even being seen as “less than” traditional and more quantitative monitoring and evaluation practices. This research finds, however, that there is a need to debunk that feminist MEAL is not as robust or systematic as traditional MEAL practices because of its flexible and adaptive nature.

The main themes emerging from this research include:

• Co-design, participation, inclusion, and consultation are fundamental pillars of feminist MEAL and the only way to guarantee accountability to all stakeholders, especially women and excluded communities

• Feminist MEAL places primacy on the use of data and evidence to amplify the voices of women, to advocate and contribute to transformational changes

• Adaptation and flexibility are key feminist principles in conflict, crisis, and humanitarian settings

• Working in consortiums, networks, and collaborations is a key approach in feminist MEAL, increasing visibility, capacity, and impact of results

• Recognizing intersectional and multiple identities is critical in feminist approaches applied by WROs and WLOs

• Using multiple Do No Harm approaches, including anonymity and confidentiality, consent and withdrawal of consent, and data security and protection approaches is central to feminist approaches applied by WROs and WLOs

• The use of feminist indicators and participatory and qualitative methodologies is key in feminist MEAL practices, and there is a need to debunk that feminist MEAL is not a robust or systematic approach because of its flexible and adaptive nature

Methodology

The study used a combination of qualitative methods including document review of gray literature and key informant interviews with ten WROs and WLOs from six countries (Colombia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Haiti, Nepal, Nigeria and Ukraine) that mainly focus on protection work, drawing on maximum variation for the selection of organizations across regions. Interviews took place between May 29 and July 15, 2024.

While the organizations who participated in the research work primarily on the protection of women and girls, including the prevention of and response to gender-based violence (GBV), the paper recognizes the larger issues that WROs and WLOs work on in crisis and conflict settings.

All information collected during the research was transcribed (if given consent) and, if needed, translated from Spanish or French into English. Transcriptions were analyzed using deductive coding based on the thematic areas of enquiry. Coding and categorization were done using Excel and then summarized into narratives following the thematic framework.

While the organizations who participated in the research work primarily on the protection of women and girls, including the prevention of and response to gender-based violence (GBV), the paper recognizes the larger issues that WROs and WLOs work on in crisis and conflict settings.

All information collected during the research was transcribed (if given consent) and, if needed, translated from Spanish or French into English. Transcriptions were analyzed using deductive coding based on the thematic areas of enquiry. Coding and categorization were done using Excel and then summarized into narratives following the thematic framework.

Ethical Considerations

In conducting the research, confidentiality and anonymity of the respondents were respected.
Quotes presented in the following pages of the research are only those where consent of the organization has been provided, and individual names are not used.

Participation in interviews posed minimal risks to participants, and no future risks are expected. Participation was also voluntary, and respondents could skip questions they chose not to answer or opt out of participation at any time without consequence. Questions were equally framed in a generalized way to increase the comfort level of participants surrounding sensitive issues.

In addition, and aligned with feminist approaches, the draft research report was shared with each of the organizations who participated in the study to provide them the opportunity to review, have time for deeper reflection, adjust or retract any of their quotes, and make any additional contributions to ensure their voices were appropriately reflected.

Limitations

As with any research, there are some considerations and limitations that should be noted in reading the findings:

• The field of feminist approach is broad, and the research does not explore the multiple dimensions of feminist approach but is limited only to MEAL.

• While the sampling strategy aimed to take a maximum variation across countries and sectors of work of WROs, interviews were often subject to availability, internet connection, and comfort of WROs and WLOs in sharing their experiences. The authors equally recognize that the power inherent in researcher versus participant is unequal.

• Likewise, considering that a purposive sampling method was used to explore perspectives of CARE and WPHF partners in select countries, the insights from them cannot be generalized to the wider population of WROs and WLOs.

• All quotes have been taken verbatim from interviewee voices in the language of their choice. Transcripts translated into English for analysis have potential for error, but the researchers’ best efforts to represent the voices of WROs and WLOs from the original languages of Spanish or French been made.