Download as xlsx, pdf, or txt
Download as xlsx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 54

GENDER AND DEVELOPMENT (GAD) PLAN AND BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022

No. Gender Issue Cause of the Gender Issue GAD Result Statement/ GAD Objective Relevant GAD Program/s GAD Activity/ies aligned to Column 5 Target Participants
(2) (3) Agency (5) (6) (7)
MFO/
PAP
(4)

Client-focused

1 GAD PPAs are not 1. Lack of Training/Orientation on To conduct Capacity Building of PAPs Human Resource Training-Workshop of School Heads School Heads and
properly Gender-Responsive Basic Education School Heads and School GAD Development and School GAD Coordinators on GAD Focal
Gender-Responsive Basic Education
implemented in Policy Cum Action Planning. Coordinators on Gender-Responsive Policy Cum Action Planning. Persons
schools. Basic Education Policy Cum Action
Planning.

2 Stereotyping about roles of boys/men PAPs Learners Support Planning Workshop for TWG and TWG and Program
and girls/women Program Holders of DepEd Bukidnon Holders on
different GAD PPAs

3 Lack of Knowledge on Gender Analysis PAPs Learners Support Quarterly Meeting of TWG and
and Audit of GFPS members Program HOlders cum: Capacity
Building on Harmonized Gender and
Development Guidelines

4 LOw awareness on Lack of advocacy program on To enhance advocacy program on PAPs Learners Support Partnership on Gender Health Project proposal
partnership partnership linkages for gender and partnership linkages for gender and for thier school
linkages for gender health health clinic
and health
advocacy

5 Sexual harassment, Stereotyping about roles of boys/men To conduct training on gender issue on PAPs Learners Support Training Workshop on gender issue 200 male
violence and and girls/women stereotyping about roles of boys and on stereotyping about roles of boys teachers, 200
substance abuse in girls in schools and girls in schools female teachers
schools and offices
6 Lack of monitoring and evaluation tool PAPs School Health Division Search for Best 3-Star-WASH Minimum of 4
on gender sensitivity/responsiveness of In School (WinS) Implementers and Entries Per
regions/divisions/schools in terms of Best Local Inovation on Water
Purification System for Boys and Girls District (47
structures, facilities and policies Districts)

on on Wash
7 In School (Star Rating) ofLow
schools
levelinofthe
awareness
Division of Health
Bukidnon To capacitate 50 HNU Personnel and 47 PAPs Health and Nutrition Section Capacity Building Cum Planning School Health
Personnel, and District Wash in School District WinS Coordinator Workshop on Water and Sanitation in Division
Coordinators on how to reach 3 Stars School (WinS) Program Management
for School Division Working Committte Personnel 50; 47
School Rating District
and Schools Districts WinS Focal
Person Coordinators
8 Higher risk of Lack of awareness on how to prevent To develop functional offline and online PAPs Information and Division Search for Best Infomercial on 1 entry per
sexual, and sexual and gender-based violence advocacy materials on how to prevent Communication Technology Gender and Development category for each
gender-based during COVID-19 pandemic  sexual and gender-based violence of the 47 Districts
violence during during COVID-19 pandemic focus on
COVID-19 Psychological First Aid
pandemic

9 Physical, Lack of psychosocial support services To provide Psychological Support PAPs Health and Nutrition 1. Conduct Training/Workshop on 200 COVID 19
psychological, and and psychological first aid to learners Services and Psychological First Aid to Psycholsocial Support Services and FOCAL PERSONS
social impacts of and personnel learners and personnel to schools Psychological First Aid
sexual and gender- implementing Face to Face Learning
based violence Modality
against learners
and personnel in
the midst of
COVID-19
pandemic are not
given appropriate
support and
immediate
interventions

10 No crafted No Crafted handbook on Bullying in To develop Handbook on different PAP's Learners Support 1. Conduct Training/Workshop on Youth
Handbook from Schools. forms of gender-based violence Psychological First Aid Psychosocial Formation / EPS
the Central Office. bullying during COVID 19 Pandemic. Support to Covid 19 Focal Persons
schools on Face to Face Learning Focal Person ,
Modality. Writers, and
school Heads
11 Increasing Lack of training in handling bullying, To upskill teacher-advisers and student PAPs Human Resource Peer Mediation 40 Teacher-
incidence of child abuse and sexual harassment in leaders in handling bullying, child abuse Development advisers and 7
bullying, child schools and sexual harassment in schools DFSSGO Student
abuse and sexual Leaders
harassment in
schools

Organization-focused
12 Lack of sex 1. No Official Tool/System that To develop a Tool/System that PAPs Planning Development of Tool/System that DepEd Bukidnon
disaggregated collects Sex disaggregated Data. collects Sex Disaggregated Data of collects Sex Disaggregated Data of Personnel
DepEd Bukidnon Personnel.
data of DepEd DepEd Bukidnon Personnel.
Bukidnon
Personnel.

13 Plan, Lack of sex disaggregated data of To train Division GFPS on Planning, PAPs Planning Updating of Data-Based on Sex All employee
Implementation teaching and non-teaching personnel Implementing, and Monitoring of Disaggregated of DepEd Bukidnon
and Monitoring of to be used in planning, implementation DepEd PPAs with integration of sex employees
DepEd PPAs in and monitoring of DepEd PPAs in view disaggregation data system of learners
view of the COVID of the COVID-19 situation in view of COVID-19 situation.
-19 situation is not
sex disaggregated

14 Increase incidence Poorly implemented Adolescent a. To review record used during the PAPs Human Resource Capability Building Comprehensive Limited Face to
in Student Drop- Reproductive Health program in the implementation of CSE-ARH Program Development- OKD Program Sexuallity Health -Adolescent Face
outs related to schools due to lack of awareness of b. To promote meaningful Implementation on Reproductive Health to address
Unwanted/ GAD advocacy activity. participation, elicit, positive values and Adolescent Reproductive Gender-Based Issues among
Teenage attitudes towards adolescents sexual Health. D.O 28, s.2018. and Adolescents
Pregnancies and reproductive health D.O 31, 2018
other Adolescent c. To observe the best practices
health related implemented on the visited school
issues.
PAPs Students will gain awaresness of
reproducitve health issues as
conducted by Deped personnel
trained on ARH programs.

15 Increase incidence Poorly implemented ARH program in "Review CSE-ARH Objectives and PAPs Human Resource Capacity building of HNU Personnel Limited Face to
in Student Drop- the schools due to lack of awareness of Guidelines, and Review the Roles and Development- OKD Program on the Implementation of CSE-ARH Face
outs related to GAD advocacy activity. Responsibilities of the Program Implementation on Program to address Teenage
Unwanted/ Implementers Adolescent Reproductive Pregnancy
Teenage " Health. D.O 28, s.2018. and
Pregnancies and D.O 31, 2018
other Adolescent
health related
issues.

PAPs Students will gain awaresness of


reproducitve health issues as
conducted by Deped personnel
trained on ARH programs.

16 Increase incidence Poorly implemented ARH program in To enhance the skills and confidence of PAPs Human Resource Training of Trainers (TOT) among Limited Face to
in Student Drop- the schools due to lack of awareness of HNU personnel in providing services for Development- OKD Program Health and Nutrition Unit Face
outs related to GAD advocacy activity. adolescent health is sexual and Implementation on Personnel on Healthy Young Ones
Unwanted/ reproductive health education Adolescent Reproductive to address the Gender Based Issue
Teenage Health. D.O 28, s.2018. and among Adolescents.
Pregnancies and D.O 31, 2018
other Adolescent
health related
issues.
PAPs Students will gain positive behavior
change by having awaresness of
reproducitve health issues as
conducted by Deped personnel
trained on Healthy Young Ones
(HYO)

17 Gender Responsive To boost the self-esteem of the PAPs Human Resource Capacity Building on Gender Division Office
Division personnel PSDS field personnel Development Mainstreaming to the Division Office Personnel
in the delivery of public services amidst Personnel
COVID 19 pandemic

18 Sedentary Lifestyle Lack of Proper and Applicable Gender To provide applicable gender-specific, PAPs Health and Wellness Fitness and Wellness of DepEd 220 Division
of Employees of Specific Employees Physical Program. varied employee welfare activities in Activities Bukidnon Personnel into Existing Office Personnel:.
DepEd Bukidnon promoting healthy lifestyle. Occupational Health Programs Including Nurses,
Dentist, PSDS, DIC

19 Absence of No Code of Conduct on Sexual To develop and contextualize the Code PAPs Employees' and Students' Development of Code of Conduct on DepEd Bukidnon
functional CODI Harassment and CODI Manual in the of Conduct on Sexual Harassment and Welfare Sexual Harassment and CODI Manual Students and
and support division. CODI Manual. Personnel
system in the
division.

20 Absence of No Code of Conduct on Sexual To develop and contextualize the Code PAPs Employees' and Students' ENFORCEMENT OF DIVISION DepEd Bukidnon
functional CODI Harassment and CODI Manual in the of Conduct on Sexual Harassment and Welfare COMMITTEE ON DECORUM AND Students and
and support division. CODI Manual. INVESTIGATION (CODI) ON SEXUAL
HARASSMENT CASES AND CONDUCT Personnel
system in the
OF RELEVANT ESSENTIAL ACTIVITIES OF
division. THIS COMMITTEE
21 Absence of No Code of Conduct on Sexual To develop and contextualize the Code PAPs Employees' and Students' Lecture on the existence and DepEd Bukidnon
functional CODI Harassment and CODI Manual in the of Conduct on Sexual Harassment and Welfare importance of CODI in the office vis a Students and
and support division. CODI Manual. vis Launching of Code of Conduct on
Sexual Harassment and CODI Manual Personnel
system in the
division.

22 Incoherent Low participation of DepEd Personnel Employees are not aware of PAPs Public Affairs Women's month Celebration in the Division Office
activities and in interagency GAD advocacy activities interagency advocacy activities Division office Personnel
programs on GAD
Mainstreaming

23 Low participation of DepEd Personnel To promote health and wellness among PAPs Employees Welfare Nutrition Month Celebration in the Division Office
in interagency GAD advocacy activities Division office personnel Division Office: Weekly Nutritional Personnel and
Assesment, Consultation and
Counselling Health Personnel
Incoherent activities and programs on GAD Mainstreaming

24 Section 26 of RA Need for appreciation and sensitivity to Increased appreciation, respect, and PAPs Youth Formation LGBT Awareness Month Division Office
9710 Magna Carta LGBT knowledge, on lGBT rights and Celebration Personnel
of Women (MCW) developments in the LGBT community
Right to
information
regarding policies
on women
including
programs,
projects, and
funding outlays
that affect them
shall be ensured

25 Low level of Lack of opportunity for professional growth To give opportunity for professional PAPs Public Affairs CAPACITY BUILDING FOR BULLS I school
awareness of school of school heads and teachers on gender growth of school heads and teachers PUBLICATION WRITERS information
heads and teachers fairness/sensitivity/responsiveness on gender
on gender coordinators
fairness/sensitivity/responsiveness
fairness/sensitivity/
responsiveness
26 Low level of Lack of opportunity for professional To enhance spiritual and morale of PAPs Employee's Welfare Spiritual Retreat and Division office
awareness of growth of school heads and teachers DepEd Bukidnon employees Recollection for Division Office personnel
school heads and on gender personnel
teachers on gender fairness/sensitivity/responsiveness
fairness/sensitivity
/ responsiveness

27 Increasing cases of Annual Health Screening was not To require all teaching and non PAPs Employee's Welfare Advocacy of Teaching and Non- Division office
sudden illness and required among deped personnel teaching personnel mandatory health teaching Personnel on Gender personnel
deaths, and screening as covid 19 Mitigation Health Advocacies, Protective
neglected chronic Measures for Covid 19,
illness Prevention and Mitigation

28 High risk of sexual Lack of awareness on how to prevent To orient the Child Protection PAP's Learning Development Capacity Building on the CPC/SGC/SGOD
and gender-based sexual and gender-based violence Committee and Guidance Conselors Prevention of Sexual and
violence during during COVID-19 pandemic  on how to prevent sexual and Gender-Based Violence Amidst
COVID-19 gender-based violence during Covid 19
pandemic  COVID-19 pandemic focus on
Psychological First Aid and Child
Protection

29 Absence of GAD Lack of GAD database on the conduct To develop a unified Division GAD PAPs Health and Nutrion School Health Nutrition and Health and
Database as of monitoring and evaluation OKD database monitoring tool for OKD Nutrition Section
mandated under Programs on gender programs in line with GAD Policies Gender Integrated Planning
OKD Program
section 36 of RA sensitivity/responsiveness of Workshop Holders and TWG
9710 regions/divisions/schools in terms of
structures, facilities and policies

30 In the absence of Water System at the PAPs Physical Facilities Provision of Water from 4th floor Division Office
Training Center to Ground Floor ( Water tanks,
fittings, pressure tanks, pumping
system, electrical, pipeline,
pedestal)
31 In the absence of Genderized Comfort PAPs Physical Facilities Division Office
Rooms and Dressing Room

32 Mobility and There is no facility intended to enhance To provide easy access facilities for PAPs Physical Facilities Provision of Ramps and other PWDs, Senior
access of the the mobility for the Persons with persons with disabilities facilities and utilities for PWDs in Citizen, Pregnant
Persons with Disability contrary to BP344 - An act to the Diviision Training Center Women
Disability to enhance the mobility of disabled
facilities persons by requiring certain buildings,
institution and establishments and
public utilities to install facilities and
other devices

33 Functional and Lack of functional and comfortable To improve restroom facilities of the PAPs Physical Facilities Rehabilitation and Improvement of Divsion office
comfortable restrooms for Division Personnel and Training Centeror for the convenience Training Center Comfort Rooms personnel and
restrooms clients and well being of the Division clients
personnel and clients

34 Breastfeeding There is no breastfeeding station and To provide breastfeeding station for PAPs Physical Facilities and Utilities Provision of Division Breastfeeding Lactating Mothers
station and Menstrual Hygiene Management Area lactating mothers as per RA 10028 - and Menstrual Hygiene and Women
Menstrual Hygiene in the division office Expanded Breastfeeding Promotion Act Management Area
Management area of 2009 and Menstrual Hygiene
Management Area

35 Division Wellness Lack of wellness and fitness facilities To enhance and provide wellness and PAPs Physical Facilities and Utilities Improvement of Training Center Division Office
and Fitness fitness facilities for Division Office Facade and Person with Disability personnel
Personnel (PWD) ramps

36 In the absence of Genderized Comfort PAPs Physical Facilities Improvement Division Clinic and Division Office
Rooms in the Division Clinic Provision of Genderized Comfort
Rooms
37 Increasing risk of To raise awareness on STI and HIV PAPs Employee's Welfare World AIDS Day Celebration Division Office
STI and HIV transmission Personnel
transmission and
infection

38 Employee's Welfare Enforcement of Division Committee on Division Office


Decorum and Investigation (CODI) on Personnel
Sexual Harassment Cases and Conduct
of Relevant Essential Activities on this
Committee

TOTAL

Prepared by: Availability of Funds: Recommending Approval: Approved:

ARIEL B. MONTECALBO, PhD RANDY H. PORRAS, CPA ARTEMIO REY S. ADAJAR, PhD RANDOLPH B. TORTOLA
Division GAD Focal Person Division Accountant Chief, SGOD Schools Division Superintendent
L YEAR 2022
Platform (Web- Proposed Date Output Performance GAD Budget Source of Responsible Actual Expenses HGDG Assessment Remarks
Based, Limited (9) Indicators and Target (11) Budget Unit/Office Result
Face to Face) (8) (10) (12) (13)

Limited Face to May 5-6, 2022 642 School Heads and 642 3,385,420.00 School GAD Artemio Rey Adajar, 20
Face May 12-13, School GAD Coordinators Funds Irene C. Quimbo,
2022. May 17- Capacitated Gladys Jean Quijada
18, 2022, May
19-20, 2022.
May 24-25,
2022. May 26-
27, 2022

Limited Face to February 16-17, GAD Plan and 90,000 Division GAD Procurement Section 90,000 20 Fully Implemented
Face 2022 Accomplishment Reports for Funds School
CY 2021 GAD Funds

Limited Face to March 23-24, 360,200 Division GAD Irene C. Quimbo /


Face 2022. June 9- Funds Zairel Barete and Jason
10, 2022. Martir
NOvember 24-
25, 2022

Limited Face to January 25-26, Project Proposal 288,900.00 Divsision GAD Jenifer Gay Lunsayan, 288,900.00 20 Fully Implemented
Face 2022 and Funds Rollen Sumooy
February 1-2,
2022

face to face May 22-23, Action Plan to address the gender 400,000.00 Division GAD Jenifer Gay Lunsayan
issue on stereotyping and other
2022 for Batch forms of sexual harassment, Funds
1 and May 24- violence and substance abuse in
25, 2022 for schools
Batch 2
Limited Face to March to June a. Participating District 238,500.00 Division GAD DGFPS, WinS TWG,
Face 2022 ( Cluster Monitoring and Evaluation Funds Almalou J. Pogoy,
Level) and July Team and Validating Team Sandra L. Amondina,
to August 2022 M & E Process Orientation Ma. Maya A. Luna,
(Division Level) Roumelia M.
Monredondo, Lovely
S. Ortiz
b. Actual Onsite
Inspection & Validation of
the Online Monitoring
System Result and School
Readiness for face-to-face
(Cluster Level)

c. Actual Onsite
Inspection & validation of
Finalist Schools

d. Deliberation
of Results

Limited Face to May - June 100% of HNU Personnel e. 143,240.00 Division GAD DGFPS, WinS TWG,
Face 2022 and 47 District WinS Funds Ma. Maya A. Luna,
Coordinator are Roumelia M.
capacitated Monredondo, Lovely
S. Ortiz
Limited Face to May 2022 Zero incidence of sexual 128,650.00 Division GAD Daryl Macario in
Face and gender-based violence Funds coordination with Ivy
during COVID 19 pandemic Pearl Lysandrou,
Bobby Glen Casanos

Limited Face to May 3-6 , 2022 1. 200 COVID 19 Focal 599,405.00 1. School GAD SGOD-DRRM &
Face Persons capacitated and Funds HNS :Ivy Pearl
on the provision of 2.Division GAD Lysandrou with
Psychosocial Support Funds Reyno Sevilla
Services and Psychological
First Aid to learners and
personnel in 200 schools
implementing limited face
to face classes.

Limited Face to April 4 to 6, Printed Handbook on 323,521.00 MOOE Ronnel Jun T. Estiva On-the Process
Face 2022 Bullying in Schools Amidst with Nancy
Covid 19 Pandemic. Panistante
Limited Face to April 2022 Conduct of Peer Mediation 219,037.00 Division MOOE SGOD/Lyn Ellorin On-the Process
Face (Pilot School)

N/A May 2022. Collected Sex 68,900.00 MOOE Ariel Montecalbo


Disaggregated Data of
DepEd Bukidnon
Personnel.

Limited Face to June 2022 Sex disaggregated data is NONE NONE Ariel B. Montecalbo
Face used in planning,
implementing, and
monitoring of DepEd PPAs
in view of the COVID -19

June 2022 25 identified 68,730.00 Division GAD Funds Dr. Ma. Maya
participants A. Luna Allan
Oriented on the Tiangha, Rea
CSE-ARH Katherine
Program Alonzo, Lovely
S. Ortiz
July 2022 45 HNU 145,500.00 Division GAD Fund Dr. Ma. Maya
Personnel, 1 A. Luna Allan
Youth Formation Tiangha, Rea
Focal Trained to Katherine
CSE ARH Alonzo, Lovely
S. Ortiz

August 2022 44 HNU 311,300.00 Division GAD Fund Dr. Ma. Maya
Personnel trained A. Luna Allan
to HYO Tiangha, Rea
Katherine
Alonzo, Lovely
S. Ortiz
Limited Face to November 24- GAD PPAs are executed 868,790.00 Division GAD c/o Richard Portillas
Face 25, 2022 effectively in different Funds
platforms

Limited Face to April 1, 2022 as At least 75% (165) Division 883,848.00 Division GAD Richard Ley M.
Face opening, Every Office Personnel will be Funds Portillas,
last friday of able to actively participate Daryl Rhey T.
the month from in the health and wellness Macario,
April to October activities. Eda Mechelyn D.
2022, and Balasoto,
Vernadette L.
November 18, Carciller
2022 as the
Culminating and
Awarding

Limited Face to Phase 1: April 71,000.00 MOOE CODI Focal Person/


Face 19-20, 20022 15 CODI- TWG members Jessa May Aclub
Phase 2: and Technical working
May 3, 2022 group develops Code of
Conduct on Sexual
Harassment and CODI
Manual.
Limited Face to June 2-3, 2022 40 108,000.00 MOOE CODI Focal Person/
Face Jessa May Aclub
Limited Face to June 24, 2022 150 Division Office Personnel 105,000.00 MOOE CODI Focal Person/
Face and CODl members Jessa May Aclub

Limited Face to 3/8 & 30/2022 GAD PPAs are executed 110,000.00 Division GAD DFGPS , Chonalyn P.
Face effectively in different Funds Dilao, Sandra L.
platforms Amondina, Ahtidemel
C. Hatulan

Limited Face to July 2022 100 Division Office and 45,350.00 Division GAD DFGPS, Chonalyn P.
Face HealthPersonnel assessed, Funds Dilao, Ahtidemel C.
consulted and counselled on Hatulan, Sandra
proper nutrition and diet Amondina

Limited Face to June 8-10, 2022 320,500.00 Division GAD Jessie James Yapao,
Face Funds Lyn Ellorin

face to face March 31, 2022 130 pax, school information 130,599.00 Division GAD Rollen B. Sumooy
coordinator Funds
face to face April 28-29, 130 Division office personnel; 376,500.00 Division GAD Zairel Barete/Jenifer
2022 Batch 1; spiritual awakening Funds Gay Lunsayan
May 3-4, 2022
Batch 2

Limited Face to October- Division Office personnel 502,500.00 Division GAD DGFPS, HNU, Sandra
Face November 2022 Funds L. Amondina, Oasia
Recina, Ma. Maya A.
Luna,MD.

Limited Face to May 10-11, Lessen the incidence of 414,739.00 MOOE SGOD / Youth On-the Process
Face 2022 sexual and gender-based Formation
violence during COVID 19
pandemic

Limited Face to May 4-5, 2022 Unified Division GAD 197,850.00 Division GAD SGOD- HNU
Face Database for OKD Program Funds Meghan Rose O. Abaya
Monitoring Tools

Limited Face to 2nd Quarter Provision of water supply, 186,307.10 Division GAD Kathleen Dumas and Obligated from the
Face reservoir up to the 4th floor Funds Engr Jason and Engr previous CY 2021
of the Division Auditorium Resty
Building
Limited Face to 3rd Quarter Provide women, girl-child 3,500,000.00 Division GAD Bobby Glen Casanos,
Face friendly facilities that meet Funds Ronnel Jun Estiva, and
standards for MHM, gender Lyn Ellorin
segregation and water facilities
(DepEd Order No. 10,s. 2016,
WinS Policy) Provision of
facilities that meet the
standards for PWDs (RA No.
7277) Promotes breastfeeding
in the workplace (RA10028)

N/A 2nd Quarter Provided easy access and 50,000.00 Division Physical Facilities,
mobility for PWDs MOOE/GAD Admin (Kathleen Ann
Fund T. Dumas, Engr. Resty
D. Ramayan, Bobby
Glen G. Casanos)

N/A 3rd Quarter Improved comfortable and 1,200,000.00 Division Physical Facilities,
functional restrooms MOOE/GAD Admin (Kathleen Ann
Fund T. Dumas, Engr. Resty
D. Ramayan, Bobby
Glen G. Casanos)

N/A 3rd Quarter Provision of breastfeeding 600,000.00


station and menstrual hygien
management area

N/A 2nd Quarter Improved wellness and fitness 800,000.00


facilities

Limited Face to 3rd Quarter 800,000.00 Division GAD Bobby Glen Casanos,
Face Funds
Ronnel Jun Estiva,
and Lyn Ellorin
Limited Face to December 9-12, Participation of Division Office 327,000.00 Division GAD Jessie James Yapao,
Face 2022 Personnel Funds Lyn Ellorin

Limited Face to April 7-8, 2022 67,500.00 Division GAD Jessa Mae Aclub
Face Funds

Grand Total for Division GAD 14,339,529.00


Budget Proposal FY 2022
Remaining Proposal 13,960,629.00
Projected Budget (10% from 12,401,100
Charge MOOE)
to School GAD 3,385,420.00

ORTOLA
perintendent
GENDER AND DEVELOPMENT (GAD) PLAN FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2022

Agency/School: STO. DOMINGO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL


Governance Level:
Total MOOE :
Total Expenditure for GAD PHP 235,000.00
No. Gender Issue Cause of the Gender Issue GAD Result Statement/ Relevant GAD GAD Activity/ies Target Platform (Web- Proposed Output GAD Budget Source of Responsible Actual HGDG Remarks
(2) GAD Objective Agency Program/s aligned to Participants Based, Limited Date (9) Performance (11) Budget Unit/Office Expenses Assessmen
(3) MFO/ (5) Column 5 (7) Face to Face) Indicators and (12) (13) t Result
PAP (6) (8) Target
(4) (10)

Client-focused

At least 75%
Social Whole year of the Pupils/
Protectio
Physical wellness and Lack of school wellness and To enhance wellness n and Human Health and Pupils/ Limited Face Round Students can School
1 and fitness among Wellness (Every last participate in Php 10,000.00 MOOE Head/Teach
fitness fitness program pupils/ students Welfare Resource Activities Students to face Friday of the the wellness ers
Program
s month) and fitness
activites

To improve
Rehabilitation Improved
comfortroom
Functional and Lack of genderized comfort facilities of every Physical of restrooms Pupils/ functional and Php
2 comfortable comfort PAPs facilities of N/A 3rd Quarter comfortable MOOE Teachers
room rooms in every classroom. classroom for the Facilities every Students restrooms 100,000.00
convenience of each
pupil/ students classroom facilities.

Improved the Php 30,000.00


Improvement quality of
To improve the Pupil/ potable water
source of potable Physical and Students
3 Potable water system Lack of potable water PAPs rehabilitation N/A 4th Quarter sytem in the MOOE Teachers
water sytem in the Facilities of school and school.
school premises teachers
water system

Pupils/ N/A Improved Php 30,000.00


Improvement Students School WINS
To improve the WINS Physical
4 WINS facilities Lack of WINS facilities PAPs of WINS Facilities MOOE Teachers
Facilities in the School Facilities facilities
Organizational -Focused
School
Head,
Teachers 1 school head
Improve the and non - and 9
To enhance wellness wellness and Teaching Teachers
Wellness and fitness Lack of welness and fitness Human Limited Face Teachers/
program for Faculty and staff. and fitness among PAPs fitness of participated in Php 15,000.00 MOOE
1 Staff
of Faculty and Staff Resource to Face Staffs
faculty & staff. faculty and the wellness
staff and fitness
program.

Improve Pupils/ Functional and


Functional and School Students/
2 comfortable school Lack of fucntional and To improve school PAPs Physical canteen to be Teahcers N/A 3rd Quarter comfortable Php 20,000.00 MOOE School Head
comfortable school canteen canteen facility Facilities School
canteen functional and and Canteen
comfortable stakeholders
Training -
Seminar of
Teachers, Teachers,
Pupil/
Advocacy of early Lack of knowledge and advocacy To conduct Advocacy Students and Teachers, Pupils/ School Head
Human Pupil/ Limited Face Students and
3 marriage or arrange of early marriage or arrange seminar of marriage PAPs Parents on 3rd Quarter Php 10,000.00 MOOE and GAD
marriage Resource Students to Face Parents are
marriage or arrange marriage the Advocacy and Parents being Focal Person
of early
marriage or capacitated
arrange
marriage.

1 School Head,
1 GAD focal
Training- person and 8
To conduct Capacity Workshop of School teachersare School Head,
GAD PPAs are not School Head, Head, GAD being
4 properly implemeted Lack of training/ Orientation Building on School PAPs Human GAD focal Focal Person Limited Face 4th Quarter capacitated Php 20,000.00 MOOE
GAD Focal
on Gender and Development Head and Teachers Resource to Face Person and
in the schools on GAD person and and Teachers
Teachers on Teachers
GAD

Prepared by: Reviewed by: Availability of Funds: Recommending Approval: Approved:

ROSDEL T. DAGULO MATEO P. PROSIA RANDY H. PORRAS, CPA ARIEL B. MONTECALBO, PhD RANDOLPH B. TORTOLA
Proponent School Head Division Accountant Division GAD Focal Person Schools Division Superintendent
HARMONIZED GENDER AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES (HGDG)
School: STO. DOMINGO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Title of the Activity: CAPACITY BUILDING ON GAD

Score for an
Elements and Item/question Response (col.2) item/ element Gender Issues
(col.1) No (2a) Partly (2b) Yeas (2c) (col.3) Identified (Col.4)

1.0 Involvement of Women and Men


(max score: 2; 1 for each item) 2

1.1 Participation of women and men


in beneficiary groups in problem
identification (possible scores: 0, 0.5,
1.0) 1

1.2. Participation of women and men


in beneficiary groups in project design
(possible score: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1

2.0 Collection of sex-disaggregated


data and gender-related information
(possible score 0, 1.0, 2.0) 2 2

3.0 Conduct of gender analysis and


identification of gender issues (max
score: 2; 1 for each item) 2

3.1 Analysis of gender gaps and


inequalities related to genfer roles,
perspectives and needs, or access to
and control of resources (possible
scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1

3.2 Analysis of constraints abd


oppurtunities related to women and
men's participation in the project
(pssible score: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1
Total GAD Score- Project
Identification Stage 6

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, outcomes, or outputs? 1 1
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
equality goals identified? 2 2

6.0 Gender analysis of likely impacts


of the project (max score: 2; for each
item or question, 0.67) 2.01

6.1 Are women and girl children


among the direct or indirect
beneficiaries? (possible scores: 0,
0.33, 0.67) 0.67

6.2 Has a project considered its long-


term impact on women's
socioeconomicstatus and
empowerment? (possible score: 0,
0.33, 0.67) 0.67

6.3 Has the project included


strategies for avoiding or minimizing
negative impact on women's status
and welfare? (possible score: 0, 0.33,
0.67) 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? 2 2

8.0 Sex-disaggregated database


requirement (possible scores: 0, 1.0,
2.0) Does the project M&E system
require the collection of sex-
disaggregated data? 2 2
9.0 Resources (max scores: 2; for
each item or question, 1) 2

9.1 In the project's budget allotment


sufficient form gender equality
promotion or integration? OR, project
tap counterpart funds from LGUs /
partners for its GAD efforts? (possible
scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1
9.2 Does the projects have the
expertise in promoting gender
equality and women's
empowerment? OR Does the project
commit itself to investing, project
staff time in building capacities within
the project to integrate GAD or
promote gender equality? (possible
scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1

10.0 Relationship with the agency's


GAD efforts (max score:2; for each
item or question,
strengthen the 0.67) 1.34
agency/PCW/government's
commitment to the empowerment of
women? (possible scores: 0, 0.33,
0.67)

IF THE AGENCY HAS NO GAD


PLAN:Will the project help in the
formulation of the implementing
agency's GAD plan? 0.67

10.2 Will the project build on the


initiatives or actions of other
organizations in the area? (possible
scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67) 0.67

10.3 Does the project have an exit


plan that will ensure the sustainability
of GAD efforts and benefits? (possible
scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67) 0.33

18
Total GAD Score- Project
Identification Stage Gender-responsive

* The possible responses and their corresponding scores are as follows:NO ("0"), YES ("2"), and PARTLY YES.
For elements with multiple items or questions, the score for PARTLY YES to an item or questions varies per
element with the total score for PARTLY YES to an element will be a positive number that is lower than "2.0".
Prepared by:
NAPTHALY M. MANSALOON
Proponent

Reviewed by:
ROSDEL T. DAGULO
School GAD Focal Person
Approved:
MATEO P. PROSIA
School Head
HARMONIZED GENDER AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES (HGDG)
School: STO. DOMINGO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Title of the Activity: Physical Fitness and Wellness

Response (col.2)
Score for an
Elements and Item/question item/ element Gender Issues
(col.1) No (2a) Partly (2b) Yeas (2c) (col.3) Identified (Col.4)

1.0 Involvement of Women and Men


(max score: 2; 1 for each item) 2

1.1 Participation of women and men


in beneficiary groups in problem
identification (possible scores: 0, 0.5,
1.0) 1

1.2. Participation of women and men


in beneficiary groups in project design
(possible score: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1

2.0 Collection of sex-disaggregated


data and gender-related information
(possible score 0, 1.0, 2.0) 2 2

3.0 Conduct of gender analysis and


identification of gender issues (max
score: 2; 1 for each item) 1

3.1 Analysis of gender gaps and


inequalities related to genfer roles,
perspectives and needs, or access to
and control of resources (possible
scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 0.5

3.2 Analysis of constraints abd


oppurtunities related to women and
men's participation in the project
(pssible score: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 0.5
Total GAD Score- Project
Identification Stage 5

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, outcomes, or outputs? 2 2
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
equality goals identified? 2 2

6.0 Gender analysis of likely impacts


of the project (max score: 2; for each
item or question, 0.67) 2.01

6.1 Are women and girl children


among the direct or indirect
beneficiaries? (possible scores: 0,
0.33, 0.67) 0.67

6.2 Has a project considered its long-


term impact on women's
socioeconomicstatus and
empowerment? (possible score: 0,
0.33, 0.67) 0.67

6.3 Has the project included


strategies for avoiding or minimizing
negative impact on women's status
and welfare? (possible score: 0, 0.33,
0.67) 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? 2 2

8.0 Sex-disaggregated database


requirement (possible scores: 0, 1.0,
2.0) Does the project M&E system
require the collection of sex-
disaggregated data? 2 2
9.0 Resources (max scores: 2; for
each item or question, 1) 2

9.1 In the project's budget allotment


sufficient form gender equality
promotion or integration? OR, project
tap counterpart funds from LGUs /
partners for its GAD efforts? (possible
scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1
9.2 Does the projects have the
expertise in promoting gender
equality and women's
empowerment? OR Does the project
commit itself to investing, project
staff time in building capacities within
the project to integrate GAD or
promote gender equality? (possible
scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1

10.0 Relationship with the agency's


GAD efforts (max score:2; for each
item or question,
strengthen the 0.67) 1.34
agency/PCW/government's
commitment to the empowerment of
women? (possible scores: 0, 0.33,
0.67)

IF THE AGENCY HAS NO GAD


PLAN:Will the project help in the
formulation of the implementing
agency's GAD plan? 0.67

10.2 Will the project build on the


initiatives or actions of other
organizations in the area? (possible
scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67) 0.33

10.3 Does the project have an exit


plan that will ensure the sustainability
of GAD efforts and benefits? (possible
scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67) 0.67

18
Total GAD Score- Project
Identification Stage Gender-responsive

* The possible responses and their corresponding scores are as follows:NO ("0"), YES ("2"), and PARTLY
YES. For elements with multiple items or questions, the score for PARTLY YES to an item or questions varies
per element with the total score for PARTLY YES to an element will be a positive number that is lower than
Prepared by:
KHRYSSELL MAY CAGANG- CAPARIDA
Proponent

Reviewed by:
ROSDEL T. DAGULO
School GAD Focal Person
Approved:
MATEO P. PROSIA
School Head
HARMONIZED GENDER AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES (HGDG)
School: STO. DOMINGO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Title of the Activity: Improvement of Genderized Comforrtrooms

Response (col.2)
Score for an
Elements and Item/question item/ element Gender Issues
(col.1) No (2a) Partly (2b) Yeas (2c) (col.3) Identified (Col.4)

1.0 Involvement of Women and Men


(max score: 2; 1 for each item) 2

1.1 Participation of women and men


in beneficiary groups in problem
identification (possible scores: 0, 0.5,
1.0) 1

1.2. Participation of women and men


in beneficiary groups in project design
(possible score: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1

2.0 Collection of sex-disaggregated


data and gender-related information
(possible score 0, 1.0, 2.0) 2 2

3.0 Conduct of gender analysis and


identification of gender issues (max
score: 2; 1 for each item) 1.5

3.1 Analysis of gender gaps and


inequalities related to genfer roles,
perspectives and needs, or access to
and control of resources (possible
scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1

3.2 Analysis of constraints abd


oppurtunities related to women and
men's participation in the project
(pssible score: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 0.5
Total GAD Score- Project
Identification Stage 5.5

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, outcomes, or outputs? 2 2
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
equality goals identified? 2 2

6.0 Gender analysis of likely impacts


of the project (max score: 2; for each
item or question, 0.67) 2.01

6.1 Are women and girl children


among the direct or indirect
beneficiaries? (possible scores: 0,
0.33, 0.67) 0.67

6.2 Has a project considered its long-


term impact on women's
socioeconomicstatus and
empowerment? (possible score: 0,
0.33, 0.67) 0.67

6.3 Has the project included


strategies for avoiding or minimizing
negative impact on women's status
and welfare? (possible score: 0, 0.33,
0.67) 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? 2 2

8.0 Sex-disaggregated database


requirement (possible scores: 0, 1.0,
2.0) Does the project M&E system
require the collection of sex-
disaggregated data? 1 1
9.0 Resources (max scores: 2; for
each item or question, 1) 2

9.1 In the project's budget allotment


sufficient form gender equality
promotion or integration? OR, project
tap counterpart funds from LGUs /
partners for its GAD efforts? (possible
scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1
9.2 Does the projects have the
expertise in promoting gender
equality and women's
empowerment? OR Does the project
commit itself to investing, project
staff time in building capacities within
the project to integrate GAD or
promote gender equality? (possible
scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1

10.0 Relationship with the agency's


GAD efforts (max score:2; for each
item or question,
strengthen the 0.67) 0.67
agency/PCW/government's
commitment to the empowerment of
women? (possible scores: 0, 0.33,
0.67)

IF THE AGENCY HAS NO GAD


PLAN:Will the project help in the
formulation of the implementing
agency's GAD plan? 0.33

10.2 Will the project build on the


initiatives or actions of other
organizations in the area? (possible
scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67) 0.33

10.3 Does the project have an exit


plan that will ensure the sustainability
of GAD efforts and benefits? (possible
scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67) 0.67

17
Total GAD Score- Project
Identification Stage Gender-responsive

* The possible responses and their corresponding scores are as follows:NO ("0"), YES ("2"), and PARTLY
YES. For elements with multiple items or questions, the score for PARTLY YES to an item or questions varies
per element with the total score for PARTLY YES to an element will be a positive number that is lower than
Prepared by:
LARA PEARL S. MONTERA
Proponent

Reviewed by:
ROSDEL T. DAGULO
School GAD Focal Person
Approved:
MATEO P. PROSIA
School Head
HARMONIZED GENDER AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES (HGDG)
School: STO. DOMINGO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Title of the Activity: IMPROVEMENT POTABLE WATER SYSTEM

Response (col.2)
Score for an
Elements and Item/question item/ element Gender Issues
(col.1) No (2a) Partly (2b) Yeas (2c) (col.3) Identified (Col.4)

1.0 Involvement of Women and Men


(max score: 2; 1 for each item) 2

1.1 Participation of women and men


in beneficiary groups in problem
identification (possible scores: 0, 0.5,
1.0) 1

1.2. Participation of women and men


in beneficiary groups in project design
(possible score: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1

2.0 Collection of sex-disaggregated


data and gender-related information
(possible score 0, 1.0, 2.0) 2 2

3.0 Conduct of gender analysis and


identification of gender issues (max
score: 2; 1 for each item) 2

3.1 Analysis of gender gaps and


inequalities related to genfer roles,
perspectives and needs, or access to
and control of resources (possible
scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1

3.2 Analysis of constraints abd


oppurtunities related to women and
men's participation in the project
(pssible score: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1
Total GAD Score- Project
Identification Stage 6

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, outcomes, or outputs? 2 2
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
equality goals identified? 2 2

6.0 Gender analysis of likely impacts


of the project (max score: 2; for each
item or question, 0.67) 2.01

6.1 Are women and girl children


among the direct or indirect
beneficiaries? (possible scores: 0,
0.33, 0.67) 0.67

6.2 Has a project considered its long-


term impact on women's
socioeconomicstatus and
empowerment? (possible score: 0,
0.33, 0.67) 0.67

6.3 Has the project included


strategies for avoiding or minimizing
negative impact on women's status
and welfare? (possible score: 0, 0.33,
0.67) 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? 2 2

8.0 Sex-disaggregated database


requirement (possible scores: 0, 1.0,
2.0) Does the project M&E system
require the collection of sex-
disaggregated data? 2 2
9.0 Resources (max scores: 2; for
each item or question, 1) 2

9.1 In the project's budget allotment


sufficient form gender equality
promotion or integration? OR, project
tap counterpart funds from LGUs /
partners for its GAD efforts? (possible
scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1
9.2 Does the projects have the
expertise in promoting gender
equality and women's
empowerment? OR Does the project
commit itself to investing, project
staff time in building capacities within
the project to integrate GAD or
promote gender equality? (possible
scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1

10.0 Relationship with the agency's


GAD efforts (max score:2; for each
item or question,
strengthen the 0.67) 2.01
agency/PCW/government's
commitment to the empowerment of
women? (possible scores: 0, 0.33,
0.67)

IF THE AGENCY HAS NO GAD


PLAN:Will the project help in the
formulation of the implementing
agency's GAD plan? 0.67

10.2 Will the project build on the


initiatives or actions of other
organizations in the area? (possible
scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67) 0.67

10.3 Does the project have an exit


plan that will ensure the sustainability
of GAD efforts and benefits? (possible
scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67) 0.67

20 Fully gender-
Total GAD Score- Project responsive (100%
Identification Stage of the budget)

* The possible responses and their corresponding scores are as follows:NO ("0"), YES ("2"), and PARTLY
YES. For elements with multiple items or questions, the score for PARTLY YES to an item or questions varies
per element with the total score for PARTLY YES to an element will be a positive number that is lower than
Prepared by:
MERLYN S. AGLAY
Proponent

Reviewed by:
ROSDEL T. DAGULO
School GAD Focal Person
Approved:
MATEO P. PROSIA
School Head
HARMONIZED GENDER AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES (HGDG)
School: STO. DOMINGO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Title of the Activity: IMPROVEMENT OF WINS FACILITIES

Response (col.2)
Score for an
Elements and Item/question item/ element Gender Issues
(col.1) No (2a) Partly (2b) Yeas (2c) (col.3) Identified (Col.4)

1.0 Involvement of Women and Men


(max score: 2; 1 for each item) 2

1.1 Participation of women and men


in beneficiary groups in problem
identification (possible scores: 0, 0.5,
1.0) 1

1.2. Participation of women and men


in beneficiary groups in project design
(possible score: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1

2.0 Collection of sex-disaggregated


data and gender-related information
(possible score 0, 1.0, 2.0) 1 1

3.0 Conduct of gender analysis and


identification of gender issues (max
score: 2; 1 for each item) 2

3.1 Analysis of gender gaps and


inequalities related to genfer roles,
perspectives and needs, or access to
and control of resources (possible
scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1

3.2 Analysis of constraints abd


oppurtunities related to women and
men's participation in the project
(pssible score: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1
Total GAD Score- Project
Identification Stage 5

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, outcomes, or outputs? 2 2
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
equality goals identified? 2 2

6.0 Gender analysis of likely impacts


of the project (max score: 2; for each
item or question, 0.67) 1.67

6.1 Are women and girl children


among the direct or indirect
beneficiaries? (possible scores: 0,
0.33, 0.67) 0.67

6.2 Has a project considered its long-


term impact on women's
socioeconomicstatus and
empowerment? (possible score: 0,
0.33, 0.67) 0.67

6.3 Has the project included


strategies for avoiding or minimizing
negative impact on women's status
and welfare? (possible score: 0, 0.33,
0.67) 0.33

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? 2 2

8.0 Sex-disaggregated database


requirement (possible scores: 0, 1.0,
2.0) Does the project M&E system
require the collection of sex-
disaggregated data? 2 2
9.0 Resources (max scores: 2; for
each item or question, 1) 2

9.1 In the project's budget allotment


sufficient form gender equality
promotion or integration? OR, project
tap counterpart funds from LGUs /
partners for its GAD efforts? (possible
scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1
9.2 Does the projects have the
expertise in promoting gender
equality and women's
empowerment? OR Does the project
commit itself to investing, project
staff time in building capacities within
the project to integrate GAD or
promote gender equality? (possible
scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1

10.0 Relationship with the agency's


GAD efforts (max score:2; for each
item or question,
strengthen the 0.67) 1.34
agency/PCW/government's
commitment to the empowerment of
women? (possible scores: 0, 0.33,
0.67)

IF THE AGENCY HAS NO GAD


PLAN:Will the project help in the
formulation of the implementing
agency's GAD plan? 0.67

10.2 Will the project build on the


initiatives or actions of other
organizations in the area? (possible
scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67) 0.67

10.3 Does the project have an exit


plan that will ensure the sustainability
of GAD efforts and benefits? (possible
scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67) 0.33

18
Total GAD Score- Project
Identification Stage Gender-responsive

* The possible responses and their corresponding scores are as follows:NO ("0"), YES ("2"), and PARTLY
YES. For elements with multiple items or questions, the score for PARTLY YES to an item or questions varies
per element with the total score for PARTLY YES to an element will be a positive number that is lower than
Prepared by:
LARA PEARL S. MONTERA
Proponent

Reviewed by:
ROSDEL T. DAGULO
School GAD Focal Person
Approved:
MATEO P. PROSIA
School Head
HARMONIZED GENDER AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES (HGDG)
School: STO. DOMINGO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Title of the Activity: Improvement of Wellness and Fitness of Faculty and Staff

Response (col.2)
Score for an
Elements and Item/question item/ element Gender Issues
(col.1) No (2a) Partly (2b) Yeas (2c) (col.3) Identified (Col.4)

1.0 Involvement of Women and Men


(max score: 2; 1 for each item) 2

1.1 Participation of women and men


in beneficiary groups in problem
identification (possible scores: 0, 0.5,
1.0) 1

1.2. Participation of women and men


in beneficiary groups in project design
(possible score: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1

2.0 Collection of sex-disaggregated


data and gender-related information
(possible score 0, 1.0, 2.0) 2 2

3.0 Conduct of gender analysis and


identification of gender issues (max
score: 2; 1 for each item) 1.5

3.1 Analysis of gender gaps and


inequalities related to genfer roles,
perspectives and needs, or access to
and control of resources (possible
scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1

3.2 Analysis of constraints abd


oppurtunities related to women and
men's participation in the project
(pssible score: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 0.5
Total GAD Score- Project
Identification Stage 5.5

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, outcomes, or outputs? 2 2
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
equality goals identified? 2 2

6.0 Gender analysis of likely impacts


of the project (max score: 2; for each
item or question, 0.67) 2.01

6.1 Are women and girl children


among the direct or indirect
beneficiaries? (possible scores: 0,
0.33, 0.67) 0.67

6.2 Has a project considered its long-


term impact on women's
socioeconomicstatus and
empowerment? (possible score: 0,
0.33, 0.67) 0.67

6.3 Has the project included


strategies for avoiding or minimizing
negative impact on women's status
and welfare? (possible score: 0, 0.33,
0.67) 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? 1 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-
disaggregated data? 2 2
9.0 Resources (max scores: 2; for
each item or question, 1) 1

9.1 In the project's budget allotment


sufficient form gender equality
promotion or integration? OR, project
tap counterpart funds from LGUs /
partners for its GAD efforts? (possible
scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 0.5
9.2 Does the projects have the
expertise in promoting gender
equality and women's
empowerment? OR Does the project
commit itself to investing, project
staff time in building capacities within
the project to integrate GAD or
promote gender equality? (possible
scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1

10.0 Relationship with the agency's


GAD efforts (max score:2; for each
item or question,
strengthen the 0.67) 1.34
agency/PCW/government's
commitment to the empowerment of
women? (possible scores: 0, 0.33,
0.67)

IF THE AGENCY HAS NO GAD


PLAN:Will the project help in the
formulation of the implementing
agency's GAD plan? 0.67

10.2 Will the project build on the


initiatives or actions of other
organizations in the area? (possible
scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67) 0.67

10.3 Does the project have an exit


plan that will ensure the sustainability
of GAD efforts and benefits? (possible
scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67) 0.33

17
Total GAD Score- Project
Identification Stage Gender-responsive

* The possible responses and their corresponding scores are as follows:NO ("0"), YES ("2"), and PARTLY
YES. For elements with multiple items or questions, the score for PARTLY YES to an item or questions varies
per element with the total score for PARTLY YES to an element will be a positive number that is lower than
Prepared by:
REZIEL T. PAYARON
Proponent

Reviewed by:
ROSDEL T. DAGULO
School GAD Focal Person
Approved:
MATEO P. PROSIA
School Head
HARMONIZED GENDER AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES (HGDG)
School: STO. DOMINGO ELEMENTARY
Title of the Activity: Improvement of School Canteen Facility

Response (col.2)
Score for an
Elements and Item/question item/ element Gender Issues
(col.1) No (2a) Partly (2b) Yeas (2c) (col.3) Identified (Col.4)

1.0 Involvement of Women and Men


(max score: 2; 1 for each item) 2

1.1 Participation of women and men


in beneficiary groups in problem
identification (possible scores: 0, 0.5,
1.0) 1

1.2. Participation of women and men


in beneficiary groups in project design
(possible score: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1

2.0 Collection of sex-disaggregated


data and gender-related information
(possible score 0, 1.0, 2.0) 1 1

3.0 Conduct of gender analysis and


identification of gender issues (max
score: 2; 1 for each item) 1.5

3.1 Analysis of gender gaps and


inequalities related to genfer roles,
perspectives and needs, or access to
and control of resources (possible
scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 0.5

3.2 Analysis of constraints abd


oppurtunities related to women and
men's participation in the project
(pssible score: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1
Total GAD Score- Project
Identification Stage 4.5

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, outcomes, or outputs? 2 2
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
equality goals identified? 2 2

6.0 Gender analysis of likely impacts


of the project (max score: 2; for each
item or question, 0.67) 2.01

6.1 Are women and girl children


among the direct or indirect
beneficiaries? (possible scores: 0,
0.33, 0.67) 0.67

6.2 Has a project considered its long-


term impact on women's
socioeconomicstatus and
empowerment? (possible score: 0,
0.33, 0.67) 0.67

6.3 Has the project included


strategies for avoiding or minimizing
negative impact on women's status
and welfare? (possible score: 0, 0.33,
0.67) 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? 2 2

8.0 Sex-disaggregated database


requirement (possible scores: 0, 1.0,
2.0) Does the project M&E system
require the collection of sex-
disaggregated data? 1 1
9.0 Resources (max scores: 2; for
each item or question, 1) 2

9.1 In the project's budget allotment


sufficient form gender equality
promotion or integration? OR, project
tap counterpart funds from LGUs /
partners for its GAD efforts? (possible
scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1
9.2 Does the projects have the
expertise in promoting gender
equality and women's
empowerment? OR Does the project
commit itself to investing, project
staff time in building capacities within
the project to integrate GAD or
promote gender equality? (possible
scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1

10.0 Relationship with the agency's


GAD efforts (max score:2; for each
item or question,
strengthen the 0.67) 1.34
agency/PCW/government's
commitment to the empowerment of
women? (possible scores: 0, 0.33,
0.67)

IF THE AGENCY HAS NO GAD


PLAN:Will the project help in the
formulation of the implementing
agency's GAD plan? 0.33

10.2 Will the project build on the


initiatives or actions of other
organizations in the area? (possible
scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67) 0.67

10.3 Does the project have an exit


plan that will ensure the sustainability
of GAD efforts and benefits? (possible
scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67) 0.67

17
Total GAD Score- Project
Identification Stage Gender-responsive

* The possible responses and their corresponding scores are as follows:NO ("0"), YES ("2"), and PARTLY
YES. For elements with multiple items or questions, the score for PARTLY YES to an item or questions varies
per element with the total score for PARTLY YES to an element will be a positive number that is lower than
Prepared by:
MARYPIL ANGELIE F. NACION
Proponent

Reviewed by:
ROSDEL T. DAGULO
School GAD Focal Person
Approved:
MATEO P. PROSIA
School Head
HARMONIZED GENDER AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES (HGDG)
School: STO. DOMINGO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Title of the Activity: ADVOCACY ON EARLY MARRIAGE OR ARRANGE MARRIAGE

Score for an
Elements and Item/question Response (col.2) item/ element Gender Issues
(col.1) No (2a) Partly (2b) Yeas (2c) (col.3) Identified (Col.4)

1.0 Involvement of Women and Men


(max score: 2; 1 for each item) 2

1.1 Participation of women and men


in beneficiary groups in problem
identification (possible scores: 0, 0.5,
1.0) 1

1.2. Participation of women and men


in beneficiary groups in project design
(possible score: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1

2.0 Collection of sex-disaggregated


data and gender-related information
(possible score 0, 1.0, 2.0) 1 1

3.0 Conduct of gender analysis and


identification of gender issues (max
score: 2; 1 for each item) 2

3.1 Analysis of gender gaps and


inequalities related to genfer roles,
perspectives and needs, or access to
and control of resources (possible
scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1

3.2 Analysis of constraints abd


oppurtunities related to women and
men's participation in the project
(pssible score: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1
Total GAD Score- Project
Identification Stage 5

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, outcomes, or outputs? 1 1
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
equality goals identified? 2 2

6.0 Gender analysis of likely impacts


of the project (max score: 2; for each
item or question, 0.67) 2.01

6.1 Are women and girl children


among the direct or indirect
beneficiaries? (possible scores: 0,
0.33, 0.67) 0.67

6.2 Has a project considered its long-


term impact on women's
socioeconomicstatus and
empowerment? (possible score: 0,
0.33, 0.67) 0.67

6.3 Has the project included


strategies for avoiding or minimizing
negative impact on women's status
and welfare? (possible score: 0, 0.33,
0.67) 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? 1 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-
disaggregated data? 2 2
9.0 Resources (max scores: 2; for
each item or question, 1) 2

9.1 In the project's budget allotment


sufficient form gender equality
promotion or integration? OR, project
tap counterpart funds from LGUs /
partners for its GAD efforts? (possible
scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1
9.2 Does the projects have the
expertise in promoting gender
equality and women's
empowerment? OR Does the project
commit itself to investing, project
staff time in building capacities within
the project to integrate GAD or
promote gender equality? (possible
scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0) 1

10.0 Relationship with the agency's


GAD efforts (max score:2; for each
item or question,
strengthen the 0.67) 1.34
agency/PCW/government's
commitment to the empowerment of
women? (possible scores: 0, 0.33,
0.67)

IF THE AGENCY HAS NO GAD


PLAN:Will the project help in the
formulation of the implementing
agency's GAD plan? 0.67

10.2 Will the project build on the


initiatives or actions of other
organizations in the area? (possible
scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67) 0.67

10.3 Does the project have an exit


plan that will ensure the sustainability
of GAD efforts and benefits? (possible
scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67) 0.33

16
Total GAD Score- Project
Identification Stage Gender-responsive

* The possible responses and their corresponding scores are as follows:NO ("0"), YES ("2"), and PARTLY YES.
For elements with multiple items or questions, the score for PARTLY YES to an item or questions varies per
element with the total score for PARTLY YES to an element will be a positive number that is lower than "2.0".
Prepared by:
MARCHELLE BAGUIO- ABELLO
Proponent

Reviewed by:
ROSDEL T. DAGULO
School GAD Focal Person
Approved:
MATEO P. PROSIA
School Head

You might also like