Where's Betty?: Integrating Gender-Based Analysis Plus (GBA+) in Canada’s Federal Government Evaluation Function

• Main Author: Whynot, Jane
• Other Authors: Andrew, Caroline
• Format: Others
• Language: en
• Published: Université d'Ottawa / University of Ottawa 2021
• Subjects: Evaluation; Intersectional analysis; GBA+/GBA; Performance
• Online Access: http://hdl.handle.net/10393/42243; http://dx.doi.org/10.20381/ruor-26465

This doctoral research by Jane Whynot explores how Gender-based Analysis/Plus (GBA/+), has been integrated into the Canadian federal government’s evaluation function. This research has been supervised by Dr. Caroline Andrew at the University of Ottawa. Efforts presented in this dissertation have been profoundly influenced by political leadership, and their efforts to reprioritize gender equality and other elements of diversity across the bureaucracy. Presumably, employing this mechanism across the policy cycle will provide information to decision-makers that will ultimately impact diversity, equity, and inclusion (EDI) outcomes. Canada is unique amongst governments worldwide in its efforts to so comprehensively consider personal identity elements in policy discourse. Sadly, however, the federal government’s evaluation function is lagging. Both domestic and international cues prompting the integration of gender and other elements of diversity into evaluation efforts have fallen unheard despite official domestic commitments formalizing these linkages. Theories of intersectionality, and how intersectional analysis is undertaken are at the core of this research. The “+” in GBA was intended to represent all elements of personal identity beyond gender such as but not limited to race, language, sexuality, geographic location, disability, and Aboriginal status. The federal government’s lead agency for gender equality does not explicitly reference details on any of these components in their publicly facing materials. These elements are embedded in this research’s conceptual framework and subsequent lines of evidence. Michie, VanStalen, and West’s (2012) theory of behavioural change provides the foundational structure for this research. These authors suggest that (c)apacity change only occurs when (m)otivations, (o)opportunities, and c(apabilities) are simultaneously present. Mayne (2016, 2017, 2018) was responsible for integrating this model of behavioural change into program theory; it is this COM-B theory of change (ToC) that has been used as the conceptual framework for this research. In Mayne’s COM-B ToC, capacity change outcomes are situated mid-results chain and are accompanied by both precedent and antecedent outcomes. A tailored ToC for integrating GBA+ in the federal government’s evaluation function is presented in the thesis that aligns with the changing state of GBA+ implementation across the policy cycle, honing in on the federal government evaluation function. This research was initiated before the specific articulation of GBA+ as a federal government priority in the Policy on Results (Treasury Board Secretariat, 2016); the conceptual framework serves to capture the dynamic nature of the state of GBA/+ implementation across the federal government’s policy cycle. This research adopted a mixed-methods approach involving qualitative and quantitative lines of evidence as recognized by Greene (2007). Supporting lines of evidence included: • A survey was administered to the Heads of Evaluation (HoE) who are senior level decision-makers responsible for the evaluation function within each federal government organization. Survey questions posed addressed the entire tailored ToC. Responses were intentionally designed to solicit binary responses; • A critical review of all publicly accessible federal government produced resources exploring the linkage between gender mainstreaming, GBA and GBA+ and evaluation; • Key informant interviews comprised of representatives from various federal government organizations including leads from central agencies and those responsible for gender mainstreaming, academics with expertise in feminist evaluation, Equity Diversity and Inclusion (EDI), and • Case studies of federal government evaluation functions exploring the integration of GBA+ in evaluation efforts (n=6). Each case study focused on a different element of GBA+ evaluation integration. Focus areas of each case study included: 1 organization focused on building evaluation function capacity to integrate GBA+, 1 organization focused on building capacity to integrate GBA+ amongst the evaluation and performance measurement and/or results unit, and 4 organizations focused on a single program. Each case study included the following lines of evidence: a literature review, a review of evaluations for GBA+ since 2016, a review of organizational documentation, key informant interviews, and for 3 case studies, a combination of focus groups/information exchange sessions. The COM-B tailored ToC for integrating GBA/+ in the federal government’s evaluation function encompasses a causal outcome pathway represented by a results chain. These pathways map a series of outcomes extending from activities and outputs, stakeholder reach/reaction, capacity change, behaviour change, direct benefits, and improved well-being. Each of these outcomes has multiple accompanying assumptions. Data from the tailored ToC is presented across thesis chapters. Despite widespread recognition of nascent GBA+ policy requirements and the federal government’s GBA+ tool, little GBA+ instrumental evaluation use has resulted. A wide interval exists however between awareness and use. Nestled between building GBA+ capacity and instrumental use within evaluation functions, are multiple examples of GBA+ conceptual and process use. Many organizations are aware of the federal government’s GBA+ tool, but there is inconsistent uptake of related training opportunities to build this capacity. Many federal organizations have undertaken only comparative or additive intersectional analysis and indicated limited intention to progress to interactional or truly intersectional integration analysis. To some extent, evaluation functions must navigate their course in this uncharted territory. Federal government organizations identifying as having established some capacity for GBA+ integration have developed unique GBA+ evaluation tools specific to their organizations in the absence of central agency guidance materials and a lack of evaluation function engagement of Gender Champions (GC) and Gender Focal Points (GFP). This research provided the first examination within the governmental contexts of efforts to integrate intersectional research within evaluation functions. While providing answers to many questions, many more arise – consequently providing the foundation for a potential future research program.