She Leads in Crisis Report Card - CARE

She Leads in Crisis Report Card

CARE report reveals how the aid system shortchanged women and girls in crisis.

A woman wearing a purple shirt smiles and raises her right arm. She is walking with three other women, all wearing matching purple shirts.

“Time for a Better Bargain: How the Aid  System Shortchanges Women and Girls in Crisis” assesses the top 11 donors and 5 UN agencies on three priority areas.

Summary Report Card

Read the full report

In recent years, donor countries and agencies have engaged in unprecedented discussions and commitments to gender equality, from setting feminist development policies to passing UN resolutions on Women, Peace and Security. But despite the talk, the numbers tell a different story—one in which women and girls still get shortchanged.

An infographic showing aid to women's groups as a percentage of gross national income.

An infographic showing the amount of money allocated to women's groups in fragile states for every $1,000 in official development assistance.

We Demand That #SheLeadsInCrisis

When women lead, they're a force to be reckoned with.

An image of a smiling woman with overlaid text that reads,

Benchmarks

This report uses benchmarks from the High-Level Roundtable on Women and Girls at the first-ever World Humanitarian Summit. CARE chose the most specific, relevant and measurable of the sample benchmarks that would genuinely lead to gender transformative change. These indicators reflect emerging global norms and standards around gender in humanitarian settings, and align to existing commitments rooted in the United Nations Women, Peace and Security Agenda, as well as Sustainable Development Goal 5 on gender equality and empowerment of all women and girls.

 

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020

UN Agencies and wealthy donor countries fall short of adequately funding women’s groups when responding to crises in fragile and conflict-affected states. Despite modest increased funding to gender equality efforts since the Grand Bargain agreement adopted in the 2016 World Humanitarian Summit, women’s organizations remain severely underfunded. Most donors reviewed allocate only a fraction of 1% to directly funding women’s organizations.

Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs

Programs focused on women and girls in humanitarian crisis responses are routinely underfunded by donor countries. The average funding of humanitarian appeals is 61%. Yet programs that address gender-based violence, reproductive health and child protection are funded at 33%, 43% and 50%, respectively. To remedy this, donor countries must ensure at least 15% of all funding goes specifically to gender equality programming in humanitarian settings.

Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls

When a crisis hits, women and girls are affected differently than men and boys. Women are more likely to be displaced, subjected to gender-based violence, lose livelihoods, or go hungry in emergencies. To effectively respond to humanitarian crises, UN agencies and donor countries must guarantee that all programs in humanitarian settings account equally for the needs of women and girls and men and boys.

Indicator 4
Include Women’s Organizations as 25% of Implementing Partners

Women-led and women’s rights organizations must be included as partners because they typically know their communities best and can reach the most marginalized populations. Despite that fact, none of the UN agencies contacted for this report currently track data on how many of their implementing partners are women’s rights organizations or women-led organizations.

Indicator 5
Ensure Women’s Representation in National Humanitarian Cluster Groups

Humanitarian clusters, usually led by a UN agency and co-led by an international NGO, play critical coordination, leadership, and accountability roles in crisis response. Women’s voices and inputs are critical to mounting effective, inclusive crisis response. Still, cluster groups don’t prioritize (or at the very least track) representation of women’s rights and women-led organizations at the field cluster level.

Indicator 6
Advance Gender Parity in Humanitarian UN Leadership

Most UN Agencies have made impressive gains toward gender parity in influential humanitarian leadership positions. While women’s leadership in humanitarian contexts has been increasing—over 37% of UN Humanitarian Coordinators are women today, compared to 20% in 2010—progress has been uneven. Women must hold at least 40% of top posts at UN agencies if the international community seeks to lead by example on gender equal leadership.

Indicator 7
Women Should Make Up At Least 30% of UN Staff

All of the UN agencies with published information on staffing have well over 30% female employees. These staffing levels include headquarters and non-headquarters staff. Staffing levels are not broken down by crisis and non-crisis affected countries, which may skew the results in favor of agencies with a presence in more countries where they only implement development programs. Nonetheless, such gender parity reflects robust progress and impressive political will.

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020

UN Agencies and wealthy donor countries fall short of adequately funding women’s groups when responding to crises in fragile and conflict-affected states. Despite modest increased funding to gender equality efforts since the Grand Bargain agreement adopted in the 2016 World Humanitarian Summit, women’s organizations remain severely underfunded. Most donors reviewed allocate only a fraction of 1% to directly funding women’s organizations.

Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs

Programs focused on women and girls in humanitarian crisis responses are routinely underfunded by donor countries. The average funding of humanitarian appeals is 61%. Yet programs that address gender-based violence, reproductive health and child protection are funded at 33%, 43% and 50%, respectively. To remedy this, donor countries must ensure at least 15% of all funding goes specifically to gender equality programming in humanitarian settings.

Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls

When a crisis hits, women and girls are affected differently than men and boys. Women are more likely to be displaced, subjected to gender-based violence, lose livelihoods, or go hungry in emergencies. To effectively respond to humanitarian crises, UN agencies and donor countries must guarantee that all programs in humanitarian settings account equally for the needs of women and girls and men and boys.

Indicator 4
Include Women’s Organizations as 25% of Implementing Partners

Women-led and women’s rights organizations must be included as partners because they typically know their communities best and can reach the most marginalized populations. Despite that fact, none of the UN agencies contacted for this report currently track data on how many of their implementing partners are women’s rights organizations or women-led organizations.

Indicator 5
Ensure Women’s Representation in National Humanitarian Cluster Groups

Humanitarian clusters, usually led by a UN agency and co-led by an international NGO, play critical coordination, leadership, and accountability roles in crisis response. Women’s voices and inputs are critical to mounting effective, inclusive crisis response. Still, cluster groups don’t prioritize (or at the very least track) representation of women’s rights and women-led organizations at the field cluster level.

Indicator 6
Advance Gender Parity in Humanitarian UN Leadership

Most UN Agencies have made impressive gains toward gender parity in influential humanitarian leadership positions. While women’s leadership in humanitarian contexts has been increasing—over 37% of UN Humanitarian Coordinators are women today, compared to 20% in 2010—progress has been uneven. Women must hold at least 40% of top posts at UN agencies if the international community seeks to lead by example on gender equal leadership.

Indicator 7
Women Should Make Up At Least 30% of UN Staff

All of the UN agencies with published information on staffing have well over 30% female employees. These staffing levels include headquarters and non-headquarters staff. Staffing levels are not broken down by crisis and non-crisis affected countries, which may skew the results in favor of agencies with a presence in more countries where they only implement development programs. Nonetheless, such gender parity reflects robust progress and impressive political will.

Data Sources

For this report, CARE drew on the most up-to-date information made publicly available by donors and UN agencies to commonly used, credible, multilateral databases. To analyze donor funding, CARE used the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) database, which requires OECD member states to report on gender equality programming and on funding to women’s rights organizations, movements and ministries. For UN agencies, CARE analyzed funding data published on the International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI) digital portal, which categorizes information using the same codes and criteria as the OECD, and considered the basis for a common standard for publishing data on humanitarian funding.

There is currently no universally reliable, systemic, harmonized database available for the data sought on resourcing and supporting women-led crisis response. While some databases exist, most track individual agencies or donors with varying approaches and coding, rendering them unfit for the purpose of cross-actor comparison or tracking funding in aggregate.

 

Donor Countries

Donor countries were assessed on their reported levels of resourcing to women’s rights organizations, women-led organizations and women’s institutions in crisis-affected areas and funding for gender-equality and empowerment of women and girls programming.

Canada

Canada

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Satisfactory  

Learn more about Canada’s score

Canada

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Satisfactory  

Learn more about Canada’s score

Denmark

Denmark

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Unsatisfactory  

Learn more about Denmark’s score

Denmark

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Unsatisfactory  

Learn more about Denmark’s score

France

France

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Unsatisfactory  

Learn more about France’s score

France

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Unsatisfactory  

Learn more about France’s score

Germany

Germany

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
 Unsatisfactory  

Learn more about Germany’s score

Germany

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
 Unsatisfactory  

Learn more about Germany’s score

Japan

Japan

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Approaching  


Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Satisfactory  

Learn more about Japan’s score

Japan

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Approaching  


Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Satisfactory  

Learn more about Japan’s score

The Netherlands

The Netherlands

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Satisfactory 


Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Satisfactory  

Learn more about the Netherlands’ score

The Netherlands

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Satisfactory 


Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Satisfactory  

Learn more about the Netherlands’ score

Norway

Norway

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Approaching  


Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Approaching  

Learn more about Norway’s score

Norway

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Approaching  


Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Approaching  

Learn more about Norway’s score

Sweden

Sweden

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Satisfactory  

Learn more about Sweden’s score

Sweden

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Satisfactory  

Learn more about Sweden’s score

United Kingdom

United Kingdom

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Unsatisfactory  

Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Approaching  

Learn more about the United Kingdom’s score

United Kingdom

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Unsatisfactory  

Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Approaching  

Learn more about the United Kingdom’s score

United States

United States

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Unsatisfactory  

Learn more about the United States’ score

United States

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Unsatisfactory  

Learn more about the United States’ score

European Union

European Union

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Unsatisfactory  

Learn more about the European Union’s score

European Union

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Unsatisfactory  


Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Unsatisfactory  

Learn more about the European Union’s score

UN Agencies

UN Agencies were assessed on resourcing to women’s rights organizations, women-led organizations and women’s institutions in crisis-affected areas; funding for gender equality and empowerment of women’s and girls’ programming; and inclusion of women and women’s organizations in leadership and equal participation in humanitarian responses and crises.

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)

UNDP

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Approaching  

Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Unsatisfactory  

Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Satisfactory  

Indicator 4
Include Women’s Organizations as 25% of Implementing Partners
  Missing  

Indicator 6
Advance Gender Parity in Humanitarian UN Leadership
  Unsatisfactory  

Indicator 7
Women Should Make Up At Least 30% of UN Staff
  Satisfactory  

Learn more about UNDP’s score

UNDP

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Approaching  

Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Unsatisfactory  

Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Satisfactory  

Indicator 4
Include Women’s Organizations as 25% of Implementing Partners
  Missing  

Indicator 6
Advance Gender Parity in Humanitarian UN Leadership
  Unsatisfactory  

Indicator 7
Women Should Make Up At Least 30% of UN Staff
  Satisfactory  

Learn more about UNDP’s score

United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)

UNFPA

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Satisfactory  

Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Missing  

Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Missing  

Indicator 4
Include Women’s Organizations as 25% of Implementing Partners
  Missing  

Indicator 6
Advance Gender Parity in Humanitarian UN Leadership
  Satisfactory  

Indicator 7
Women Should Make Up At Least 30% of UN Staff
  Satisfactory  

Learn more about UNFPA’s score

UNFPA

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Satisfactory  

Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Missing  

Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Missing  

Indicator 4
Include Women’s Organizations as 25% of Implementing Partners
  Missing  

Indicator 6
Advance Gender Parity in Humanitarian UN Leadership
  Satisfactory  

Indicator 7
Women Should Make Up At Least 30% of UN Staff
  Satisfactory  

Learn more about UNFPA’s score

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)

UNHCR

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Missing  

Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Missing  

Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Missing  

Indicator 4
Include Women’s Organizations as 25% of Implementing Partners
  Missing  

Indicator 6
Advance Gender Parity in Humanitarian UN Leadership
  Unsatisfactory  

Indicator 7
Women Should Make Up At Least 30% of UN Staff
  Satisfactory  

Learn more about UNHCR’s score

UNHCR

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Missing  

Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Missing  

Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Missing  

Indicator 4
Include Women’s Organizations as 25% of Implementing Partners
  Missing  

Indicator 6
Advance Gender Parity in Humanitarian UN Leadership
  Unsatisfactory  

Indicator 7
Women Should Make Up At Least 30% of UN Staff
  Satisfactory  

Learn more about UNHCR’s score

United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF)

UNICEF

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Approaching  

Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Satisfactory  

Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Satisfactory  

Indicator 4
Include Women’s Organizations as 25% of Implementing Partners
  Missing  

Indicator 6
Advance Gender Parity in Humanitarian UN Leadership
  Satisfactory  

Indicator 7
Women Should Make Up At Least 30% of UN Staff
  Satisfactory  

Learn more about UNICEF’s score

UNICEF

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Approaching  

Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Satisfactory  

Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Satisfactory  

Indicator 4
Include Women’s Organizations as 25% of Implementing Partners
  Missing  

Indicator 6
Advance Gender Parity in Humanitarian UN Leadership
  Satisfactory  

Indicator 7
Women Should Make Up At Least 30% of UN Staff
  Satisfactory  

Learn more about UNICEF’s score

World Food Programme (WFP)

WFP

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Missing  

Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Missing  

Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Missing  

Indicator 4
Include Women’s Organizations as 25% of Implementing Partners
  Missing  

Indicator 6
Advance Gender Parity in Humanitarian UN Leadership
  Unsatisfactory  

Indicator 7
Women Should Make Up At Least 30% of UN Staff
  Satisfactory  

Learn more about WFP’s score

WFP

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Missing  

Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Missing  

Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Missing  

Indicator 4
Include Women’s Organizations as 25% of Implementing Partners
  Missing  

Indicator 6
Advance Gender Parity in Humanitarian UN Leadership
  Unsatisfactory  

Indicator 7
Women Should Make Up At Least 30% of UN Staff
  Satisfactory  

Learn more about WFP’s score

CARE Self-Assessment

Six of the seven indicators in this report are relevant to CARE and not just donors and UN agencies. CARE funds women’s rights and women-led organizations, has implementing partners, aspires to gender-transformative programming and has thousands of staff working in crisis-affected countries around the world.

CARE

CARE

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Missing  

Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Satisfactory  

Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Satisfactory  

Indicator 4
Include Women’s Organizations as 25% of Implementing Partners
  Satisfactory  

Indicator 6
Advance Gender Parity in Humanitarian  Leadership
  Unsatisfactory  

Indicator 7
Women Should Make Up At Least 30% of Staff
  Satisfactory  

Learn more about CARE’s score

CARE

Indicator 1
Increase Funding to Women’s Groups to 4% by 2020
  Missing  

Indicator 2
Allocate 15% of Funding to Gender Equality Programs
  Satisfactory  

Indicator 3
Account Equally for the Needs of Women and Girls
  Satisfactory  

Indicator 4
Include Women’s Organizations as 25% of Implementing Partners
  Satisfactory  

Indicator 6
Advance Gender Parity in Humanitarian  Leadership
  Unsatisfactory  

Indicator 7
Women Should Make Up At Least 30% of Staff
  Satisfactory  

Learn more about CARE’s score

Where do we go from here?

We walk the talk. We hold major aid actors to account on gender equality commitments. We galvanize action on funding and participation of women in leading crisis response.

As part of the aid system, we call on donors, UN agencies and fellow INGOs to:

  • Adopt gender-specific commitments to hold the aid system accountable to funding and inclusion of women and girls in crisis response​.
  • Systematically track and report funding to and partnerships with women- and girls-led and women’s rights organizations.
  • Increase the amount and quality of humanitarian funding that goes to organizations that are led by women or focused on women, girls or gender (including by reducing bureaucratic hurdles to accessing and administering funds, and providing core, flexible, multi-year funding).
  • Actively champion and ensure that local women and women’s organizations are equitably represented and have an equal voice in humanitarian decision-making structures.

Now more than ever, funding and influence must flow into women- and girls-led crisis response, for effective, long-lasting, intergenerational impact. Please sign our global petition.

Tell Global Leaders: She Leads In Crisis

Women and girls know best what they need in crises, yet they are often severely under resourced and excluded from decisions that impact them.

Sign the Petition
Embark

As an example of direct quality funding to women and girl-led efforts, Embark, an initiative of CARE, is a collective of members and activist advisors that creates flexible grants, lasting relationships, and distributes time and skills to women and girl-led organizations and leadership.

Learn more about Embark

Footnotes

Indicator 2

For this indicator, CARE has analyzed OECD data which is marked as “gender principal” as a proportion of humanitarian expenditure. According to OECD criteria, projects should be marked gender principal where “gender equality is the main objective of the project/program and is fundamental in its design and expected results. The project/program would not have been undertaken without this gender equality objective.”47

*CARE used 2018 OECD data for donors, except those marked with a single asterisk in the table — Canada, Germany, Norway and Sweden — which are based on updated 2019 OECD data. CARE used IATI 2019 data for UN agencies. IATI and OECD use the same coding and definitions.

**This number illustrates the potential discrepancy between reporting to a public database, such as IATI used in this report and UN reports, as well as variance due to IATI’s coding of “humanitarian activity” which in some situations may be more limited in scope and scale compared to broader funding to fragile states. For example, UNDP notes that based on its internal database, its spending on Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment programming in fragile states is 9.6% of total program spending in those countries, an increase from 7.7% in 2018. UNFPA stated that 15.1% of their programs in 2019 were gender targeted, and 94.6% either targeted or mainstreamed, although this is not disaggregated by crisis and non-crisis contexts.48

Indicator 3

Under OECD coding, such funding includes programs that promote gender equality as their core objective “gender principal” (see above) and those that consider “gender equality is an important and deliberate objective, but not the principal reason for undertaking the project/program” (“gender significant”).56 IATI and OECD use the same coding and definitions.

*CARE used 2018 OECD data for donors, except those marked with a single asterisk (*) in the table — Canada, Germany, Norway, Sweden — which are based on updated 2019 OECD data. CARE used IATI 2019 data for UN agencies. Note that IATI data is updated on an ongoing basis.

**Note that the Directorate General of European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (ECHO), the principal European institution for EU humanitarian relief, has a different gender analysis of its funding. A report published this year on the implementation of its Gender Marker found that in “2016 and 2017, 89% of all DG ECHO-funded actions integrated gender and age considerations either ‘strongly’ (mark ‘2’) or ‘to a certain extent’ (mark ‘1’).”57