A: The GAM is not primarily intended to be an externally applied ‘testing’ or ‘compliance’ tool: it is a learning tool for project improvement by the designers and implementers. It is not possible to review all the elements of the GAM for each project.
Donors, clusters, and/or HCT are recommended to spot-check GAM and GEM codes as part of the project review process. This can be done by a panel with gender, age and programming experience collaboratively spot check to review random or different combinations of the 4 key GEMs.
Clusters or organizations may also decide to identify which GEMS are most important or of greatest interest to them. Depending on the country/cluster/donor strategy, reviewers may decide to focus on participation, accountability/complaints mechanisms or perhaps program consistency and responsiveness.
If reviewers feel that the key indicators (“GEMs”) have not been adequately addressed in design (i.e. that gender differences are clearly evident in the analysis, tailoring of activities, influence/participation, and project benefits) they may want to refer to the narrative explanations and references provided in the GAM tool, to ensure good gender programming is equally reflected in the project narrative and logframe.