GBA+ Implementation Survey Results

PDF Version
[PDF - 130 KB]

Infographic
Infographic: GBA+ Implementation Survey Results

GBA+ Implementation Survey Results Highlights

The results of the second annual Gender-based Analysis Plus (GBA+) Implementation Survey shed light on the state of GBA+ implementation across 49 departments and agencies in the Government of Canada in 2016-2017.

CAPACITY

Most organizations report having key elements of GBA+ capacity in place, including:

[Graphic]

  • 86% of organizations have a GBA+ Champion or other senior management lead.
  • 80% of organizations have discussions of GBA+ at senior management committees.
  • 69% of organizations have GBA+ tools and resources to assist employees.
  • 69% of organizations have a GBA+ responsibility centre.

Significant progress has been made in the past year in almost every element of GBA+ capacity.

Results from the 30 organizations that responded in 2016 and 2017 surveys.

[Graphic]

  • 100% of organizations in 2017 had a GBA+ Champion or other senior management lead compared to 80% of organizations in 2016.
  • 90% of organizations in 2017 had GBA+ tools and resources to assist employees compared to 80% of organizations in 2016.
  • 87% of organizations in 2017 had a formal GBA+ policy or statement compared to 83% of organizations in 2016.
  • 87% of organizations in 2017 had a GBA+ responsibility centre compared to 77% of organizations in 2016.
  • 70% of organizations in 2017 had an intra-departmental network or working group compared to 57% of organizations in 2016.
  • 70% of organizations in both 2017 and 2016 had resources to support GBA+ training for employees.
  • 67% of organizations in 2017 had a departmental GBA+ action plan compared to 40% of organizations in 2016.

There has been an increase in the number of full-time equivalents (FTEs) dedicated to supporting GBA+ in organizations.

Results from the 30 organizations that responded in 2016 and 2017 surveys.

[Graphic]

  • In 2016, 10% of organizations had more than 5 FTEs dedicated to GBA+; 70% of organizations had between 1 and 5 FTEs dedicated to GBA+; and 20% of organizations had no FTEs dedicated to supporting GBA+.
  • In 2017, 45% of organizations had more than 5 FTWs dedicated to GBA+ and 55% of organizations had between 1 and 5 FTEs dedicated to GBA+.

TRAINING

[Graphic]

Almost ¾ of organizations reported using the SWC GBA+ course as mandatory or recommended training for policy analysts.

Mandatory GBA+ training has become more common.

Results from the 30 organizations that responded in 2016 and 2017 surveys.

[Graphic]

Percentage of organizations with mandatory GBA+ training:

  • In 2016, 47% organizations had mandatory GBA+ training.
  • In 2017, 57% organizations had mandatory GBA+ training.

The SWC online GBA+ course makes up the majority of GBA+ training across all functional areas listed in the survey. Only three of the functional areas are shown.

Only three of the functional areas are shown.

[Graphic]

  • For policy groups, organizations reported that the SWC introduction to GBA+ course made up 73% of GBA+ training; other GBA+ training made up 8%; and 19% of organizations indicated no GBA+ training or not applicable.
  • For research groups, organizations reported that the SWC introduction to GBA+ course made up 54% of GBA+ training; other GBA+ training made up 8%; and 38% of organizations indicated no GBA+ training or not applicable.
  • For procurement groups, organizations reported that the SWC introduction to GBA+ course made up 43% of GBA+ training; other GBA+ training made up 4%; and 53% of organizations indicated no GBA+ training or not applicable.

81% of organizations indicate that GBA+ training is taken by those in policy.

APPLICATION

GBA+ is generally applied to the core four phases of the policy cycle (analysis, option development, decision making and implementation), but less frequently to the problem definition and evaluation phases.

[Graphic]

Frequency GBA+ is often/always/sometimes applied in the Policy Cycle.

  1. 63% of organizations indicated they often/always/sometimes applied GBA+ in the problem definition phase;
  2. 78% of organizations indicated they often/always/sometimes applied in the analysis and research phase;
  3. 78% of organizations indicated they often/always/sometimes applied in the option development phase;
  4. 79% of organizations indicated they often/always/sometimes applied in the decision making phase;
  5. 80% of organizations indicated they often/always/sometimes applied in the policy/program implementation phase;
  6. 73% of organizations indicated they often/always/sometimes applied in the policy/program evaluation phase.

Majority of organizations report that Memorandum to Cabinets (MC) and Treasury Board (TB) submissions include GBA+. Beyond MCs/TB submissions and legislation, GBA+ is less integrated in other activities.

[Graphic]

  • 97% of organizations reported they often/always integrated GBA+ in Memoranda to Cabinet, and 3% of organizations reported they sometimes integrated GBA+ in Memoranda to Cabinet
  • 91% of organizations reported they often/always integrated GBA+ in TB submissions, 5% of organizations reported they sometimes integrated GBA+ in TB submissions, and 4% of organizations reported they rarely or never integrated GBA+ in TB submissions
  • 76% of organizations reported they often/always integrated GBA+ in legislation, 10% of organizations reported they sometimes integrated GBA+ in legislation, and 14% of organizations reported they rarely or never integrated GBA+ in legislation
  • 48% of organizations reported they often/always integrated GBA+ in regulations, 19% of organizations reported they sometimes integrated GBA+ in regulations, and 32% of organizations reported they rarely or never integrated GBA+ in regulations
  • 30% of organizations reported they often/always integrated GBA+ in DRF and DPR, 37% of organizations reported they sometimes integrated GBA+ in DRF and DPR, and 33% of organizations reported they rarely or never integrated GBA+ in DRF and DPR
  • 27% of organizations reported they often/always integrated GBA+ in training design and development, 32% of organizations reported they sometimes integrated GBA+ in training design and development and 41% of organizations reported they rarely or never integrated GBA+ in training design and development
  • 18% of organizations reported they often/always, 13% of organizations reported they sometimes and 69% of organizations reported they rarely or never integrated in procurement

DATA COLLECTION

More organizations appear to be collecting gender-disaggregated data and producing internal or public research reports that include gender and diversity perspectives.

[Graphic]

  • 83% of organizations in 2017 collected gender-disaggregated data compared to 77% in 2016.

CHALLENGES

  • Less than half of departments and agencies had a GBA+ action plan and most identified a lack of internal mechanisms as a barrier to GBA+ implementation.
  • Most GBA+ training continues to be non-mandatory and focused on policy analysis.
  • GBA+ is still less integrated in some phases of the policy cycle.
  • Departments and agencies report that access to gender-disaggregated data is still a significant barrier.
  • Less than half of departments and agencies tracked GBA+ in MCs and TB submissions or other documents; 40% report that no tracking of GBA+ implementation or its impacts was in place.

To ensure that action is taken to address each of these gaps and challenges, the survey results will inform an updated 2016-2020 GBA+ Action Plan, and will guide SWC’s work in the coming year with members of the Interdepartmental GBA+ Committee. The survey’s results were also included in SWC’s report to the Standing Committee on the Status of Women (FEWO) and the Standing Committee on Public Accounts (PACP) in March 2018.

Date modified: