The Feminist Innovation in Monitoring and Evaluation (FIME) Small Awards have produced something very tangible for practitioners: six concrete toolkits that cover the full evaluation cycle, from policy design and crisis response to relocation, community projects, impact investing, and evaluator training. They were developed in real-world settings and respond to gaps most of us know too well: what women and marginalized groups describe as transformative change rarely shows up in our logframes or indicators.
All six toolkits are freely available on BetterEvaluation.org, with manuals, examples, and downloadable resources for direct use in your work.
1. Toolkit to Strengthen Gender Policies (Ecuador)
This toolkit supports ministries, public agencies, and other institutions to diagnose gender policies, develop indicators, and assess results in a systematic way, using a feminist and intersectional lens that explicitly asks “who is being left behind.” It connects diagnostics, indicator design, theories of change, and mixed methods with a focus on power, resources, and norms.
When to use it
- Ex ante: Gender impact assessments for new policies, strategies, or programs.
- Mid‑term: Reviewing gender dimensions within sector strategies (labor, education, urban development, social protection, etc.).
- Ex post: Assessing whether gender policies have actually shifted power, access to resources, and institutional practice.
Evaluation stages
- Scoping and design: Gender‑transformative theory of change, evaluation questions, and indicator frameworks.
- Data collection and analysis: Integrating administrative data, surveys, and qualitative methods with explicit gender and diversity disaggregation.
- Use and follow‑up: Feeding findings into policy revisions, budget allocations, and institutional reforms.
Data and stakeholder needs
- Administrative and monitoring data on programs, budgets, staffing, and target groups.
- Disaggregated outcome data (sex, age, location, ethnicity, disability, etc.).
- Engagement of policy makers, line ministries, gender units, civil society, and affected groups in defining questions and interpreting results.
2. Phoenix Metric: Gender Social Return on Investment (G‑SROI)
The Phoenix Metric is a feminist social return on investment framework that redefines “return” so it centers what women and marginalized communities themselves describe as transformation: decision‑making power, safety, care burdens, solidarity, and intergenerational change. It combines a set of structured indices with narrative valuation scales to quantify outcomes that resist market‑based proxies.
When to use it
- Summative evaluations of programs with clear investment volumes: women’s economic empowerment, inclusive business, gender‑lens funds, blended finance vehicles.
- Portfolio‑level comparisons of where investments generate the strongest gender‑transformative return per dollar invested.
- Strategic communication with ministries, parliaments, funds, and philanthropic donors.
Evaluation stages
- Design: Adding feminist impact dimensions and indices to existing results frameworks.
- Data collection: Using structured questionnaires and participatory techniques (story circles, participatory proxy development) to build the indices together with communities.
- Analysis: Calculating a G‑SROI ratio and using sensitivity analysis to discuss assumptions with funders and partners.
Data and stakeholder needs
- Financial data on investments and operating costs.
- Primary data on agency, safety, unpaid care, collective action, and aspirations of women and girls.
- Time and trust to engage communities as co‑producers of indicators and narratives, not just respondents.
3. Feminist Evaluation Toolkit for Crisis Contexts
This toolkit builds on a synthesis of 17 feminist evaluations in humanitarian and crisis settings. It bridges the gap between feminist evaluation theory and the realities of conflict, disasters, epidemics, and protracted crises, where standard evaluations tend to track only short‑term outputs such as shelters built or cash transferred.
When to use it
- Real‑time and mid‑term evaluations of humanitarian programs (cash, food assistance, WASH, SRHR, GBV, protection).
- Learning exercises in complex, multi‑phase crises where gender dynamics shift quickly.
- Designing crisis MEL systems that take risk, trauma, and power relations seriously.
Evaluation stages
- Planning: Integrating feminist evaluation questions, ethics and risk analysis, and safe access strategies into the TOR and design.
- Methods: Choosing context‑appropriate qualitative and participatory methods (most significant change, outcome harvesting, safe digital approaches, adapted sampling).
- Analysis and use: Intersectional analysis, co‑interpretation of findings with affected groups, and careful dissemination that does no harm.
Data and stakeholder needs
- Context, conflict, and GBV risk analyses, as well as available humanitarian datasets.
- Safe access to women, girls, and marginalized groups via trusted local partners; strong protocols on consent, anonymity, and referral.
- Joint work with UN agencies, NGOs, national crisis structures, and women’s rights organizations.
4. Participatory M&E Toolkit for the Relocation of Maasai Women (Tanzania)
This toolkit translates feminist principles into the specific field of relocation and displacement, drawing on work with Maasai women in Tanzania. It responds to a classic gap: relocation evaluations often focus on visible outputs such as houses or compensation, rather than on power, agency, cultural continuity, and long‑term livelihoods.
When to use it
- Evaluations of resettlement and relocation linked to infrastructure, conservation, or land‑use change.
- Designing monitoring systems for projects that involve displacement of indigenous or rural communities.
- Documenting negotiation processes, decision‑making, and gendered impacts in relocation boards and committees.
Evaluation stages
- Planning and design: Co‑defining evaluation criteria and questions with women and community representatives; clarifying who decides what.
- Data collection: Using participatory tools (e.g., community mapping, timelines, collective reflection sessions) that center women’s experiences, subjectivity, and agency.
- Analysis and use: Joint sense‑making with communities, feedback loops into community assemblies and decision spaces, and advocacy for policy or project changes.
Data and stakeholder needs
- Baseline information prior to relocation (livelihoods, access to land and water, care arrangements, cultural practices).
- Longitudinal qualitative data on how women experience the move, the trade‑offs, and evolving gender roles.
- Engagement of indigenous women, community leaders, governmental authorities, project developers, and NGOs.
5. Adaptive Toolkit for Living Projects (Central Asia)
The “Living Projects” toolkit is designed as a starter kit for civil society organizations that want monitoring and evaluation to be a human‑centered, decolonial, feminist learning process. It uses simple, accessible exercises (for example, “the other question,” iceberg metaphors, automatic writing) to make project plans flexible and responsive to real needs of women and girls.
When to use it
- Project design and theory of change work in NGOs, grassroots initiatives, feminist collectives, and community groups.
- Ongoing monitoring that helps teams adjust activities as context and priorities shift.
- Qualitative, reflective components in evaluations where there is little internal M&E capacity.
Evaluation stages
- Co‑design: Joint goal setting, power and context analysis, and identification of local strengths rather than deficits.
- Monitoring: A five‑step adaptive project cycle that teams can revisit at any time; monitoring is a continuous reflective process, not a one‑off exercise.
- Evaluation: Using the qualitative material generated by the exercises as data and as a basis for collective interpretation.
Data and stakeholder needs
- Largely qualitative, experience‑based information from staff, volunteers, beneficiaries, and community members.
- Time and space for facilitated reflection sessions that include both project teams and participants.
- Organizational willingness to loosen rigid logframes and treat M&E as shared learning.
6. Holistic Transformative Evaluator Framework (Asia–Pacific)
This framework focuses on the upstream side of quality: evaluator competencies and training systems. It builds on a landscape analysis of existing gender‑related evaluation training in the Asia–Pacific region and identifies an “articulation gap,” where technical and quantitative skills dominate while reflexivity, context sensitivity, cognitive pluralism, and inner work receive far less attention.
The framework defines five competency domains (political, social, contextual, methodological‑complexity, inner) and proposes pedagogical formats such as meta‑concept workshops, co‑design modules, simulations, and ethical role play.
When to use it
- Redesigning curricula in evaluation training centers, universities, and professional networks.
- Planning in‑house capacity building for M&E units in public agencies, multilaterals, or NGOs.
- Auditing existing courses for their ability to support gender‑transformative and decolonial practice.
Evaluation stages
- Before evaluations: As a competency blueprint for recruitment, training, and mentoring of evaluators.
- After evaluations: As a self‑assessment and reflection tool to identify learning needs and adjust future practice.
Data and stakeholder needs
- Information on current training offers, learning objectives, teaching methods, and participant profiles.
- Feedback from evaluators, trainers, and commissioners on skill gaps and emerging needs.
- Collaboration with universities, professional associations, and development organizations to institutionalize the framework.
Quick Guide: Which Tool for Which Job?
You can use the following overview as a practical entry point when deciding which toolkit to explore in more depth on BetterEvaluation.org.
| Toolkit | Best fit situations | Main evaluation stages | Core data needs | Key stakeholders | Practical payoff |
| Toolkit to Strengthen Gender Policies | Government policies and programs that should integrate gender more systematically | Design, mid‑term, ex‑post policy and systems evaluations | Administrative and monitoring data, disaggregated outcome data, qualitative policy and budget insights | Ministries, government agencies, gender units, CSOs, affected groups | Makes gender in public policy visible and measurable, with concrete indicators and tools |
| Phoenix Metric – G‑SROI | Programs and investments with explicit gender equality objectives, impact funds | Mainly summative impact assessments; also design of new investments | Financial data, structured indices on agency, safety, care, solidarity, narratives | Evaluators, program teams, impact investors, donors, ministries | Turns feminist impact into an SROI‑style metric decision‑makers can understand and act on |
| Feminist Evaluation Toolkit for Crisis Contexts | Humanitarian programs, fragile and crisis‑affected settings | Planning, implementation, analysis, and use of crisis evaluations | Crisis and GBV data, qualitative and participatory data, risk and ethics information | UN, NGOs, crisis agencies, women’s rights groups, communities | Offers tested, safe, feminist methods for evaluation under high risk and uncertainty |
| Participatory M&E Toolkit for Relocation of Maasai Women | Relocation, resettlement, large infrastructure or conservation projects affecting indigenous communities | Planning, data collection, analysis, and use in resettlement evaluations | Baseline and follow‑up data on livelihoods, land, care, culture; rich qualitative data | Indigenous women, community leaders, authorities, project sponsors, NGOs | Brings women’s voices and power relations in relocation to the center of assessment and decision‑making |
| Adaptive Toolkit for Living Projects | Civil society and grassroots projects, especially where formal M&E capacity is limited | Project design, ongoing monitoring, qualitative evaluation | Qualitative experience and reflection data from teams and communities | Program teams, local activists, participants, M&E facilitators | Low‑threshold entry into feminist, decolonial, and human‑centered MEL for CSOs |
| Holistic Transformative Evaluator Framework | Evaluation training systems, professional development, curriculum review | Upstream capacity development; post‑hoc reflection on practice | Curricula, course descriptions, competence self‑assessments, feedback | Training centers, universities, evaluation networks, agencies | Provides a benchmark and blueprint for truly gender‑transformative evaluator competencies |
Each toolkit is described in detail on BetterEvaluation.org, with links to manuals, webinars, blog posts, and examples from practice. For the webinar presentations, you can also refer to the recording on YouTube, which brings the voices of the awardees and partners into the picture.
Text and Image supported by AI. Published first at https://deveval.wordpress.com/2026/03/31/feminist-innovation-in-evaluation-practice-six-tools-you-can-use-now/