job Description
1. Background of the study
Unpaid care and domestic work (UCDW) is direct care of people; such as caring for children, elderly people, people with disability, or caring for the ill, and indirect care or domestic work including cooking, fetching water and fuel wood, cleaning, mending, etc. Unpaid domestic work and caregiving are necessary for social reproduction, the maintenance of the labour force, and the generation of new human potential, however, it is not valued or recognised as work because it is not remunerated. As a result, the workloads of the UCDW mostly rests on women and girls affecting their rights and opportunities for education, their ability to earn a living via paid work, their ability to exercise their social and political rights, and their ability to find time for leisure, self-care, and rest. This also often affects women’s health.
Addressing the unfair distribution of UCDW is slowly gaining momentum as a development agenda starting from initial efforts of the Household Care Survey (HCS) and Rapid Care Analysis (RC), respectively. The HCS generated context-specific evidence on how women, men, and children spend their time, how care is provided, by whom, and the main factors that affect people’s responsibilities for UCDW, such as access to care services, infrastructure, and social norms. The RCA gathered evidence for wider program design to promote the recognition of care work and the identification of practical interventions. The discourse has moved to the development of social and economic policies that support the care economy and help to redistribute the responsibility of unpaid care and domestic work beginning to question why unpaid care hours are not counted and advocating for UCDW to be counted into systems of national accounts. However, in low-income / less developed nations like Zimbabwe, there has been little progress in the implementation of targeted government policies and investments in care-reducing infrastructure and services, policy, and legislative frameworks.
In an international expert meeting on unpaid care work and economic development and well-being organised by the UN In 2008, the ’recognition, reduction and redistribution’ of UCDW was proposed as a model to address UCDW in development. Recognition refers to the inclusion of UCDW in policy documents, national statistics, and compensation for unpaid care workers in social security programs. Reduction refers to the introduction of infrastructure and technology that helps reduce the drudgery of care work. Redistribution refers to sharing the responsibility and cost of care work among men and women, boys and girls, the market (the private sector), the State, and civil society. Since then, Oxfam and others have added a fourth element of representation to this framework, referring to the need for the views of unpaid carers to be heard by policy and decision-makers. In addition, the Sustainable Development Goals, SDG 5.4. has set targets for states to recognize and value unpaid care work by providing public services, infrastructures, and social protection policies.
Oxfam in Zimbabwe, through a grant from the Hewlett Foundation, is implementing an advocacy and influencing project on women’s economic empowerment and care (WE-CARE). The WE-Care project aims to build effective advocacy approaches to transform unpaid care and domestic work, by supporting advocacy and influencing the Government of Zimbabwe and other relevant stakeholders such as the private sector and civil society organisations to make policy commitments on UCDW and engagement with national government actors on policymaking and gender-sensitive budget setting processes to consider access to care-supporting infrastructure and services. Oxfam has been closely working with sector offices such as the Ministry of Women’s Affairs and Community, Small and Medium Enterprise Development, the Zimbabwe Statistical Office (ZimStats), the Parliament of Zimbabwe, and other relevant stakeholders since the beginning of the project.
2. What is the Care Policy Scorecard?
Oxfam in collaboration with like-minded global organisations developed a care scorecard policy tool. The Care Policy Scorecard (hereafter, the ‘Scorecard’) provides care advocates with a practical tool to measure and track government progress and commitments on policies that have a direct impact on care (unpaid and paid) and provides policymakers with evidence and information to make informed decisions on these policies. The Scorecard draws on the work of feminist and development economists and the ILO’s 5R Framework. This is accompanied by a set of policy indicators and questions to assess progress systematically and holistically across relevant public policy areas for unpaid and paid care work.
The Scorecard aims to assess government policy performance and progress on care and care-supporting policies, with outcomes ranging from ‘policy doesn’t exist’ to ‘policy exists and is transformative for care’. Our definition of ‘transformative’ is based on the ILO’s core principles supporting transformative care policies, which stipulate that they are rights-based, and universal, Governments have the overall and primary responsibility and are founded on social dialogue and representation. To help realise this objective, the project has planned an assessment to evaluate and monitor the adoption, funding, implementation, and impact of government policies regarding care work in Zimbabwe and make recommendations for further areas of policy development and investment toward this outcome.
The study is expected to cover care-related public services, infrastructure, social protection policies, and labour policies, sector ministries, the private sector, and civil society organisations are responsible for developing and implementing these policies. Care-related public services include public health services, early childhood care and education, and care services for the elderly, sick, disabled, and people with additional care needs. Infrastructure that help to reduce and redistribute care include, solarised piped water schemes, electricity, sanitation facilities, public transport, and time and energy-saving equipment and technologies (TESET). Social protection policies and programs that can recognise care include public and private pension schemes, cash transfer policies, school meals/food vouchers, and care-sensitive public work programs. Care supporting workplace policies that can redistribute care include paid sick and parental leave, and flexible working conditions that help to accommodate family and work responsibilities, for example, onsite child daycare centers and breastfeeding facilities at workplaces, as well as supporting informal care workers with the necessary social protection policies, and infrastructure support. These care services and policies lie in several sector ministries: Education, Health, Water, Energy, Road and Transport, Agriculture, Labour, and Social Welfare.
Duties and Responsibilities
3. The Aim of the Assessment
The assessment aims to measure performance and progress on policies relating to unpaid care work and cross-sectoral areas by the Government, private sector, and civil society. The assessment will Inform these sectors on gaps and areas of improvement and generate evidence on unpaid care, influence policymakers, civil servants, activists, media, and communities, shape the care policy environment, and firmly put the care agenda within the policy and legislative framework of Zimbabwe.
3.1. The specific objectives are to:
1) Review existing policies, strategies, and reports of government sectors (the types of sectors to be determined –( likely finance, including an analysis of whether the national budget is gender-responsive, health, education, labour and social protection, and infrastructure) to measure the extent to which government policies related to care are adopted, budgeted for, and implemented, or lack of policies and strategies regarding care work.
2) Conduct a gendered analysis of the budget to determine the extent to which the budget adopts a caring economy approach.
3) Understand and determine where there is positive progress in terms of policy implementation and identify gaps and room for improvement.
4) Analyse the extent to which the policies have a transformative effect on care, gender, and intersectionality and discuss options to redistribute and reduce care responsibilities more equitably through increased investment in care infrastructure and care-related policies and services.
5) Provide recommendations for improvement regarding practices, services, policy, and legislative frameworks that can be adapted to various contexts and programs.
3.2. The assessment will assess various documents including:
➢ Policies: Zimbabwean government policies on early childhood and development (daycare centers in public and private sectors), social protection including pension policies, informal work, water and energy management policies, transport policy, science, education, health, technology, and innovation policy, etc.),
➢ Surveys: demographic and health census, household budget surveys, time-use surveys, etc.
➢ Databases: independent evaluations: WHO database, World Bank database, UN database, etc.
In addition, sectors’ programs, strategies, plans, and reports related to care work will be assessed.
4. Research questions.
The specific assessment questions are found on the policy scorecard. However, the general indicative research questions include:
• Are policies related to care work available and/or adopted?
• Are policies in alignment with applicable laws and international standards?
• Are the available policies being implemented and where are the gaps?
• Are policies covering the wider community including underserved and marginalised areas and populations, especially rural and peri-urban areas?
• Are care-supporting facilities and services accessible and reachable to all and prioritise underserved and marginalised populations, including informal workers?
• Are national and local authority budgets sufficiently allocated to implement care-supporting policies, infrastructure, and services (consider both direct implementation and maintenance costs, and indirect personnel and administrative support)
• Are there assigned rights through policy and legislation for decent work, rights for improved and accessible public care and protection services, increased investment in public care for affordable and accessible infrastructure, and quality services that reach underserved and marginalised populations, including informal workers and other groups considered unemployed?
• Is there an appropriate governance arrangement?
• Is there stakeholders’ involvement in policy formulation and implementation, especially for carers, trade unions, informal workers, women’s rights organisations, and social movements? Who are the relevant stakeholders in the care agenda discourse?
• Were policies developed through consultation with women and/or women’s rights organizations from diverse backgrounds?
• Are there effective monitoring and regulatory mechanisms to enable follow-through to hold relevant stakeholders accountable and evaluate the implementation of the policies?
• Are there evidence/case studies that showed positive impacts on the reduction or redistribution of unpaid care work due to policies?
• What are the gaps and areas that require improvement?
Qualifications and Experience
5. Expected Methodology
• Desk review of policies, (to compromise 65% of the assignment) databases, assessments, programs, strategies, plans, reports (CEDAW shadow reports, NGO reports, Media reports), and other relevant documents
• Key informant interviews with government officials (policy makers) and civil servants from different sectors, NGOs/CSOs involved in the care work policy design processes, policy-focused researchers, and other relevant government bodies and community members.
• Focus group discussion with women’s rights organizations, informal workers, and any stakeholders working on thematic issues covered by the different sectors and policy areas.
• Focus group discussion with women community groups, rights holders of the different policies (for example women benefiting from community-based insurance system, working on formal social security schemes, benefiting from onsite-day care centers in the private sector or government ministries, local authorities)
• Supplementary interviews with decision-makers, policy analysts, civil society organizations (CSOs), and people involved in the design and/or implementation of the relevant policy areas.
NOTE: The most likely marginalised and overlooked groups in policymaking must be prioritised when answering assessment questions. Women, youth and older, informally employed, single-parent households, people with disabilities, people on low and informal incomes, and people living in rural areas are among the prioritised groups.
6. Deliverables.
• Inception report detailing the proposed final methodology, work plan and updated timeline, research questions, and interview scripts.
• A draft report (not more than 30 pages including an executive summary excluding and without the annex). The report includes a thorough analysis of policies in place or not, accessibility of policies and services by users, (gender-responsive) budgeting, monitoring trends, and the impact of care and support services, social protection benefits and infrastructure, and their transformational impact on gender and other intersections, as well as possible recommendation for improvement.
• Final report, incorporating feedback and comments from Oxfam (the report should be straightforward to understand and include good graphics (infographics, tables, and visual communication reporting systems).
• Case studies of best practices in policies and programs at local and national levels, including the private sector that demonstrate the distributive and /or reduction nature of equitable care work, show intentional investment in care infrastructure and services, their impact, and lessons for the wider sector (at least 1 case study per sector and with quality photos)
• Key recommendations for care policy asks for a transformative effect.
7. Research audience and use.
The assessment and findings will be used primarily to inform Oxfam’s policy asks and messaging on UCDW as part of the broader advocacy and influencing WE-Care program. The findings will be used by Oxfam in Zimbabwe’s, economic justice and humanitarian program pillars to mainstream the care work agenda into their programmatic work.
The Government and the private sector will be the primary research audience for the findings, and relevant stakeholders, such as INGOs, private sector representatives, social movements, and civil society organisations. A workshop will be organized to validate the first draft findings with Oxfam staff, government, private sector representatives, and key stakeholders.
8. Expertise required.
The consultant team should be led by a gender specialist with a PhD or at a minimum a Master’s degree in economics, law, political science, gender studies, development studies, or sociology. An understanding of the feminist economy and care work agenda would be an added advantage. The team members should have:
• Basic knowledge of research methods – the ability to gather data and assess its relevance and working knowledge of conducting key informant interviews.
• Familiarity with policy- and/or law-making processes in Zimbabwe.
• Ability to interpret policy documents, especially the care agenda – understanding the inclusions and exclusions.
• Knowledge of actors – including key non-government actors – involved in policymaking, implementation, data collection, impact assessment, etc.
• Understanding of government budgetary trends.
• Familiarity with government monitoring and oversight processes.
• Experience of carers’ organizations to understand the lived experiences of different categories of paid/unpaid care workers.
• Examples of similar work previously done would be an added advantage.
• Fluency in English, and local languages, (chiShona and isiNdebele)
9. Indicative timeline / Expected days of input.
Once a contract is signed between Oxfam and the consultant team, an inception report will be submitted within one week. The assignment must not be extended beyond 90 working days. The time frame for the actual assessment work will include:
• Collecting policy documents, analysis, sources of verification, and write-up:
• Conducting supporting interviews, and consultations with policymakers, stakeholders, and community members.
• Analysing documents, completing assessment criteria, and conducting a validation workshop.
• Developing communications products, and policy briefs and writing up research findings.
10. Budget.
- The payment schedule will be paid as follows:
• 20% upon signing of the contract, submission of an approved work plan, methodology, research tools, and the inception report.
• 50% upon submission of the desk review report and the first draft report of the final report.
• 30% upon submission of a validation workshop report and approved findings of assessment report.
11. Timeline and Bidding
• The deadline for proposal submission is the 2 December 2024.
• The desk review aspect of the assessment is expected to end by 31st January 2025, with KIIs and FGDs commencing on the 1st of February 2025.
• Final approved report to be submitted by 20th of March 2025.
Other Jobs
