aid effectiveness in the education sector 2010...these ten dps provided in total us$66.2 million to...

Cambodia

Aid Effectiveness in the Education Sector 2010

2011 Monitoring Exercise on Aid Effectiveness iﾐ the EduIatioﾐ SeItor …

Collected data from Ministries of Education and development partners in 40 developing countries on selected

Paris Declaration indicators, which were adapted for this education sector exercise (Table 1). In addition to the

Paris Indicators, information was collected on the three-year predictability of domestic financing and DP

commitments; learning outcomes; the governance of Local Education Groups (LEGs); and the participation of

civil society in education sector processes. This yields an unprecedented picture of aid effectiveness at the

sector specific level. This data can be used as the basis for in-country dialogue and debate going forward.

Used three exercise tools to collect data: For quantitative data the (1) Ministry of Education Questionnaire

and (2) DP Questionnaire, and for qualitative data the (3) Explanatory Note. The exercise is based on self-

reporting by the LEGs. Data collection was based on self-reporting and self-assessment by the participating

partners. Based on the submitted data the Secretariat produIed けprofiles oﾐ aid effeIti┗eﾐess iﾐ the eduIatioﾐ seItorげ for eaIh partiIipatiﾐg Iouﾐtr┞.

Looks at how education aid is delivered and managed by development partners and governments. To

conduct aid effectiveness monitoring, the GPE Secretariat worked with LEGs: in each country an agency was

tasked to coordinate the exercise with the LEG and to work closely with the Ministry of Education.

Provides the baseline data for selected aid effectiveness indicators in the GPE Results Framework.

Profile on Aid EffeItiveﾐess iﾐ the EduIatioﾐ SeItor …

Aims at stimulating, reviving and strengthening dialogue on aid effectiveness among the LEG partners.

Does not attempt to provide a full and exhaustive picture of the aid effectiveness situation in the education

sector in a country.

Does not intend to issue a summative judgment on aid effectiveness in a country, or to rank the

effeIti┗eﾐess of a Iouﾐtr┞げs eduIatioﾐ aid iﾐ Ioﾏparisoﾐ ┘ith other Iouﾐtriesげ for aﾐ┞ high-stakes purpose

other than mutual learning from challenges and good practices.

Is based on data submitted by the LEG, which was also subsequently reviewed and validated by the LEG.

Profiles are published as working papers online indicating that they are a contribution to the global and local

learning process on aid effectiveness rather than a summative, exhaustive and rigid reflection of the aid

effectiveness situation in a country. Such a monitoring exercise takes place in a very dynamic environment of

development cooperation which allows only a snapshot of the state of play in 2010.

Contents

1. Overview: Paris Declaration Principles & Indicators Adapted to the Education Sector

2. Summary: Data Basis & Key Findings

3. Findings: By Aid Effectiveness Principle & Indicator

4. Annex: Sources & Abbreviations

http://www.globalpartnership.org/about-us/aid-effectiveness/2011-monitoring-exercise-on-aid-effectiveness/

http://www.globalpartnership.org/2011-monitoring-exercise-on-aid-effectiveness

of 22

Working Paper, April 2012

Cambodia: Aid Effectiveness in the Education Sector

1. Overview: Paris Principles & Adapted Paris Indicators Adapted to the Education Sector

COUNTRY OWNERSHIP is a core principle in the context of the aid effectiveness agenda. Country ownership means that

partner countries exercise leadership over their development policies and strategies, strengthen their institutions, and

coordinate development action.1 It refers to Go┗erﾐﾏeﾐtげs Ioﾏﾏitﾏeﾐt to a Hroad Iouﾐtr┞-level policy dialogue with

parliament, local authorities and civil society organizations.2

Indicator 1 Shows the existence of an education plan endorsed by the local DP partners.

ALIGNMENT means that DPs Hase their o┗erall support oﾐ partﾐer Iouﾐtriesげﾐatioﾐal de┗elopment strategies,

institutions and procedures. This includes Government and DP efforts to improve the quality and capacity of national

systems and DPsげ Ioordiﾐated support for IapaIit┞ de┗elopﾏeﾐt, iﾐIludiﾐg a┗oidiﾐg parallel struItures aﾐd uﾐt┞iﾐg aid.

Indicator 2 Quality of national public financial management and procurement systems.

Data on Indicator 2 was not collected in this monitoring exercise.

Indicator 3 Share of education aid flows to the government sector that are reported on recipient goverﾐﾏeﾐtげs budget

Indicator 4 Share of DP technical assistance provided through coordinated programs consistent with the priorities

of the partﾐer go┗erﾐﾏeﾐtげs IapaIit┞ de┗elopﾏeﾐt priorities

Indicator 5a Share of education aid to the government sector that uses PFM systems

Indicator 5b Share of education aid to the government sector that uses country procurement systems

Indicator 6 Number of parallel PIUs in the education sector as reported by the DPs

Indicator 7 Share of aid disbursements released within a fiscal year for which it was scheduled within an annual or

multi-year framework

Indicator 8 Share of untied aid in the education sector.

Data on Indicator 2 was not collected in this monitoring exercise.

HARMONIZATION refers to cooperation between DPs to improve the efficiency of aid delivery, this includes avoiding

duplication, simplifying procedures and agreeing a better division of labour with partner countries. Harmonization aims

at reducing transaction costs and extra burdens on the partner country administration resulting from aid fragmentation.

In the Paris Declaration (2005), DPs committed to develop common arrangements for planning, funding, monitoring,

evaluating and reporting on aid flows, and to reducing the number of separate field missions and analysis.

Indicator 9 Share of education aid provided in a context of a program-based approach

Indicator 10a Share of DP missions in the education sector undertaken jointly

Indicator 10b Share of DP analytic work in the education sector undertaken jointly

MANAGING FOR RESULTS means ensuring that all development activities – by Government, DP partners and other

development stakeholders – are focused toward achieving the results envisioned for the development of a country and

to improve the lives of its people. Managing for results requires the availability of data and performance information of

each activity – from project to country development strategies – to feed into decision-making processes.

Indicator 11 Results framework to monitor and evaluate progress in the education sector is in place

MUTUAL ACCOUNTABILITY means that partner countries and DPs are accountable to achieving development results and

to the transparent use of development resources. This requires existence or putting in place structures to hold partners

at both sides accountable, specifically in development partnerships that have agreed on objectives and goals.

Indicator 12 A process for regular Joint Sector Review among education stakeholders is established

1 http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/30/63/43911948.pdf, page 3.

2 http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/30/63/43911948.pdf, page 16.

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/30/63/43911948.pdf


of 22



2. Summary: Data Basis & Key Findings for Cambodia

Data Basis

All data and findings presented in this profile are based on the data provided in the context of the

2011 GPE Monitoring Exercise on Aid Effectiveness in the Education Sector. Data for 2010 was

submitted by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport (MoEYS) and ten participating

development partners (DPs) in response to questionnaires completed in 2011 (Table 1). Five DPs did

not participate in this Monitoring Exercise. The findings contained in this report are thus illustrative

only for the sample of participating DPs.

The methodology and data with which the results for the aid effectiveness in the education sector

are determined are explained throughout the report. The quantitative indicators against which

progress is assessed are those of the Paris Declaration

Monitoring Survey which were adapted to the

education sector. The Paris indicators are but a proxy

and snapshot but, as this Monitoring Exercise aims to

show at a sector level, can be used as a catalyst for

dialogue and reform.

These ten DPs provided in total US$66.2 million to the

education sector in 2010. Total aid to education

provided in 2010 was US$80.4 million. Analysis of the

effectiveness of education aid in this Monitoring

Exercise therefore applies to 82.3% of education aid to

Cambodia in 2010.

This report drew upon existing reports including the

2011 Paris Declaration Monitoring Survey country

chapter for Cambodia, the Mid Term Evaluation for

EFA FTI Country Case Study of Cambodia and the

fiﾐdiﾐgs of GPEげs ヲヰヰΒ pilot sur┗e┞ on aid

effectiveness for Cambodia.

Cambodia in the Global Partnership for Education

Cambodia joined the Global Partnership for Education in 2006 when the Local Education Group

endorsed the Education Sector Plan (ESP). In 2007, the Education Sector Working Group (ESWG)

prepared a proposal to the Catalytic Fund based upon the financing gap of US$57.4 million.

Aid Effectiveness in Cambodia

Cambodia participated in the 2006, 2008, and the 2011 OECD Surveys on Monitoring the Paris

Declaration. These surveys measured progress in Cambodia against aid effectiveness indicators.

Participation is demonstrative of overall commitment to the aid effectiveness principles in

Cambodia. The results of OECDげs ヲヰヱヱ survey are displayed in Table 2 below to allow appreciation of

progress in comparison to the education-specific analysis here.

3 UNFPA participated in the exercise and submitted a donor questionnaire. The majority of the questions were not applicable

for UNFPAげs ┘ork. 4 The status column graphically shows for which indicators the results met or exceeded the 2010 Paris Targets (green), are

Table 1: Response from the Education Sector

Working Group

ESWG members who provide ODA to the

education sector: 15

Asian Development Bank (ADB), Belgian Technical

Cooperation (BTC), European Union (EU), French

Agency for Development (AFD), International Labor

Organization (ILO), Japan (JICA and Japanese

Embassy), Sweden (Sida), World Food Programme

(WFP), UNDP, UNESCO, UNFPA3, UNICEF, USAID,

World Bank

DPs who responded to the GPE 2011 Monitoring

Exercise: 10

ADB, BTC, EU, Japan, Sida, UNESCO, UNICEF, USAID,

WFP, World Bank (as Supervising Entity for GPEげs

Catalytic Fund grant)

Response from Ministry of Education, Youth and

Sport

Secretary of State


http://www.moeys.gov.kh/en/home.html

http://www.oecd.org/site/0,3407,en_21571361_39494699_1_1_1_1_1,00.html




http://www.camb-ed.com/fasttrackinitiative/download/FTI_CR_Cambodia(February2010y).pdf


http://www.globalpartnership.org/media/library/FTI_Aid_Effectiveness_Report_42009.pdf

http://www.globalpartnership.org/partners/developing-countries/cambodia/

http://www.globalpartnership.org/support-we-offer/global-partnership-for-education-fund/catalytic-fund/



of 22



Summary 2011 OECD Survey Results: Since 2005, net Overseas Development Assistance has

averaged 8% of Gross National Income (OECD 2011). The 2011 OECD Survey found that reforms

undertaken by the Cambodian government けare Hegiﾐﾐiﾐg to pa┞ offげ, aﾐd that けgood progress had been achieved considering the difficulties of changing behaviours and adopting new working

praItiIes iﾐ just fi┗e ┞earsげ (OECD 2011: 1). Nationwide, the 2011 OECD Survey found progress to be

particularly evident in the increased use of country public financial management systems (used to

disburse 21% aid from 10% in 2005), procurement systems (for 24% aid from 6% in 2005) and

common programming arrangements. Across all sectors, however, aid to Cambodia was not found

to be well harmonized: technical cooperation is less coordinated than it was in 2005, 66 project

implementation units run in parallel to government systems, and development partners conduct the

vast majority of their missions and analytic works independently. All of this places an unnecessary

coordination burden on the Government of Cambodia.

Aid Effectiveness in the Education Sector 2010 – Summary

Civil conflict in the 1970s resulted in the complete destruction of the education system in Cambodia.

Throughout the 1980s and early 1990s, external assistance was directed at emergency relief and

rehabilitation of education services. A more systematic development of the education sector began

in the late 1990s, and over the past deIade CaﾏHodia けhas aIhie┗ed reﾏarkaHle e┝paﾐsioﾐ of eduIatioﾐal ser┗iIesげふBunroeun and Bridle 2009). Significant progress has been made in access of

students to school at primary level in particular, but also lower secondary. The largest enrolment

gain was among the poorest quintile.

PartiIipatioﾐ iﾐ GPE’s 2008 pilot survey oﾐ aid effeItiveﾐess: CaﾏHodia partiIipated iﾐ GPEげs pilot

survey on aid effectiveness in 2008. Eight of 19 education DPs participated, and although the results

are therefore not directly comparable with the data from the 10 participating DPs in this Monitoring

Exercise, if comparison is useful it is highlighted here. Lessons from the GPE pilot survey, indicated

that lessons could be learned in Cambodia from practices in their education sector, particularly

around the coordination of capacity development, the harmonization of missions and the existence

of a quality results-oriented framework. It is clear that in 2011, too, the education sector holds

useful lessons: results highlighted here are often significantly higher than those found nationwide in

the 2011 OECD Survey. However, results for education in some areas – such as use of country

systems – are far lower than the national average.

Results in this Monitoring Exercise show that the Government of Cambodia and its development

partners have worked to achieve more education aid being provided on budget (Indicator 3), to

improve the coordination of technical assistance (Indicator 4), to increase the proportion of

education aid provided through a programme-based approach (Indicator 9), and to ensure accurate

and timely reporting and recording of financing data (Indicator 7). Yet these excellent results are

curiously combined with low scores around harmonisation of missions and use of country systems,

despite continuous efforts for improved coordination and use of country systems. Technical

assistance was provided in 2010 in order to advise on aid effectiveness, translating the aid

effectiveness agenda into concrete actions – this latter is an innovative and additional component of

the SWAp in Cambodia.

Looking at results from 2011 and 2008 in the education sector (despite differences in the reporting

agencies) there have been improvements for indicators 3, 4, 7, 9, and 10a. The low use of country

systems (indicator 5a and 5b) by development partners is striking which seems related to



of 22



development partners perceived issues related to corruption. Regarding indicator 5a the situation

has not changed much and the report later on provides more details on measures to improve

country PFM systems. Regarding the result for indicator 5b it was reported that parallel

procurement system, Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) are applied in Cambodia by the World

Bank, Asian Development Bank, aﾐd the GPE prograﾏ. Ho┘e┗er, ┘ith regard to OECDげs defiﾐitioﾐ of country procurement systems SOP was disregarded when reporting to this Monitoring Exercise. The

difference between the 2008 and 2011 results for indicator 5b might be a consequence of excluding

SOP figures in 2011 and including it in the 2008 data. It was reported that the actual level of using

country procurement systems by development partners has not changed. The actual concern is the

low use of country PFM and procurement systems.

Table 2: Aid Effectiveness Results in the Education Sector (2010 Data)

Aid Effectiveness indicators adapted to the education sector

2011 GPE Monitoring Exercise 2011 OECD

Survey2

GPE 2008

pilot survey

Cambodia

Education

Sector

Median

Result1

GPE countries

Cambodia

overall

Cambodia

Education

Sector

1 Education sector plan is in place Yes 100% B* Yes

3 Aid flows are aligned on national priorities 62% 5 80% 88% 50%

4 Coordinated technical cooperation 98% 60% 27% 90%

5a Use of country public financial management (PFM) systems 4% 29% 21% 5%

5b Use of country procurement systems 2% 39% 24% 40%

6 Avoid parallel project implementation units (PIUs) 4 2 66 3

7 Education aid is more predictable 98% 50% 90% n.i.

9 Education aid provided as program-based approaches 57% 40% 35% 48%

10a Joint DP missions in the education sector 41% 57% 19% 26%

10b Joint analytic work in the education sector 48% 80% 35% 53%

11 Results-oriented frameworks in place Yes 83% C** n.i.

12 Joint Sector Review (JSR) process in place Yes 73% Yes Yes

Note : 1

Median Results might change slightly in 2012. 2 OECD. September 2011. Statistical Annex. www.aideffectiveness.org/busanhlf4/images/stories/hlf4/Progress_Since_Paris_Part_II.pdf

3 This concerns the quality of the operational development strategies (ranging from A-good to E)

4 This concerns the quality of the results-based monitoring frameworks (ranging from A-good to E)

5 Please see Indicator 3 in Section 3 of the report for more explanation.

of 22



4 The status column graphically shows for which indicators the results met or exceeded the 2010 Paris Targets (green), are

close to achieve them (yellow), or where the results show that action is needed to improve performance (red). The 2010 Paris

Targets provide a reference for comparison. The status column is for illustration only to highlight were further attention is

needed.

Table 3: Background Information by Indicator4

Indicator Status Key Findings

1

Ownership in the Cambodian education sector is good: a prioritised and activity-based Education Sector Plan

(2009-13) is established and available in hard copy and online. It is linked to Annual Operational Plans and a

Medium Term Expenditure Framework. The education vision is linked to the national development vision, and is

based upon consultative engagement with civil society and local government. The number of reports on aid

effectiveness in Cambodia, in the education sector in particular, indicates the extent of debate on these issues,

and there is commitment to improve further ownership of education activities.

3

Results for this indicator show that 62% of aid was recorded in governments budget estimates ふけoﾐ Hudgetげぶ and

therefore suggests low alignment since this is below the median across countries participating in this Monitoring

Exercise (80%) and significantly lower than the national average across Cambodia in 2010 (88%). But the results

shown here also suggest that DPs largely align their aid around the education plan (けoﾐ plaﾐげ). Results of the

related indicator 7 show that reporting of education aid data is managed well.

4

The coordination of technical cooperation in the Cambodia education sector is exemplary. In 2010, near to all

technical cooperation provided by participating DPs was coordinated. MoEYS approved a Medium Term Capacity

Development Plan in 2010, and as of June 2011 DPs provide technical cooperation through a Capacity

Development Partnership Fund (CDPF).

5

The use of PFM and procurement systems in Cambodia is low (21% and 24% respectively according to the Paris

Survey 2011) but in the education sector it is extremely low. Only 4% of education aid in 2010 used MoEYS PFM

systems (and none was disbursed using the national audit system), and 2% was disbursed through national

procurement systems.

6 Four PIUs were reported by participating DPs as having been in place in 2010. This is double the median found in

this GPE Monitoring Exercise, but a small proportion of the 66 found by the Paris Survey across Cambodia.

7

The reporting and recording of education aid in Cambodia is exceptional, achieved through annual Budget

Strategic Plans (BSP). If both over- and under-disbursement is taken into account, 98% of the aid expected by

MoEYS was disbursed in 2010. This is far higher than the 50% median across this Exercise, and than the 90%

national average in 2010. The BSP does not analyse expenditure where DP projections were not provided, and this

seems to happen frequently. Also, NGOs are not included in financial data collection yet.

9

57% of education aid was provided through programme-based approaches in 2010. A Sector Wide Approach

(SWAp) is well established in Cambodia, and the entire sector works towards the Education Sector Plan through

a series of mechanisms including the Joint Technical Working Group, the Education Sector Working Group and the

ESP. While this score is higher than both the GPE median (40%) and Cambodian national average in 2010 (35%), it

still indicates that 43% of education aid was not provided through a PBA.

10

41% of DP missions in 2010 and 48% of analytic works undertaken were coordinated among DPs. Both figures

are lower than the median across participating countries in this Exercise (57% and 80% respectively), but

significantly higher than national averages (19% and 35% respectively). The CDPF should improve this.

11

The monitoring and evaluation structures in the Cambodian education sector are robust. The ESP has an M&E

framework based upon a range of data, including an Education Management Information System that has been in

place for many years. However, DPs continue to conduct their own independent monitoring also. Cambodia

monitors learning achievement at primary and secondary school levels.

12

The Joint Annual Sector Reviews began in 2010, and are part of the overall SWAp. The Joint Technical Working

Group, established in 1999 and with membership from MoEYS, DPs and the NGO Education Partnership, meets

quarterly and is chaired by the MoEYS.

of 22



3. Findings: By Aid Effectiveness Principle & Indicator

Country Ownership

Indicator 1: Education plan in place

A revised Education Strategic Plan, elaborated in September 2010, covers the period from 2009 to 2013.

It merges the Rolling Education Sector Support Program (ESSP) and the 2006-2010 Education Strategic

Plan (ESP). This sets out the MoEYS overall policy framework and direction for education reform for five

years and defines specific programmes and budget to achieve the objectives. The ESP is aligned with the

National Strategic Development Plan (NSDP) for 2009-2013. The Annual Operational Plan (AOP)

translates these medium term policies and strategies into annual actions and targets, specifying all

funding sources (Government of Cambodia (GoC), DPs, NGOs).

The Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport coordinated the process. All education partners, including

civil society, monitor progress in the sector and review the ESP annually. The ESP is accessible to all

partners and the public on the website of the MoEYS - www.moeys.gov.kh. It is also available in hard

copy and has been is available in Khmer and English.

The education SWAp in Cambodia was launched as part of a series of reforms within the sector, with the

objective of moving from けdoﾐor-ship to Government-led owﾐership aﾐd partﾐershipげ (Bunroeun and

Bridle 2009). In the presentation to the GPE in 2009, the Government of Cambodia highlighted increased

ownership and leadership in sector reform as a key achievement. In demonstration of this, they

highlighted the initiation by MoEYS of Joint Annual Sector Reviews (Indicator 12), the development

under MoEYS leadership of the second cycle of ESP and ESSP (2006-10), and the coordination of

dialogue by MoEYS with DPs and NGOs through the Joint Technical Working Group on Education (JTWG-

Ed) and Education Sector Working Group (ESWG). The JTWG-Ed is a forum for regular policy dialogue,

and the ESWG a formal mechanism for donor coordination composed of 13 DPs and the NGO Education

Partnership (NEP, representing over 70 NGOs).

Consultation for the ESP

The CaﾏHodiaﾐ eduIatioﾐ seItor is Ioﾐsidered けfairl┞ ad┗anced with robust coordination and

consultation mechanisms in placeげふHittori ヲヰヰΓぶ. MoEYS Ioordiﾐated the ESP proIess, Ioﾐsultiﾐg loIal and provincial MoYS officials as well as DPs and civil society.

Civil society engaged in the revision of the ESP by meeting regularly with the Education Sector Working

Group (ESWG), participated in the workshops on aid effectiveness and the Joint Annual Sector Review,

and attended meetings where information on the education sector plan was shared.

Table 4: Ownership in the education sector 2010

Education

plan in

place

CSOs

consulted

Education

plan

publically

available

Implementation

schedule for

education plan

in place

Data on

domestic

expenditure

2008-2010

available

Data on

domestic

expenditure

2011-2013

Education

MTEF in

place

Education

MTEF

discussed

with MoF

Cambodia

http://www.moeys.gov.kh/

of 22



The European Union (EU) and UNICEF participated actively in the preparation of the Education Strategic

Plan. JICA, UNICEF, the EU and USAID provided technical assistance, and UNICEF provided additional

financial assistance. The ADB, JICA, the EU, UNICEF and USAID facilitated consultations among Belgium

Technical Cooperation (BTC), Sida, UNESCO, UNICEF, USAID, the World Bank and WFP.

Development Partner Support to CSO Capacity Development

Supporting the capacity of national civil society is one component of DP strategies to facilitate country

ownership and accountability. NGOs and national CSOs play a significant implementing role in

rebuilding the education sector. NGOs and CSOs are active in the reform processes through the NGO

Education Partnership (NEP), which represents 78 NGOs/CSOs. In 2008, NGO support accounted for

more than 20% of the total development assistance in the sector. The NEP plays a critical role in

informing and influencing education reform as it can reflect grass-root level impact through its active

participation in reform (Hittori 2009).

All DPs except for Sweden supported efforts to increase the capacity of CSOs in 2010. The EU allocates

on average US$2.9 million annually in support of NGOs in the education sector. In addition, the EU has

been promoting a more pro-active presence of the NEP in the ESWG and their improved recognition by

education authorities. UNESCO works in partnership with NGOs for project implementation, advocacy

and campaigns for EFA, and convenes meetings and workshops with civil society partners. UNICEF

currently is the chair of the ESWG and UNESCO and the EU are the vice chairs. Local civil society and

international NGOs are represented in the ESWG through the NEP. The ESWG promotes working in

partnership with and strengthening the MoEYS. UNICEF provided financial support for the creation and

functioning of the NEP. USAID specifically supported capacity development of five local NGOs in the

areas of leadership, internal management, financial management, and communication. WFP helped to

strengthen civil society capacity by providing training to Provincial office of Education (PoE) staff in 12

provinces, NGOs and school support committees and communities participating in school feeding on

program monitoring, and reporting and database maintenance. Between 2010/11 NEP received a

US$232,608 grant from the Civil Society Education Fund as for capacity development and advocacy

activities. The Civil Society Education Fund is managed by the Global Campaign for Education and funded

by the Global Campaign for Education.

However, financing to NGOs is often not reported on the budget of the MoEYS. Whether this aid is

provided to NGOs for the purpose of enhancing their capacity to participate in the sector is not always

clear: the indicator measured here did look at the importance of civil society capacity development to

increase their participation in the education sector dialogue.

Domestic Finance for Education

Table 4 presents information on government spending on education during the past three years (2008-

2010) and commitments in the national budget for the next three years (2011-2013). Data was reported

by the MoEYS. Total disbursements increased by US$60.2 million from 2008 to 2010, representing a

39.7% increase. According to total commitments, it is expected that the budget for education will

increase by another US$62.3 million over the next three years. The education share from total public

expenditures will remain at around 14% between 2011 and 2013.

http://www.nepcambodia.org/

http://www.nepcambodia.org/

http://www.globalpartnership.org/support-we-offer/financing/epdf/Civil-Society-Education-Fund/

of 22



CaﾏHodiaげs go┗erﾐﾏeﾐt has a ﾏediuﾏ-term expenditure framework for the education sector in place. It

was formulated in 2010 and covers the period from 2011 to 2013. It is reviewed and updated annually in

collaboration with the Ministry of Finance.

Table 5: Government Education Disbursements and Commitments

Disbursement in US$ million Commitment in US$ million

2008/9 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

Total public expenditures (a)

1,641.71 2,151.24 2,329.59 2,316.85 2,618.19 2,828.74

Total to education 151.63 177.66 212.15 331.11 364.76 395.65

Approximate share of education budget 9.24% 8.26% 9.11% 14.29% 13.93% 13.99%

Teacher salaries 109.65 127.41 132.61 167.91 189.11 210.59

Recurrent expenditures

other than teacher salary (b)

41.97 50.25 79.54 61.06 72.49 80.75

Capital expenditures n.i. n.i. n.i. 102.14 103.16 104.31

Total to basic education (c)

n.i. n.i. n.i. 58.7 64.62 71.99

Notes:

Source: Ministry of Education Questionnaire, which data was submitted in USD. (a)

Data source for total public expenditures (not requested in questionnaire): World Economic Outlook of International Monetary Fund (IMF),

January 2012. Data was provided in local currency and converted to dollars (USD1 = KHR4015, February 16, 2012). Data available in this link. (b)

Includes salaries for teaching and non-teaching personnel (c)

Estimated amount for general education, which includes early childhood, primary and secondary education

n.i. = no information

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2011/02/weodata/weorept.aspx?sy=2008&ey=2013&scsm=1&ssd=1&sort=country&ds=.&br=1&c=522&s=GGX&grp=0&a=&pr1.x=71&pr1.y=10

of 22



Alignment

Indicator 3: Aid flows are aligned on national priorities

Indicator 3 attempts to measure the share of all aid to education that was disbursed in the context of an

agreement with national administrations and recorded on budget by the recipient government. The

accuracy of this indicator depends on the (a) availability of the government budget estimates of aid

flows for each DP, (b) availability of the data from the DPs about the disbursements to the government

sector5 and (c) match between recipient government fiscal year and the DPsげ fisIal ┞ear.

Table 6 shows that about 62% of the aid disbursed by DPs to the government sector was recorded in

goverﾐﾏeﾐt’s Hudget. GoC had estimated a US$73.8 million to be disbursed by the DPs for education in

2010. This includes analysis of DPs that did not themselves not report any aid disbursement to the

government sector in 2010. The ten DPs collectively disbursed US$28 million less than anticipated by

the government. Nonetheless, this represents progress since the 2008 GPE pilot survey, when only 44%

of aid flows to education were captured on budget in 2007. Total aid to Cambodia was 88% on budget in

2010.

5 Disbursements to the government sector: ODA disbursed in the context of an agreement with administrations (ministries,

departments, agencies or municipalities) authorized to receive revenue or undertake expenditures on behalf of central

government. (Source: OCED, www.oecd.org/document/19/0,3746,en_21571361_39494699_39503763_1_1_1_1,00.html#G)

Table 6: Indicator 3, Alignment of aid flows to education on national priorities in FY 2009/10

Development

Partner

Government

budget estimates

of aid flows (US$)

Aid disbursed by

DPs for government

sector (US$)

Total aid

disbursed (US$)

% of total aid

disbursed for IEP

execution

Indicator 3

%

a b For reference For reference c=a/b

ADB 15,549,300 n.i. 7,156,007 100% /

BTC 411,000 1,065,786 1,535,068 100% 39%

GPE 1 20,445,600 13,400,000 13,400,000 100% 66%

EU 2,361,350 5,562,000 9,200,000 17% 42%

JICA 10,422,825 8,270,296 8,270,296 51% 79%

Sweden 2 n.i. 3,666,268 3,666,268 0% /

2

UNESCO 382,800 781,612 781,612 100% 49%

UNICEF 5,313,175 6,242,418 6,242,418 100% 85%

United States 1,525,925 2,700,000 2,700,000 0% 57%

WFP 13,196,925 n.a. 9,334,300 100% /

World Bank 4,271,175 3,900,000 3,900,000 100% 91%

Total 73,880,075 45,588,380 66,185,969 70% 62%


n.a.: reported as not applicable by the development partner 1

Data on the Global Partnership for Education funding (Catalytic Fund grant) was reported by the Supervising Entity, which is in Cambodia the

World Bank.

2 S┘edeﾐふSidaぶ reported that all their eduIatioﾐ aid ┘as iﾐ support of UNICEFげs E┝paﾐded BasiI EduIatioﾐ Prograﾏﾏe phase II iﾐ 2010. In order

to refleIt Sidaげs IoﾐtriHutioﾐ to the eduIatioﾐ seItor iﾐ CaﾏHodia iﾐヲヰヱヰ it is included in the dataset – however there is a risk that Sida and

UNICEF reported twice on the Sida aid which means that this aid was double counted.

http://www.oecd.org/document/19/0,3746,en_21571361_39494699_39503763_1_1_1_1,00.html#G

of 22



Omitting ADB, Sida and WFP from analysis, due to no data being provided on disbursements, yields a

much higher figure of 92.9% for the aligﾐﾏeﾐt of DPs to the Goverﾐﾏeﾐt’s estiﾏated Hudget. This

proxy indication of alignment is based upon a simple calculation, and depends upon effective

communication, reporting and recording of aid figures. Results are also affected by issues such as

differing exchange rates used, different financial years, and often different understandings of what is

ﾏeaﾐt H┞ けoﾐ-Hudgetげ aid ふas differeﾐt to けoﾐ treasur┞げ or けoﾐ plaﾐげぶ. Froﾏ respoﾐses to this Moﾐitoring

Exercise and the number of studies of aid effectiveness in Cambodia (and in the education sector

specifically) in the last few years, it is clear that debates on this issue are on going.

The overall result masks considerable variance in over and under disbursement figures. Disbursements

by GPE, JICA, aﾐd the World Baﾐk ┘ere less thaﾐ Go┗erﾐﾏeﾐtげs estiﾏates. BTC, the EU, UNSCO, UNICEF,

aﾐd USAID disHursed ﾏore thaﾐ reIorded iﾐ Go┗erﾐﾏeﾐtげs Hudget estiﾏates. Sida reported that all of its

aid was disbursed iﾐ support of UNICEFげs Expanded Basic Education Programme phase II in 2010

because of that the MoEYS might have recorded it under the UNICEF funds and therefore had no budget

estimates for Sida.

Various reasons explain the discrepancy between government estimates of DP allocations and DPsげ actual disbursements. Those reported included low absorption and implementation capacity on part of

the government as well as DPs, complicated procurement processes, optimistic financial projections at

the beginning of the calendar year, unachieved performance indicators that have impact on

disbursements of sector budget support, currency exchange rate fluctuation, and different reporting

schedules between Government and DPs.

In the education sector, DP interventions and activities are often aligned to the education plan

objectives and priorities since DPs participate in the preparation, appraisal and endorsement of a

national education plan. In Cambodia, all DPs that participated in this exercise were involved in the

preparation of the current education sector plan and provided some sort of financial, technical, or

coordination support for the consultation process. Despite this only the ADB, UNESCO, UNICEF, the

World Bank and WFP provided all of their education aid for the execution of activities included in the

education sector plan. JICA supported the implementation of the sector plan with half of its education

aid, the EU with less than 20%, and USAID

provided no support for plan implementation.

Indicator 4: Strengthen capacity by

coordinated support

Indicator 4 measures the percentage of DP

technical assistance provided through

coordinated programs consistent with the

national education plan.

In 2010, 98% of aid flows for technical

cooperation were implemented through

coordinated programs that were in line with

national and sector development strategies.

As indicated by Table 7, most DPs reported

that they coordinated all of their technical

cooperation in 2010.

Table 7: Indicator 4, Coordinated Technical Cooperation in 2010

Development

Partners

Coordinated

technical

cooperation

(US$)

Total

technical

cooperation

(US$)

Indicator 4

a b c = a / b

ADB n.i. n.i. n.a.

Belgium 0 234,515 n.a.

GPE 776,000 776,000 100%

EU 800,000 800,000 100%

Japan 3,143,623 3,143,623 100%

Sweden 0 0 n.a.

UNESCO 781,612 781,612 100%

UNICEF 6,242,418 6,242,418 100%

United States 920,000 920,000 100%

WFP 6,000 40,000 15%

World Bank 217,000 217,000 100%

Total 12,886,653 13,155,168 98% n.a. = not applicable

n.i. no information

of 22



Nevertheless, it was also reported that the alignment of technical cooperation to national priorities

remains a challenge. Historically, technical cooperation has been fragmented, mainly focusing on

technical departments and on the achievement of specific outputs of individual DP projects, rather than

on strengthening government capacities.

In 2010, the MoEYS approved a Medium-Term Capacity Development Plan, which outlines a more

holistic vision on capacity development, and provides an opportunity for DPs to harmonize and align

with agreed sector priorities for capacity development. DPs can support objectives and activities within

the document, reducing transaction costs. It creates the opportunity for the development of

sustainable capacity through a demand-led process, where solutions are rooted within and owned by

the Ministry, rather than a supply-driven one imposed by development partners.

The Capacity Development Partnership Fund (CDPF) was launched in June 2011 and will initially be

funded by the EU, Sida and UNICEF to support the implementation of the Capacity Development Plan.

This is the first time since the start of the SWAp in the early 2000s that a single coherent plan has

existed, aligned with the Education Strategic Plan (ESP) and identifying capacity development priorities

across the whole sector at national and sub-national levels. The CDPF is not tied to a DP project or

Parallel Implementation Unit (see Indicator 6), and its potential impact is therefore aimed at

strengthening existing country systems and capacities at institutional, organisational and individual

levels. Sida reported that in 2011 they will also support the CDPF. The Capacity Development Plan

enables much greater aid effectiveness whereby development partners can support objectives and

activities within the document reducing transaction costs. It creates the opportunity for the

development of sustainable capacity through a demand-led process, where solutions are rooted within

and owned by the Ministry, rather than a supply-driven one imposed by development partners.

IﾐdiIator 5: Use of Iouﾐtry’s puHliI fiﾐaﾐIial ﾏaﾐageﾏeﾐt aﾐd proIureﾏeﾐt systeﾏs

Indicator 5a measures the percentage of aid to education that use public financial management (PFM)

systems, and Indicator 5b measures the percentage of aid to education that use partner country

procurement systems.

DP alignment with country procedures regarding aid to education has been low in Cambodia. DPs

reported that they used PFM systems for only 4% of the aid that they provided to the education sector.

Only the EU partially used the PFM systems. No DP used the national auditing system. The use of

Iouﾐtr┞げs proIureﾏeﾐt s┞steﾏs ┘as e┝treﾏel┞ lo┘ at oﾐl┞ ヲ% iﾐヲヰヱヰ, even compared to a low national

average of 24% (OECD 2011). Only BTC reported the use of the Iouﾐtr┞げs proIureﾏeﾐt s┞steﾏs, and this

was for the total of its aid disbursed to the government sector.

This exceedingly low use of county systems indicates a lack of confidence on the part of the DPs, and a

lack of capacity within the system. Government maintains two parallel fiduciary systems: one is the

MoEYS internal system for the processing of government funding. The other is the Standard Operating

Procedure for external funds. In 2010, only the GPE Catalytic Funding, World Bank and ADB funds were

processed through this Standard Operating Procedure. The majority of DPs have not used country

systems at all.

Efforts to improve the management of public finances have been underway in Cambodia for over a

decade, under the Technical Cooperation Action Plan. In 2003 the Integrated Fiduciary Assessment and

Public Expenditure Review proposed a multi-year approach to reform, and efforts have since been made

to ensure that credible budgets are produced, that financial accountability is assured and that priorities

of 22



and budgets are linked. Achievements to date have included improvements to resource mobilisation

(measured by the revenue-to-GDP ratio), more comprehensive budgets that are aligned to sector

priorities, and the launch of a new budget cycle and execution processes. Public procurement

frameworks have also been improved, with implementation rules and standard bidding documents, and

the Financial Management Information System (FMIS) has been designed.

The MoEYS has been selected as one of the five ministries to pilot the FMIS. This is due to launch in

2013 and is expected to improve the reliability, transparency, aﾐd aIIouﾐtaHilit┞ of the Iouﾐtr┞げs financial and procurement systems, and encourage DPs to use country PFM systems:

The FMIS will facilitate the introduction of an integrated uniform account code structure that will foster a

better understanding of how funds are being accounted for, and where expenditures are incurred. This is

ﾏade possiHle H┞ けsourIe of fuﾐdsげ aﾐd けgeographiIげ IlassifiIatioﾐ Iodiﾐg. The けsourIe of fuﾐdsげ IlassifiIatioﾐ supports the integration of externally financed projects into the budget and fiscal reporting and captures

government own sources and external (DP-fiﾐaﾐIedぶ sourIes ┘hile the けgeographiIげ IlassifiIatioﾐ ideﾐtifies locations of incurred expenditures distinguishing among central, provincial, municipal, district, and commune

levels of administration.

Between 2000 and 2004, the GoC prioritized resource allocations to the education sector under the Priority

Action Programme, which helped to ensure budgetary resources in form of cash available at school levels

while other non-priority sectors faced chronic cash crunches. Since 2004, the credibility and predictability of

budgetary resources for the sector as well as for the rest of implementing agencies have been markedly

improved after the full elimination of payment arrears in 2007. The sector also has benefited from being a

program-based budget pilot, and the recipient of direct grants from the centre.

The Education Sector Working Group has supported financial management capacity building as a priority

action in line with the PFM national reforms.

The Iouﾐtr┞げs proIureﾏeﾐt s┞steﾏ ┘ill He suHstaﾐtiall┞ iﾏpro┗ed ┘ith the adoptioﾐ aﾐd implementation of the draft public procurement law currently being reviewed by the World Bank

Table 8: Indicator 5, Use of country systems in 2010

Development

Partners

Aid disbursed by

DPs for gov't

sector (US$)

Public Financial Management (US$) Procurement

Budget

execution

Financial

reporting Auditing

Indicator

5a

Proc.

Systems

Indicator

5b

a b c d avg(b,c,d)/a e e /a

ADB n.i. n.i. n.i. n.i. n.a. n.i. n.a.

Belgium 1,065,786 0 0 0 0% 1,065,786 100%

GPE 13,400,000 0 0 0 0% 0 0%

EU 5,562,000 2,400,000 2,400,000 0 29% 0 0%

Japan 8,270,296 0 0 0 0% 0 0%

Sweden 3,666,268 0 0 0 0% 0 0%

UNESCO 781,612 n.i. n.i. n.i. n.a. 0 0%

UNICEF 6,242,418 n.i. n.i. n.i. n.a. n.i. n.a.

United States 2,700,000 0 0 0 0% 0 0%

WFP n.a. n.i. n.i. n.i. N/A n.i. n.a.

World Bank 3,900,000 0 0 0 0% 0 0%

Total 45,588,380 2,400,000 2,400,000 0 4% 1,065,786 2%

n.a. = not applicable n.i. = no information

of 22



planned by the end of 2011. It is expected that this will eﾐIourage DPs to iﾐIreasiﾐgl┞ use the Iouﾐtr┞げs procurement system. The implementation of the procurement law will require the integration of dual

procurement functions within the Ministry of Economy and Finance and the line ministries which

process government and DP financed procurements. At this stage the National Audit Authority requires

significant capacity strengthening in order to take on the auditing of DP projects.

Indicator 6: Strengthen capacity by avoiding parallel implementation structures

Indicator 6 measures the number of parallel implementation units (PIU) in the education sector as

reported by the DPs who participated in this exercise.

Four parallel implementation units were reported as being in place in 2010 by participating DPs.

USAID, the World Bank, UNICEF and BTC each used one. These results indicate that the findings of the

2008 GPE Mid Term Evaluation are still valid, whereby DPs prefer to use their own aid management

systems rather than the weak country systems. Where projects did not use PIUs, they often set up

project steering committees to monitor progress (Hittori 2009). Indications are that new PIUs will be

established for projects being planned. The Government and ESWG are working to provide a rationale

and justification for not complying with the Partnership Principles in this instance.

Indicator 7: Aid is more predictable

Indicator 7 measures the proportion of aid disbursements released within a fiscal year for which it was

scheduled within an annual or multi-year framework.

Cambodia attained exceptionally high results on aid predictability compared to other GPE countries. 98% of the

actual disbursements accounted by Government were scheduled by DPs for disbursement in 2010 (table 8). The

amount of aid that was actually disbursed to the government sector in 2010 was US$45.5 million. In 2009,

Government and the DPs agreed on developing and using an Annual Operational Plan to strengthen sector

coordination and the implementation and monitoring of the Education Strategic Plan. The Annual Operational Plan

sets out all sector programs and activities supported by the Government, bilateral and multilateral DPs, and NGO

resources. On an annual basis the MoEYS consults on a Budget Strategic Plan with the Ministry of Economy and

Finance for the education sector. Once the Budget Strategic Plan is approved, the MoEYS Department of Planning

processes the development of the Annual Operational Plan with support from the DPs. Once the Annual

Operational Plan is approved, it is made available to the public.

In addition, the Program Management and Monitoring Office in MoEYS Department of Planning annually

collect aid data from development partners on commitments and actual disbursements to the education

sector. This is used to de┗elop the Budget StrategiI Plaﾐ, ┘hiIh has けIoﾐtriHuted to iﾐIreasiﾐg the predictability of government financing and clarifies the links between the budget and programme

resultsげふHittori ヲヰヰΓ). The BSP is linked to a wider government process of aid management under the

Council for the Development of Cambodia (CDC) database. However, Hittori found that in 2009 it only

iﾐIluded the Go┗erﾐﾏeﾐtげs reIurrent budget and not information on external resources or capital

expenditures. Also, it was not developed in line with the AOP, leaving significant differences.

http://www.mef.gov.kh/



http://www.cdc-crdb.gov.kh/

of 22



Table 10 compares the ODA projections by each DP as reported by the Ministry of Education and the DP

partners themselves. DPs provide forward-looking financial data to varying timelines. The World Bank,

for example, provides a three years rolling plan, while UNICEF provides a five years rolling plan. Overall

the challenge for MoYES is the difference between actual expenditures and projected amounts for each

DP, and consolidating the information with different time frames. Hittori found in 2009 that the

optimum use of the ODA database in Cambodia was constrained by the lack of full and timely data

provided by DPs. Many DPs did not provide future funding prospects (and hence the BSP does not

include them). Also, NGOs are not part of the data collection on financing, and this is significant given

that they are estimated to contribute 20% of the total assistance to the sector. CDC is working on this

(Hittori 2009).

Table 10: Three-year projections for total education by DP, 2011-2013

Development Partner

3-year projections reported by the MoEYS (US$) 3-year projections reported by DP in US$

2011 2012 2013 2011 2012 2013

Basic Total Total Total Basic Total Basic Total Basic

ADB n.i. n.i. n.i. n.i. n.i. n.i. n.i. n.i. n.i.

Belgium 488,600 n.i. n.i. 489,000 n.i. n.i. n.i. n.i. n.i.

GPE 30,000,000 8,900,000 n.i. 30,000,000 28,800,000 8,900,000 8,900,000 n.i. n.i.

EU 15,400,000 15,400,000 15,400,000 15,400,000 n.i. 15,400,000 n.i. 15,400,000 n.i.

Japan 4,827,000 2,514,000 242,000 4,827,000 n.i. 2,513,000 n.i. 242,000 n.i.

Sweden 7,516,000 7,121,000 6,331,000 7,516,000 n.i. 7,121,000 n.i. 6,331,000 n.i.

UNESCO 1,413,000 504,000 240,000 1,413,000 n.i. 504,000 n.i. 240,000 n.i.

UNICEF 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000

United States n.i. n.i. n.i. n.i. n.i. n.i. n.i. n.i. n.i.

WFP 16,102,000 19,972,000 19,849,000 16,102,000 n.i. 19,972,000 n.i. 19,849,000 n.i.

World Bank 3,000,000 5,300,000 6,000,000 3,000,000 n.i. 5,300,000 n.i. 6,000,000 n.i.

Total 83,747,000 64,710,000 53,063,000 83,747,000 33,800,000 64,710,000 5,008,900 53,063,000 5,000,000


Table 9: Indicator 7, Predictability of Aid in FY 2009/10

Development

Partner

Disbursements recorded

by gov't (US$)

Aid scheduled by DPs

for disbursement (US$)

Aid disbursed by DPs

for gov't sector (US$)

Indicator 7

%

a b for ref. only c = a / b or b/a

ADB 7,156,007 7,156,007 n.i. 100% Belgium 1,535,068 1,136,437 1,065,786 74% GPE 13,400,000 13,400,000 13,400,000 100% EU 9,200,000 4,300,000 5,562,000 60% Japan 8,270,296 8,270,296 8,270,296 100% Sweden 3,666,268 3,666,268 3,666,268 100% UNESCO 781,612 781,612 781,612 100% UNICEF 6,242,418 6,786,640 6,242,418 92% United States 2,700,000 2,700,000 2,700,000 100% WFP 9,334,300 12,996,245 n.a. 72% World Bank 3,900,000 3,900,000 3,900,000 100% Total 66,185,969 65,093,505 45,588,380 98% n.a. = not applicable n.i. = no information

of 22



Harmonization

Indicator 9: Use of common arrangements or procedures

Indicator 9 measures the percentage of aid to education provided in a context of a programme-based

approach (PBA). A PBA is a cooperation modality based on the principle of coordinated support for a

locally owned programme of development, such as a national development strategy, a sector

programme, a thematic programme or a programme of a specific organisation6.

In the education sector in Cambodia, 57% of DP aid used common procedures and arrangements in

2010. Of the US$66 million disbursed in education, US$5.1 million was provided as direct budget

support. Collectively, the EU, EFA FTI, JICA, Sida, UNESCO, UNICEF and the World Bank supported other

PBAs with US$32.5 million. Compared to other reporting countries Cambodia is above the median value

of 47% but remains behind the suggested Paris target of 66%. As shown in Table 8, individual

performance varies from DP to DP.

In 2009, the Government of Cambodia highlighted harmonisation as a けforﾏidaHle Ioordiﾐatioﾐ Ihalleﾐgeげ – education being けoﾐe of the ﾏost fragﾏeﾐted seItorsげ (Bunroeun and Bridle 2009). This was

in a context, they argued, of 22 DPs and over 80 NGOs active supporting 350 discrete projects. Division

of Labour was not followed, and over four hundred person months of technical assistance were

recorded in 2008.

Table 11: Indicator 9, Share of education aid provided in the context of program-based approaches in 2010

Development

Partners

Program-based approaches (US$) Total Aid

disbursed (US$) Indicator 9

Budget support

a

Other PBAs

b

Total

c = a + b

Total

d e = c / d

ADB n.i. n.i. n.i. 7,156,007 n.a.

Belgium 0 0 0 1,535,068 0%

GPE 0 13,400,000 13,400,000 13,400,000 100%

EU 2,400,000 1,000,000 3,400,000 9,200,000 37%

Japan 0 4,198,502 4,198,502 8,270,296 51%

Sweden 0 3,666,268 3,666,268 3,666,268 100%

UNESCO 0 781,612 781,612 781,612 100%

UNICEF 0 6,242,418 6,242,418 6,242,418 100%

United States 0 2,700,000 2,700,000 2,700,000 100%

WFP 0 0 0 9,334,300 0%

World Bank 0 3,300,000 3,300,000 3,900,000 85%

Total 2,400,000 35,288,800 37,688,800 66,185,969 57% n.i. = no information

n..a. = not applicable

6 For further details see OCDE glossary:

http://www.oecd.org/document/19/0,3746,en_21571361_39494699_39503763_1_1_1_1,00.html#G

http://www.oecd.org/document/19/0,3746,en_21571361_39494699_39503763_1_1_1_1,00.html%23G

of 22



The benefit of using a PBA is that it provides a framework for improved application of aid effectiveness

principles, including stronger sector coordination; better coordination of aid; and it provides the

Government with an opportunity to strengthen its leadership. Several coordination mechanisms have

already been operational for a number of years in the Cambodian education sector, as part of the SWAp.

This sector coordination mechanisms include (i) the Joint Technical Working Group, chaired by the

Minister, (ii) the Education Sector Working Group of DPs, and (iii) the NGO Education Partnership (NEP).

A number of improvements have been made regarding sector coordination mechanisms in recent years,

including:

The preparation of a Joint Annual Sector Review aide memoire to strengthen mutual

commitments to jointly implement findings and recommendations from the Annual Congress,

Convening the first MoEYS and development partners joint retreat,

The use of an Annual Operational Plan since 2009 that sets out all programs and activities

supported by the Government, bilateral and multilateral DPs, and NGO resources,

The adoption of Partnership Principles in 2010, and

Recently, the initiatives to develop a sector Capacity Development Plan which will partly be

funded through a joint Capacity Development Partnership Fund.

Various modes of joint programming have been practiced among DPs based on MoEYS policies and

programmes. A good example is the implementation of the Child-Friendly School (CFS) initiative, in

which multiple DPs (e.g., UNICEF, Save the Children Norway, and Volunteer Service Overseas) provided

coordinated, coherent assistance based on the MoEYS CFS Policy and Master Plan via the demarcation

of target provinces. The Department for International Development (DfID), UNFPA, and UNICEF jointly

supported a life-skills Programme for HIV and AIDS through the MoEYS Inter-Departmental Committee

for HIV and AIDS, based on a common work plan. (Hittori 2009).

Indicator 10: Encourage joint missions and analytic work

Indicator 10 measures (a) the share of field missions and (b) country analytic work, including diagnostic

reviews, which are undertaken jointly.

As shown in Table 12, six out of ten DPs (ADB, GPE, Sida, UNESCO, UNICEF and USAID) that participated

in the GPE 2011 Monitoring Exercise reported that 41% of their missions were undertaken jointly with

other DPs. All of ADBげs aﾐd USAIDげs ﾏissioﾐs ┘ere IoﾐduIted joiﾐtl┞ ┘ith aﾐother DP. There has been an

increase in the number of joint missions (for instance between GPE with Sida and between the EU,

UNICEF aﾐd Sidaぶ. Iﾐ additioﾐ, aﾐけopeﾐげ aﾐd けIlosedげ seasoﾐ for iﾐIoﾏiﾐg ﾏissioﾐs has Heeﾐ agreed upon with the MoEYS. There is an increased awareness of the transaction costs linked to each mission.

Compared to the share of joint missions reported in 2008 (26%) development partners have improve

their collaboration in this area.

Only three DPs reported having carried out joint analytic work, 36% of the total. These levels are

under the median of countries that participated in this exercise: 52% and 77% respectively. The

proportion of joint country analytic work is far from the Paris Declaration suggested target, 66% of the

total number of analytic work. The Sector Capacity Development Plan is intended to strengthen the

coordination of analytic work while the Joint Technical Working Group and the Education Sector

Working Group are used as platform for this.

of 22



Table 12: Indicator 10, Joint Missions and Analytic Work in 2010

Development

Partner

Coordinated

DP missions

Total DP

missions Indicator 10a

Coordinated

DP analytic

work

Total DP

analytic work Indicator 10b

(number) (number) (number) (number)

a b c = a / b a b c = a / b

ADB 5 5 100% n.i. 2 n.a.

Belgium 0 0 n.a. 0 0 n.a.

GPE 1 2 50% 0 0 n.a.

EU 0 0 n.a. 1 1 100%

Japan 0 1 0% 0 0 n.a.

Sweden 1 2 50% 0 1 0%

UNESCO 1 5 20% 0 1 0%

UNICEF 1 2 50% 2 5 40%

United States 1 1 100% 0 0 n.a.

WFP 0 3 0% 1 1 100%

World Bank 0 4 0% 0 0 n.a.

Total 10 25 41% 4 11 48%

Notes In order to adjust for double counting, the results for Indicator 10a and 10b are the average of the results of each DP for

the respective indicator.

n.a. = not applicable

of 22



Managing for Results

Indicator 11: Results-oriented framework

Indicator 11 measures the number of partner countries with transparent and monitorable performance

assessment frameworks to assess progress against (a) the national development strategies and (b)

sector programs. The indicator refers to results-oriented reporting and the existence of assessment

frameworks that monitor progress against key dimensions of the national and sector development

strategies; and whether frameworks track a manageable number of indicators for which data are cost-

effectively available. In the context of this Monitoring Exercise, Indicator 11 measures whether a

monitoring and evaluation strategy, including a results framework, is embedded in the education plan

and agreed between Government and the Local Education Group.

A monitoring and evaluation framework is part of the Education Strategic Plan. This includes a

comprehensive monitoring framework with indicators, baselines and targets for each of the main policy

areas. In addition, the Education Strategic Plan includes Core Breakthrough Indicators, which prioritise a

number of key areas where relatively limited progress was made. This has a policy action matrix and

sector performance milestones and targets. The most recent population census of 2008 and EMIS will

provide further information for the monitoring and evaluation framework of the Education Strategic

Plan. The EMIS has been evaluated by an external organization and although it reported to be slightly

inaccurate in some areas, it is sufficiently accurate to be used as a basis for sector planning.

Yet the vast majority of DPs continue to conduct their own independent monitoring to supplement

MoEYS systems. The linkage of EMIS to other information systems needs improving, and evidence-based

policy formulation is still weak. (Bunroeun and Bridle2009)

Progress reports written by technical departments and provincial education congresses, together with

annually updated school census data by the Education Management Information System (EMIS) and a

review of the progress towards achieving the overall targets of the Education Strategic Plan are used in

assessment of annual progress at the Joint Annual Sector Reviews, otherwise known as the National

Education Congress. This involves participation of many stakeholders, including development partners,

education authorities at national and sub-national levels and schools. Some areas for improvement

remain the level of analysis in the education congress reports, the linkages between sub-national and

national reviews, and an overall limited use of qualitative studies and evaluations.

Cambodia monitors learning outcomes at the primary and secondary school levels and school leaving

exams are administered at grades 6 (primary) and 9 (lower secondary). Cambodia does not participate in

any international tests, but in 2011 did implement EGRA in five provinces (100 schools) as a pilot.

However, Hittori found in 2009 that the data and results of the achievement tests were neither

integrated into EMIS nor sufficiently used in the analysis of sector performance through the joint sector

review. National assessments were administered in 2005-2006 at grades 3 and 6, in 2006-2007 at grades

6 and 9, in 2007-2008 at grade 9, in 2008-2009 at grades 3 and 9, and a national assessment is planned

for June 2012 at grade 3.

of 22



Mutual Accountability

Indicator 12: Mutual accountability of progress

The Joint Technical Working Group for Education (JTWG), was formally established in 1999. It consists

of senior leadership of the MoEYS, development partners (ADB, Belgium, the EU, the WFP, the AFD, the

French Embassy, the Japanese Embassy, JICA, UNESCO, UNICEF, Sida, World Bank, UNFPA, USAID), and

the NGO Education Partnership. The Joint Technical Working Group for Education meets quarterly and is

chaired by the Minister.

The Doﾐorげs Education Sector Working Group (ESWG) includes all major multilateral, bilateral and UN

agencies in the education sector have developed a number of coordinating mechanisms. In 2001, the

ESWG adopted Terms of Reference that recognized its role in the coordination of aid and development

in the education sector, and the collective role of donors in promoting an integrated approach to this

aid. The objectives of the ESWG include: (1) The advancement of education in the country, (2)

Establishing linkages with the Royal Government, and particularly with the MoEYS, (3) Monitoring the

program of education reform and development in the country, and (4) The co-ordination of

development partners working in the education sector in Cambodia.7

The Joint Annual Sector Review was formally established in March 2010 and is held annually. Results, as

outlined above, are considered and an aide memoire produced that provides recommendations for

future reviews in terms of process and preparation.

In 2010, the Partnership Principles for the education sector were adopted. These were formally agreed

between the MoEYS and the DPs to frame sector collaboration. These principles outline the main

intentions consistent with the aid effectiveness principles of the Paris Declaration and the Accra

Agenda for Action. They are not legally binding, but reflect the intentions of the government and of the

DPs to comply with the aid effectiveness principles. The Partnership Principles include principles of but

no specific targets on the engagement with the civil society on part of the government and DPs. They

include aid effectiveness targets that are agreed by Government and DPs that are assessed by both,

and discussed during the Joint Sector Review.

It was reported that more and faster progress in applying aid effectiveness principles is made on paper

compared to reality due to resistance to procedural and behavioral change among development

partners as well as Government. Capacities to manage program-based approaches remain a challenge

and those constraints have discouraged donor partners from using country systems despite Government

efforts to strengthen their quality. This shows that strengthening institutional, individual and system

capacities takes a lot of time, particularly in a country like Cambodia with its recent past, its dependency

7 UNESCO: www.unesco.org/new/en/phnompenh/education/support-to-the-education-reform-process-and-enhanced-donors-

partnership/donors-education-sector-working-group

Table 13: Mutual accountability in the education sector in 2010

Joint Sector

Review in

place

LEG exists

Civil Society

represented

in LEG

Partnership

Principles in

place

Aid effectiveness

targets agreed

Aid effectiveness

targets reviewed

during JSR

Aid

effectiveness

targets reviewed

last 2 years

Cambodia - - -

of 22



on external aid, its long history of donor-driven projects instead government-executed programs, and

the continuation of fragmented donor support. Currently, only the EU made commitments to provide

aid through sector budget support while there is a trend to keep and create new separate PIUs/PMUs.

This shows that the translation of the aid effectiveness principles in reality and to achieve a real step

change in donor behavior takes time.

4. Annex: Sources, Abbreviations

Sources

1. GPE 2011 Monitoring Exercise, including data from Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport provided

in the Ministry of Education Questionnaire, data from the DP Questionnaires completed by 11 DPs

and an Explanatory Note: www.globalpartnership.org/about-us/aid-effectiveness/2011-monitoring-

exercise-on-aid-effectiveness/

2. OECD-DAC. 2008. 2008 Survey on Monitoring the Paris Declaration: Making Aid More Effective.

Cambodia Chapter, in: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/25/49/42298877.pdf

3. OECD-DAC. 2011. 2011 Survey on Monitoring the Paris Declaration. Cambodia Chapter, in:


4. Bunroeun, H.E. Nath and Richard Bridle, Enhancing Aid Effectiveness through Education SWAp in

Cambodia, presented at FTI Partnership Meeting, Denmark 20-21 April 2009.

5. Chanboreth, Ek and Sok Hach, (2008) Aid Effectiveness in Cambodia. Wolfensohn Center for

Development at Brookings. Working Paper 7.

http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2008/12_cambodia_aid_chanboreth/12_camb

odia_aid_chanboreth.pdf

6. EFA FTI. 2008. Making Aid More Effective by 2010. Cambodia Chapter, in :

http://www.educationfasttrack.org/media/library/FTI_Aid_Effectiveness_Report_Cambodia_Capter

_43_62.pdf

7. Hattori, Hiroyuki, 2009, Enhancing Aid Effectiveness in education through a sector-wide approach in

Cambodia. Prospects Quarterly Review of Comparative Education. UNESCO.

http://www.springerlink.com/content/7w46j11415643164/fulltext.html

8. Purcell, Ray, Abby Riddell, George Taylor and Khieu Vicheanon (2010) Mid-Term Evaluation of the

EFA Fast Track Initiative: Country Case Study Cambodia. http://www.camb-

ed.com/fasttrackinitiative/download/FTI_CR_Cambodia(February2010y).pdf

9. World Bank. April 2010. Annual Catalytic Fund Status Report.





http://www.educationfasttrack.org/media/library/FTI_Aid_Effectiveness_Report_Cambodia_Capter_43_62.pdf

http://www.educationfasttrack.org/media/library/FTI_Aid_Effectiveness_Report_Cambodia_Capter_43_62.pdf

http://www.springerlink.com/content/7w46j11415643164/fulltext.html



of 22



Abbreviations

CSOs Civil Society Organizations

DFID Uﾐited Kiﾐgdoﾏげs Departﾏeﾐt for Iﾐterﾐatioﾐal De┗elopﾏeﾐt ESP Education Sector Plan

ESWG Education Sector Working Group

GoC Government of Camodia

GPEげs CF GloHal Partﾐership for EduIatioﾐげs Catal┞tiI Fuﾐd

MoEYS Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport

MTEF Medium-term expenditure framework

NEP NGO Education Partnership

NGOs Non-Governmental Organizations

OECD DAC Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development – Development Assistance

Committee

PBA Program-based approaches

PFM Public Financial Management

PIU Parallel Implementation Unit

UNICEF Uﾐited Natioﾐs Childreﾐげs Fund

USAID United States Agency for International Development

The Global Partnership for Education is a global partnership of DPs, 46 developing countries, multilateral institutions,

civil society organizations (CSOs), private foundations and the private sector dedicated to ensure that all children

receive quality basic education. Through the GPE, developing countries and their development partners coordinate at

both national and international levels to ensure greater DP harmonization, knowledge sharing and resource

mobilization. At country level, the GPE supports the development, implementation and monitoring of national

education plans. The Local Education Group (LEG) is the foundation for the Partnership governance at the country

level. It comprises the government of the developing country partner, DPs, multilateral agencies, CSOs, etc. These

partners work together to develop, appraise, endorse, implement, monitor, and evaluate education plans.

http://www.globalpartnership.org/

aid effectiveness in the education sector 2010...these ten dps provided in total us$66.2 million to...

Documents