gar: philippines: enhancing access to quality early childhood

Grant Assistance Report

Project Number: 45127-001 February 2012

Grant Assistance

Republic of the Philippines: Enhancing Access to

Quality Early Childhood Education Services for

Children in Poor Communities (Financed by the Japan Fund for Poverty Reduction)

CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (as of 31 January 2012)

Currency Unit – peso (P)

P1.00 = $0.023250 $1.00 = P43.01

ABBREVIATIONS

ADB – Asian Development Bank BEIS – basic education information system CCT – conditional cash transfer DOH – Department of Health ECCD – early childhood care and development ECERS – early childhood environment rating scale DepEd – Department of Education DSWD – Department of Social Welfare and Development GVS – Global Voluntary Service JFPR – Japan Fund for Poverty Reduction JICA – Japan International Cooperation Agency K to 12 – Kindergarten to Grade 12 LGU – local government unit M&E – monitoring and evaluation MDG – Millennium Development Goal NGO – nongovernment organization PCLC – parents for child literacy committee PIU – project implementation unit PSC – project steering committee UNICEF – United Nations Children's Fund

GLOSARRY

AGAPP – Aklat, Gabay, Aruga Tungo sa Pag-angat at Pag-asa (Books and Classrooms, Guidance and Care Towards Upliftment and Hope for the Poorest Filipino Children)

barangay – the smallest administrative division in the Philippines and is the native Filipino term for a village, district or ward

Pantawid Pamilya

– Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (Building Bridges for the Filipino Family Program)

Silid Pangarap – school-library facilities that will also serve as preschool classrooms for schools in depressed and disadvantaged communities

NOTES

(i) The fiscal year of the Government of the Philippines ends on 31 December.

(ii) In this report, “$” refers to US dollars.

i

Vice-President S. Groff, Operations 2 Director General K. Senga, Southeast Asia Department (SERD) Director I. Matsumoto, Human and Social Development Division, SERD Team leader E. Masaki, Social Sector Economist, SERD Team members N. Calma, Project Officer, SERD

U. Hoque, Social Development Specialist (Gender and Development), SERD S. Kawazu, Senior Counsel, Office of the General Counsel J. Mangahas, Country Specialist, Philippines Country Office, SERD C. Spohr, Senior Education Economist, SERD

Peer reviewers

J. Asanova, Education Specialist, East Asia Department R. Elfving, Social Development Specialist (HIV and AIDS Coordination), Regional and Sustainable Development Department K. Schelzig Bloom, Senior Social Sector Specialist, Cambodia Resident Mission, SERD

In preparing any country program or strategy, financing any project, or by making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area in this document, the Asian Development Bank does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area.

JAPAN FUND FOR POVERTY REDUCTION (JFPR)

JFPR Grant Proposal

I. Basic Data

Name of Proposed Activity Enhancing Access to Quality Early Childhood Education Services for Children in Poor Communities

Country Philippines

Grant Amount Requested $1,500,000

Project Duration 3 years

Regional Grant � Yes / � No

Grant Type � Project / � Capacity building

II. Grant Development Objective(s) and Expected Key Performance Indicators

Grant Development Objectives: The grant project’s development objective is to improve access to quality early childhood education services, to create a stronger foundation for schooling and learning, especially among children in poor communities in the Philippines. The project supports a sustainable multistakeholder partnership to implement the Government of the Philippines’ program to universalize preschool for 5-year-old children to prepare them better for primary education, thereby reducing the dropout rate and improve their learning outcomes. The development objective will be achieved by: (i) constructing 60 preschool buildings that are safe, child-friendly, and accessible to children with disability; (ii) training preschool teachers and primary school heads in delivery and management of universal preschool education; (iii) building sustainable partnerships with communities and civil society in the areas of school health and nutrition, livelihood programs, and parent education; and (iv) establishing a monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system and impact studies for evidence-based policy recommendations for preschool and early primary education. Expected Key Performance Indicators: (i) Elementary transition rate from preschool to elementary school among the targeted pupils improved

by at least 10%; (ii) elementary dropout rate reduced among the targeted students by at least 10%; (iii) age-appropriate child development index scores achieved by at least 90% of targeted children; (iv) proportion of grade 1 enrollees with prior preschool participation increased by 20%; and (v) more and stronger partnerships developed as measured by amount of resources mobilized from the

private sector, and development partners.

III. Grant Categories of Expenditure, Amounts, and Percentage of Expenditures

Category Amount of Grant Allocated in $ Percentage of Expenditures (%)

1. Civil works 889,542 59.3

2. Equipment and supplies 74,417 5.0

3. Training, workshops, and seminars 37,087 2.5

4. Consulting services 116,558 7.8

5. Grant management 57,558 3.8

6. Other inputs 251,290 16.7

7. Contingencies 73,548 4.9

Total 1,500,000 100.0

Incremental Cost 45,000

2

JAPAN FUND FOR POVERTY REDUCTION

JFPR Grant Proposal Background Information

A. Other Data Date of Submission of Application

19 August 2011

Project Officer Emiko Masaki, Social Sector Economist

Project Officer’s Division, E-mail, Phone

Human and Social Development Division (SEHS) [email protected] Tel. 634-5470

Other Staff Who Will Need Access to Edit and/or Review the Report

Christopher Spohr, Senior Education Economist, SEHS Joel Mangahas, Country Specialist, Philippines County Office Uzma Hoque, Social Development Specialist, SEHS Nida Calma, Project Officer, SEHS Joji Bautista, Operations Assistant, SEHS Grace Cruz, Operations Analyst, SEHS

Sectors (subsectors) Education (preprimary and basic education); health and social protection (nutrition, early childhood development)

Themes (subthemes) Social development (human development, other vulnerable groups); capacity development (institutional development; client relations, network, and partnership development); gender equity (human capabilities); governance (civil society participation)

Targeting Classification Targeted intervention - TI-M

Name of Associated Asian Development Bank (ADB) Financed Operation

Philippines: Social Protection Support Project (Loan 2662 PHI)

Executing Agency Department of Education (DepEd)

Grant Implementing Agency

Aklat, Gabay, Aruga Tungo sa Pag-angat at Pag-asa (AGAPP) Foundation Unit 300, 3F Regalia Tower A Quezon City, Metro Manila, Philippines Aurora Aquino Abellada, Felicisima A. Bautista, Pier-Angela P. Caguioa [email protected] Tel. 352-6478 Fax. 426-7271

B. Details of the Proposed Grant

1. Description of the Components, Monitorable Deliverables and/or Outcomes, and Implementation Timetable

Component A Component name Safe and child-friendly learning environments Cost ($) $1,025,674 (including contingencies) Component description By 2014, 60 safe and child-friendly preschool buildings,

accessible to children with disability, will be completed; each sized, furnished, and equipped to serve at least 100 preschool students for each school in targeted poor and

3

underserved communities. An advocacy campaign will raise parents’ awareness on the importance of preschool attendance as a foundation for literacy and learning. The project sites will be selected using targeting and selection criteria comprising: (i) priority divisions of DepEd, with high proportion of schools with classroom shortage and low performance (i.e., low participation and completion rates, high dropout rates, and low national achievement test scores); (ii) poor communities targeted for the Pantawid Pamilya (Building Bridges for the Filipino Family Program) of the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD); (iii) prevalence of high malnutrition among elementary school children; and (iv) evidence of local community support and effective school leadership.

Monitorable deliverables and/or outputs

By 2014 in target communities: (i) 60 safe and child-friendly, fully furnished and equipped

preschool buildings with functional library completed; (ii) 6,000 preschool students enrolled in beneficiary schools

equipped with preschool facilities and adequate learning materials;

(iii) number of grades 1–3 students benefiting from fully functional library increased; and

(iv) number of parents reached by advocacy and awareness raising campaign on the importance of preschool, early literacy and foundational learning increased.

Implementation of major activities—number of months for grant activities

(i) Site selection and evaluation for all 60 project sites completed;

(ii) construction of 60 one-story buildings, each with two preschool classrooms and a library, completed by end of year 2; all structures furnished with basic learning materials and books, classroom supplies as turned over;

(iii) school heads and teachers given orientation on how to set up and operationalize the Model Preschool Program, including classroom, school library, family literacy and parent education hub (sessions to start by month 4 and, thereafter, at least 1 month before every turnover);

(iv) data-gathering for database on students and their family profiles in pilot sites to begin within the first year as input to metrics for child nutrition; and

(v) advocacy campaign targeting parents in pilot sites on importance of early literacy and kindergarten education launched by month 4.

Component B Component name Teaching and school leadership capacity building Cost ($) $64,406 (including contingencies) Component description The project will support the implementation of the government

program on universal kindergarten education. In schools, the project will train the teachers, school heads, and division supervisors (preschool coordinators) on: (i) the revised DepEd kindergarten curriculum; (ii) developmentally suitable practices in early childhood education; (iii) assessment of child

4

development and the quality of learning environments; (iv) supportive transition programs and the early literacy support and enrichment program for grades 1–3 students. The project will also train school heads and principals, district supervisors, and civil society partners on: (i) school leadership to enhance parent involvement and participation in children’s education, (ii) facilitating parenting support and education programs in schools, (iii) building community partnerships for improving child development and learning outcomes, (iv) implementing school health and nutrition programs, and (v) planning livelihood support programs for parents.


(i) DepEd's revised preschool curriculum and program implemented,

(ii) early childhood environment rating scale (ECERS) tools for assessing quality of learning environments fully adopted and implemented, and

(iii) training on school leadership for greater parental involvement and community partnerships for early childhood development


(i) Training program designed, materials, and handouts prepared by month 3;

(ii) baseline established through survey and needs assessment on teachers’ and principals’ competence in early childhood education within site selection process;

(iii) three modules of the Model Preschool Program implemented with participation of preschool teachers and school heads of recipient schools within 2 years of project life;

(iv) monitoring tools developed for principals and division preschool coordinators used to assess teachers’ performance within year 1, together with training materials; and

(v) validation of teacher performance and status of Model Preschool Program as child-friendly environments for “K to 3” (kindergarten to grade 3) through site-based monitoring, observation, and assessment by trainers (at least 1 per year).

Component C Component name Sustainable partnerships with communities and civil society Cost ($) $236,212 (including contingencies) Component description The project will support partnership building and capacity

development for organizing family literacy and parent education workshops, and organizing activities for livelihood and community development, thereby strengthening home–school–community partnerships. Partnerships with other civil society groups (i.e., local volunteer groups and corporate social responsibility efforts) and nongovernment organizations (NGOs) shall be formed and mobilized to fund and implement nutrition programs for preschool students and workshops for parents on livelihood programs. Mobilizing school heads, teachers, and NGOs will involve the following key activities:

5

(i) organizing parent education activities; (ii) storytelling and early literacy workshops and family development sessions within Pantawid Pamilya; (iii) implementing school-based feeding and nutrition programs for children, including growth monitoring, deworming, micronutrient supplementation, and supplemental feeding; and (iv) planning and implementing livelihood and income-generating activities to sustain school nutrition and feeding programs, and other community partnership activities. This component also discusses gender issues and promotes gender equity by (i) raising awareness of partners to help them understand and commit to the importance of early childhood education for children and the need to support both boys and girls in completing schooling, (ii) increasing awareness of mothers on early childhood care and development (ECCD) and caring for and rearing young children, (iii) training teachers and education staff at elementary schools on key gender issues and on the need to encourage boys in particular to complete schooling.


(i) Institutional framework and business plan for strengthening multistakeholder partnerships developed by year 2,

(ii) parents for child literacy committees (PCLCs) established in each target school and municipality and meeting at least monthly, with regular participation by at least 50% of parents of preschool students,

(iii) nutrition programs implemented in project-supported schools, and

(iv) at least 10 livelihood programs established with partner NGOs.


(i) An institutional framework and business plan for strengthening multistakeholder partnerships in support of universal access to preschool developed by month 24;

(ii) school heads and teachers trained to organize and implement family literacy and parent education modules in the model preschool of the target schools with the active participation of parents by month 6;

(iii) teachers and school heads organize parents and motivate their participation in PCLCs by month 6;

(iv) annual workplan for PCLCs developed to include activities for parent education, livelihood projects in support of feeding and other child health and education programs by month 3 and implemented by month 6;

(v) NGO or corporate partners for each project school determined and evaluated, and initial meetings facilitated (months 2–6); and

(vi) memorandum of understanding signed with NGOs and/or corporations by month 8, and activities or programs with partner NGOs and/or corporations implemented and PCLCs monitored (months 8–36).

Component D Component name Project management, monitoring, and impact evaluation

6

Cost ($) $173,708 (including contingencies) Component description The project will establish a project implementation unit (PIU) to

lead overall implementation and monitoring of the project activities. Key activities and tasks under project management are to (i) establish project management systems for stronger governance, accountability, and transparency in project implementation; (ii) prepare a grant implementation manual; (iii) periodically monitor project implementation; (iv) prepare periodic narrative reports and photo documentation of project activities; and (v) conduct annual audits of project accounts. Key monitoring activities are to (i) develop and implement performance monitoring systems; (ii) design, select, or adapt assessment tools for child development and learning outcomes, and for the quality of early-childhood learning environments; (iii) establish a project database with detailed school profiles and updated summaries of the assessments; (iv) conduct site visit to schools to monitor project activities for consultation and supervision purposes; (v) provide close monitoring and implementation support to ensure smooth project implementation, knowledge transfer, and execution of the project’s exit strategy. The project will conduct an evaluation study to assess the impact of the pilot models on learning outcomes among children in poor communities. The project will formulate policy recommendations to DepEd on upscaling the project’s partnership-building model and innovating early-childhood education delivery in support of the national goal of universal preschool education. Key activities are to: (i) design and implement a baseline survey, (ii) prepare midterm and completion reports, (iii) conduct a project impact evaluation study,1 (iv) formulate policy recommendations on upscaling the models piloted by the project, and (v) prepare and publish knowledge products.


Project monitoring: (i) PIU fully staffed and operational, (ii) project M&E system put in place within first 6 months of

implementation, (iii) comprehensive monitoring reports submitted on time, (iv) exit strategy prepared and implemented successfully, (v) midterm and completion reports prepared, and (vi) annual audits conducted. Impact evaluation and policy formulation: (i) Baseline and endline surveys designed and conducted, (ii) an impact evaluation study conducted, (iii) a project evaluation report prepared,

1 Subject to detailed design of the evaluation strategy after site identification, it is envisaged that the study will employ

a difference-in-difference approach that measures changes in the key indicators (such as basic cognitive, psychosocial measures, or measures of parental attitudes toward continued schooling) from the pre-intervention to the post-intervention period for children in target communities, compared with changes over the same period for children in nonparticipating communities.

7

(iv) policy recommendations on strengthening “K to 3” education prepared and presented to DepEd, and

(v) knowledge products prepared and disseminated. Implementation of major activities—number of months for grant activities

(i) PIU established and mobilized by month 1, (ii) inception workshop conducted by month 2, (iii) monitoring and information system designed and

established by month 5, (iv) baseline survey completed by month 6, (v) annual audit conducted, (vi) regular site monitoring conducted, (vii) regular project monitoring reports prepared and

submitted, (viii) midterm evaluation conducted by month 18, (ix) revised Philippines ECCD checklists and ECERS

adapted and used, (x) impact evaluation study competed by month 35, (xi) impact assessment report prepared by month 36, (xii) policy recommendations formulated and presented by

month 35, and (xiii) policy notes prepared by month 36.

2. Financing Plan for Proposed Grant to Be Supported by JFPR

1. The estimated cost is $3.54 million, of which $1.5 million (or 42% of the total project cost) is requested to be financed by JFPR grant, while the rest of the project cost (i.e., $2.04 million) will be cofinanced through the government, private sector, and community contributions. DepEd provides $1.63 million equivalent in land and for teachers’ salaries (permanent and contractual) for 60 proposed project sites over 36 months. The private partners provide $0.38 million to cover the costs of school construction and supplies for 15 sites. Volunteers from the targeted communities will also be engaged to support the project activities under component C. Funding Source Amount ($) JFPR 1,500,000 Government (in-kind) 1,627,814 Private sector contribution 383,716 Community contribution (in-kind) 31,140

Total 3,542,670

3. Background

2. Government reform program. The government has embarked on a comprehensive reform of its education system. The basic education cycle will be extended from 10 to 12 years. The government is also committed to universalize kindergarten education. Implementing the “K to 12” system (kindergarten to grade 12) is a complex and massive undertaking that requires significant investment. Public spending on education has been insufficient, and basic education opportunities have been uneven.2 While the DepEd budget for preprimary education increased from P1.9 billion in 2010 to P2.3 billion in 2011, the current budget is inadequate for universalizing kindergarten. Existing DepEd facilities can cover less than half of the 2.5 million children at age 5.

2

Public spending on education averaged 2.5% of gross domestic product from 2002 to 2007, compared with the average spending at 4% in other Asian countries.

8

3. Need to achieve Millennium Development Goals. The Philippines is lagging on all four education indicators of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and appears unlikely to reach any of its MDG targets for education by 2015. Net enrollment rates in primary education have been stagnant—84.6% in 1990 and 85.1% in 2008). The primary completion rate has shown minimal improvement from 64.2% in 1990 to 73.3% in 2008, with 1 in 4 children not able to complete the 6 years of compulsory elementary education. Educational outcomes of poor children in the Philippines are undercut partly by the limited availability of preschools, which hampers children’s readiness for schooling. The 2008 annual poverty indicator survey by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) indicates that poor children are much less likely to attend preschool. Less than 40% of boys and 46% of girls aged 5 from the poorest 30% households were enrolled in preschool (or higher), while roughly 80% (twice as high) of boys and 87% of girls among 5-year-olds in the richest 30% of households attended preschool. The data also show that poor children are more likely to start schooling behind schedule, and suggest that this poor early learning foundation contributes to later repetitions, dropouts, and low learning.3 4. Rationale for investing in early childhood program. Global evidence shows that good-quality early childhood education programs for disadvantaged children along with nutritional supplements have brought long-lasting and highly cost-effective results in school retention rates, intellectual ability and performance, and long-term earnings and welfare.

4 This is also enforced by key findings from an evaluation of ADB’s Early Childhood Development Project,5 which found that there was significant improvement in weight-for-height Z scores6 and in cognitive and social development among children in the program areas, compared with children in nonprogram areas.7 Similarly, there is strong evidence in the Philippines and globally that lack of exposure to reading in the early years leads to low achievement and dropouts, as children fall behind in classrooms. While decades of investments in the ECCD programs and services in the Philippines have improved day care and maternal and child health services in the barangays, 8 challenges still remain: (i) creating sufficient access to quality learning environments for young children, particularly at preschool age; (ii) building teaching capacity in preschools; and (iii) engaging parents and communities, and mobilizing support from broader civil society and the private sector. There is a pressing need to solve interlinked problems (e.g., low enrollment in preschool due to lack of physical access, low quality, and low parental awareness of the importance of formative years through preschool and early grade schooling). 5. Ongoing initiatives. To tackle those issues, a number of actions are underway. To improve quality, DepEd has introduced a new preschool curriculum in school year 2010/11. DepEd has also launched new programs to strengthen early literacy and numeracy, such as “every child-a-reader” and the “eight-week ECCD curriculum in grade 1” designed to boost school readiness of 6-year-olds enrolled in grade 1. The ECCD curriculum builds on outputs of the ADB-financed Early Childhood Development Project (1998–2005) aimed to aid transition

3 Among 14-year-old boys in the poorest 30% of households, roughly 24% have dropped out of school, while

roughly 10% remain in school but are at least 4 years behind their expected grade. 4 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. 2006. The UNESCO Education For All Global Monitoring Report 2007: Strong Foundations – Early Childhood Care and Education. Paris.

5 ADB.1998. Report and Recommendation of the President to the Board of Directors: proposed Loan to the

Philippines for the Early Childhood Development Project. Manila (Loan 1606 PHI), for $24.5M, approved on 6 January.

6 A Z-score is a statistical measure and the number of standard deviations that a given x value is above or below the

mean. 7 Armecin et al. 2006. Early Childhood Development through an Integrated Program: Evidence from the Philippines.

World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3922. 8 the smallest administrative division in the Philippines and is the native Filipino term for a village, district or ward.

9

from home to primary school for the majority of 6-year-olds who had no access to any form of organized ECCD program (i.e., day care or preschool).9 6. In addition, DepEd and other government agencies are also seeking new models and partnerships to engage parents, communities, and a broader array of actors such as DSWD, the Department of Health (DOH), local government units (LGUs), and international agencies, i.e., the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) in preschool,10 and several development partners in elementary education. 7. DepEd is also expanding partnerships with NGOs and the private sector to expand resources, particularly to construct new classrooms and develop a high-quality kindergarten program at the base of the new “K to 12” system. Under the existing partnership arrangement with DepEd, the AGAPP Foundation has been supporting the expansion of preschool classrooms and school libraries through successful partnerships with the private sector, LGUs, and other NGOs for mobilizing and coordinating resources for early childhood education. 8. Proposed approach. The project will build on these initiatives, and directly tackle supply-side constraints on preprimary education and education in early elementary grades. The project will cover facilities for preschool, library space and materials, and training to improve teachers’ ability to support early learning by all (especially children from more disadvantaged households who would otherwise be at risk of repetition and dropout). Linked to the government's Pantawid Pamilya, the project will also help remove key demand-side constraints on early education, including costs and financial constraints (by providing school feeding, which lowers cost constraints and provides an incentive for sending young children to preschool and grades 1–3); raise parental awareness on the importance of early education, and the quality and safety of project-supported preschools; and increase advocacy and mobilization of parental and community support to sustain project preschools. The project will institutionalize a sustainable model for early childhood education delivery through stronger public–private–civil society partnerships, and contribute to evidence-based policymaking and expansion of the project model in the Philippines.

4. Innovation and Knowledge Sharing 9. The project will help increase knowledge and evidence on effective and sustainable partnership and delivery of early childhood education in poor communities. The key innovation is integrating public–private–civil society partnerships into the existing government models of early childhood education delivery. This approach is consistent with the Education-for-All “grand alliance framework” designed to operationalize a multistakeholder partnership for the delivery of basic education services. It fosters partnerships of parents, community volunteers, and LGUs, and corporate social responsibility initiatives in the private sector, under a school partnership framework that transforms schools into participatory learning communities that promote local resource mobilization and transparent school governance. Capacity-building investments for school leaders, teachers, parents, and local stakeholders will support the implementation, sustainability, and subsequent expansion of the innovative early education partnership model. The involvement of community-based public and private organizations in the planning,

9 The project was focused largely on community-based interventions such as home-based ECCD, the day care

centers, and maternal and child health services in the participating local government units in regions VII and VIII. 10

For decades, UNICEF has been a partner of DepEd for all its ECCD programs, specifically supporting teacher training; provision of learning materials and resources; and policy, program, and curriculum development. UNICEF continues to support the expansion of the Model Preschool Program initiated by DepEd in 2010 in collaboration with the Community of Learners Foundation, a nongovernment organization. It is within this model-building project that DepEd and its partners—UNICEF and the Community of Learners Foundation—revised the preschool curriculum and introduced more developmentally suitable methods and materials for use in the public schools.

10

implementation, monitoring, evaluation, and dissemination of lessons learned will also provide a mechanism for horizontal and vertical learning, and knowledge transfer that will support ongoing programmatic and policy enhancements related to early childhood education. 10. Building on the successful Model Preschool Program of DepEd and UNICEF, the project will further develop a best-practice model and generate fresh knowledge from operations research on an integrated holistic approach to school-based preschool programs. Achievements and lessons from the project will be carefully documented and developed into knowledge products, such as (i) holistic child development M&E tools (e.g., refinements of the Philippines ECCD checklist and ECERS tools); (ii) a resource kit to promote best practices in school-based preschool leadership; (iii) a design framework, business plan, and operations manual for promoting and strengthening effective public–private partnerships in sustainable community-based early childhood education; and (iv) a set of policy recommendations for ECCD based on project experiences. These knowledge products will be published and disseminated widely within DepEd and among public and private providers of early education programs.

5. Sustainability 11. The government is seeking effective and sustainable models for expanding quality early childhood education to support universalization of kindergarten for 5-year-olds. The project will pilot innovative and sustainable models for early childhood education delivery to help the government strengthen the Model Preschool Program. An impact evaluation study of the project that also examines policy implications for the model will provide evidence-based policy recommendations on subsequent expansion of the effective and sustainable early childhood education program in the country. 12. Sustainability is facilitated by anchoring the project in the government’s “K to 12” reform initiatives with national policies and a law (Republic Act 8980 and the proposed Early Years Act). It directly supports the government’s commitment under the Education for All Philippine Plan of Action and the Basic Education Sector Reform Agenda to universalize access to preschool for 5-year-olds. The project is closely aligned with the recently approved Philippine Development Plan, 2011–2016, and the Comprehensive and Integrated Infrastructure Program, both of which highlight the role of public–private partnerships in improving access to basic social services and enhancing the scope and quality of social infrastructure. 13. Locally, sustainability is fostered by entrusting the host school and community with the operation and maintenance of the school libraries constructed by the project. Community mobilization mechanisms will be carefully fostered drawing on in-country experience, e.g., under the Philippines’ community-driven development program (Kalahi-CIDSS).11 The involvement of local NGOs, community volunteers, and local government will promote convergence of various programs and services for school children in targeted communities (e.g., supplementary feeding, health promotion, extended day or child-care support, and microenterprise for parents implemented by partner NGOs, civil society organizations, or the local service providers). The engagement of private partners will also increase the potential to leverage resources for sustaining and expanding project outputs and outcomes, during and beyond project life, especially in ensuring continued provision of books, instructional materials, school feeding and nutrition supplies, and teaching–learning supplies. Teachers and school heads trained by the project will be instrumental in transferring knowledge and skills gained to other teachers and school heads through trainings, on-the-job coaching, and peer mentoring.

11

Kalahi-CIDSS is implemented by DSWD. As noted, DSWD will be a key partner under the project, supporting coordination and sharing of knowledge on the successful experience under Kalahi-CIDSS in supporting barangay-based preschools.

11

6. Participatory Approach

14. Project preparation involved consultations with government agencies, development partners, NGOs, Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), and the Embassy of Japan in the Philippines in June and July 2011. Preschools and feeding programs in Negros Occidental were visited in June 2011 and consultations were made with schoolteachers, volunteers, and parents. At all levels, project stakeholders were invited to provide suggestions on the project design, scope, implementation arrangements, opportunities for partnerships, and lessons learned from similar interventions in the country. Project preparation also included determining opportunities to partner with UNICEF in key focus areas. The views of stakeholders were incorporated into project design and implementation arrangements. 15. During implementation, the project envisages continuous stakeholder participation. It has therefore integrated in its design strong partnerships between schools, private sector, and civil society that by default involve community, parents, and NGOs. Quarterly meetings of the project steering committee (PSC) and regular M&E will also involve stakeholder representatives.

Primary Beneficiaries and Other Affected Groups and Relevant Description

Other Key Stakeholders and Brief Description

Approximately 6,000 preschool children from poor and underserved areas across three regions (regions V, VI, and VII) will have access to quality early childhood education programs, including equipped preschool buildings with developmentally suitable learning materials. Teachers, school heads, and preschool supervisors or school coordinators of the school divisions of the target areas will participate in the training program and capacity-building activities.

Teachers, school heads, and school coordinators will strengthen their capacity to deliver quality early childhood education services. Local NGOs, private sector, communities, and volunteers involved in the project will gain experience and strengthen their partnerships in promoting effective and sustainable models for early childhood education.

Parents will participate in parent education activities organized by the school heads and teachers to improve their caregiving practices and support for their children’s education. Grades 1–3 students in the targeted areas will also benefit from the library resources provided and the literacy-enrichment activities.

A Japanese NGO will be engaged as partner of local NGOs in the school-based nutrition and feeding program and livelihood support activities. The project will strengthen coordination and cooperation among key stakeholders in delivery of quality early childhood education services.

7. Coordination

16. The project was designed in close consultation with government agencies, development partners (JICA and UNICEF), NGOs, and the Embassy of Japan in the Philippines. Consultation with the government agencies—i.e., ECCD Council, National Economic and Development Authority, DOH, and DSWD—confirmed areas of coordination in support of the various government initiatives to improve health and educational outcomes for poor children. 17. The Global Voluntary Service (GVS), a Japanese NGO supporting various health, nutrition, and livelihood programs in the Philippines since 2003, is proposed to be involved in the school-based nutrition and feeding program and livelihood support under component C. GVS will lead community and parental education for nutrition and livelihood support activities as well as provide capacity building for the local NGOs in program implementation and monitoring.

12

The project has also determined areas of collaboration and coordination with UNICEF, such as (i) teacher training, (ii) expansion of ECCD checklist, (iii) M&E, and (iv) policy advice and advocacy for an inclusive preschool model (including costing, budgeting, and planning). JICA expressed strong interest in coordinating activities in health and education services through its planned support for the government’s Pantawid Pamilya.

8. Visibility 18. Japan's official development assistance (ODA) logo and the JFPR logo will be used in publications and any other materials produced under the project. All press releases issued by ADB and local news media for the JFPR project activities will acknowledge the financial contribution from the Government of Japan following the Guidance Note on Visibility of Japan. Officials from the Embassy of Japan are invited to attend project events and ceremonies, including turnover of school facilities. Involvement of GVS in community-based activities, including nutrition and feeding programs and support for livelihood program, will further promote the visibility and local awareness of the JFPR program.

9. Detailed Cost Table 19. Please refer to Appendix 2 for the summary cost table, Appendix 3 for the detailed cost estimates, and Appendix 4 for the fund flow arrangement. C. Link to ADB Strategy and ADB-Financed Operations

1. Link to ADB Strategy 20. The project will directly contribute to progress toward the achievement of the MDG targets on education, and will also support the development goals of the Philippine Education for All 2015 Plan, which emphasizes universal primary education. The project goals are consistent with ADB’s Strategy 2020,12 which specifies education as one of the five core areas of operation and calls for developing innovative partnerships with the private sector. The country assistance program evaluation (2008) for the Philippines concluded that ADB’s engagement in education should be a priority, and ADB’s country partnership strategy 2011–201613 names education as a core sector and also foresees expanded support for social protection, particularly for children. The draft country partnership strategy supports the government’s strategy to achieve inclusive growth by providing equal access to development opportunities through investing in human capital as prioritized in the Philippine Development Plan, 2011–2016.14

Document Document Number

Date of Last Discussion

Objectives

Country Partnership Strategy: Philippines, 2011–2016

Sec.M55-11

2011 Ensure high, inclusive, and sustainable growth through more efficient, effective, and equitable social services delivery, focusing on education and social protection services.

12

ADB. 2008. Strategy 2020: The Long-Term Strategic Framework of the Asian Development Bank, 2008–2020. Manila.

13 ADB. (2011). Country Partnership Strategy: Philippines, (2011–2016). Manila.

14 Government of the Philippines. 2011. 2011–2016 Philippine Development Plan. Manila (May). Publicly released on 27 May 2011 and accessible through: www.neda.gov.ph/PDP/2011-2016/default.asp.

13

Document Document Number

Date of Last Discussion

Objectives

Country Operations Business Plan: Philippines, 2012–2014

IN223-11 2011 Inclusive and sustainable growth with proposed program in education, infrastructure, environment, and finance. The project is in line with the 2013 planned ADB assistance in education to support basic education, including implementation of the “K to 12” system.

Strategy 2020: The Long-Term Strategic Framework of the Asian Development Bank, 2008–2020

R51-08 2008 The project is aligned with Strategy 2020’s goal of poverty reduction and its strategic development agenda of inclusive growth. Education is specified as a core operation area under Strategy 2020.

2. Link to Specific ADB-Financed Operation

21. The project will be implemented in close coordination with ADB’s Social Protection Support Project as well as three linked technical assistance projects approved in 2010.15 The Social Protection Support Project directly supports the government’s effort to reduce poverty and promote human development.

Project Name Social Protection Support Project

Project Number 43407

Date of Board Approval September 2010

Loan Amount $400 million

3. Development Objective of the Associated ADB-Financed Operation

22. The development objective of the Social Protection Support Project is to reduce income poverty and non-income poverty. The Social Protection Support Project’s directly targeted outcome is increased consumption and utilization of education and health services among poor households and women beneficiaries of Pantawid Pamilya. The latter is the Philippines’ conditional cash transfer (CCT) program, which is its flagship social assistance program aimed at reducing immediate poverty and longer-term, cross-generational poverty by promoting parents’ investment in the human capital (education and health) of the next generation. Site selection criteria for the project (Appendix 5) will explicitly prioritize barangays within those provinces that are participating in Pantawid Pamilya.

4. Main Components of the Associated ADB-Financed Operation

No. Component Name Brief Description

1. Efficient implementation of a national targeting system to select poor households

1.1 Directly supports DSWD in the implementation of the national household targeting system for poverty reduction as a standardized targeting mechanism for identifying poor households, based on a proxy means test methodology that captures multiple facets of poverty

1.2 Provides secondary/indirect support to extension of national household targeting system for poverty reduction to become a unified and transparent mechanism to identify poor households and a nationwide

15

ADB. 2010. Report and Recommendation of the President to the Board of Directors: Proposed Loan, Technical Assistance Grant, and Administration of Technical Assistance Grant to the Republic of the Philippines for the Social Protection Support Project. Manila (Loan 2662-PHI, TA 7586-PHI, and TA 7587-PHI).

14

No. Component Name Brief Description database that can be used by various national and local social protection and poverty reduction programs

2. Conditional health and education cash grants provided to poor households

In selected poor provinces, municipalities, and cities, partially finances DSWD’s 2 types of CCT grants:

2.1 Health grants for poor households with children 0–14 years old and/or pregnant women, based on verified compliance with health-related conditions and mothers’/parents’ participation in family development sessions

2.2 Education grants for 3–14-year-old children verified to maintain at least 80% attendance rates in educational services (day care, preschool, elementary, and early grades of secondary schooling)

3. Strengthened capacity for CCT program operations

3.1. Provides capacity development and support for all key national and local management activities in the CCT program, including household registration, compliance verification, payment management, organization of assemblies of grantees, and strengthening of gender and indigenous peoples aspects

4. Improved systems for M&E of social protection programs

Supports:

4.1. The implementation of a management information system that will cover all steps in the operation of the CCT program

4.2. M&E, including (i) spot checks to monitor project implementation; (ii) M&E studies;

16 and (iii) regular

monitoring and reporting, including quarterly and annual reviews, and internal audits

4.3. Operation of a grievance redress system, featuring a publicly accessible grievance database to track and resolve complaints, including targeting errors, payment irregularities, fraud, and corruption

5. Rationale for Grant Funding Versus ADB Lending

23. The government is very keen to develop an effective model in expanding private sector and civil society participation, particularly in tapping public–private partnership modalities, to fill the investment gaps in the implementation of a universal kindergarten policy. This is a relatively new area for ADB and the government. Grant operations allow exploring options on a smaller scale. Given the early phase of implementation, it is better to first focus on a smaller project to demonstrate a viable, sustainable, and replicable model that effectively delivers quality early childhood education in the poor and underserved areas. Once effective models are demonstrated, larger investments can follow. It is probable that the government will replicate the JFPR-supported model in expanding the preschool access and programs across the country. D. Implementation of the Proposed Grant

1. Implementing Agency AGAPP Foundation

16

This will include qualitative evaluation studies and impact evaluation. ADB and the World Bank are exploring collaboration on a rigorous impact evaluation using regression continuity methodology.

15

24. DepEd is the executing agency and the AGAPP Foundation is the implementing agency. The AGAPP Foundation is a not-for-profit private foundation registered with the Philippine Securities and Exchange Commission. Its objectives are to uplift and enrich the life of poor communities throughout the country by providing fully equipped preschool classrooms and libraries, training the preschool teachers, and conducting research in the development of preschool programs. The AGAPP Foundation is DepEd’s designated partner in achieving universal preschool. Since its establishment, the AGAPP Foundation has demonstrated capacity in constructing high-quality preschool facilities, providing library resources, training teachers, and mobilizing resources through partnerships with other NGOs and the private sector. The project implementation arrangement will use the collaboration mechanism of DepEd and the AGAPP Foundation. Their memorandum of understanding focuses on collaboration in providing preschool classrooms and an early literacy program for primary grades through the Silid Pangarap’s17 resources for grades 1–3 in the country. The AGAPP Foundation mobilizes partnerships and resources to fund those inputs and implement activities, while DepEd provides policy and directions on program content. 25. DepEd will provide policy advice and overall guidance, while the AGAPP Foundation will be responsible for project implementation and management. A PSC will comprise one representative and one alternate each from DepEd, DOH, DSWD, ECCD Council, private sector partners, and the AGAPP Foundation. DepEd will chair the PSC and the AGAPP Foundation will be its secretariat. The PSC will meet quarterly to discuss and review project progress, provide policy support and guidance, ensure timely and adequate coordination of stakeholders, ensure dissemination of information, and adopt the necessary policy measures and program adjustments. Representatives of LGUs, private sector associations, NGOs, and development partners may be invited to PSC meetings. The project will involve close collaboration with other government agencies and development partners, in particular UNICEF. 26. The PIU will be established within the AGAPP Foundation. Its main functions will be to ensure timely and effective project planning, management, coordination, procurement, financial controls, monitoring, and reporting to DepEd and ADB. The PIU will consist of (i) project director, (ii) technical advisors, (iii) project implementation specialist, (iv) financial management specialist, and (v) civil works and/or procurement specialist. 27. Project implementation will also involve one international NGO to provide overall support to the community-based activities and two local NGOs to provide livelihood opportunities to sustain the nutrition and feeding program. The PIU will engage the partner international NGO, GVS, through single-source selection, based on their international and local experience in the areas of health, nutrition, feeding, and livelihood support program. The partner local NGOs will be selected on a competitive basis by the PIU, and confirmed by ADB, on the following criteria: (i) proven experience in successfully implementing community-based social development programs in barangays; (ii) experience in planning, organizing, and implementing feeding, livelihood, or microfinance programs; (iii) proven ability to design and deliver training for communities and parents that is responsive to the needs of the community and families to support continued learning for young children; and (iv) availability for the duration of the project. 28. The PIU will be responsible for all procurements. All procurements under the JFPR grant will be conducted in accordance with ADB’s Procurement Guidelines (2010, as amended from time to time). Construction of 45 one-story, two-classroom buildings financed by the grant will be packaged into one unit, but with multiple contracts. Procurement of civil works above $100,000

17 school-library facilities that will also serve as preschool classrooms for schools in depressed and disadvantaged

communities

16

shall follow national competitive bidding procedures. Goods and civil works costing $100,000 or less shall be procured using shopping. Any minor equipment and materials costing less than $10,000 may be procured through direct contracting. Supplies for health and nutrition program may be procured through procurement from specialized agencies. The individual consultants, international NGO, and local NGOs will be contracted by the PIU in accordance with ADB’s Guidelines on the Use of Consultants (2010, as amended from time to time). The grant implementation manual, including NGO subcontract agreements and disbursement methods for the subcontracted activities, will be finalized by the PIU before the project starts. Detailed implementation arrangements are in Appendix 5.

2. Risks Affecting Grant Implementation

29. Potential risks include: (i) inability of corporate partners to deliver on their financial counterpart commitments, (ii) lack of support from the communities and parents, and (iii) insufficient adequacy and competence of school staff. 30. To mitigate the probable risks, the following actions are proposed: (i) the AGAPP Foundation develops a memorandum of agreement with corporate partners to confirm their counterpart commitments; (ii) the PSC and PIU ensure continuous engagement of community leaders and parents at every stage of project implementation, and systematic targeting of project sites coupled with adequate social preparation for smooth implementation; (iii) the PSC and PIU recognize gaps in skills and competence of school staff and provide the necessary support and guidance; (iv) the PIU engages experts in project management, civil works and/or procurement, and financial management.

3. Incremental ADB Costs

Component Incremental ADB Cost

Amount requested $45,000

Justification Incremental costs will finance (i) impact evaluation study (design and analysis); and (ii) project review missions, routine project administration, project completion review.

Type of work to be rendered by ADB Specialist consultants (international and national) will be engaged to assist with the preparation of the impact assessment and project completion reports.

4. Monitoring and Evaluation

Key Performance Indicator

Reporting Mechanism

Plan and Timetable for Monitoring and Evaluation

Elementary transition rate among the targeted students improved by at least 10%

DepEd annual statistical reports (elementary transition rate, elementary dropout rate, preschool participation rate) for target schools

Periodic project status reports

Baseline assessment survey completed within 6 months

Annual data collection by schools in accordance with national protocols for basic education information system (BEIS)

Quarterly project progress reports

Midterm evaluation

Impact evaluation study

Elementary dropout rate reduced among the targeted students by at least 10%

DepEd annual statistical reports (elementary transition rate; elementary dropout rate,


Annual data collection by schools in

17

Key Performance Indicator

Reporting Mechanism

Plan and Timetable for Monitoring and Evaluation

preschool participation rate) for target schools

Revised Philippine ECCD checklist


accordance with national protocols for BEIS


Midterm evaluation


Age-appropriate child development index scores achieved by at least 90% of targeted children

Revised Philippine ECCD checklist



Annual data collection by schools in accordance with national protocols for BEIS

Revised Philippine ECCD checklist administration


Midterm evaluation


Proportion of grade 1 enrollees with prior preschool participation increased by 20%

DepEd annual statistical reports (elementary transition rate; elementary dropout rate, preschool participation rate) for target schools



Annual data collection by schools in accordance with national protocols for BEIS


Midterm evaluation


More and stronger partnerships developed to support preschool and early primary education as measured by amount of resources mobilized from the private sector, and development partners

Project status reports

Partner NGO reports

Midterm and project completion report

Final evaluation study

Report on institutional partnership framework and business plan by month 24


Monthly reports by PCLCs

Midterm evaluation


5. Estimated Disbursement Schedule

Fiscal Year (FY) Amount ($)

FY2012 450,000

FY2013 825,000

FY2014 225,000

Total Disbursements 1,500,000 Appendixes 1. Design and Monitoring Framework 2. Summary Cost Table 3. Detailed Cost Estimates 4. Fund Flow Arrangement 5. Implementation Arrangements 6. Targeting and Selection Criteria 7. Summary Poverty Reduction and Social Strategy

Appendix 1

18 DESIGN AND MONITORING FRAMEWORK

Design Summary Performance Targets and

Indicators with Baselines Data Sources and

Reporting Mechanisms Assumptions and

Risks Impact Improved access to quality early childhood education services for better learning outcomes among children in targeted poor communities

Improved school retention and better learning outcomes for cohort group up to grade 3 measured by: Elementary transition rate improved by at least 10% by 2016

Elementary dropout rate reduced by at least 10% by 2016

Age-appropriate child development index scores achieved by at least 90% of targeted children by 2016

a

(baseline to be collected)

DepEd annual statistical reports School data on performance and achievement measures Narrative reports from schools

Revised Philippine ECCD Checklist

Assumptions DepEd MIS data is available, up-to-date, and accurate for target beneficiary schools and communities

DepEd maintains a enabling policy environment for early childhood education

UNICEF will complete the revised ECCD checklist

Outcome A sustainable multistakeholder partnership model established for expansion of preschool and early primary education

By 2014 in target communities: More and stronger partnerships to support preschool and early primary education as measured by amount of resources mobilized from the private sector, and development partners (baseline to be collected)

Proportion of grade 1 enrollees with prior preschool participation increased by 20% (baseline to be collected)

Final evaluation study

DepEd annual statistical report

Narrative reports from schools

Assumptions DepEd MIS data is available, up-to-date, and accurate for target beneficiary schools and communities

Outputs 1. Expanded access to safe and child-friendly preschool learning environments

By 2014 in target communities: 60 safe and child-friendly, seismically stable, fully furnished and equipped preschool buildings completed

6,000 preschool students have access to fully equipped preschool buildings and developmentally suitable learning materials

At least 9,000 students (grades 1–3) benefited from fully functional library

Number of parents (both fathers and mothers) reached by advocacy and awareness raising campaign on the importance of preschool, early literacy, and foundational learning increased (with a minimum 40% of men)

DepEd annual report on number of classrooms, number of children enrolled in June and principal’s attendance reports by year-end in March–April

ECERS reportsb

End of project completion report and evaluation study

Assumption Land and teachers required for construction and staffing of new buildings are made available by DepEd

Risk Major natural calamities or disasters cause construction delay in some areas

2. Improved capacity in teaching and school leadership

By the end of 2014, the following fully adopted and implemented: Improvement of DepEd's gender- inclusive preschool curriculum and program, and literacy support program for students of grades 1–3

PIU quarterly project status reports Summary report on participant training evaluation

Assumption Stability of teacher and school head deployment in partner schools assured

Greater quality of learning environments as measured by

Assessment results using ECERS tools

a

Risks Midyear or midstream turnover of teachers and

Appendix 1

19 Design Summary Performance Targets and

Indicators with Baselines Data Sources and

Reporting Mechanisms Assumptions and

Risks ECERS score by 2014 (baseline

data to be collected)

Training of teachers and education staff at elementary schools on key gender issues conducted

Performance appraisals of teachers conducted by DepEd PIU quarterly project status reports

school heads Weak division and school leadership

3. Sustainable partnerships with communities and civil society in support of preschool and early primary education established

Institutional framework and business plan for strengthening multistakeholder partnerships developed for at least 50% of targeted communities by year 2 PCLCs established in each target school and municipality by year 2 and meeting at least monthly with regular participation of at least 50% of parents of preschool students. Nutrition programs implemented in project-supported schools by year 2 At least 10 livelihood programs established with partner NGOs by year 3

Agreed business plans Midterm review

PCLCs' monthly reports that indicate level of parent involvement in activities

Partner NGOs' quarterly reports

Assumption School heads and teachers fully appreciate the importance of home–school partnerships and are committed to creating the enabling conditions

Risks Weak school leadership and/or turnover of school staff disrupt home–school partnerships

Delays in implementation of project activities by partner NGOs

4. Project monitoring and impact evaluation conducted

Project monitoring: PIU fully staffed and operational

Project monitoring and evaluation system put in place within 6 months of implementation

Annual performance monitoring and evaluation reports submitted on time

Annual audits conducted

Impact evaluation: Baseline and endline surveys designed and conducted

Impact evaluation study designed and conducted

Exit strategy prepared and implemented successfully

Policy recommendations on strengthening “K to 3” (kindergarten to grade 3) education prepared and presented to DepEd

PIU quarterly project reports Annual audit reports Performance monitoring and evaluation reports Midterm review Project completion report Impact assessment report Policy notes

Assumption Recruitment of qualified staff, consultants, and local NGOs by implementing agency Risk Poor reporting and quality of data

Activities with Milestones Inputs

1. Expanded access to safe and child-friendly preschool learning environments

1.1 Site selection and evaluation to start on day 15, with all 60 project sites selected (with complete requirements for participation) after 18 months

1.2 Construction of 60 one-story buildings, each with two classrooms and a library, completed by end of year 2. All structures furnished with basic learning materials and books, classroom supplies replaced as turned over.

1.3 School heads and teachers given orientation on how to set up and operationalize

Project Cost: $3.54 million

Japan Fund for Poverty Reduction: $1.50 million

Appendix 1

20

Activities with Milestones Inputs Silid Pangarap

1 as preschool classroom, school library, family literacy and parent

education hub (commenced by month 4, and at least 1 month prior to every turnover)

1.4 Data-gathering for database on students and family profiles in pilot sites to begin within year 1 as input to metrics for child nutrition.

1.5 Advocacy campaign targeting parents in pilot sites on importance of early literacy and kindergarten education launched by month 4

2. Improved capacity in teaching and school leadership

2.1 Training program designed, materials and handouts prepared by month 3

2.3 Baseline established through survey and needs assessment on teachers’ and principals’ competencies on early childhood education within site selection process 2.3 Three modules on the Model Preschool Program and the Silid Pangarap as library

implemented with 100% participation of preschool teachers and school heads of recipient schools within 2 years of project life

2.4 Training conducted for teachers and staff at elementary schools on key gender issues and on encouraging boys in particular to complete schooling

2.5 Validation of teacher performance and status of the Silid Pangarap as child-friendly environments for “K to 3” through site-based monitoring, observation and assessment by trainers (at least 1 per year).

3. Sustainable partnerships with communities and civil society in support of preschool and early primary education established

3.1 An institutional framework and business plan for strengthening multistakeholder partnerships developed by month 24

3.2 School heads and teachers trained to organize and implement family literacy and parent education modules in the Silid Pangarap of the beneficiary schools with the active participation of parents by month 6 3.3 Teachers and school heads organize parents and motivate their participation in PCLCs by month 6

3.4 Annual workplan for PCLCs developed to include activities for parent education, livelihood projects in support of feeding and other child health and education programs by month 3 and implemented by month 6 3.5 Annual workplan of NGO or corporate partners for each project school determined and evaluated and initial meetings facilitated (months 2–6)

3.6 Memorandums of understanding signed with NGOs and/or corporations by month 8, and activities and programs with partner NGOs and/or corporations implemented and PCLCs monitored 4. Project monitoring and impact evaluation conducted

4.1 PIU established and mobilized by month 1

4.2 Inception workshop conducted by month 2

4.3 Monitoring and information system designed and established by month 5

4.4 Baseline survey completed by month 6

4.5 Annual audit conducted

4.6 Regular site monitoring conducted

4.7 Regular project monitoring reports prepared and submitted

4.8 Midterm evaluation conducted by month 18

4.9 Revised Philippines ECCD checklists and ECERS adapted and used

4.10 Impact evaluation study competed by month 35

4.11 Policy recommendations formulated and presented by month 35

4.12 Policy notes prepared and published by month 36

4.13 Impact assessment report prepared and published by month 36

Government: $1.63 million (in-kind) Private sector: $0.38 million Communities: $0.03 million (in-kind)

ADB = Asian Development Bank, DepEd = Department of Education, ECCD = early childhood care and development, ECERS = early childhood environment rating scale, MIS = management information system, NGO = nongovernment organization, PCLC = parents for child literacy committee, PIU = project implementation unit, UNICEF = United Nations Children’s Fund. a

90% of children enrolled in the preschool classes achieve child development index scores of at least 80–119 on the expanded Philippine ECCD checklist. b ECERS is a tool for evaluating the quality of early childhood education programs to be adapted for use in all schools supported by the

Japan Fund for Poverty Reduction-funded project. Source: Asian Development Bank.

1 school-library facilities that will also serve as preschool classrooms for schools in depressed and disadvantaged communities

Ap

pe

ndix

2 21

SUMMARY COST ESTIMATES ($)

Item

Component A: Safe and Child-Friendly

Learning Environments

Component B: Teaching and

School Leadership Capacity Building

Component C: Sustainable

Partnerships with Communities and Civil Society

Component D: Project

Management, Monitoring, and

Impact Evaluation

Total ($)

%

1. Civil works 889,542 0 0 0 889,542 59.3

2. Equipment and supplies 73,254 0 0 1,163 74,417 5.0

3. Training, workshops, and seminars 0 28,604 6,018 2,465 37,087 2.5

4. Consulting services 12,558 0 0 104,000 116,558 7.8

5. Project management, monitoring, and evaluation 0 0 0 57,558 57,558 3.8

6. Other inputsa 0 32,685 218,605 0 251,290 16.7

7. Contingencies 50,320 3,117 11,589 8,522 73,548 4.9

Subtotal Grant Financed 1,025,674 64,406 236,212 173,708 1,500,000 100.0

8. Government contribution (in-kind) 446,512 1,180,465 837 0 1,627,814

9. Private sector contributions 320,925 0 62,791 0 383,716

10. Communities' contributions (in-kind) 0 1,440 29,700 0 31,140

Total Estimated Costs 1,793,111 1,246,311 329,540 173,708 3,542,670 a Includes nutritional supplement, deworming pills, seed money for livelihood programs, operating costs of nongovernment organizations, and volunteers’ time.

Source: Asian Development Bank estimates.

22 A

pp

end

ix 3

DETAILED COST ESTIMATES

Costs Contributions JFPR Code Supplies and Services Rendered

Unit Quantity Units

Cost Per Unit

Total ($) Amount

Method of Procurement

Govern-ment

Private Sector

Commu-nities

Component A: Safe and Child-Friendly Learning Environments Subtotal 1,742,791 975,354 446,512 320,925

1.1 Civil works

1.1.1 Construction of one-storey, two-classroom buildings

lump sum

60 19,767 1,186,047 889,542 NCBa 296,505

1.1.2 Land for school construction square meter

9600 47 446,512 0 446,512

1.2 Equipment and supplies

1.2.1 Furniture site 60 465 27,907 20,932 DC 6,975

1.2.2 Books site 60 163 9,767 7,322 DC 2,445

1.2.3 Learning materials, supplies site 60 767 46,047 34,542 DC 11,505

1.2.4 Shipping site 60 233 13,953 10,458 DC 3,495

1.3 Consulting services

1.3.1 Civil works/procurement specialist person-month

18 698 12,558 12,558 IC

Component B: Teaching and School Leadership Capacity Building

Subtotal 1,243,194 61,289 1,180,465 1,440

2.1 Training, workshops, and seminars

2.1.1. Teacher training workshop 1: Orientation and Needs Assessment Surveys

2.1.1.1 Local travel and per diem of trainers trainers 3 291 872 872 FA

2.1.1.2 Local travel and per diem of teacher participants

partici-pant

120 105 12,558 6,279 FA 6,279

2.1.2 Teacher training workshop 2: Curriculum and Literacy Enhancement Programs



partici-pant

120 105 12,558 6,279 FA 6,279

2.1.3 Teacher training workshop 3: Curriculum and Literacy Enhancement Programs



partici-pant

120 105 12,558 6,279 FA 6,279

2.1.4 Teacher training workshop 4: Enhancement and Refresher Programs

Ap

pe

ndix

3 23


Unit Quantity Units

Cost Per Unit

Total ($) Amount


Govern-ment

Private Sector

Commu-nities



partici-pant

120 105 12,558 6,279 FA 6,279

2.2 Monitoring visits

2.2.1 Trainers' follow-up visits (1 visit/region/year) visit 9 1,134 10,203 10,203 FA

2.2.2 DepEd monitoring visits (1 visit/region/year) visit 9 1,134 10,203 10,203 FA

2.3 Printing cost of manuals unit 480 26 12,279 12,279 DC

2.4 Salaries of teachers, school coordinators, and volunteers

2.4.1 Salaries of teachers and school coordinators month 120 9,628 1,155,349 0 1,155,349

2.4.2 Time of volunteers month 1,440 0 1,440

Component C: Sustainable Partnerships with Communities and Civil Society

Subtotal 317,951 224,623 837 62,791 29,700

3.1 School health and nutrition program

3.1.1 Nutritional supplement site 60 4,186 251,163 188,372 PSA 62,791

3.1.2 Deworming pills 837 0 PSA 837

3.2 Livelihood program (NGOs)

3.2.1 Workshop for formulation of the sustainable livelihood strategy and business plan

work-shop

3 785 2,355 2,355 CQS

3.2.2 Organizational/training and monitoring work-shop

6 610 3,663 3,663 CQS

3.2.3 Operating costs of NGOs for nutrition and livelihood programs International NGO, GVS Local NGOs

lump sum

2 11,628 23,256 23,256

SSS/ CQS

3.2.4 Seed money for livelihood program site 6 1,163 6,977 6,977 b

3.2.5 Time of volunteers 29,700 29,700

Component D: Project Management, Monitoring, and Impact Evaluation

Subtotal 165,186 165,186

4.1 Consulting services

4.1.1 Baseline survey unit 1 20,000 20,000 20,000 FA

4.1.2 Impact evaluation study unit 1 60,000 60,000 60,000 FA

4.1.3 Technical advisor person-month

2 6,000 12,000 12,000 IC

4.1.4 External audit unit 3 4,000 12,000 12,000 LCS

4.2 Project management

24 A

pp

end

ix 3


Unit Quantity Units

Cost Per Unit

Total ($) Amount


Govern-ment

Private Sector

Commu-nities

4.2.1 Project implementation specialist person-month

30 1,163 34,884 34,884 IC

4.2.2 Financial management specialist person-month

30 465 13,953 13,953 IC

4.2.3 Travel and per diem lump sum

3 291 872 872 FA

4.2.4 Monitoring and review visits visit 9 872 7,849 7,849 FA

4.3 Monitoring

4.3.1 Planning and monitoring workshops and meetings

work-shop

2 233 465 465 FA

4.3.2 Policy forum work-shop

1 2,000 2,000 2,000 FA

4.4 Equipment and supplies

4.4.1 PIU office supplies, stationery, communications lump sum

1 1,163 1,163 1,163 DC

Components A–D Subtotal 3,469,122 1,426,452 1,627,814 383,716 31,140

Contingency 73,548 73,548

Total Grant Costs Total 3,542,670 1,500,000 1,627,814 383,716 31,140

Total Incremental Costs 45,000

CQS = consultants' qualification selection, DC = direct contracting, DepEd = Department of Education, FA = force account, IC = individual consultant, JFPR = Japan Fund for Poverty Reduction, LCS = least-cost selection, NCB = national competitive bidding, NGO = nongovernment organization, PIU = project implementation unit, PSA = procurement from specialized agencies, SSS = single-source selection. a Consists of one package with multiple contracts.

b Provisional sum to local NGO contracts.

Source: Asian Development Bank estimates.

Appendix 4 25

FUND FLOW ARRANGEMENT

1. The Japan Fund for Poverty Reduction (JFPR) grant proceeds will be disbursed in accordance with the Loan Disbursement Handbook (2007, as amended from time to time) of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and detailed arrangements agreed between the Government of the Philippines and ADB. ADB will channel JFPR funds directly to a JFPR imprest account in US dollars, to be opened by the Aklat, Gabay, Aruga Tungo sa Pag-angat at Pag-asa (AGAPP) Foundation at a commercial bank acceptable to ADB and delegated to the project implementation unit (PIU) established within the AGAPP Foundation to facilitate day-to-day project expenditures. The Department of Education will be kept informed by the PIU of all transactions and will receive copies of financial statements and annual audit reports. Initial disbursement will be based on the first 6-month activity plan and related budget, and afterwards on the five remaining semiannual work plans and budgets. Private sector contributions will be channeled to a separate account established by the AGAPP Foundation to finance different sets of civil works and equipment and supplies packages. The schematic fund flow for JFPR funds is shown in Figure A4.1, and the overall project fund flow in Figure A4.2. 2. ADB will advance up to 6 months estimated expenditure to be financed through the imprest account or 10% of the grant amount, whichever is lower, as agreed between ADB, the Government of the Philippines, and the AGAPP Foundation. ADB will replenish funds to the imprest account based on requests from the PIU in accordance with ADB’s statement of expenditures procedure. The imprest account will be established, managed, replenished, and liquidated in accordance with ADB’s Loan Disbursement Handbook. The statement of expenditures procedure will apply for all payments and transactions under $10,000 to ensure speedy project implementation. Detailed implementation arrangements, such as funds flow, replenishment, and administrative procedures will be detailed in a grant implementation manual and established between ADB and the government through the letter of agreement. 3. Interest earned on the imprest account may be used for project purposes within the approved total amount of the JFPR project, subject to ADB approval. Any unutilized interest should be returned to the JFPR fund account maintained in ADB upon completion of the project and before closing the JFPR project.

Figure A4.1: Fund Flow Arrangement

$38,000

ADB = Asian

Source: Asian Development Bank.

Asian Development Bank (ADB)

$45,000

$64,406

$12,558

$173,708

$236,212

Component D: Project management, monitoring,

and impact evaluation

Component A: Safe and child-friendly learning environments

(civil works and supplies)

Component B: Teaching and school leadership

capacity building

Component C: Sustainable partnerships with communities and civil society

Project Implementation Unit

Project Imprest Account

Component A: Safe and child-friendly learning

environments

ADB Incremental Costs Impact evaluation study

and project administration

$1,013,116

26 A

pp

end

ix 4

Figure A4.2: Fund Flow Arrangement

Asian Development Bank

Contractors/ suppliers

Component A: Safe and child-friendly learning environments

(civil works and supplies)

Component B: Teaching and school

leadership capacity building

Component D: Project management,

monitoring, and impact evaluation

Invoice

Withdrawal application and replenishment

Department of Education

(executing agency)

Direct payment

Component C: Sustainable partnerships

with communities and civil society

AGAPP Foundation (implementing agency)

JFPR imprest

account (PIU)

Contract

Letter of agreement

Private sector partners

Donation

pro

ject

overs

ight

Account – private sector contribution

Invoice Contract

Source: Asian Development Bank. AGAPP – aklat, gabay, aruga tungo sa pag-angat at pag-asa, JFPR – Japan For Poverty Reduction, PIU – Project Implementation Unit

Flow of fund request Flow of funds to JFPR imprest, AGAPP-private sector, contractor

Appendix 5 27

IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS

A. Project Management 1. The Department of Education (DepEd) is the executing agency and the Aklat, Gabay, Aruga Tungo sa Pag-angat at Pag-asa (AGAPP) Foundation is the implementing agency. The AGAPP Foundation is designated by DepEd to assist the expansion of universal preschool and has demonstrated capacity in areas such as construction of high-quality preschool facilities, providing library resources, teacher training, and mobilizing resources through partnerships with other nongovernment organizations (NGOs) and the private sector. The implementation arrangement of the project will be built on the existing collaboration mechanism of DepEd and the AGAPP Foundation, where there is a memorandum of understanding to support the expansion of preschool classrooms and libraries in the country. 2. A project steering committee (PSC) will be established to provide supervision, coordination, and management for project implementation. The PSC consists of representatives from DepEd, the Department of Health, the Department of Social Welfare and Development, the Early Childhood Care and Development Council, and the AGAAP Foundation. The PSC will meet quarterly to review project progress, provide policy guidance, and facilitate interagency coordination and exchange of lessons learned. PSC meetings may include representatives of other government agencies, local government units (LGUs), private sector associations, NGOs, and development partners as appropriate. 3. The project implementation unit (PIU) will be established within the AGAPP Foundation. Its main functions will be to ensure timely and effective project planning, management, coordination, procurement, financial controls, monitoring, and reporting to DepEd and the Asian Development Bank (ADB). The PIU comprises a full-time project director, a project implementation specialist, a financial management specialist, and a part-time engineer or procurement specialist. The PIU will prepare a grant implementation manual, including preparation of NGO subcontract agreements, and disbursement methods for the subcontracted activities. 4. Project implementation will also involve two local NGOs to conduct community-based feeding programs, and to promote livelihood programs to sustain the nutrition and feeding program. The AGAPP Foundation will directly engage local NGOs, consultants, and PIU staff, in accordance with ADB’s Guidelines on the Use of Consultants (2010, as amended from time to time). Selection of local NGOs will be based on the following criteria: (i) proven experience in successfully implementing community-based social development programs in barangays; 1 (ii) experience in planning, organizing, and implementing feeding, livelihood, or microfinance programs; (iii) proven ability to design and deliver training for communities and parents that is responsive to the needs of the community and families to support continued learning for young children; and (iv) availability for the duration of the project implementation period. The project also involves close dialogue and collaboration with other government agencies and development partners, in particular the Department of Social Welfare and Development, the Department of Health, the Early Childhood Care and Development Council, and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). A diagram of the project’s organization and management structure is shown in Figure A5.

1 the smallest administrative division in the Philippines and is the native Filipino term for a village, district or ward

28 Appendix 5

B. Procurement and Consulting Services 5. All procurement to be financed by the project will be conducted in accordance with ADB’s Procurement Guidelines (2010, as amended from time to time). Civil works will consist of one package with multiple contracts to allow big and small contractors to bid. Procurement of civil works above $100,000 shall follow national competitive bidding procedures. Goods and civil works costing $50,000 or less shall be procured using shopping. Any minor equipment and materials costing less than $10,000 may be procured through direct contracting. Supplies for the health and nutrition program could be procured through procurement from specialized agencies. The project will construct 60 one-story, two-classroom buildings, in which 45 will be financed by the JFPR and 15 by contributions from the private sector. The AGAPP Foundation will follow its own procedure for the procurement of the 15 packages through award of packages to local accredited contractors, in which it has established a standard unit cost for one-story, two-classroom buildings. 6. Four individual consultants, one international NGO, two local NGOs, and an external audit firm will be recruited in accordance with ADB’s Guidelines on the Use of Consultants. The project will recruit individual consultants to support project implementation under the PIU. An individual project implementation specialist will be recruited to plan, coordinate, and monitor the project activities and prepare the project progress reports. A financial management specialist will be hired to maintain the project accounts and prepare financial reports. An engineer and procurement specialist with experience in the Government of the Philippines and ADB

Project Implementation Unit

Figure A5: Implementation Arrangement

Project director

Project implementation

specialist

Civil works/ procurement

specialist

Financial management

specialist

Technical advisors

Project Steering Committee

Local NGOs

Community volunteers

Source: Asian Development Bank

Appendix 5 29

procurement procedures will be engaged to oversee the civil works and procurement of equipment and supplies. A policy advisor and monitoring and evaluation specialist will be recruited for 2 person-months to lead a project evaluation study and to formulate policy recommendations. The AGAPP Foundation will be responsible for selection of consultants with ADB endorsement. One international NGO, Global Voluntary Service, will be recruited through single-source selection to provide overall support to the community-based activities, while two local NGOs will be recruited through the consultants' qualification selection method to provide livelihood opportunities to sustain the nutrition and feeding program. An external auditor, to audit the project accounts, will be engaged through the least-cost selection method. C. Disbursement 7. Payments for eligible expenditures arising from activities funded by the Japan Fund for Poverty Reduction (JFPR), including the use of imprest account and statement of expenditures procedure, will be done in accordance with ADB’s standard procedures for disbursements— Loan Disbursement Handbook (2007, as amended from time to time)—except where agreed otherwise with the government. The AGAPP Foundation will establish a project account solely used for JFPR-funded activities, while a separate account will be established for different sets of procurement packages and/or activities financed through private sector contributions. D. Safeguards 8. Project implementation will closely follow ADB social and environmental safeguard policies and guidelines as articulated in ADB’s Safeguard Policy Statement (2009). Construction will be very small in scope and will be limited to existing elementary school grounds, hence no significant environmental impacts are expected. The project will not involve any involuntary resettlement, land acquisition, compensation, or associated issues. While the project will not specifically target indigenous communities nor include specific activities for indigenous school children, the project will equally benefit all the eligible students, including indigenous school children in target communities. E. Auditing 9. The PIU will maintain separate project accounts financed by the project, by the government, and by the private sector, in accordance with sound accounting principles. All project accounts will be audited annually by an independent external auditor acceptable to ADB, using international accounting and auditing standards. The audit report from the external auditor must be submitted to ADB’s Controller’s Department, with a copy to Office of Cofinancing Operations, no later than 6 months after the end of the fiscal year or project closing date (whichever comes first). The report should include certified copies of the audited accounts and financial statements and the report of the auditors relating to said statements, including the auditors’ opinion on the use of the JFPR funds, and the operation of any imprest account and the application of any statement of expenditures procedure authorized under the JFPR project. F. Reporting 10. The PIU will consolidate all project activity reports prepared by the PIU, consultants, and contractors, and prepare gender-disaggregated quarterly and annual reports on project implementation—the form and content of which will be agreed upon with ADB—for endorsement by DepEd and timely submission to ADB. Quarterly reports will be due no later than 30 days after the end of each project quarter. Within 2 months of project inception, the PIU will submit a

30 Appendix 5

baseline survey report on the project’s target communities. A midterm report will be submitted to ADB 18 months after project inception. The government will provide a project completion report to ADB with the support of the PIU, within 3 months of physical completion of the project. All reports will comprise an assessment of the project outcome and outputs, project performance indicators, as well as suggestions for improving project implementation. G. Project Review 11. ADB and the government will jointly undertake reviews of the project at least twice a year. The reviews will assess progress, specify issues and constraints, and determine necessary remedial action and adjustments. A midterm review will be conducted in the second year of implementation. It will review and assess the progress of project implementation against performance indicators, and recommend changes in the project scope and/or implementation arrangements, if necessary. H. Implementation Schedule 12. The project will be implemented over 3 years, from about 1 February 2012 to January 2015.

Appendix 6 31

TARGETING AND SELECTION CRITERIA 1. The project will target areas with communities with a large number of malnourished school children and limited access to early education programs and services due to lack of available preschool classrooms. The project will cover up to six school divisions in three regions (Table A6). A least two school divisions in each region will be covered to maintain cost effectiveness. Within each school division, the target schools will be selected based on consultations with the Department of Education (DepEd), the Department of Social Welfare and Development, and other project stakeholders. The selection criteria will primarily include: (i) DepEd’s high-priority divisions based on shortage of classrooms and low school performance (i.e., low participation and completion rates, high dropout rates, and low national achievement test scores); (ii) barangays 1 covered under the government's Pantawid Pamilya (Building Bridges for the Filipino Family Program); (iii) prevalence of high malnutrition among elementary school children; and (iv) evidence of local community support and effective school leadership. 2. Given that the civil works component involves construction of 60 preschool buildings, access to suitable physical space within school premises and availability of teachers to staff these new buildings will be additional considerations. In selecting the sites, the presence of other donor-assisted preschool education programs are considered to avoid duplication of efforts and to maximize collaboration and synergy opportunities. One of the project outputs will be the documentation of target selection and screening policies and protocols, so as to support future expansion of the project. 3. Priority regions and divisions selected in accordance with these selection criteria are:

Table A6: List of Priority Regions and School Divisions

Priority Region Priority School Divisions Region V Camarines Sur

Catanduanes Masbate Sorsogon

Region VI Cadiz City Kabankalan City Negros Occidental Sagay City

Region VII Bais City Negros Oriental

Source: ADB and DepEd

4. An initial list of possible target schools in each of the priority school divisions will be identified by DepEd in accordance with the aforementioned selection criteria. Based on this priority list of schools, selection of the 60 school sites to be supported by the project will be made after a consultative assessment process involving DepEd, the Aklat, Gabay, Aruga Tungo sa Pag-angat at Pag-asa Foundation, and local project stakeholders, and endorsed by the project steering committee.

1 the smallest administrative division in the Philippines and is the native Filipino term for a village, district or ward

32 Appendix 7

SUMMARY POVERTY REDUCTION AND SOCIAL STRATEGY

Country: Philippines Project Title: Enhancing Access to Quality Early Childhood Education Services for Children in Poor Communities Lending/Financing Modality:

Project Department/ Division:

Southeast Asia Department/Human and Social Development Division

I. POVERTY ANALYSIS AND STRATEGY

A. Links to the National Poverty Reduction Strategy and Country Partnership Strategy

In contrast to rapid progress in the region as a whole, poverty and inequality have presented persistent challenges in the Philippines.

a Despite high economic growth, the poverty incidence in the Philippines has been stagnant.

Using the latest national poverty measure, the poverty incidence actually rose from 24.9% to 26.4% of the population during 2003–2006, and then to 26.5% in 2009. For the 2003–2009 period, the number of Filipinos living in poverty increased by 1.6 million. Roughly 45% of the population is vulnerable to falling into poverty.

b The

Philippines has one of the highest income inequalities in the region, and poverty rates vary significantly between localities. It appears that several Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) will not be met, including indicators related to primary education enrollment and completion. To counter these challenges, the government has made a strong commitment to accelerating poverty reduction. As reflected in the Philippine Development Plan, 2011–2016, the government aims to reduce poverty through more rapid economic growth and making that growth more inclusive.

The country partnership strategy, 2011–20161 of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) stresses alignment with the

government’s agenda. It also foresees that ADB will expand its education and social protection assistance to the Philippines, increasing ADB support to efficient, effective, and equitable delivery of social services. This is consistent with ADB's Strategy 2020, which has a continued focus on inclusive growth, specifies education as a core area of operation, and calls for developing innovative partnerships with the private sector.

c A key focus of

ADB’s assistance is to support the government in transforming basic education into a “K to 12” (kindergarten to grade 12) system. The project supports the latter. In parallel, the country partnership strategy foresees the further expansion of ADB’s growing role in supporting social protection in the Philippines, including the government's conditional cash transfer program, which will play a key demand-side role in expanding access for poor children to earlier years of the “K to 12” system. The project aligns with this social protection support by providing further support on both the demand and supply sides, focusing on preschool to provide a foundation for stronger learning outcomes and, in turn, for escaping poverty. B. Poverty Analysis Targeting Classification: Targeted intervention TI-M

Key issues. Under the second MDG on universal primary education, the project will directly support indicators related to universal enrollment and completion. In the Philippines, poor children’s education opportunities and outcomes are undercut by low preschool access and weak instruction and support for emergent literacy. ADB analysis of data from the 2008 annual poverty indicator survey confirms that poor children are much less likely to avail of preschool: among 5-year-old children in the poorest 30% of households surveyed in the annual poverty reduction survey, just below 40% of boys and 46% of girls were enrolled in preschool in July 2008, compared with participation rates of roughly 80% (twice as high) for boys and 87% for girls among 5-year-olds in the richest 30% of households.

d

Children’s participation in preschool among the poor families is likely to be of much lower quality than those attended by children from affluent families. The data also show that poor children are more likely to start schooling behind schedule, and suggest that this poor early learning foundation contributes to later repetitions and dropouts. Lack of access to good quality preschool is compounded by weak instruction in early grades: in particular, there is strong evidence in the Philippines and globally that poor early exposure to reading leads to a cycle whereby poorer children fall increasingly behind in school, contributing to low achievement and dropouts and undermining progress toward MDG 2.

The government recognizes these issues, as well as the global evidence on the very high returns to providing access to good-quality early childhood education programs for disadvantaged children in terms of impacts on school retention rates, intellectual ability and performance, and long-term earnings and welfare. The project aims to build on and support efforts by the government to improve foundational years of education, thereby enhancing the quality of human capital, particularly among the children in selected poor communities in the country. It will provide interventions consistent with government thrusts: (i) expanded access to preschool education by providing the necessary school infrastructure and facilities; (ii) greater capacity and quality through training and workshops; and

1 ADB. (2011). Country Partnership Strategy: Philippines, (2011)–(2016). Manila.

Appendix 7 33

(iii) engaging communities and building sustainable partnerships with civil society, the corporate sector, and other nongovernment organizations (NGOs) through the existing Silid Pangarap

2 Program of the AGAPP Foundation. In

view of the government’s fiscal and capacity constraints to fully implement preschool education and early childhood care and development (ECCD), the proactive engagement of the private sector, civil society, and communities will be critically important. By piloting and demonstrating models for multistakeholder cooperation, the project will have significant value-adding potential and prospects for scaling up.

Design features. As elaborated above, lack of access to good-quality preschool services and weak mastery of literacy and numeracy skills in early years of schooling contribute to low participation and high repetition rates, which leads to dropouts and noncompletion among the poor in particular. This creates a vicious cycle wherein poverty leads to low educational performance among children, confining them to poverty as adults. The project aims to directly break this vicious cycle by interventions focusing on the foundational years of learning: in particular, expanding access to good-quality preschool services, and strengthening literacy and numeracy skills for children in grades 1–3.

Key design features include: (i) targeting of poor communities based on criteria such as poverty, weak educational performance, and socioeconomic factors; (ii) alignment with interventions under the conditional cash transfer program and other pro-poor initiatives; (iii) initiatives to mobilize parental and community involvement in tackling interlinked and poverty-related challenges, such as expanding parents’ involvement in children’s education, and mobilizing community support for school-based feeding programs; (iv) mobilization of broader civil society actors (including NGOs, volunteers, and the private sector) to support the sustainability and replicability of approaches piloted; and (v) inclusion of monitoring and evaluation to track participation and impacts among the poor in particular.

II. SOCIAL ANALYSIS AND STRATEGY A. Findings of Social Analysis

Key issues. Set against the countrywide context of interlinked challenges elaborated above, the project will support enhanced access to quality education services for young children in poor areas. The poor and disadvantaged children will benefit from the project by gaining access to education opportunities. The project targets areas where preschool participation and elementary school enrollment and completion rates are particularly low (and school dropout rates are very high), and with high malnutrition rates among poor and disadvantaged children. These areas appear to reflect a combination of both supply- and demand-side factors, ranging from physical access and perceived low quality of services available, to financial constraints, to parents’ low recognition of the value of education or involvement in their children’s early learning. The project will comprehensively tackle these issues by (i) actively engaging parents; (ii) mobilizing volunteers for livelihood support and community development programs for families and communities; (iii) promoting partnerships with NGOs and the private sector to support feeding programs so as to lower costs and raise incentives for sending young children to school, and to raise learning efficacy. The project will not entail any land acquisition for school-building construction and will ensure that the Japan Fund for Poverty Reduction grant will not be used to finance any activities involving involuntary land acquisition and/or restriction of people to access lands.

B. Consultation and Participation

The fact-finding mission conducted consultations with various stakeholders, including the Department of Education and other government agencies, development partners, NGOs, and the Embassy of Japan in the Philippines. Field visits were made to preschools in Negros Occidental in June 2011, and consultations were held with schoolteachers, volunteers, preschool students, and their parents. At all levels, project stakeholders were invited to provide suggestions on the project design, scope, implementing arrangements, opportunities for partnerships, and lessons learned from similar interventions in the country. This helped establish priority needs and opportunities, and informed project design and implementation arrangements. Discussions with development partners such as the Japan International Cooperation Agency and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) also helped ensure complementarity with existing efforts and embedding of lessons learned. The views of stakeholders consulted have been incorporated into project design and implementation arrangements.

1. What level of C&P is envisaged during the project implementation and monitoring?

2 school-library facilities that will also serve as preschool classrooms for schools in depressed and disadvantaged communities

34 Appendix 7

Information sharing Consultation Collaborative decision making Empowerment

2. Was a C&P plan prepared for project implementation? Yes No

The project will develop a C&P at inception to further strengthen the project’s participatory process during implementation. The C&P plan will outline stakeholder and community consultation processes that will be actively managed by the project implementation unit.

C. Gender and Development Gender Mainstreaming Category: Effective gender mainstreaming

1. Key issues. Key challenges include: low preschool enrollment of boys and girls from the poorest households; malnutrition of children impairing their cognitive development; lack of adequate knowledge among mothers or caregivers on ECCD; lack of access to preschools; and gender-insensitive teaching and learning methods.

2. Key actions. Key gender-inclusive design features of the project support access and gender progressive educational environment and development of girls and boys in preschool and elementary grades. They include: (i) new preschools to support access of poor girls and boys to ECCD and aid compliance with the conditionality of the Pantawid Pamilya (Building Bridges for the Filipino Family Program); (ii) gender-sensitive, joyful teaching and learning curricula and methods; (iii) greater liaison between teacher and parentc and inclusion of module on ECCD in family development sessions of Pantawid Pamilya to build understanding and commitment of parents to the importance of early childhood education for children and of encouraging both boys and girls to complete schooling; (iv) awareness-raising among mothers on ECCD and on caring for and rearing young children; (v) support of late entrants with literacy-boosting activities; (vi) training of teachers and education staff at elementary schools on key gender issues and on encouraging boys in particular to complete schooling.

Gender action plan Other actions or measures No action or measure III. SOCIAL SAFEGUARD ISSUES AND OTHER SOCIAL RISKS

Issue Significant/Limited/

No Impact Strategy to Address

Issue Plan or Other Measures Included in Design

Involuntary resettlement No impact No action

Indigenous peoples No adverse impact: project will ensure that any indigenous peoples' children in target areas have at least equal opportunity to participate.

No action

Labor

Employment opportunities Labor retrenchment Core labor standards

No adverse impact: construction will create employment opportunities, and core labor standards will be ensured.

No action

Affordability Access will be free of charge, while feeding will help lower cost barriers.

No action

Other risks and/or vulnerabilities

HIV/AIDS Human trafficking Others (conflict, political instability, etc.)

No issues foreseen No action

IV. MONITORING AND EVALUATION Are social indicators included in the design and monitoring framework to facilitate monitoring of gender and social development activities and/or social impacts during project implementation? Yes No Monitoring will include gender-specific data such as on preschool enrollments, and participation by mothers and fathers in parental activities such as parents for child literacy committee meetings. a ADB. 2009. Poverty in the Philippines: Causes, Constraints, and Opportunities. Manila.

b National Anti-Poverty Commission and National Statistical Coordination Board. 2005. Assessment of Vulnerability to Poverty in the Philippines. Manila.

c ADB. 2008. Strategy 2020: The Long-Term Strategic Framework of the Asian Development Bank, 2008–2020. Manila.

d Noted figures for preschool include a very small share of 5-year-olds reported to be in grade 1.

Source: Asian Development Bank.

gar: philippines: enhancing access to quality early childhood

Documents