the project on improvement of literacy education...

JRHM

18-053

Ministry of EducationLiteracy DepartmentIslamic Republic of Afghanistan

The Project on Improvement of LiteracyEducation Management in Afghanistan

Phase 2 (LEAF2)

Project Completion Report

August 2018

Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)

Koei Research & Consulting Inc. (KRC)Asia-Pacific Cultural Centre for UNESCO (ACCU)

Ministry of EducationLiteracy DepartmentIslamic Republic of Afghanistan

The Project on Improvement of LiteracyEducation Management in Afghanistan

Phase 2 (LEAF2)


August 2018

Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)

Koei Research & Consulting Inc. (KRC)Asia-Pacific Cultural Centre for UNESCO (ACCU)

LOCATION MAPS OF THE PROJECT AREAS

PROJECT PHOTO GALLERY

The 1st Project Year (April 2010 ~ November 2011)

Kick off meeting 1st TWG meeting

3rd TWG meeting 4th TWG meeting

Interview for PLC staff

(Baseline Survey) Balkh LIFE coordination meeting

The 2nd Project Year (December 2011 ~ February 2013)

34 province good practice sharing workshop 2nd JCC meeting

Facilitator training in Nangarhar province DLC monitoring training in Kabul city

DLC monitoring training in Kabul province DLC monitoring training in Bamyan province

The 3rd Project Year

(April 2013 ~ January 2015)

3rd JCC meeting Training of trainers (ToT)

Pilot training in Balkh province End-line Survey in Nangarhar province

Nationwide training targeting Parwan provinces,

Kapisa provinces, and Panjshir provinces Teaching methods training in Nangarhar

province

The 4th Project Year

(March 2015 ~ February 2016)

Nationwide training in Badakhshan province Technical support training in Nangarhar

province

Assessment training using supplemental

visual material in Balkh province 2nd assessment video using mobile projector

SWOT analysis workshop For the community survey

Nationwide training in Sare Pul province

The 4th Project Year Extension Period

(March 2016 ~ July 2018)

TWG3/UNESCO meeting in Delhi M&E workshop in Kabul city (TWG1)

M&E checklist meeting Output sharing workshop

Monitoring of literacy class in Kama district Literacy committee meeting

in Mazar-e-Sharif city

Contents Location Maps Project Photo Summary Table of Contents List of Figures List of Tables List of Appendixes List of Abbreviations

Table of Contents 1. Background of the Project ..................................................................................................... 1 2. Project Overview ................................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Project Name ..................................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Project Period .................................................................................................................... 3 2.3 Project Overall Goal .......................................................................................................... 3 2.4 Project Purpose .................................................................................................................. 3 2.5 Outputs .............................................................................................................................. 3 2.6 Activity .............................................................................................................................. 4

2.6.1 Activities for All Outputs ............................................................................................. 4 2.6.2 Activities for Output 1 .................................................................................................. 4 2.6.3 Activities for Output 2 .................................................................................................. 4 2.6.4 Activities for Output 3 .................................................................................................. 4 2.6.5 Activities for Output 4 .................................................................................................. 4

2.7 Input .................................................................................................................................. 5 3. Input for the Project ............................................................................................................... 6 3.1 Result of Manning Schedule ............................................................................................. 6

3.1.1 Duties of Japanese Experts ........................................................................................... 6 3.1.2 Result of Manning Schedule ...................................................................................... 12

3.2 Provision of Equipment ................................................................................................... 21 3.3 Training Results............................................................................................................... 21 3.4 Actual Cost of Field Work ............................................................................................... 21 3.5 Input by Counterpart ....................................................................................................... 22

4. Results of the Project ........................................................................................................... 23 4.1 Project Activity for All Outputs....................................................................................... 23

4.1.1 Joint Coordination Committee (JCC) ......................................................................... 23 4.1.2 Baseline and End-line Survey .................................................................................... 25 4.1.3 LIFE (Literacy Initiative for Empowerment) Meeting ............................................... 25 4.1.4 Output Sharing ........................................................................................................... 30

4.1.5 Advertisement............................................................................................................. 32 4.1.6 Survey on the Status of Finance Management ........................................................... 32

4.2 Results of the Project ....................................................................................................... 35 4.2.1 Activities of Output 1 ................................................................................................. 35 4.2.2 Activities of Output 2 ................................................................................................. 52 4.2.3 Activities of Output 3 ................................................................................................. 64 4.2.4 Activities of Output 4 (Technical support) until the 3rd Project Year ......................... 69 4.2.5 Activities of Output 4 (Technical support) from the 4th project year .......................... 74 4.2.6 Activities of Output 4 (Community Participation Activity） ..................................... 77

5. Measures and Lessons upon Implementation and Operation of the Project ........................ 96 5.1 Change of Project Implementation Structure in Response to Unstable Security Situation ............................................................................................................................................... 96 5.2 Cooperation with ELA Members in Charge of Creating New Textbook ........................ 97 5.3 Measures for Technical Transfer ..................................................................................... 97

5.3.1 Fostering a Sense of Ownership of Counterparts toward the Project ......................... 97 5.3.2 Promotion of Collaboration among Outputs .............................................................. 98 5.3.3 Development of Rules and Manuals and Capacity Building of LD, PLC and DLC Staff by Full Utilization of Pilot Areas ........................................................................................ 98

5.4 Consideration of Gender Equality (Securing Women’s Participation) ............................ 99 6. Project Output .................................................................................................................... 100 6.1 Achievement Status of Each Output .............................................................................. 100

6.1.1 Achievement Status of Output 1 ............................................................................... 100 6.1.2 Achievement Status of Output 2 ............................................................................... 100 6.1.3 Achievement Status of Output 3 ............................................................................... 101 6.1.4 Achievement Status of Output 4 (Technical Support) .............................................. 103 6.1.5 Achievement Status of Output 4 (Community Participation Activity) ..................... 105

6.2 Achievement Status of Project Purpose ......................................................................... 106 6.3 List of Product ............................................................................................................... 108

7. Measurements to Achieve Project Overall Goal ................................................................ 112 7.1 Prospect to Achieve Project Overall Goal ..................................................................... 112 7.2 Establishment of Structure for the Sustainable Implementation of Project Activity ..... 114 7.3 Recommendations on Monitoring of Literacy Education ............................................. 115 7.4 Recommendations on Learners’ Learning Assessments ................................................ 116 7.5 Recommendations on Literacy Class Data Collection and Reporting .......................... 116

7.5.1 Continuous Support for PLCs/DLCs ........................................................................ 116 7.5.2 Calculation of Graduation Rate/Grasp of Learning Achievement............................ 117

7.6 Recommendations on Technical Support for Facilitators .............................................. 117 7.7 Recommendations on Community Participation Activity ............................................. 117

7.7.1 Flexible Application of Rules on Implementation of Literacy Education (Rules and

Regulations) ...................................................................................................................... 117 7.7.2 Expansion of Community Participation Activity Nationwide .................................. 118

8. Lessons and Recommendations for the Similar Projects and Sector ................................. 119 8.1 Limitations of Disseminations of Manuals and Guidelines through Training ............... 119 8.2 Improvement of Facilitator-Centered Teaching Method ............................................... 120 8.3 Caution and Measures for Fake Reporting such as Report of an Excessive Number of Learners ............................................................................................................................... 120 8.4 Importance of Promotion of Understanding of Surrounding People and Support of Influential People in Community ........................................................................................ 120 8.5 Necessity of Finding Opportunities for Collaboration with Skills Training ................. 121

List of Figures

Figure 1: Quantitative and Qualitative Aspects of Monitoring Activity at Each Governmental Agency ........................................................................................................................ 48

Figure 2: Implementation Status of Literacy Facilitator Training on Learners’ Assessment ..................................................................................................................................... 59

Figure 3: Activities Conducted in the Facilitator Training on Learners’ Assessment ......... 60 Figure 4: Implementation Status of 4 Assessments ............................................................. 61 Figure 5: Submission Status of Assessment Record Sheets ................................................ 61 Figure 6: Issuance Status of Literacy Certificate ................................................................ 62 Figure 7: Activity of Model Facilitator Seminar ................................................................. 75 Figure 8: Brief Schedule of the Survey ............................................................................... 81 Figure 9: One Cycle of Literacy Courses with Community Participation (City type) ........ 84 Figure 10: One Cycle of Literacy Courses with Community Participation (District type) . 85 Figure 11: Concept of Community Participation Activities in One District ....................... 86

List of Tables

Table 1: Input by Government of Japan and Government of Afghanistan ............................ 5 Table 2: Duties of Japanese Experts in the 1st Project Year ................................................... 6 Table 3: Duties of Japanese Experts in the 2nd Project Year .................................................. 7 Table 4: Duties of Japanese Experts in the 3rd Project Year .................................................. 8 Table 5: Duties of Japanese Experts in the 4th Project Year till February 2016 ..................... 9 Table 6: Duties of Japanese Experts in the 4th Project Year from March 2016 ................... 11 Table 7: Field Works of Japanese Experts (The 1st Project Year) ........................................ 13 Table 8: Works in Japan of Japanese Experts (The 1st Project Year) ................................... 14 Table 9: Field Works of Japanese Experts (The 2nd Project Year) ....................................... 15 Table 10: Works in Japan of Japanese Experts (The 2nd Project Year) ................................ 16 Table 11: Field Works of Japanese Experts (The 3rd Project Year)...................................... 17 Table 12: Works in Japan of Japanese Experts (The 3rd Project Year) ................................ 18 Table 13: Field Works of Japanese Experts (The 4th Project Year) ..................................... 18 Table 14: Works in Japan of Japanese Experts (The 4th Project Year)................................. 20 Table 15: Number of Third Country Training Participants ................................................. 21 Table 16: Actual Cost of Field Work ................................................................................... 22 Table 17: General Information of JCC ................................................................................ 23 Table 18: Modification of PDM .......................................................................................... 24 Table 19: Participation Results of LIFE Meeting ................................................................ 26 Table 20: List of Output Sharing Workshops ...................................................................... 30

Table 21: Target Province and District for Survey on Financial Management ................... 33 Table 22: Table of Contents of Monitoring Manual ............................................................ 38 Table 23: Dates and Number of Participants of Nationwide Training (first batch) ............. 40 Table 24: Dates and Number of Participants of Pilot Training for Nationwide Training .... 42 Table 25: Dates and Number of Participants of Nationwide Training (second batch) ........ 43 Table 26: Dates and Number of Participants of Nationwide Training (third batch) ............ 46 Table 27: Dates and Number of Participants of Nationwide Training (fourth batch) ......... 47 Table 28: Trial of Learners’ Assessment Tools .................................................................... 54 Table 29: Training of Facilitators on Learners’ Assessment ................................................ 56 Table 30: Scope of Data Collection of Learners’ Assessment ............................................. 57 Table 31: Average Scores and Correct Answer Percentages (Total, by sex and areas) ....... 57 Table 32: The Comparison List of Calculation Questions and the Competency ................. 63 Table 33: Problems and Countermeasures .......................................................................... 70 Table 34: List of Created TV Spot for Campaign ............................................................... 70 Table 35: Overview of Lesson Plan Training ...................................................................... 72 Table 36: Overview of Facilitator’s Teaching Method Training ......................................... 72 Table 37: Overview of Technical Support Training ............................................................ 73 Table 38: Overview of Teaching and Observation Guideline ............................................. 74 Table 39: Overview of Facilitator Seminar Improvement Activity ..................................... 75 Table 40: Content of Revised Teaching and Observation Guideline ................................... 76 Table 41: List of Awareness-Raising Activity Training ....................................................... 78 Table 42: List of Target Interviewees and Interview Methods ............................................ 79 Table 43: Number of Interviews in Each Target Village and Area ...................................... 80 Table 44: List of Community Survey TWG members ........................................................ 81 Table 45: Target Gozars in Mazar-e-Sharif ......................................................................... 90 Table 46: Number of Learners and Graduates in 7 Pilot Areas ........................................... 91 Table 47: Timing of Surveys ............................................................................................... 93 Table 48: Survey Areas ....................................................................................................... 93 Table 49: Number of Samples in Baseline Survey and End-line Survey ............................ 93 Table 50: Quarterly Data Submission Rate on Literacy Courses by PLC ......................... 102 Table 51: Quarterly Data Submission Rate on Literacy Courses by DLC ........................ 102 Table 52: Technical Support Tools Developed by LD and the Project .............................. 104 Table 53: Average Scores of Facilitator’s Self-Evaluation and Evaluation by DLC Monitor

and LEAF2 Staff ....................................................................................................... 105 Table 54: Departments of LD Corresponding to the Prospective Outputs ........................ 115

List of Appendixes

Appendix 1: List of Provided Equipment Appendix 2: Results of Third Country Training and Training in Japan Appendix 3: List of Counterparts Appendix 4: Minutes of JCC Meeting Appendix 5: PDM (Ver.1~6) Appendix 6: Resolution of Output Sharing Workshop Appendix 7: Project Activity Schedule (the 1st Project Year to the 4th Project Year)

List of Abbreviations CDC Community Development Committee DDA District Development Assembly DED District Education Department

DLC District Literacy Center ELA Enhancement of Literacy Education in Afghanistan EMIS Education Management Information System ERTV Education Radio Television FS Facilitator Seminar GLC Gozar Literacy Committee GOA Government of Afghanistan GOJ Government of Japan JCC Joint Coordination Committee JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency LD Literacy Department LEAF (LEAF1) Project on Support for Expansion and Improvement of Literacy Education in

Afghanistan LEAF2 Project on Improvement of Literacy Education Management in Afghanistan LIFE Literacy Initiative for Empowerment M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MOE Ministry of Education NESP National Education Strategic Plan NFE-MIS Non-Formal Education Management Information System NFUAJ National Federation of UNESCO Associations in Japan NGO Non-Governmental Organization NRC Norwegian Refugee Council PDCA Plan-Do-Check-Act PDM Project Design Matrix PED Provincial Education Department PLC Provincial Literacy Center P-LIFE Provincial LIFE PO Plan of Operation R/D Record of Discussions RTA Radio Television Afghanistan SVA Shanti Volunteer Association SWOT Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats TOG Teaching and Observation Guideline

TWG Technical Working Group TWG1 Monitoring TWG TWG2 Assessment TWG TWG3 Data Collecting TWG TWG4 Technical support TWG TWG4 (FS) Facilitator Seminar Training TWG TWG4 (EB) Development of Exercise Book TWG TWG5 Community Participation TWG UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific, Cultural Organization UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund UN-HABITAT United Nations Human Settlements Programme VLC Village Literacy Committee

1

1. Background of the Project In 2007/2008, the literacy rate in Afghanistan for 15-24 year-olds was reported as 39.0% (male 52.9%, female 23.9%) and in 2011/2012 it was 47% (male 61.9%, female 32%). The adult literacy rate for over 15 year-olds was 26% (male 39%, female 12%) in 2007/2008 and 31.4% in 2011/2012. Although the literacy rate is increasing year by year, the rate is still relatively low in the world and the disparity between urban and provincial areas is also a big problem1. To address this issue, a number of projects/programs on literacy education have been implemented by Literacy Department (LD), development partners, NGOs, and other stakeholders. Currently, Literacy Initiative for Empowerment (LIFE) has been promoted by the initiatives of LD and UNESCO to cooperate and coordinate the activities among all organizations working on literacy education to achieve the national goal mentioned in the National Education Strategic Plan (NESP). “The Project for Support for Expansion and Improvement of Literacy Education in Afghanistan (LEAF)” was implemented from March 2006 to July 2008 under the cooperation of JICA and LD. Through that project, knowledge and skills of LD on data management of literacy courses, material management and supervisors’ (currently called “monitors”) training were enhanced. A total of 10,347 learners received the literacy education in Kabul, Balkh and Bamyan Provinces. The terminal evaluation conducted in February 2008 showed that the Project purpose was achieved well with a positive impact while the sustainability of the activities was insufficient but a continuous support for LD was still highly needed to work effectively under the LIFE framework to achieve the goal. Therefore, the Government of Afghanistan (GOA) requested the Government of Japan (GOJ) to implement the Project focusing on capacity development of supervisors who are the core element for successful implementation of literacy courses. In response to the request, JICA dispatched the Detailed Planning Survey Team in order to collect necessary information and to discuss the detailed design of the Project with the GOA’s concerned authorities. As a result of the surveys, and in order to execute “The Project on Improvement of Literacy Education Management in Afghanistan (LEAF2)”, Record of Discussions (R/D) was signed on February 18, 2010 between JICA and authorities of the GOA. The team arrived in Afghanistan in May 2010, and conducted meetings with concerned offices, selected pilot areas, conducted Baseline Survey, organized Technical Working Group (TWG) by outputs, and continued activities related to technical supports of each output. Since July 2013, the Project has conducted activities remotely from third countries such as India and Pakistan as well as from Japan due to the strict restriction on Japanese experts’ movement in areas of security deterioration. The 3rd year of the Project was extended up to January 2015 as the result of Terminal Evaluation which was conducted from December 2013 to January 2014.

1 Both literacy rates refer to “National Risk and Vulnerability Assessment 2007/2008 and 2011/2012.

2

However, during the extended period, project activities were postponed due to the insecure situation in Afghanistan caused by the presidential election and the new government settlement. Besides, the nationwide monitoring training planned to be conducted in 2014 could not be implemented because the contract negotiation between JICA Afghanistan office and the local candidate organization was not successful. Therefore, in order to complete the project activities, R/D was revised in January 2015 and it was agreed that the project period would be re-extended as the 4th year from March 20, 2015 to February 27, 2016. However, since the situations changed as described below, it was decided that the project period would be re-extended up to the end of January 2018 (the 3rd extension). In addition to the extension, Project Design Matrix (PDM) was also revised.

By the end of the 3rd extension period, it was agreed to extend the 4th project year up to July 2018 for the purpose to follow up LD’s activities for Facilitator Seminar and community participation. This report compiles the contents of the project activities, which were implemented from the 1st project year (April 2010) up the end of the 4th project year (July 2018).

Box 1: The change of the situation after the 2nd extension period: Part of “the nationwide monitoring training” planned to be conducted in the extension

period could not be conducted due to the deterioration of security in Afghanistan. It was expected to conduct more active awareness raising activities since the TV/Radio

programs which were developed through “Implementation of awareness raising activity on literacy education through media”, one of the activities of the 4th year, provoked lots of responses from viewers.

It was demanded by LD to conduct further activities with community participation since the reputation of the literacy needs survey which was conducted in the 4th year was high.

3

2. Project Overview 2.1 Project Name The Project of Improvement of Literacy Education Management in Afghanistan: LEAF2 2.2 Project Period Original Plan： April 2010 ~ March 2015 (4 years) Actual Period： April 2010 ~ July 2018 (8 years and 4 months) The periods of each project year are the following. (1) The 1st project year April 2010 ~ October 2011 (2) The 2nd project year December 2011 ~ March 2013 (3) The 3rd project year April 2013 ~ January 2015 (4) The 4th project year March 2015 ~ July 2018 2.3 Project Overall Goal Management and quality of literacy education in Afghanistan will be improved. 2.4 Project Purpose Monitoring and technical support capacity of literacy administration is enhanced for quality improvement of literacy education. 2.5 Outputs Output 1: Framework of monitoring and technical support covering all literacy courses is

developed. Output 2: Measures for assessing the learning achievement of learners after completion of course

are developed. Output 3: Measures for reporting and information sharing are developed and implemented. Output 4: Measures for technical support are developed.

4

2.6 Activity The activities of each outcome are the following. More detailed activities are explained in Chapter4. 2.6.1 Activities for All Outputs (1) LIFE (Literacy Initiative for Empowerment) meeting (2) Third country training (3) Activation of JICA Project Homepage and Website of Literacy Department 2.6.2 Activities for Output 1 (1) Management and support of the training for PLC/DLC staff and other stakeholders on

monitoring and technical support (2) Analysis of the result of monitoring form and the reflection to Output 4 (3) Implementation of the seminar to share the result of the monitoring and Output 4 2.6.3 Activities for Output 2 (1) Development of a supplementary audio-visual material for the improvement of

implementation of learners’ learning assessment and dissemination of the material to PLCs (2) Utilization of supplementary audio-visual materials and monitoring of the appropriate

implementation of learners’ assessment (3) Collection and analysis of the result of learners’ assessment (4) Analysis of learners’ assessment data and reflection to Output 4 2.6.4 Activities for Output 3 (1) LD reflects the collected result of monitoring in accordance with the collecting data guideline

to database appropriately (2) Compilation of the analysis result and the information sharing with stakeholders (3) Coordination with NFE-MIS 2.6.5 Activities for Output 4 (1) Implementation of technical support training in pilot DLCs (2) Development of technical support tool manual based on the technical support training in the

3rd project year (3) Implementation of awareness raising activity on literacy education through media (4) Needs Survey on literacy education (5) Revision of the training contents for new and experienced facilitators (6) Implementation and evaluation of the revised training (7) Development and distribution of exercise book for learners in accordance with the new

curriculum (8) Development, trial and evaluation of the activity measure for the literacy education

5

expansion with community participation 2.7 Input Input by Government of Japan and Government of Afghanistan mentioned in PDM are the following.

Table 1: Input by Government of Japan and Government of Afghanistan Japan Afghanistan

(1) Experts Literacy Policy /Donor Coordination Literacy Assessment Data Management Material Development Training management Literacy Class Management

(2) Cost of field work Training cost Material development cost Pilot activity cost

(3) Cost of the third country training and training in Afghanistan for counterparts

(1) Deployment of counterparts (2) Office space and cost of utility in LD and

offices in pilot provinces

Source: PDM ver.6

6

3. Input for the Project 3.1 Result of Manning Schedule 3.1.1 Duties of Japanese Experts Detailed duties of Japanese experts from the 1st project year to the 4th project year are listed below.

Table 2: Duties of Japanese Experts in the 1st Project Year Name Position Organization Contents of duties

Masami Suda Chief Advisor System Science Consultants Inc.

To summarize the team as the responsible person of the Project To conduct the management of all project

activities operation based on the project outline

Yumiko Ono Literacy Policy / Donor Coordination

System Science Consultants Inc. (Naruto University of Education)

To provide technical support for trainings of technical support and assessment To analyze other donors’ support for

literacy education

Rie Koarai Literacy Assessment

Asia-Pacific Cultural Centre for UNESCO

To provide technical support for assessment

Sakiko Yamaguchi

Material Development

System Science Consultants Inc.

To provide technical support for manual development To provide technical support for trainings

of technical support

Madoka Mori Training Management 1


To support operational management and provide technical support regarding nationwide training To support management of trainings of

technical support and assessment

Utako Morita Training Management 2


To provide technical support for trainings of teaching methods To provide technical support for

assessment data analysis

Naoyuki Sato Data Management

System Science Consultants Inc. (Sunballes Inc.)

To provide technical support for data collecting regarding NFE-MIS

Harumi Tsukahara

Literacy Class Management1

System Science Consultants Inc. (Oriental

To support revision on Monitoring Manual and Training Manual

7

Consultants Co., LTD.)

To prepare, compile, analyze and develop the report regarding literacy class management

Yoko Satomi Literacy Class Management2


To prepare, compile, analyze and develop a report regarding literacy class management

Satoko Okamoto

Project Coordinator


To summarize the team as the responsible person of the Project

Table 3: Duties of Japanese Experts in the 2nd Project Year

Name Position Organization Contents of duties







literacy education




Toshiharu Hata



To provide technical support for manual development To provide technical support for the

trainings of technical support

Madoka Mori Training Management 1




Takuya Sasaki Training Management 1




Mariko Ikawa Training Management 2

System Science Consultants Inc. (From October 2013)

To provide technical support for trainings of technical support To provide technical support for


8




Harumi Tsukahara

Literacy Class Management

System Science Consultants Inc. (Oriental Consultants Co., LTD.)

To support revision on Monitoring Manual and Training Manual To prepare, compile, analyze and develop a

report regarding literacy class management

Table 4: Duties of Japanese Experts in the 3rd Project Year





Takuya Sasaki Training management 1


To support operational management and provide technical support regarding nationwide training To support the management of trainings of





literacy education




Madoka Mori Material Development1

System Science Consultants Inc. (Until March 2014)



Kenji Tajima Material Development1

System Science Consultants Inc. (From April 2014)



Utako Morita Material Development2

System Science Consultants Inc. (From October 2013)

To provide technical support for trainings of teaching methods To provide technical support for


9

Hiroko Saito Training management 2


To support operational management and provide technical support regarding nationwide training To support the management of trainings of





Harumi Tsukahara


System Science Consultants Inc. (Oriental Consultants Co., LTD. (From June 2014, changed to Oriental Consultants Global Co., Ltd.))

To prepare, compile, analyze and develop the report regarding community survey

Table 5: Duties of Japanese Experts in the 4th Project Year till February 2016





Takuya Sasaki Deputy advisor / Training management 1


To help the chief advisor To support operational management and

provide technical support regarding nationwide training To support operational management and

provide technical support regarding community survey



To provide technical support for training, manual development and data analysis regarding technical support and assessment



To provide technical support for supplementary materials and data analysis regarding assessment To prepare, compile, analyze and develop

the report regarding community survey

10

Kenji Tajima Manual Development 1


To provide technical support for training and developing manuals regarding technical support To provide technical support for data

analysis regarding assessment

Utako Morita Manual Development 2



Hiroko Saito Training Management 2


To support operational management and provide technical support regarding nationwide training To prepare, compile, analyze and develop

the report regarding community survey

Naoyuki Sato Data Management 1



Erika Asada Data Management 2 / Project Coordinator


To provide support for data collecting regarding NFE-MIS To set up and manage Project Office in

India To conduct necessary logistic duties in

India

Harumi Tsukahara


System Science Consultants Inc. (Oriental Consultants Global Co., Ltd.)


Yu Ikeo／ Kikuko Muroya

Program Producer

System Science Consultants Inc. (NHK International Inc.)

To summarize and provide technical support for developing TV and radio program as literacy promotion activity

Ryotaro Matsuda

Editing Director 1

System Science Consultants Inc. (sole proprietor)

To provide technical support for developing TV and radio program as literacy promotion activity

Masayuki Akaba

Editing Director 2

System Science Consultants Inc. (NTT LEARNING SYSTEMS CORPORATION)

To provide technical support for developing TV and radio program as literacy promotion activity

11

Table 6: Duties of Japanese Experts in the 4th Project Year from March 2016 Name Position Organization Contents of duties

Masami Suda Chief Advisor/ Data Management 2

System Science Consultants Inc.（From July 2017 changed to Koei Research & Consulting Inc., same as below）

To control the team as the responsible person of the Project To conduct the management of all project

activities’ operation based on the project outline To provide technical support for data

collection management

Takuya Sasaki Deputy Advisor / Monitoring 2/ Assessment 2


To help Chief Advisor To support operational management and

provide technical support regarding nationwide training To provide technical support for

appropriate utilization and analysis of monitoring and assessment

Yumiko Ono Literacy Policy / Technical Support 1/ Exercise Book Development 1


To supervise and provide technical support for the facilitator training and manual development To supervise and provide technical support

for development of an exercise book for learners

Rie Koarai Monitoring 1/ Assessment 1/ Donor Coordination


To provide technical support for appropriate utilization and analysis of monitoring and assessment To coordinate and share information

among donors and stakeholders regarding literacy education

Kenji Tajima Technical Support 2/ Exercise Book Development 2


To provide technical support for the facilitator training and manual development To provide technical support for

development of an exercise book for learners

Utako Morita Awareness Raising 1/ Community Participation 2


To provide technical support and implementation management for activities on awareness raising of literacy To provide technical support for literacy

education with community participation

12

Hiroko Saito Technical Support 3/ Exercise Book Development 3


To provide technical support for the facilitator training and manual development To provide technical support for

development of the excise book for learners

Naoyuki Sato Data Management 1


To provide technical support for data collection management

Harumi Tsukahara

Community Participation 1/ Awareness Raising 2

System Science Consultants Inc. (Oriental Consultants Global Co., Ltd.)

To provide technical support for literacy education with community participation To provide technical support and

implementation management for activities on awareness raising of literacy

Chie Sagawa Awareness Raising 3/ Community Participation 3

System Science Consultants Inc. (Until June 2017)

To provide technical support for the literacy education with community participation

Yukari Oshima Awareness Raising 3/ Community Participation 3

System Science Consultants Inc. (From June 2017)

To provide technical support for the literacy education with community participation

Source: LEAF2

3.1.2 Result of Manning Schedule During the project period, 21 Japanese experts were dispatched. Regarding the Project management, Chief Advisor, Deputy Advisor, experts on Literacy Policy and Donor Coordination, and Project Coordinator were dispatched. Regarding the development of literacy class monitoring framework, experts on Monitoring, Assessment, Data Management, Literacy Class Management, and Training Management were dispatched. Regarding the capacity development of facilitator, experts on Technical Support and Exercise Book Development were dispatched. Regarding the promotion of community participation, experts on Community Participation and Awareness Raising, Program Producer and Editing Director were dispatched. During the project period, the Japanese experts were dispatched for 265.12 Man Month (MM) (1st project year: 37.27 MM, 2nd project year: 29.42 MM, 3rd project year: 75.90 MM, 4th project year: 122.53 MM). The detailed dispatch periods of the experts are shown in Tables 7 to 12.

13

Table 7: Field Works of Japanese Experts (The 1st Project Year)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

5 2 3 7 19 9 20

65 2.17

8/20-9/1 (8/25-9/1:RR) 10/16-17 11/7, 8, 24 12/1-6, 20 1/8-1/26 4/23 5/1 9/19 10/8

5 25 21

51 1.70

7/2-4. 7/8,7/14 8/10 9/4 1/3-1/23

60 53 51 36

200 6.67

5/7 7/5 10/3 11/24 1/16 3/7 5/16 5/30 6/10 6/20

4 0 17 50 61

132 4.40

5/17-20 6/9-16(RR) 8/4-11(RR), 8/15-31 2/12 4/2 7/11 9/9

60 105 （RR 16days excluding）

165 5.50

8/1 9/29 3/13 4/21 4/28 6/11 6/18 7/11

30

30 1.00

1/8 2/6

60 30 43

133 4.43

5/17 7/15 1/18 2/16 7/12 8/23

45 31 23

99 3.30

8/17 9/30 3/23 4/22 6/19 7/11

43 47 45 22

157 5.23

5/7 6/18 8/7 9/22 11/8 12/22 5/29 6/19

14

14 0.47

1/8-1/21

1046 34.87

Field Works in Afghanistan

Data Management Naoyuki Sato

Literacy ClassManagement1

HarumiTsukahara

Madoka Mori

Training Management 2 Utako Morita

Project Coordinator Satoko Okamoto

Total

Project Chief Advisor Masami Suda

Literacy Policy/DonorCoordination

Literacy Assessment Rie Koarai

Literacy ClassManagement2 Yoko Satomi

Total Project MonthProject year First Year

YearDay

2010 2011MM

First year total

Month

Material Development SakikoYamaguchi

Training Management 1

Yumiko Ono

14

Table 8: Works in Japan of Japanese Experts (The 1st Project Year)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

0 0.00

30

30 1.00

13

13 0.43

0 0.00

3

3 0.10

3

3 0.10

0 0.00

0 0.00

23

23 0.77

0 0.00

72 2.40

Works in Japan

1118 37.27

Total Project MonthFirst year total

Project year First YearYear 2010 2011

Day MMMonth

Project Chief Advisor Masami Suda

Literacy Policy/DonorCoordination Yumiko Ono


Material Development SakikoYamaguchi

Training Management 1 Madoka Mori

Training Management 2 Utako Morita

Project Coordinator Satoko Okamoto

Total

Total Works in Fieldand Japan


Literacy ClassManagement1

HarumiTsukahara

Literacy ClassManagement2 Yoko Satomi

15

Table 9: Field Works of Japanese Experts (The 2nd Project Year)

Day MM

Masami Suda

12/3-19(17), 12/24-30(7)

1/14-28(15)

4/3-4/22(20) 5/26-6/9(15) 9/29-10/13(15) 2/23-27(5)

94 3.13

Yumiko Ono

10/9-10/23(15)

15 0.50

Rie Koarai

12/3-12/30(28) 1/28-3/5(38), 3/6-3/12(7) 6/3-7/2(30) 9/15-10/6(22) 10/7-10/23(17) 11/28-12/27(30)

172 5.73

Toshiharu Hata

1/4-2/2(30)

30 1.00

Madoka Mori

12/17-1/16(31) 3/5-4/18(45)

76 2.53

Takuya Sasaki（replaced from Madoka Mori)

7/16-9/17(64) 10/6-11/29(55) 1/4-2/27(55)

174 5.80

Mariko Ikawa

11/28-12/27(30)

61 2.03

Naoyuki Soto

1/31-2/29(30)

80 2.67

Harumi Tsukahara

2/27-3/27(30) 5/28-6/26(30) 7/16-7/30(15) 1/4-2/3(31)

136 4.53

838 27.92

Field Works in Afghanistan Third Country Training

Project Chief Advisor

Literacy Assessment



24 25 26

Literacy ClassManagement

Total Project Month

Project year

21 22 23

Second Year

3 4 5

27 28 29 30 31 32

Month 12 1 2

33 34 35 36

12

TotalYear 2012 2013

9/1-9/30(30)

6 7

11/10-29(20)

2 38 9 10 11

Total

1

10/13-11/11(30)




7/31-8/30(31)

Data Management

16

Table 10: Works in Japan of Japanese Experts (The 2nd Project Year)

Day MM

Masami Suda 0 0

Yumiko Ono

15 5 12 5 7 1

45 1.50

Rie Koarai 0 0

Toshiharu Hata 0 0

Madoka Mori 0 0

Takuya Sasaki（replaced from Madoka Mori)

0 0

Mariko Ikawa 0 0

Naoyuki Soto 0 0

Harumi Tsukahara 0 0

45 1.50

Works in Japan 883 29.42

32Total Project Month 21 22 23 24 25 26 33 34 35 3627 28 29 30 31

Project year Second YearTotal

Year 2012 2013

Month 10 1112 1 2 3 4 5 12 1 2 3

Project Chief Advisor


6 7 8 9

Literacy Assessment





Total Works in Field andJapan

Data Management

Literacy ClassManagement

Total

17

Table 11: Field Works of Japanese Experts (The 3rd Project Year)

4/17 5/2 6/4 6/26 8/16 8/23 9/29 10/8 11/17 11/25 1/10 1/24 3/7 3/13 4/25 5/2 6/16 6/22 9/10 9/18 10/21 10/26 12/4 12/13 1/5 1/14138 4.60

（16days） (23days) (8days) (10days) (9days) (15days) (7days) (8days) (7days) （9days） (6days) (10days)

8/16 8/19 9/30 10/3 4/18 4/24 12/7 12/14

(4days) (4days) (7days) (8days) 23 0.76

5/25 7/2 8/16 8/23 9/29 10/8 11/17 11/25 12/13 12/19 1/25 2/7 3/3 3/11 4/18 5/2 6/16 6/24 9/10 9/18 10/21 11/8 1/5 1/12

(39days) (8days) (10days) (9days) (7days) (14days) (9days） (15days) (9days) (9days) (19days) (8days) 156 5.20

8/16 8/23 9/29 10/8 11/17 11/25 1/10 1/17 4/16 4/24 6/16 6/24 9/10 9/18 10/31 11/8 12/5 12/13

(8days) (10days) (9days) (8days) (9days) (9days) (9days) (9days) (9days)80 2.67

4/16 4/24 9/10 9/18 10/31 11/8 12/5 12/13

(9days) (9days) (9days) (9days)36 1.20

4/8 5/22 8/16 8/23 9/29 10/8 12/12 12/27 1/10 1/17 3/3 3/11 4/18 5/2 6/16 6/24 10/21 11/8 12/3 12/13

(45days) (8days) (10days) (16days) (8days) (9days） (15days) (9days) (19days) (11days) 150 5.00

9/29 10/8 12/12 12/20 1/10 1/17 3/3 3/11 4/16 4/24 6/16 6/24 10/31 11/8 1/5 1/13

(10days) (9days) (8days) (9days） (9days) (9days) (9days) (9days) 72 2.40

5/15 6/6 9/29 10/8 3/3 3/11

（23days） (10days) (9days） 42 1.40

8/16 8/23 9/29 10/8 11/17 11/25 1/10 1/17 9/10 9/18 1/5 1/13

(8days) (10days) (9days) (8days) (9days) (9days)(8days) 53 1.77

750 25.00　　　　　　　　Field Works


Literacy Class Management Harumi Tsukahara

Total

Material Development2 Utako Morita(From October 2013)

Training management 1 Takuya Sasaki

Training management 2 Hiroko Saito

Literacy Policy /Donor Coordination Yumiko Ono


Material Development1 Madoka Mori/Kenji Tajima(From April 2014)

Chief Advisor Masami Suda(10days)

4 5 6 7 8 910 11 12 1 2 34 5 6 7 8 9

Day

10 11 12 1

47 54 55 56 5748 49 50 51 5242 43 44 45 46

Position Name

36 37 38 39 40 41

MMThird Year

2013 2014 2015

53

18

Table 12: Works in Japan of Japanese Experts (The 3rd Project Year)

7/17, 18, 24 8/14, 28,29 11/1, 4-8, 27 12/9-12 2/10, 12,13, 17, 18 5/8, 9, 12-15 6/3-6, 9, 10 12/16, 17107 5.35

(3days) (3days) (17days) (5days) (6days) (4days) (5days) (12days) (6days) (6days) (10days) (8days) (8days) (12days) (2days)8/2, 9, 14 1/6-8, 20-22 4/7-9, 14-16 6/4-6, 9 8/1-3, 21-24 12/1, 2, 15

42 2.10(6days) (3days) (7days) (6days) (6days) (4days) (7days) (3days)

4/18, 19 5/21-23 2/10, 14, 18, 26 3/17, 19 4/7, 8, 14, 15 5/8, 26 6/4, 10, 11, 20 10/3, 6-10

147 7.35(2days) (3days) (9days) (8days) (16days) (7days) (8days) (8days) (14days) (4days) (2days) (4days) (2days) (4days) (10days) (14days) (10days) (6days) (8days) (8days)

10/15, 25 11/5, 14 12/9, 10 (各半days)1/22 2/5, 19 4/1-4, 7-10 5/12-16, 19 6/9-12 7/7-11, 14-18 8/4-8, 11-13 9/1-5, 24-26 10/1-3, 6-8 11/10-14, 17-19 12/15-19, 24-26

94 4.70(7days) (7days) (6days) (2days) (2days) (1days) (1days) (2days) (8days) (6days) (4days) (10days) (8days) (8days) (6days) (8days) (8days)

5/8, 9, 14-16, 30 6/9-13, 20, 23, 24 8/4-8, 11-13 11/10-14, 17-19 12/15-19, 22

139 6.95(13days) (14days) (14days) (8days) (10days) (10days) (6days) (8days) (10days) (8days) (14days) (10days) (8days) (6days)

5/23, 24, 27-30 6/17-20, 24-26 12/3-6, 9, 10 4/1-4, 7-11, 14 5/12-16, 19-21 6/2-5 7/1-4, 7-11, 14 9/1-5, 8-12 10/1-3, 6-8 11/10-14, 17 12/15-18

191 9.55（ 6days）（ 7days）（ 16days）（ 10days）（ 16days）（ 12days）（ 18days）（ 6days）（ 7days）（ 13days）（ 10days）（ 10days）（ 8days）（ 4days）（ 10days）（ 12days）（ 10days）（ 6days）（ 6days）（ 4days）

9/17-20, 24-27 12/3-5, 9-11 1/7-9, 21, 22, 24 2/3-5, 10, 24-28 3/17, 25-28, 31 4/1-4, 7-11, 14 5/12-15 6/2-6, 9, 10 7/1-4, 7-11, 14 10/1-3, 6-10 11/10-14, 17 12/15-17

137 6.85

（ 8days）（ 10days）（ 16days）（ 6days）（ 6days）（ 9days）（ 8days）（ 10days）（ 4days）（ 7days）（ 10days）（ 12days）（ 14days）（ 8days）（ 6days）（ 3days）11/6-8, 11, 12 2/21, 24-28 6/2-6, 9-13, 16,17 8/18-22, 25

（ 10days） (5days) (12days) (6days) (12days) (6days) 51 2.55

6/3, 17, 18 8/14, 15, 26 9/4, 12, 18 11/1, 13, 15, 27 12/24, 26, 27 3/31 6/24-26 7/1 8/21, 22 25-29 1/14

110 5.50(15days) (3days) (10days) (3days) (3days) (9days) (4days) (3days) (10days) (1days) (6days) (6days) (3days) (1days) (7days) (8days) (17days) (1days)

1018.00 50.90

75.90Total Works in Field and Japan

　　　　　　　 Works in Japan

1/6-9, 20-22, 24,28, 30

4/2, 3, 8, 16, 21,28

5/1, 2, 7, 8, 12, 13 9/1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 22,24, 25

12/1-5 ,8-12, 15,16, 18, 19, 24-26

Total


9/12, 13, 17-20,24-27

12/9-13, 16-20,24, 25

Literacy ClassManagement Harumi Tsukahara

5/7-10, 13-17, 22-24, 27-29

7/2, 3, 5, 8-12, 17,18

10/17, 18, 23-25,28-31

Training management 2 Hiroko Saito

10/11, 18, 21-25,28, 30, 31

11/5-7, 11-14, 18-22, 26-29

8/4-8, 11-15, 18,19

9/1-5, 8-12 , 24-26, 29

10/10, 11, 15-18,21-25, 29

11/1, 5-8, 11-15,19-22, 25-27, 29

1/7-9, 20, 22, 23,27

2/3-7, 12-14, 17-21

3/13, 14, 19, 20,24-28, 31

8/4-8, 11-15, 18,19

3/13, 14, 19, 20,24-28, 31

4/1-4, 8-11, 14, 15 7/9-11, 14-18, 22,23

9/1-5, 8, 9, 19, 22,24-26, 29, 30

10/1-3, 14-17, 20-22

Training management 1 Takuya Sasaki

7/1-5, 8-11, 17,18, 22-25, 30

8/1, 2, 6, 9, 14, 15,26-29

9/2, 3, 5, 6, 10-13,17-20, 24-27

Material Development2 Utako Morita(From October 2013)

11/13-15, 18-22,25-29

12/2-7, 9-11, 13,16-18, 24

1/6, 8-10, 14-17,21-24, 28, 29

2/6, 13, 17-21, 24

39/2-5, 8, 9, 19, 22

11/12-14, 17-20,28

12/2, 4, 8, 9, 22,24-26

Material Development1 Madoka Mori/Kenji Tajima(From April 2014)

7/19, 22, 24-26,30, 31

8/5-7, 14, 27, 28,30

9/3, 5, 9, 18, 24,27

11/7, 11, 12, 14,15, 27-29

12/2-6, 9, 10, 24 1/6-10, 14-17, 20-24

7/1-3, 7-9, 14, 22-24

8/4-6, 11, 12, 14,18, 19, 21, 22, 25-27, 29

9/1-5, 8, 9, 24, 25,30


7/5, 8, 9, 16, 17,23-26

8/2, 5, 8, 9, 12-14,27

9/2-6, 9-12, 17-19,24-27

10/ 10, 15-17, 24,25, 30

10/1, 2, 6-10, 14-17, 20

Literacy Policy /Donor Coordination Yumiko Ono

7/4, 8, 17, 18, 24,30

12/3-5, 9, 10, 12,17

11 12

56

1

Chief Advisor Masami Suda

9/2-6, 9-12, 17-20,24-27

10/10,11, 15, 16,31

4/1-3, 9-11, 14-18,23

7/2-4, 7-11, 15, 17 8/4, 5, 7, 8, 11, 12,19, 20

5 6 7 8 9 1011 12

57

Day MMThird Year2013 2014 2015

4

49 50 51 52 53 5443 44 45 46 47 48

1 2 4

55

Position Name

36 37 38 39 40 41 42

5 6 7 8 9 10

19

Table 13: Field Works of Japanese Experts (The 4th Project Year)

10/10-11/16

471 15.70

21 0.70

11/26-12/23

321 10.70

69 2.30

174 5.80

285 9.50

11/27-12/21

276 9.20

11/14-12/17

351 11.70

75 2.50

11/28-12/21

279 9.30

36 1.20

14 0.46

21 0.70

14 0.47

9 0.30

　Field Works Ramadan 2416 80.53

4th Projecyt Year

Field Work Total Actual

6/25-7/6

6 6

4/9-20

12

12 6 6

4/9-20 6/25-7/6

86

7 5

6/24-7/510/16-11/8 11/28-12/17

83 84 85 86 87 88 89

3 4 5 6 7 8 926 7 8 9 10 1112 1

83

3/1-3/25 5/9-5/314/22-4/291/4-1/27

10/9-15

9/10-21

25

4/7-29

12/10-26

20 24 1213

7/24-8/10

11/6-2010/10-275/29-6/23

16

16

7/19-8/16

24

26

3/27-4/25

36

8

10/14-28

18 1534

8/6 - 203/24-4/1

28

6 6

10/27-11/20

19

8/1611/13-12/9

10

9/11-28

9

6/25-7/17

16 11 17

6/13-6/29

17

12/18-26

13

5/7-6/6

23

7/28-8/193/29-4/19

28

7

8/1-12

3/23-4/15

12

2518

4/3-4/17

15

12/7-23

10/28-11/21

7/9-8/10

29

4/12-5/11

24 30

18

7/19-

9

19

1/12-2/3

23

3/24-4/16

15

5/17-23

7

5/17-23

7 7

10/9-15

7/24-30

7 7

10/9-15

7 7

7/24-30

5/25-6/9 6/29-7/11

16

8/12

7

25

6/30 9/13-10/18

8/23

36

25

25 8 23

7/19-

9

TotalMM2015 2016 2017 2018

3 4 5 6 7 10 1112 1 2 3 4 5

79 8059 70

2

77 78

126 7 8 9

TotalDay

8

24

7/21-

3/24-5/13 6/6-29

6/27-8/9

2/28-3/30

3 4 54/11-5/17 9/6-9/29 12/15-12/29

15 24

71 72

1

　

Position Name

24 15 28 16 13 24 38

9 10 11

Masami Suda37

12/11-237/21-8/4 9/14-30 10/1-11

18

7

8/5

3/2-2511/11-26

4/10-4/21

12

51

4/6-4/20

3/23-4/15

2419

10/5-23 11/9-218/11-9/10

15

12 31 23 31

4/13-4/24

9/13-305/17-6/8

7/11-7/25

5/11-6/3 1/11-2/8

22 23 24

42

3/21-4/25

7/27- 3/6-3/29

17

6/18-7/11 10/13-11/9

33 27

6/29-7/17

25 23

24

24

28

24 12

24

15

7/25-8/10

18

6/27-8/9

16

15

31

8/1-8/15

35

4/21-4/30

15

11/15-12/7

9/25-10/61/10-1/28 3/21-5/1

10

24

48

5/8-5/31

35 9

8/13

4/20-5/16

7/22-8/318/8-9/6

30 24 27

8/29-9/17 9/28-10/24 11/19-12/14

14

30

11

7/25-8/11

25 196

1710 31

4/10-4/27

2

10/6-11 11/6-12/19

Chief Advisor/Data

Management 2

Deputy Advisor /Monitoring 2/Assessment 2

Literacy Policy /TechnicalSupport 1/

AwarenessRaising 1/Community

TechnicalSupport 2/

Exercise Book

Monitoring 1/Assessment 1/

Donor

4/5-4/29CommunityParticipation 1/

Awareness

DataManagement 1

TechnicalSupport 3/

Exercise Book9/17-10/2

93 9460 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 87 88 89 90 91 9281 82 84 857573 7468 69 76

DonorCoordination Masami Suda

Yumiko Ono

Takuya Sasaki

Editing Director2

MasayukiAkaba

ProgramProducer

Yu Ikeo／Kikuko Muroya

Editing Director1

RyotaroMatsuda

DataManagement 2 /

Project

Hiroko Saito

Utako Morita

Rie Koarai

Naoyuki Sato

HarumiTsukahara

Kenji Tajima

Erika Asada

AwarenessRaising 3/Community

Yukari Oshima（From July

2017） 9

8/1-9

20

Table 14: Works in Japan of Japanese Experts (The 4th Project Year)

Source: LEAF2

3/23 5/15 6/3,4 8/25, 27, 31 9/1 10/1312/1-4, 7

7/11,12, 17~19, 24

66 3.30

4 0.207/21, 23, 27-31 10/16, 30 11/30 12/4, 15

124 6.205/11,13,18,20 7/2,3 8/24, 25 9/11

12 0.60

3/23-27 9/1-4, 9 11/25,26

134 6.705/1 7/1-2, 7 9/3

56 2.805/14 '4/8

7/3,4, 10~13, 17~20

120 6.007/28-30 10/8 11/16-20, 24 12/1, 2, 2

7/11,18~20

72 3.60

8/16,17,29,30,31 1/5, 6, 10, 11

48 2.403/24, 30 4/30 5/1,7 6/23,24 7/21,23 10/26 11/24,25 '4/4-5 8/15,17,18,22,24

54 2.703/20,23 7/28-31 8/3, 5, 6 9/28-30

12 0.608/3-7

12 0.605/13,15,25,26 7/13-16

8 0.407/21

8 0.40

90 4.50

20 1.00

Works in Japan Ramadan 840 42.00

Actual 122.53Total Works in Field and Japan

Works in Japan Total Actual

4 3 6 1 4

4/11,12,245/9,10,23,24,28,30

6/203/8,23,27,29

3/5,12,22, 26

4/2, 5 5/8, 9, 30 6/13, 27,29

4 2 3 3 10

4/10,11,13,17,18

5/16,17,18 6/19,20

5 3 2

3/22,28 4/4,23-25 5/21,22 7/9,11~13

2 4 2 4

3/12-16,19-23

10 6

83 84 85 86 87 88 89

3 4 5 6 7 8 9

6/12,15,16

7/21-24,27-31

8/3-7, 10-13

5/7,8,12,13,14,15

10/169/28(half), 29(half), 305/7,11,15,25

3/20,23 4/2,3,6-9,27 6/2,10,22,23,30

7/14,28(half),29(

half）

8/21, 24 9/1,3,8,9,11,14-18,21-

25

2 1

3/8-10, 14, 16,17,23,24,30,31

'4/19,25

3/14-18 4/18,19,20,22,25,26

2. Works in Japan

3/20, 23-26,30,31

10/2,5-9,13,14,16,19,20,26

7/3, 6-9, 13,23

6/10, 15-18,22-24, 26,29-30

5/12-15

6/18,23-26,29

8/11, 13,14, 20, 21

14Editing Director 2 Masayuki Akaba

6 6 6 56 5 7 75 3

5/22-26,316/2,6,23,

28,2910,11,18

30'1/5,6,

25,26,272/2,9,22,2

3,273/13,14,22,28-30

4/3,10-12,17,25

6/13-174/4-6,14-

15,283/7-11 12/1,2,

13-16,27

5 55 6 7

9/1,5,12,14-16

10/20,24-27

6

5/10,18-25

8/23-25,29-31

7/4-6Awareness Raising 3/Community

Participation 3

Chie Sagawa（Until June

2017）

4 4Editing Director 1 Ryotaro Matsuda

1 6 5Program Producer Yu Ikeo／

Kikuko Muroya

4/2732 4 3

Data Management 2 /Project Coordinator Erika Asada

4 2 22 2 55 21 2

5/9,10,11,17,23,31

6/8 11/4,11,16,18 1/6, 10, 24, 25

2 1 2 2 2

8/21,28,29,31

12/20-21 1/25-262/7, 9 3/7, 8 6/12-15,2010/20, 257/13

4 42 6 1 1

CommunityParticipation 1/

Awareness Raising 2

HarumiTsukahara

1 2 23 3 2 35 2 2 1 49

8/14 10/27,30 11/8,204/5-7 6/6,7 7/19,20,2410/18, 19 11/28

9Data Management 1 Naoyuki Sato

9/12, 16

10 21 9 4

10/17-21,24-28

8 2 263 3

9/5,8,13,14,19,21,

27,2910/3-4 11/27-2811/4, 8

'4/25-265/9-10

2 2

4

Technical Support 3/Exercise BookDevelopment 3

Hiroko Saito

3 3 4 6 1 41 8 3 21 3 5 4 1 33 1 4 12 15

2/14,2122,23

5/18,20,23,24

2 7 1 5 2

8/15,17,23 9/19,20,25

10/25-27,30

11/2,7-9,13,15

12/27 1/10,16,22,26

3/31 4/4-7, 10,11,14,17

6/20,22,28 7/11,148/24 9/5, 21,30(half)

10/3, 18,27-28, 31

11/4,11,16,18

12/28 1/4, 10, 123/3,10,30 7/135

Awareness Raising 1/Community

Participation 2Utako Morita

62 2 21 6 3

8/30,31 9/5, 6 1/5, 6 6/20, 215/9,10,11,13,17

6 5 25 1

Technical Support 2/Exercise BookDevelopment 2

Kenji Tajima

4 5 12 2 4 32 8 14 11 4 96 4 11 7

2/3, 6, 9,13

3/1, 6, 78/29,30

11/2,7,10,15,16,21,22,24,25,28

,29

12/5,6,7,14

1/4-6, 10,17, 23-25,

31 '5/2

6/3, 8, 13,15, 20, 27

7/4, 8, 13,14

8/25, 26,28, 31

9/5-6, 8,16, 20, 26,

29-30

10/3,4,6,11,12,14,17,18,19,20,25,27,28,3

10 2 1 6

4/20,21,23,27,28,30

45

Monitoring 1/Assessment 1/ Donor

CoordinationRie Koarai

24 2

6/19, 2011/30

2 1 1

Literacy Policy /Technical Support 1/

Exercise BookYumiko Ono

6 2 1 12 7 77 6 4 1 14

10/31 11/62/21,274/3-5,7,

12,14,176/5-7,12,14,20,21

11/1,10,11,24

12/26 1/67/4, 5, 13,

14

8/15,1721,22,28,31

9/4,7

4/1,2,6,7,10,4/27

6/8,10,12,16-18,23

8 2 1 2

5/9-12,16-17

9/14-18,28-30

12 5 6

Deputy Advisor /Monitoring 2/Assessment 2

Takuya Sasaki

3/1,2,4,7-11,14,15,17,18 4/19,22,25

-278/9-10,

15-18,24

7 6 7 7

11/18,21,22,24,25,30

1/12, 16,19(half)

7/4, 8

4 6 105 62

4/1,4/4-8 2/2,7-9,10（half）,20,22-24,27

11/2,4-6,9,27

62

3/28-31

3

Chief Advisor/ DataManagement 2 Masami Suda

1 1 1 1

Position

10 11 12 1 2

Name

Forth Project Year67 68 69 70

201590

2016 20178 7 89 10 11 128

82

3 4 1011 12 12018

3 4 5 6

71 72

7

73 74

1 23 4 5 6

75 76 89 91

9

80

25 6 97

3/27, 29, 30

2/13-15, 20-22

2/16,17,20,21,22,24

10/18,19,21,24,26,27

TotalDay

TotalMM

59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 92 93 9483 84 85 86 87 8877 78 79 81

Awareness Raising 3/Community

Participation 3

Yukari Oshima（From July

2017）

7/27,28,318/'14-18,

21-2512/11-15,

18,19

3 10 7

Donor Coordination Masami Suda

31/9,2324, 29

4

21

3.2 Provision of Equipment Total cost of the provided equipment is 3.57 million Japanese Yen. The major equipment which was provided are; laptop and desktop computers, photocopiers, projectors and a video camera. The equipment list is shown in Appendix 1. 3.3 Training Results In total, the third country training was held 4 times in Bangladesh, India and Pakistan, of which duration varied from 12 to 16 days. The total number of trainees was 38. In terms of training in Japan, 8 counterparts participated in the training for development of audio-visual products for 10 days in 2015. The number of participants (LD staff, project national staff and Japanese experts) of these training is shown as the table below. Also, the details of the detail information of these training is attached in Appendix 2.

Table 15: Number of Third Country Training Participants

Country Name LD/PLC/DLC Project

National Staff Japanese Expert(s)

1st Bangladesh 6 1 1

2nd India 12 0 2

3rd Pakistan 11 2 3

4th India 9 6 2

Source: LEAF2

The training in Japan was conducted for the 6 staff members of Radio Television Afghanistan (RTA) in the office of NHK International. The training participants developed an action plan at each training. Among the developed action plans, some plans were not implemented due to the shortage of budget, while methods of community participation activity that was started from 2016 were developed from what they learnt from the third country trainings. 3.4 Actual Cost of Field Work In order to manage the project activity in the fields, total JPY 405,015,000 was used. The field work cost was composed mainly of employment fee, travel expense, rent fee, material production cost, supplies expenses, etc. The field work cost of each project year is as follows.

22

Table 16: Actual Cost of Field Work Project year Cost (JPY)*

1st Project year (April 2010～November 2011) 28,383,000

2nd Project year (December 2011～February 2013) 55,599,000

3rd Project year (April 2013～January 2015) 101,797,000

4th Project year (March 2015～July 2018) 219,236,000

Total 405,015,000

*The costs from the 1st to the 3rd project year are based on the record of actual cost, but the cost of the 4th project year

is estimate.

Source: LEAF2

3.5 Input by Counterpart Regarding the input by counterparts, the Deputy Minister of LD and the Director of Program Directorate were assigned as the project director and manager from the counterpart side. 65 staff from LD, 11 staff from Kabul province and Kabul city, 33 staff from Balkh province and 34 staff from Nangarhar province worked for the Project. The counterpart list is shown in Appendix 3.

23

4. Results of the Project 4.1 Project Activity for All Outputs 4.1.1 Joint Coordination Committee (JCC) In total, 9 JCC meetings were held from April 2010 to July 2018. General information is shown in Table 17. The details are in Appendix 4.

Table 17: General Information of JCC

S/N Date No. of

attendees Agenda

1 November 7, 2010 19 Sharing the progress of project activities Sharing the results of the Baseline Survey Discussion on revision of indicators of PDM Sharing the operation plan of the first-year remaining

activities

2 December 27, 2011 27 Sharing the progress of the first-year project activities Sharing the objectives and plan of Consultation Mission Sharing the operation plan of the 2nd project year

3 April 23, 2013 33 Sharing the progress of project activities up to the second year

Sharing the operation plan of the 3rd project year

4 January 21, 2014 42 Sharing the progress of project activities from the first year to the third year and the plan of operation of the future activities

Sharing the revised indicators of PDM Sharing the results of the first terminal evaluation

5 April 27, 2015 28 Discussion on remote operation of the Project by establishment of the Project Office in the third country

Sharing the progress of project activities up to the third year

Sharing the operation plan for the 4th project year

6 November 4, 2015 5 Sharing the results of the second terminal evaluation Agreement on extension of the Project and the activities

during the extension period

7 May 10, 2016 18 Discussion on project implementation measures Sharing the progress of the 4th year project activities Discussion and agreement on addition of pilot areas

(Kabul city and Kabul province) Discussion on coordination with UNESCO-ELA and

24

LIFE

8 December 11, 2017 34 Sharing the achievement of project activities and remaining issues

Sharing and discussion on the plan of activities of LD and Project during the extension period

9 July 3, 2018 15 Sharing the achievement and remaining challenges during the extension period and LD’s commitment for the challenges

Agreement on the change of indicators of Overall Goal of PDM

Discussion on the request for continuous support of JICA

Source: JCC Minutes, LEAF2

PDM was modified 6 times during the project period from 2010 to 2018. The timing and reasons for modification are listed below in Table 18. The details of PDM (Ver. 1 - 6) are in Appendix 5.

Table 18: Modification of PDM S/N Date Reasons

1 Nov. 7, 2010 In order to reflect the findings from Baseline Survey. The target figures and percentages were decided for each indicator.

2 Mar. 19, 2014 To reflect findings and recommendations from the first terminal evaluation survey.

3 Jan. 24, 2015 The nationwide monitoring training planned to be completed in 2014; however, it could not be implemented due to the failure of contract negotiation between JICA Afghanistan Office and local candidate organization. To finalize the project activities, the project period was extended by amendment of R/D. PDM was modified in this process.

4 Jan. 20, 2016 The second terminal evaluation was conducted in November 2015 and 2-year re-extension of the Project was recommended due to some weakness of achievement of some indicators and continuation of some activities to see their impacts. In this modification, new activities, that is, literacy class management involving community and facilitator’s capacity development were added so that the activities supported by the Project become firm and spread. Therefore, PDM was modified for the extended 2 years.

5 Dec. 11, 2017 In the JCC held in December 2017, PDM was revised for the purpose to extend the project period for 6 months.

6 Jul. 24, 2018 To make indicators of Overall Goal more feasible and practical, it was agreed to revise the PDM in the 9th JCC held in July 2018.

Source: PDM (Ver. 1 - 6), LEAF2

25

4.1.2 Baseline and End-line Survey The Baseline Survey was conducted from May till August 2010. The survey target areas are the Project’s pilot provinces, namely Balkh and Nangarhar provinces. Prior to the survey, LD in cooperation with the PLCs of those pilot provinces, selected three pilot areas in each pilot province: Mazar-e-sharif city, Balkh district and Khulm district in Balkh province and Jalalabad city, Kama district and Rodat district in Nangarhar province. The objectives of survey were 1) to understand the current situation of literacy programs, monitoring and technical support which were provided by LD and other literacy stakeholders and 2) to obtain baseline data (both quantitative and qualitative) based on the indicators set out in the PDM before implementing the Project. The survey results were compiled in the Baseline Survey Report submitted in August 2010. Based on the findings from the Baseline Survey, the target values for the indicators in the PDM were set. The End-line Survey was conducted from June to July 2013 to confirm the achievement of the Project. In order to compare with the Baseline Survey, target areas are selected in the Project ’s pilot provinces, same as the Baseline Survey, such as Mazar-e-Sharif city, Balkh district and Khulm district in Balkh province, Jalalabad city, Kama district and Rodat district in Nangarhar province. On the other hand, in order to figure out the current situation of literacy education, the survey was also conducted in Bamyan and Kabul provinces which were selected as observation provinces. The objectives of the End-line Survey were: 1) to confirm the achievement of three indicators of project purpose as “monitoring and technical support capacity of literacy administration is enhanced for quality improvement of literacy education” and 2) to figure out “facilitators’ teaching skill” and “learners’ information” for the purpose of improvement of literacy education furthermore in Afghanistan. The result of the End-line Survey was compiled in the End-line Survey report submitted in October 2013. Achievement status of three indicators are shown in “6.2 Achievement Status of Project Purpose”. 4.1.3 LIFE (Literacy Initiative for Empowerment) Meeting Coordination meeting for the purpose of establishing the framework of literacy education in Afghanistan is conducted among LD, donors, NGOs, etc. per month initiated by LD. LEAF2 also participated in LIFE meeting as one of the LIFE partners. The participation results are shown below.

26

Table 19: Participation Results of LIFE Meeting Place Date Meeting

Style Contents

Kabul

June 2010 LIFE Outline of LEAF2 project and introduction of implementation plan

December 2011 Coordination with Human Resource Department of Ministry of Education, cooperation with India, and etc.

April 2012 Discussion on the responsibility of Literacy Department in literacy

Review of LIFE Action Plan Introduction of activity in each working group Introduction of activity in each donor

April 2013 Sharing information about the consultant to develop and evaluate the comprehensive strategy for literacy by UNESCO

Discussion on the cooperation framework for developing strategy

September 2013 Utilization of manual and guideline developed by the cooperation of LEAF2 in National Literacy Strategy activity

November 2013 Discussion on literacy stakeholders mapping workshop

Discussion on stakeholders’ questionnaire form Discussion on national literacy guideline

March 2014 Presentation on introduction of LIFE framework and its background in Afghanistan

June 2015 LIFE Steering Committee

Briefing on National Literacy Committee Discussion on LIFE Forum and National

Literacy Technical Committee Open Discussion

August 2015 LIFE Forum

Updates on National Literacy Committee /Provincial Literacy Committee/District Literacy Committee

Discussion on International Literacy Day (ILD) celebration planning and preparation

Presentation by LIFE partners on their progress and key priorities for 2015

Curriculum works and progress update on ELA Discussion on Compulsory Literacy for drivers

27

workshop Discussion on National Literacy Strategy

Implementation Plan

December 2015 Discussion on National Mobilization Program in NESP-III

March 2016 LIFE

Reactivation of the LIFE framework Update on literacy components of NESP-III Discussion on overall literacy progress Discussion on upcoming LIFE Forum

April 2016 Not attended

May 2016 Discussion on National Literacy Campaign and Education Coalition

JICA / LEAF 2 Presentations Discussion on Preparation of LIFE New Action

Plan 2016 Updates on the new literacy curriculum

framework

June 2016 Presentation of LIFE Action Plan draft and LIFE ToR

July 2016 Discussion on finalization of LIFE Action Plan and ToR

Finalizing the activities and the organizations taking responsibility

Updates on education coalition Updates literacy new curriculum

October 2016 Discussion and presentation about the Joint Sector Review

Finalization of the LIFE Action Plan

December 2016 Discussion and comments on the idea of how to involve the civil societies and private sector in the national mobilization for the literacy

Mrs. Rahima presented a PPT about the India trip by support of LEAF2 JICA

Discussion on LIFE Action Plan Discussion on getting support of media for

awareness about the literacy

February 2017 Discussion on conducting workshop and inserting the comments of civil society, private sector and NOGs in the concept of National Mobilization

28

Discussion on final LIFE Operational Plan Discussion on creating suggested concept for

national literacy committee in order to prioritize literacy program in the national and international conferences agenda of the government and attract more financially attention and supports for increasing the literacy rate in the country

Concept of supplementary teaching programs for the ELA literacy courses

March 2017 Report on preparation and conducting workshop to collect comments of civil societies, private sector, institutions and NGOs on National Mobilization for literacy scheme

Report on printing literacy magazine Follow up on preparing proposed mechanism

for prioritizing literacy in national & international conferences agenda by government

Increasing budget and support to enhance literacy rate in Afghanistan

Report on the progress of curriculum preparation for literacy courses

April 2017 Report on preparation of concept note for including literacy in national and international conferences

Report on preparation of advocacy plan for attracting business men support for preparation of teaching material

Repot on collecting financial support for printing of literacy magazine

May 2017 Report on preparing concept note to include literacy in national and international agenda

Report on preparing advocacy plan and attracting trader’s financial support to print curriculum

Finalizing fund allocation receipt August 2017 Preparation and finalization of the action plan

on celebrating International Literacy Day

November 2017 Feedback on literacy report

29

Suggestions on organizing meeting with religious scholars

Organizing National Literacy Education Conference

January 2018

Discussion on holding a ceremony for gaining support of media and civil society with cooperation of Nai supporting media and civil society based on the result of National Literacy Committee

February 2018 Reports from the selected working groups Discussion on holding conference for gaining

media and social societies support By support of NAI (Supporting open media in

Afghanistan) All NGOs to send the reports of all literacy

activities to LD for uploading in LD web

April 2018 Reports on progress status of activities and conferences and the Deputy Minister’s Mission to several provinces

Introduction of the adult literacy teacher education roadmap

Reports from Working Committees of Organizing National Literacy Education Conference

Discussion on Global Action Week on Education 2018

Discussion on National Civil Society Week

Mazar-e-Sharif

December 2011 March-April 2012 April-May 2013

P-LIFE

Report of the activities from donors Solution of the challenges

June 2015 Introduction of NLC to NGO and other ministries at provincial level related to the literacy education

September 2015 Discussion on the literacy day celebration in Balkh province August 2016

December 2016 Explanation of achievements and challenges of PLC

Instructions on how to address the problems and challenges

Nangarhar December 2010 P-LIFE Report of activity from donors for the last 6

30

December 2011 months Report of the workshop in Kabul by PLC

manager

January 2012 Report of the workshop conducted in 34 provinces by LEAF2

Introduction of activity by Norwegian Refugee Council: NRC

Source: LEAF2

4.1.4 Output Sharing (1) Output Sharing and Wrap-Up Workshop For the successful completion of the Project, it was essential to get understainding of the literacy stakeholders on the project outputs. Therefore, the Project reguarly conducted several sharing workshops to disseminate the project results and to obtain feedback from the literacy stakeholders on the project activities in Kabul. The details of the workshops are shown in Table 20.

Table 20: List of Output Sharing Workshops PY Date Participants Contents

PY2 December, 2011

PLC managers, monitoring officers and master trainers from 32PLC (89 persons)

Sharing of the draft monitoirng manual Sharing of statistic report and challenges

found in the data collection process

PY2 January, 2013

PLC managers, monitoring officers, master trainers, program officers, statistic officers from 35PLC (166 persons)

Reporing of DLC monitoring training and the revision of monitring manual

Explanation of PDCA cycle of the provision of literacy education

Sharing of the assessment tools and guidelines

Sharing of the improvement measures of statistical data collection

Sharing of the effective way of usage of monitoring results for the improvement of literacy courses

PY4 November, 2017

PLC managers and monitoring officers from 35 PLC, 1 officer from MOE, 2 officers from the second vice president office, 5 staff members from NGOs and 1 staff of ELA (79 persons)

Sharing of overall project outputs Sharing of remaining challenges after the

completion of the Project and recommended measures for literacy administrative agencies

Signing on the resolution for further promotion of literacy education

*TWG members and DLC staff who presented at the workshops are excluded from the number of participants.

31

In the workshop on November 2017, TWG members and pilot DLC staff presented overall project outputs to the MOE, PLCs and other literacy stakeholders. In order to sustain the achievements produced by the Project , participants including Deputy Minister of LD and all PLC managers signed on a resolution which showed their future commitment. The participants from the MOE and other literacy stakeholders also signed on the resolution which included recommended activities for them. The signed resolution is presented in Appendix 6. By the occasion of the project termination, two project wrap-up workshops aiming to disseminate the achievements of project were conducted in Mazar-e-Sharif city of Balkh province in March 2018 and Kabul city in July 2018 inviting the staff of LD, MOE, DLCs and PLCs in the pilot areas, UN agencies and NGOs. The same workshop was planned for Nangarhar province in July 2018 as well. However, the workshop to be held in Jalalabad city, the state capital of Nangarhar province was cancelled according to the request of LD, which concerned about the security. (2) Uploading Manuals and Guidelines on LD’s Homepage LD’s homepage was closed at the beginning of the Project due to a lack of budget. However, it was reactivated at the end of September 2016 and manuals and guidelines developed through the project activities were uploaded. As of January 2018, the following manuals and guidelines are uploaded on LD’s homepage.

1) Monitoring Manual for Literacy Activities 2) Assessment Tools & Guideline 3) Guideline for Statistical Data Collection forms of Literacy Activities 4) Training Manual 5) Teaching Methods Guideline 6) Literacy Facilitators’ Teaching & Observation Guideline 7) Survey on Present Situations and Needs of Adult Literacy in Selected Communities in

Afghanistan 8) Statistics Report of Literacy Activities in Afghanistan 2014 9) Statistics Report of Literacy Activities in Afghanistan 2015 10) Statistics Report of Literacy Activities in Afghanistan 2016 11) Revised Literacy Facilitators’ Teaching & Observation Guideline 12) Community Participation Manual for Establishment and Implementation of Literacy

Courses These uploads on LD’s homepage followed to the upload on the Project Homepage in JICA’s website in August 2016. This upload on LD’s website was very valuable in terms of increasing the accessibility and utilization of necessary manuals and guidelines by not only LD staff but also PLC, DLC, and facilitators. Simultaneously, uploading ‘Statistics Report of Literacy Activities in Afghanistan’ on LD’s homepage contributed to promoting disclosure of information to open public and international community.

32

4.1.5 Advertisement From the beginning of the Project, the Project opened the Project Homepage in JICA’s website and updated project news. However, it was only the Japanese site; therefore, English, Dari and Pashto sites were additionally created in June 2016. In the Project Homepage, project news was regularly updated, and developed manuals and guidelines were uploaded. As of January 2018, among the manuals and guidelines which were mentioned in 4.1.4, 6 materials before ‘7) Survey on Present Situations and Needs of Adult Literacy in Selected Communities in Afghanistan’ are uploaded. Utilization of the Project Homepage, as well as upload of developed manuals and statistics reports, played an important role in sharing the tools with not only LD staff but also PLC and DLC staff and disclosing and publicizing information to the public. Besides the above, an introductory leaflet was developed and used for explanation of the Project to the visitors of the Project Office. 4.1.6 Survey on the Status of Finance Management (1) Background of Survey Most of the necessary expenses for the project activities were covered by the Japanese side and the past project evaluations pointed out that the limitation of LD’s budget would jeopardize the sustainability of the project effect. In this situation, the Project conducted activities which could be implemented within the existing budget and human recourses of LD, PLCs and DLCs. At the same time, it was decided to conduct a survey on the current status of finance management of literacy education administrative agencies considering the sustainability. Since the survey period was limited from February to June 2018, interview surveys were conducted only to LD, PLCs and DLCs. The survey questionnaire to PLCs and DLCs consists of the 5 stages of financial management: i) budget planning, ii) budget management, iii) budget execution, iv) internal control and audit and v) external audit. It was developed based on the PFM Handbook of JICA. As for LD, the Project interviewed about current practice of budget allocation and execution of all literacy administrative agencies. LD administrated 34 provinces by dividing them into 4 zones. Therefore, 2 PLCs from each zone and 3 DLCs (including the DLC in the provincial capital) from each selected province were selected as the survey target areas as shown in the table below. Selection of the target area was made by LD, and telephone interviews with PLC and DLC managers were conducted by the project national staff based on the questionnaire.

33

Table 21: Target Province and District for Survey on Financial Management

North Zone South Zone East Zone West Zone

1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2

Province Faryab Samangan Khost Bamyan Panjshir Kunar Ghor Farah

District 1 (Center)

Center Center Center Center Center Center Center Center

District 2 Pashtum

Kot

Khoram

Sarbagh

Nadirshah

Kot Yakwlang Rokha

Khas

Kunar

Dawlat

Yar

Anar

Darah

District 3 Andkhoy Hazrat

Sultan Gorbaz Sayghan Showtol Shegal

Laal o

Sarjangal

Posht

Road

Source: LEAF2 (2) Result of Survey 1) Budget Planning, Management and Execution in Districts and Provinces It was found from the survey that the budget planning, management and execution for DLC’s activities were managed at the provincial level. The PLCs developed the budget list including all DLCs and submitted it to Provincial Education Department (PED). It was processed from the PED to the MOE and compiled at the MOE as the MOE’s budget plan afterwards. Most of the interviewed DLCs answered that they verbally requested PLCs to provide necessary annual budget at the event, such as regular meetings with the PLC. In case, a DLC needed to procure services, the verbal request of the DLC was made to a PLC and the PLC proceeded it to the PED. The final approval and payment for the procurement was done by the PED. The necessary period for the procurement process varied from a few weeks to 4 months as the interviewees answered. All interviewed DLCs and PLCs answered that the allocated budget was usually fully paid. In addition, other than the ordinary budget which the survey asked about, it was found that the development budget for operating ELA courses and others was also allocated to all provinces at least in the previous fiscal year. The allocated budget was paid quarterly to LD, PLCs and DLCs. However, as for the first quarter, there was usually a delay of payment for 1 to 3 months due to the delay of parliament’s approval on the ministries’ budget. 2) Internal and External Audit in Districts and Provinces All interviewed PLCs had experienced an internal audit by MOE or PED at least once a year. While necessary expenditures for PLC’s activities were made by the PED, staff attendance records, inventory lists and other records were checked during the audit. As for the audits against DLCs, PED, PLCs and LDs checked the same kind of records including facilitators’ attendance record and inventory lists when they make a monitoring visit to DLCs. Regarding an external audit, 7 out of the interviewed 8 PLCs answered that they were subject to audits by the Presidential Office.

34

3) Budget Allocation and Execution of Literacy Education Administrative Agencies According to the list of approved budgets for all literacy education administrative agencies, the total budget for LD, PLCs and DLCs in 2018 was 703,443,000 Afghani (Approx. 9,810,000 USD) and 89% of the total budget was allocated for the personnel cost. The rest covered transportation, communication, utilities, consumables (including stationery and teaching materials for literacy courses) and others. During the project period, the Project observed that and the pilot PLCs and DLCs always faced with the challenges to cover the transportation cost for monitoring activities, the training cost for the capacity building of literacy facilitators, and daily communication and printing costs. Therefore, it was believed that the budget allocation to all literacy education administrative agencies were not enough to conduct what they had planned to do. However, it was found that 85,716,000 Afghani, around 12 % of the total budget of 2017 (719,548,000 Afghani), were not executed and returned to the MOE. The same situation was observed in 2016 as well. Around 10 % of the total budget was not executed. According to the Manager of Finance and Account Unit of LD, most of the remained budgets were for the personnel cost in the both years. The personnel cost was calculated and allocated based on the number of positions in the list of personnel (Tashkil). However, there was no personnel employed for some positions and the planned personnel cost was not executed. Only a little remaining budget for the personnel cost were diverted for the employment of contracted staff. There were remaining budgets in other cost items as well, while LD, PLCs and DLCs could not afford the costs for communication and transportation which were the part of the basic items in the general administrative cost. Sometimes, LD requested the Project to provide financial support for those cost items or LD staff covered the cost by their own pocket money. Deputy Minister and Program Director of LD mentioned 3 reasons for the above situation as follows. There was a challenge in the coordination among departments for activities which needed

cross-sectional implementation. Budget plans and requests for this kind of activities were not made properly.

The procedures for requesting budgets became complicated due to the frequent changes of the procedures by the Ministry of Finance.

Budgets were not distributed in a timely manner especially in the 1st quarter of every fiscal year due to the delay of parliament’s approval for the annual budget of ministries.

This survey did not aim to leading an improvement measure for the current practice of finance management. The survey result could show only a part of the current finance management status of the literacy education administrative agencies. It could not be said that the budget execution

35

rate was significantly low. It seemed that some of the above challenges could not be solved by LD and MOE. However, it was found that a certain amount of the budget for personnel cost were not executed repeatedly at least for the last 2 years while the budget allocation to literacy education activities on the whole does not meet the demand. In case, there is another occasion of technical cooperation for the literacy education administration in future, it is recommended to take an action for the improvement of finance management in cooperation with MOE. 4.2 Results of the Project The details of the implemented activities in the project period for the 4 outputs are described below. The operational schedule of the Project is shown in Appendix 7. 4.2.1 Activities of Output 1 (1) Issues and Challenges at the Beginning of the Project At the beginning of the Project, actual situations of the monitoring on literacy courses were surveyed as a part of the Baseline Survey. The survey identified the following issues and challenges. First of all, the position which was in charge of monitoring literacy courses was just changed from “supervisors” to “monitors” and the roles and responsibilities of monitors were not clearly defined. In relation with this, the roles and responsibilities in monitoring of DLCs, PLCs, and LD were also not defined yet and as a result, it was found that the method and content of monitoring activities were the same for different levels and the differences were just the size of areas where they were responsible for. It was also found that different tasks were conducted by organizations at the same level. Furthermore, the following three challenges were found in monitoring activities by DLC monitors, who started conducting monitoring of literacy courses although the roles and responsibilities of them were not clearly set. ・ The form used at their monitoring was not user-friendly and the monitoring items did not

include the quality aspect. The ways of filling the form, which was used by DLC monitors when monitoring literacy courses, were different from monitor to monitor. This might be because there were no manuals and guidelines for the form and many items on the form were confusing by themselves and did not indicate clearly what to write. The monitoring form included limited items, such as the number of learners, the progress of the textbook and the teaching materials, and the spaces for each item were small. In terms of the items related to the quality aspect, there was only one item as “learning achievements”. The space for the item was small and it was not clear what to write there.

・ The aspect of monitoring “quality” of literacy courses was lacking. At the monitoring of literacy courses, DLC monitors did not observe the teaching processes.

36

They visited literacy courses in the middle of teaching, checked learners’ attendances, lesson plans prepared by facilitators and the progresses of the textbook, and assessed learners’ achievements by asking learners simple questions. Their visits of literacy courses finished within 15-30 minutes. Besides, as it is written above, the form used for monitoring literacy courses did not have items related to the quality.

・ There was no system of compiling and reporting monitoring results. Although it was found that DLC monitors used the specific form mentioned above to record monitoring results, it was not found that there was a system to compile the monitoring results and report them to the higher entities. Since there was no system to compile and analyze the monitoring results, there was no particular system to improve literacy courses based on the monitoring results.

(2) Approaches by Project In order to tackle with the found issues and challenges in monitoring activities of literacy courses, it was decided that a monitoring system would be established by the Project and the system would be compiled as Monitoring Manual. Besides, the training regarding Monitoring Manual would be conducted to DLC monitors because they needed to understand the content of the manual well so that they could conduct proper monitoring activities according to the manual. In addition, the training program would be compiled as Monitoring Training Manual. In fact, before the start of the Project, it was said that Monitoring Manual and Monitoring Training Manual were developed by LD and the Project was supposed to just review the contents of these manuals and implement the training based on them. However, it was confirmed after the start of the Project that these manuals were not developed yet. Therefore, the Project needed to develop both manuals from scratch. Regarding the content of the Monitoring Manual, the focus was on the establishment of the monitoring method of literacy courses through the development of the monitoring form which would be used for daily monitoring of literacy courses by DLC monitors. Using the monitoring form enabled DLC monitors to monitor the quality of literacy courses because the monitoring form included many monitoring items about the teaching processes and the facilitator. In addition, the manual clarified the roles and responsibilities of DLCs, PLCs and LD in terms of monitoring since it was not efficient if DLCs, PLCs and LD conducted the same type of monitoring. Since it was urgent to build capacities of DLC monitors who were deployed without knowing their own roles, it was decided that Monitoring Manual including the content mentioned above should be finalized as soon as possible and the content of the manual should be disseminated widely through nationwide training. Once monitoring activities started at literacy courses, it became necessary to report monitoring results and analyze the results for implementing improvement measures. Therefore, the Monitoring Manual is needed to be revised to add these contents. The additional parts of the manual should be spread to DLC monitors through the second and later nationwide training.

37

(3) Implemented Activities 1) Establishment of Monitoring TWG (TWG1) Right after the Project started, a technical working group (TWG) consisting of members selected from different departments of LD was established. The TWG had meetings to discuss about monitoring of literacy courses 5 times and then, it was divided into three sub-groups. One of them was Monitoring TWG (TWG1). TWG1 was composed of about 10 members who were mainly from the M&E unit of LD. 2) Development of Monitoring Form and Monitoring Manual TWG1 started with development of Monitoring Form. TWG1 members reviewed the existed monitoring form and the monitoring forms used by other organizations and examined necessary monitoring items considering the monitoring objectives to develop the first draft. The draft Monitoring Form was trialed at literacy courses in Jalalabad and Kabul in February 2011. The trial resulted in finding the improvement points such as the volume was large, some monitoring items should be added, the order of monitoring items should be reexamined, and the language part and the math part should be monitored separately. These points were further discussed at TWG1 meetings, and Monitoring Form was finalized at the end of March 2011. Along with development of the Monitoring Form, TWG1 started to develop Monitoring Manual. The table of contents and the schedule for developing Monitoring Manual were made in February 2011 and TWG1 members wrote the contents, and Japanese experts reviewed the contents and made comments for improvement if necessary. 5W1H (When, Where, Who, What Why and How) of each topic in the manual were discussed at TWG meetings before it was written by responsible TWG1 members because the concrete ideas of each topic might not be included if responsible TWG1 members wrote the contents without any consultations. The draft Monitoring Manual was completed in June 2011 and it was trialed in Mazar-e-Sharif. In Kabul, the draft Monitoring Manual and the draft Monitoring Form were shared with LIFE members, who provided their comments on them through group discussions. The draft Monitoring Manual was reviewed based on the trial results and comments from relevant people and the final draft was developed at the end of July 2011. The table of contents of Monitoring Manual is shown in the table below.

38

Table 22: Table of Contents of Monitoring Manual Chapter1 Introduction 1-1 What is this Manual for? 1-2 How was the Manual developed? 1-3 Who is the Manual for? 1-4 Structure of the Manual Chapter 2 Basic Concept of Monitoring 2-1 Monitoring of Literacy Classes 2-2 Objectives of Monitoring 2-3 Principles of Monitoring 2-4 Ways of effective monitoring 2-5 Characteristics of effective monitoring 2-6 Conventional monitoring 2-7 Why is it important to monitor literacy classes? 2-8 What should be monitored? 2-9 How can the monitoring be done? 2-10 When to monitor? 2-11 Roles of monitors in improvement of literacy process Chapter 3 Monitoring of Literacy Activities 3-1 Monitoring of literacy classes at District Level 3-2 Monitoring of literacy classes at Provincial Level 3-3 Monitoring of literacy classes at National Level Chapter 4 The Introduction of New Monitoring Form 4-1 Guideline on how to use the New Monitoring Form on literacy classes 4-2 Procedure of filling out the New Monitoring Form 4-3 Reporting and filling the New Monitoring Form

Source: LEAF2 3) Development of Monitoring Training Manual Monitoring Training Manual was started to be developed in May 2011 when most parts of Monitoring Manual were developed because it was required that a manual for the training of Monitoring Manual should be developed as Monitoring Training Manual. Monitoring Training Manual was written mainly by Japanese experts since TWG1 members were busy with development of Monitoring Manual at that time. The contents were “training implementation guideline”, “sample of training program” and “session plans and training materials of sample training program”. Monitoring Training Manual was finalized at the end of August 2011. 4) Pilot Training of Monitoring Training It was decided that pilot training of monitoring training was implemented, targeting a few PLCs, because this type of training was never implemented before and it was necessary to find an appropriate implementation method before the training for Monitoring Manual was implemented

39

nationwide by utilizing Monitoring Training Manual. Kabul City PLC, Kabul PLC, Nangarhar PLC, Balkh PLC and Bamyan PLC were selected as pilot PLCs. ToT was conducted in Kabul to PLC managers and monitoring officers of these PLCs in February 2012. Trainers of the ToT were TWG1 members. Pilot training, which was for two days, was implemented at each pilot PLC from March to May 2012 after the ToT, targeting DLC staff (DLC managers and monitors) of DLCs under each PLC. Trainers of the pilot training were PLC managers and monitoring officers who participated in ToT and TWG1 members observed the pilot training. 5) Implementation of Nationwide Training (first batch) The contents of the monitoring training were examined through the pilot training and the training duration was changed from two days to three days. In addition, the implementation method that PLC staff who was trained through ToT became the trainer of DLC staff, was established through the pilot training. So, in order to start nationwide training (first batch), ToT for nationwide training was implemented for four days in September 2012 in Kabul. The training contents included not only the contents of the monitoring training, but also basic training skills required as trainers (such as the implementation way of group work). The whole country was divided into six zones and the nationwide training would be conducted by zone (except for Badakhshan province) in Kabul, Jalalabad, Mazar-e-Sharif, Bamyan and Herat. Trainers of the nationwide training would be PLC staff who were based in these cities. Therefore, PLC managers and monitoring officers of Kabul City PLC, Kabul PLC, Nangarhar PLC, Balkh PLC, Bamyan PLC, and Herat PLC participated in the ToT. The nationwide training started right after the ToT. The training targets were PLC managers and monitoring officers and DLC managers and DLC monitors (two for each DLC). The table below shows dates and the number of participants of the nationwide training (first batch) including the pilot training.

40

Table 23: Dates and Number of Participants of Nationwide Training (first batch)

Venue Dates of Training Target PLCs Number of Participants

Kabul City

Mar. 6-7, 2012* Kabul City 50 Sep. 24- 26, 2012 Parwan 31

Nov. 12-14, 2012 Panjshir 23 Kapisa 20

Nov. 18 – 20, 2012 Paktia 30

Wardak 26

Kabul Province

Mar. 25-26, 2012* Kabul 1st 21 Mar. 27-28, 2012* Kabul 2nd 21

Sep. 18 – 20, 2012 Logar 24

Urozgan 9 Oct. 13-15, 2012 Paktika 39 Dec. 8-10, 2012 Ghazni 53

Dec. 2-4, 2012 Zabul 4 Khost 21

Balkh Province

Apr. 8-9, 2012* Balkh 47 Nov. 4-6, 2012 Takhar 53

Nov. 10- 12, 2012 Kunduz 22 Juzjan 34

Nov. 12-14, 2012 Baghalan 35

Nov. 27-29, 2012 Samangan 25 Sar-e-Pul 22

Dec. 2-4, 2012 Faryab 44

Badakhshan Province Sep. 29 - Oct. 1, 2012 Badakhshan 1st 45

Oct. 2-4, 2012 Badakhshan 2nd 26

Nangarhar Province

Apr. 22-23, 2012* Nangarhar 71

Dec. 11-13, 2012 Nooristan 9 Laghman 17

Dec. 16-18, 2012 Kunar 46

Bamyan Province May 8-9, 2012* Bamyan 25

Sep. 29 - Oct. 1, 2012 Daikundi 25

Ghor 30

Herat Province

Oct. 8-10, 2012 Herat 49

Oct. 13-15, 2012 Farah 18

Badghis 17

Nov. 13-15,2012 Kandahar 30

Nov. 17-19, 2012 Nimroz 9

Hilmand 17 Source: LEAF2 Note: *=Pilot training

41

Training targets of the nationwide training (first batch) were 70 PLC staff members (35 PLCs * 2 people) and 1,200 DLC staff members (400 DLCs * 3 people) and the actual number of participants were 1,088 people and the participation rate was 85.6%. Twenty-seven training sessions in total including 6 pilot training sessions were conducted for the participants. 6) First Revision of Monitoring Manual Monitoring Manual was revised in response to the comments from the staff of LD and PLCs on the version completed in August 2011 and the result of the discussions about the comments at TWG meetings. Particularly, the following points were revised. ・ Addition of the form and its explanation which makes it possible to compile results of

monitoring of literacy courses at DLC and report to PLC ・ Addition of the form and its explanation which enables PLCs to compile and report to LD

the monitoring results of literacy courses which are reported from DLCs ・ Addition of the explanation of the flow that the necessary improvement measures/technical

supports would be identified based on the monitoring results and implemented with the concrete example (development of training program on lesson plans)

・ Small revisions such as changes of wording and phrasing Regarding the forms for compiling monitoring results, draft forms were developed at first, the drafts were trialed in pilot provinces and the drafts were revised based on the results of the trials. In this way, it made it possible to develop forms which could be practically used in the field. Regarding the implementation of improvement measures based on the monitoring results, TWG1 members compiled their own experience that they collected and analyzed actual monitoring results from filled Monitoring Forms of the Monitoring Manual and identified and implemented necessary improvement measures. Monitoring Training Manual was also revised by reflecting the changes of training contents and methods which were made by TWG1 members for the actual implementation of the nationwide training (first batch). 7) Development of Training Program for Nationwide Training (Second Batch) and Implementation of Pilot Training While the nationwide training on the Monitoring Manual finalized in August 2011 was implemented as the first batch, each TWG worked on revision of Monitoring Manual and development of Learners’ Assessment Tools and Guideline as well as Guideline for Statistical Data Collection Forms of Literacy Activities (Data Collection Guideline). It was decided that the contents of these manuals and guidelines should be disseminated through the nationwide training (second batch). So, members of each TWG developed training programs for these manuals and guidelines. In order to examine the training contents and methods practically, it was decided that pilot training

42

was implemented again for the nationwide training (second batch). ToT for the pilot training was conducted in Kabul for four days in May 2013. The participants were PLC managers, monitoring officers and statistics officers of Kabul City PLC, Kabul PLC, Nangarhar PLC, Balkh PLC, Bamyan PLC and Herat PLC, who were supposed to be trainers at each zone during the nationwide training. Trainers of the ToT were TWG1 members. The pilot training was implemented in Nangarhar province, Balkh province and Bamyan province in June 2013.

Table 24: Dates and Number of Participants of Pilot Training for Nationwide Training (Second batch)

Dates of Training Venue Number of Participants

June 9-12, 2013 Nangarhar Province Total: 73 participants Nangarhar PLC staff and DLC managers and monitors of 22 DLCs in Nangarhar

June 17-20, 2013 Balkh Province Total: 37 participants Balkh PLC staff and DLC managers and monitors of 16 DLCs in Balkh

June 30- July 3, 2013 Bamyan Province Total: 27 participants Bamyan PLC staff and DLC managers and monitors of 7 DLCs in Bamyan

Source: LEAF2

8) Implementation of Nationwide Training (second batch) Feedback from the pilot training was compiled by TWG members and project national staff, and referring to the feedback, Japanese experts and the project national staff discussed how to revise the training program in India in August 2013. After the project national staff went back to Afghanistan, TWG members discussed more how to revise the training program based on the discussion results in India and they revised the training program at last. The revised parts were not so many, just changing training methods and durations of some parts. Refresher ToT was conducted for two days, targeting TWG members and PLC staff (from Kabul City PLC and Kabul PLC), in India in October 2013. The objectives were to share the revised parts of the training program and to improve training skills. The same type of refresher ToT was conducted for three days in Kabul in November 2013. The participants of the training were PLC managers, monitoring officers, and statistics officers of Kabul City PLC, Kabul PLC, Nangarhar PLC, Balkh PLC, Bamyan PLC and Herat PLC, who were supposed to be trainers of the nationwide training. After the refresher ToT, the nationwide training (second batch) was implemented from December 2013 to February 2014. The training was implemented by zone like the nationwide training (first

43

batch) (due to geographical limitations, the training for Badakhshan PLC was separately conducted). One training session was for four days and the contents of the training were explanations of revised parts of the Monitoring Manual and contents of the Assessment Tools and Guideline and the Data Collection Guideline. It was aimed that the participants became able to implement their duties according to the manuals and guidelines after the training. The dates and the number of participants of training sessions are shown below.

Table 25: Dates and Number of Participants of Nationwide Training (second batch) Dates of Training Venue Number of Participants (by PLC)

December 3-6, 2013 Bamyan Ghor: 24 people, Daikundi: 20 people

December 4-7, 2013 Faizabad Badakhshan: 60 people

December 9-12, 2013 Kabul (by Kabul City PLC)

Kabul City: 36 people, Logar: 18 people

December 15-18, 2013 Kabul (by Kabul City PLC)

Parwan: 24 people, Panjshir: 19 people, Kapisa: 18 people

December 22-25, 2013 Kabul Paktia: 27 people, Paktika: 54 people

December 23-26, 2013 Herat Badghis: 14 people, Farah: 17 people

December 29, 2013 - January 1, 2014

Herat Herat: 33 people, Nimroz: 15 people

December 29, 2013 - January 1, 2014

Mazar-e-Sharif Sar-e-Pul: 17 people, Samangan: 18 people, Jawzjan: 26 people, Balkh: 1 person

January 4-7, 2014 Herat Kandahar: 24 people, Helmand: 17 people

January 5-8, 2014 Kabul Ghazni: 42 people, Wardak: 20 people

January 19-22, 2014 Kabul Khost: 26 people, Zabul: 6 people

January 26-29, 2014 Mazar-e-Sharif Baghlan: 34 people, Faryab: 32 people

January 26-29, 2014 Jalalabad Kunar: 34 people, Nooristan: 19 people

February 2-5, 2014 Kabul Kabul: 29 people, Uruzgan: 15 people, Laghman: 16 people

February 2-5, 2014 Mazar-e-Sharif Kunduz: 18 people, Takhar: 36 people

Source: LEAF2

At the time of the nationwide training (second batch), it was impossible for Japanese experts to pay per-diems and transportation costs for the participants directly because traveling to Afghanistan by Japanese experts was generally prohibited in July 2013. Therefore, the logistics arrangements including the payments of per-diems and transportation costs were out-sourced to a local company/organization by JICA Afghanistan office. As a result of the bidding, Shanti Volunteer Association (SVA), which had its base in Afghanistan, was selected and SVA was responsible for payments of per-diems and transportation costs to the participants. SVA implemented its own tasks in close cooperation with LD staff and project national staff.

44

9) Second Revision of Monitoring Manual Monitoring Manual was revised after TWG1 members discussed how to deal with comments on the manual which were collected from the participants at the time of the pilot training of the nationwide training (second batch). The revision included the addition of the training program (textbook, agenda and session plans) for improving facilitators’ teaching skills: The experience of the activities in relation to the Output 4, which examination and implementation of the Literacy Education Improvement Activities based on the monitoring results of literacy courses, was compiled as an example of “improvement measures/technical supports based on the monitoring results of the literacy courses”. Monitoring Training Manual was also revised by adding the training program for the nationwide training (second batch) (about Monitoring Manual, Assessment Tools and Guideline, and Data Collection Guideline) to the training program for the nationwide training (first batch) (mainly about Monitoring Manual). The order of the chapters was also changed, considering the actual flow of the training implementation. The revised Monitoring Manual was officially approved by LD at the end of February 2014 and distributed to all PLCs and DLCs after May 2014. 10) Follow-up Survey and the Third Revision of Monitoring Manual In order to investigate how the new monitoring system introduced by the Monitoring Manual was implemented in the field and whether or not there were improvement points, the follow-up survey was conducted. The follow-up survey was implemented in the pilot areas in May 2014 by a survey team consisted of TWG members, PLC and DLC staff and project national staff. The survey was conducted through interviews with prepared questionnaires and observations of actual activities implemented according to the manuals and guidelines. Considering the original project completion date, the survey was conducted in May 2014, when the manuals and guidelines were just distributed. Therefore, it was not found that there were big impacts by them. Still, it was confirmed that PLC and DLC staff accepted the manuals and guidelines favorably and they utilized them in practice. On the other hand, it was found as well that small revisions were needed and some parts were difficult for users to understand in reality. Considering the survey results as well as received comments through the nationwide training, TWG1 members discussed again for improving the Monitoring Manual, and the Monitoring Manual was revised. This time, there were no big revisions. Rather, it was revised so that the users of the manual (mainly, DLC monitors) could easily and appropriately conduct monitoring activities. For example, the secret of monitoring was added as notes (i.e. Marking “No” honestly to monitoring items of Monitoring Form led to the real improvement) and the example of filled Monitoring Form was improved. The revised Monitoring Manual was finalized in December 2014. 11) Postponement of Nationwide Training (third batch) Although the nationwide training (second batch) covered all PLCs and DLCs, it failed to invite all the target people because the duration of the nationwide training was shortened due to the

45

deterioration of security situations. Therefore, the nationwide training (third batch) was planned in 2014, targeting those who did not participate in the nationwide training (second batch). However, the bidding procedure for out-sourcing logistics arrangements by JICA Afghanistan office was not finished successfully and the Presidential election was conducted as well. So, the nationwide training (third batch) was postponed to 2015. (4) Issues and Challenges at the Beginning of the 4th Project Year Because the nationwide training (second batch) on the revised parts of the Monitoring Manual, Assessment Tools and Guideline and Data Collection Guideline could not cover all the target people, the nationwide training (third batch) was planned. However, the training was postponed. In order to spread the monitoring system of literacy courses established by the Project all over Afghanistan, the training was very important for DLC staff to understand the contents of the manuals and guidelines. Therefore, implementation of the nationwide training (third batch), which had been postponed was necessary. Furthermore, the training was needed to target other stakeholders who implemented literacy activities because LD promoted them to conduct monitoring activities according to the manuals and guidelines. In order to introduce the new monitoring system, it was an important first step that the contents of the manuals and guidelines were widely spread through the training. However, it was true at the same time that it was really difficult that the required activities by the manuals and guidelines were properly conducted nationwide by the training just once. Therefore, after the nationwide training covered all expected target people, it was necessary to observe how the monitoring activities were actually conducted at all PLCs and DLCs according to the manuals and guidelines and examine and implement necessary measures to improve the situations if required. (5) Implemented Activities in the 4th Project Year 1) Implementation of nationwide training (third batch) Although the nationwide training (second batch) was planned to target 2 DLC monitors of all DLCs, only one DLC monitor was trained in many DLCs because the number of training sessions was forced to decrease when the security situations became worse. Therefore, the nationwide training (third batch) was planned in 2014 to target 386 DLCs (in 31 provinces). However, the training included untrained monitors was postponed. Finally, the nationwide training (third batch) was implemented from May to August 2015. In fact, the training sessions were planned to be implemented after September 2015 in 11 provinces. However, they were canceled because it became difficult to move by land due to the deterioration of the security situations. The nationwide training (third batch) targeted other stakeholders such as the staff of NGOs, ELA and donor agencies who conducted literacy activities so as to implement unified monitoring system all over Afghanistan. As for the implementation method, like the nationwide training (second batch), the tasks related to accounting and logistics matters were outsourced to SVA, an NGO in Afghanistan, by JICA

46

Afghanistan office. In terms of the training contents, a part regarding “assessment training for literacy facilitators” was added in order that DLC staff could instruct facilitators how to conduct assessments according to the guideline after the training. The addition was based on the result of the follow-up survey that many facilitators did not conduct assessments according to the procedures explained in the Assessment Tools and Guideline. Table 26 shows the dates and number of participants in the training sessions of the nationwide training (third batch).

Table 26: Dates and Number of Participants of Nationwide Training (third batch) Dates Venue Target Provinces Number of Participants

May 3-6, 2015

Kabul Province

Kabul, Logar and Kapisa provinces

Total: 30 participants Kabul: 15 people, Logar: 8 people, Kapisa: 7 people

May10-13, 2015

Nangarhar Province

Kunar, Nuristan and Laghman provinces

Total: 40 participants Kunar: 16 people, Nuristan: 9 people, Laghman: 6 people, ELA: 4 people, SERVE (NGO): 5 people

May 25-28, 2015

Balkh Province

Sar-e-Pul, Samangan and Takhar provinces

Total: 40 participants Sar-e-Pul: 13 people, Samangan: 8 people, Takhar: 18 people, Swedish Committee for Afghanistan: 1 person

May-June. 3, 2015

Balkh Province

Baghlan and Jawzjan provinces

Total: 39 participants Baghlan: 21 people, Jawzjan: 17 people, ELA: 1 person

May 31-Jun. 3, 2015

Herat Province

Herat, Nimroz and Badghis provinces

Total: 33 participants Herat: 18 people, Badghis: 9 people, Nimroz: 6 people, ELA: 1 person

Jun. 7-10, 2015

Balkh Province

Faryab and Kunduz provinces

Total: 35 participants Faryab: 15 people, Kunduz: 10 people, ACTED (NGO): 2 people, ADA: 1 person, ANAFAE: 1 person, AWAC: 1 person, Care: 1 person, DACAAR: 1 person, Medica Afghanistan: 1 person, GIZ: 1 person, ELA: 1 person

Jul. 26-29, 2015

Bamyan Province

Daikundi and Ghor provinces

Total: 26 participants Daikundi: 12 people, Ghor: 12 people, ELA: 2 people

Jul. 26-29, 2015

Kabul City Panjshir province and Kabul City

Total: 26 participants Kabul city:18 people, Panjshir province:8 people

47

Aug. 16-19, 2015

Badakhshan Province

Badakhshan Province

Total: 27 participants Badakhshan: 25 people, Afghan Aid (NGO): 1 person, OHW Organization: 1 person

Total number of provinces: 21 (Out of the target 31 provinces for this year) Total number of participants: 266 Total number of PLC and DLC participants: 240, Total number of participants from stakeholders: 26

Source: LEAF2

2) Implementation of Nationwide Training (fourth batch) The nationwide training (fourth batch) was implemented from April to May 2016, which targeted 11 provinces where the nationwide training (third batch) was not conducted. Since the security situations of the cities other than Kabul remained unstable, all the training sessions were implemented in Kabul, instead of other cities. Trainers of the sessions were Kabul City PLC staff, Kabul PLC staff and LD staff. This time, all the tasks for implementation of the training sessions were not outsourced but done by the Project. The summary of the training sessions is shown in Table 27.

Table 27: Dates and Number of Participants of Nationwide Training (fourth batch) Dates Venue Target Provinces Number of Participants

Apr. 24-28, 2016

Kabul City Ghazni, Farah and Parwan provinces

Total: 39 participants Ghazni: 21 people, Farah: 4 people, Parwan: 13 people, ELA: 1 person

May 8-11, 2016

Kabul City Paktia and Khost provinces

Total: 34 participants Paktia: 20 people, Khost: 14 people

May 15-18, 2016

Kabul City Kandahar, Zabul and Helmand provinces

Total: 42 participants Kandahar: 18 people, Zabul: 5 people, Helmand: 17 people

May 22-25, 2016

Kabul City Wardak, Uruzgan, and Paktika provinces

Total: 36 participants Wardak: 10 people, Uruzgan: 6 people, Paktika: 18 people, ELA: 1 person, LHL (NGO): 1 person

Total number of provinces: 11, Total number of participants: 151 Total number of PLC and DLC participants: 148, Total number of participants from stakeholders: 3

Source: LEAF2

3) Confirmation of the Status Regarding Monitoring Report Submission and Implementation of Improvement Measures The Project made efforts to introduce the new monitoring system through the nationwide training where the Monitoring Manual was explained well. However, it was also assumed that the new monitoring system was not fully implemented by just one-time training. Therefore, it was

48

necessary to examine how PLCs and DLCs actually conducted monitoring activities after the training and to implement improvement measures if needed. Monitoring activities of literacy courses introduced by the Monitoring Manual required different tasks for different levels from the central level (LD) to the district level (DLCs). In order to enhance the monitoring activities to improve the literacy courses, it was necessary to improve from both aspects of the quantity and quality of the monitoring activities as shown in the figure below.

Figure 1: Quantitative and Qualitative Aspects of Monitoring Activity at Each

Governmental Agency

Activity

Quantitative Frequency of monitoring

QualitativeUsage of monitoring form based onthe monitoring manual

QuantitativeFrequency of development of DLCmonthly qualitative report

Qualitative

Relevance of contents of the report(whether or not real challengesfound from the monitoring activitywere conveyed)

Quantitative

Number of implemented action forimprovement of literacy educationat a district level

Qualitative

Relevance of action to solve thechallenge found in literacyeducation

QuantitativeFrequency of development of PLCmonthly qualitative report

Qualitative

Relevance of contents of the report(whether or not the contents ofDLC reports were conveyed)

Quantitative

Number of implemented action forimprovement of literacy educationat a provincial level

Qualitative


QuantitativeFrequency of development of PLCmonthly qualitative report

Qualitative

Relevance of contents of the report(whether or not the contents ofPLC reports were conveyed)

Quantitative

Number of implemented action forimprovement of literacy educationat LD level

Qualitative


LD

Development ofnationwidemonitoring

report

Action forimprovement

Governmentalagency for literacy

education

Monitoring ofliteracy activity

Development ofDLC monthly

qualitative report


DLC

Monitor

Quantitative and Qualitative aspects of activity

Manager

Development ofPLC monthly

qualitative report


PLC

Repo

rtin

g ofM

onito

ring R

esul

ts

49

As shown in the figure, monitoring activities include “development of monitoring reports” and “actions for improvement” at each level in addition to monitoring of literacy courses by DLC. Because it was difficult to review and improve all activities at once, “development of monitoring reports” at each level was targeted at first. In order to see the statues of the submissions of monitoring reports, telephone interviews were conducted on the submissions of PLC monthly qualitative reports to LD and the submissions of DLC monthly qualitative reports to PLCs in May 2016. Targets of the interviews were all PLCs in Afghanistan (35 PLCs) and all DLCs under pilot PLCs (Balkh PLC, Nangarhar PLC, Kabul City PLC and Kabul PLC) (69 DLCs out of all 416 DLCs) in Afghanistan. In terms of PLC monthly qualitative reports to LD, only Faryab PLC out of 35 PLCs submitted the reports for all targeted months when it was checked at LD. 17 PLCs did not submit any reports, which amounted to about 48% of all PLCs. On the other hand, 5 PLCs out of above 17 PLCs answered that they submitted the reports to LD at the time of telephone interviews, which meant that there were gaps in their answers between LD and PLCs. There were big gaps in their answers between PLCs and DLCs as well when they were asked about the submissions of DLC monthly qualitative reports to PLC. While DLCs answered that they submitted the reports to PLCs, PLCs did not answer that they received the reports. At the time of the distribution of the Monitoring Manual which included monthly monitoring reports as well as at the nationwide trainings, LD instructed all PLCs and DLCs to submit the monthly monitoring reports. However, many PLCs and DLCs answered at the time of telephone interviews that they did not think it was necessary to submit the monthly monitoring reports to LD or PLCs. In order to improve the situation, LD issued an official letter in June 2016 to PLCs and DLCs, which required them to submit the monthly monitoring reports. Besides, it was found through the telephone interviews that the PLC monthly qualitative reports were submitted to various destinations inside LD. According to LD, that happened because there were no rules about the management of submitted reports, and therefore, each LD staff kept the reports by their own ways. In order to tackle with the challenge, 3 members of TWG1 were invited to Delhi in August 2016 and the TWG1 members and Japanese experts with project national staff discussed about the procedure from the receptions of the PLC monthly qualitative reports to the share of the summary reports inside LD. The discussion continued at a meeting in Delhi in December 2016 and the procedure inside LD after receptions of PLC monthly qualitative reports and responsible people for each step were decided as below.

a) Four zone managers and M&E assistants (2 assistants to each zone manager) who belong to the M&E unit of LD receive PLC monthly qualitative reports from his/her assigned PLCs and confirm the receipts of the reports with the PLCs.

50

b) Zone managers compile the contents of the received PLC report into a designated format which TWG1 developed.

c) After the compilation of PLC report, the manager of the M&E unit, zone managers and M&E assistants extract challenges which each area faces with in their implementation of literacy education from the compiled PLC reports.

d) The manager of the M&E unit delivers the extracted challenges to related departments by an official letter.

e) The manager of the M&E unit confirms whether or not the related departments have developed counter-measures for the reported challenges.

4) Review of Capacities for Analyzing Monitoring Results and Implementation of Improvement Measures Since it was necessary to improve not only the submission status but also the contents of monitoring reports, it was decided to review the report contents and consider how to improve them, in addition to the improvement of submissions of monitoring reports. In order to see the analyzing capacities of monitoring results at PLC and DLC levels, DLC monthly qualitative reports (to PLCs) and PLC monthly qualitative reports (to LD) of July 2016 were sampled and analyzed at the Delhi meeting in December 2016. As a result, the following three challenges were found: 1) there was no consistency between DLC and PLC reports, 2) information was not written in a proper column in the report format and 3) a challenge in a literacy class was not extracted in a proper way. Since it was assumed that these challenges must be found at other PLCs and DLCs as well, TWG1 decided to implement the improvement measures written below and develop the instruction notes for PLC and DLC monthly qualitative reports. They were distributed to all over Afghanistan at the time of distribution of Teaching and Observation Guideline. ・ Development and distribution of instruction note of PLC monthly qualitative report ・ Development and distribution of instruction note of DLC monthly qualitative report 5) Continuous Capacity Building on Monitoring Activities by M&E Staff of LD Through the examination of how PLCs and DLCs conducted monitoring activities after the nationwide training, it was found that continuous guidance and instruction on the new monitoring system introduced by the Monitoring Manual were needed in order that PLCs and DLCs could implement the monitoring activities regularly and properly. M&E unit of LD supervises monitoring activities of literacy courses all over Afghanistan and 4 zone managers of the M&E unit conduct monitoring activities on site when they go to provinces and districts once in a quarter by LD’s budgets. If the zone managers would guide and instruct PLCs and DLCs directly on proper monitoring activities when they visit them, LD could improve monitoring activities continuously by its own budgets after the Project finishes. Therefore, it was decided to build capacities of the zone managers on the instructions for proper monitoring. Regarding the capacities of M&E unit staff on the instructions for proper monitoring, it was observed that they were not fully aware of the monitoring system introduced through the Project

51

and it was necessary to make them trained on the details of the monitoring activities (especially about the development of monitoring reports). Utilizing the training opportunity for M&E unit staff, it was also decided to conduct a workshop right after the training where the challenges of monitoring activities at the field level would be discussed by the participants from DLCs and PLCs whose monitoring reports were analyzed at TWG1 meeting so that M&E unit staff could understand the actual challenges at monitoring. The training for M&E unit staff was conducted on the 22nd April 2017 and the workshop was conducted on the 23rd and 24th April 2017. Both were conducted in Kabul. At the workshop, various challenges that PLCs and DLCs face in terms of monitoring activities were raised and discussed (the major challenges were found in the quality and submission of monthly monitoring reports as written above). These challenges were categorized after the workshop and the causes and solutions for these challenges were discussed at TWG1 meeting. It was found that many of the challenges occurred because PLC and DLC staff did not understand and implement the monitoring activities well. Therefore, TWG1 members decided to issue official letters to all PLCs and DLCs which requested them to conduct the monitoring activities appropriately (September 2017). In order that M&E unit staff could guide and instruct PLCs and DLCs better to improve their monitoring activities when they went to provinces and districts, checklists for checking the quality of monitoring activities at PLC and DLC levels were developed, using the discussion results of the workshop. The checklists were trialed in Panjshir and Kabul provinces in September 2017 and they were revised based on the trial results for finalization. The checklists included various check items to see whether the monitoring activities were implemented properly or not and instruction samples for each check item when it was found that the item was not properly done. A sample instruction is shown in the Box 2.

Since the development of the checklists, the M&E unit staff had made monitoring visits to local areas twice. In the both visits, it was observed that they utilized the developed checklists. It is expected that they will check the quality of monitoring activities of PLCs and DLCs with the checklists when they go to provinces and districts and instruct PLCs and DLCs what to do for

Box 2: Sample Instruction There is a check item at the DLC checklist asking “whether DLC monthly qualitative reports are made based on the contents of filled monitoring forms or not”. M&E unit staff will check “yes” or “no” for the item and write reasons for the selection. Then, in case of “no”, the M&E unit staff can refer to the sample instruction for the item which mentions that “DLC monthly qualitative reports should be developed based on the reality shown in filled monitoring forms and DLC managers should be instructed that they need to refer to the Monitoring Manual whenever they have unclear points”.

52

improvement on site at the same time, which shall make the monitoring system function properly in the future. 4.2.2 Activities of Output 2 (1) Issues and Challenges at the Beginning of the Project The baseline and the follow-up surveys were conducted to find out the situation of learners’ assessment in literacy courses. The result of survey showed that there used to be a test (written/oral) conducted for assessment, but it was abolished due to the understanding that a test may give negative psychological effect on adult learners. The rules and regulations said that a litearcy certificate was given to learners who achieved the set attendance rate and score of assessment. However, due to the unavaiability of standerdized learners’ assessment, literacy facilitators, based on their observation of learners’ performance, gave scores to each learner every month. The survey also found that many literacy facilitators made assessment for their learners by themselves. But the timing and contents of assessment varied by each literacy facilitator. Therefore, a decision that a literacy learner could graduate from the literacy course or need to take a course again was left to each literacy facilitator’s discretion. A literacy certificate was given to graduates. The literacy certificate was equivalent to the completion of the 3rd grade of formal education. Those who had the certificate could transfer to the 4th grade of formal education. In Balkh PLC, a literacy certificate was given to learners who had passed the evaluation by facilitators. Nangarhar PLC, however, only issues letters to children who completed literacy class and entered formal school. Based on the finding from the surveys, it was decided to establish the standerdized learners’ assessment system which included assessment tools, criteria of graduation and a system for the issuance of certificate. (2) Approaches by the Project In order to tackle with the found issues and challenges in learners’ assessment, it was decided to compile “Learners’ Assessment Tools” to assess learners’ learning achievement and “Assessment Guideline” to explain implementation methods of learners’ assessment as “Learner’s Assessment Tools and Guidelines”. As same as Output 1 for the literacy monitoring activity, the nationwide training regarding Learners’ Assessment Tools and Guidelines would be conducted to all DLCs and PLCs for the expantion of assessment system all over Afghanistan. The learners’ assessment was conducted by literacy facilitators. There were over 1,900 facilitators who taught at LD’s 9-month literacy courses according to the statistical data of 2010. Therefore, it was decided to implement the nationwide training for DLC staff and the trained DLC staff taught literacy facilitators the implementation methods of learners’ assessment. It was also

53

decided to distribute the assessment tools and guideline not only PLCs and DLCs but also literacy facilitators. In addition, the nationwide training was implemented for representatives from other organizations which worked for literacy education. Softcopy of Learners’ Assessment Tools and Guidelines was provided to them in order to make the developed learner’s assessment system robust. The training program was compiled as the Training Manual as well as the training on monitoring activity of literacy courses. Meanwhile, the revision of litearcy educaiton curriculum was underway with the support of UNESCO and UN-Habitat. It was expected that LD would need to revise the Learners’ Assessment Tools and Guidelines by themselves based on the revised curriculum in future. Therefore, Assessment TWG (TWG2) was established, and TWG2 members were involved in every single step for the development of Learners’ Assessment Tools and Guidelines in order to build the capacity of LD staff and increase their feeling of ownership on the tools and guidelines which they would develop. (3) Implemented Activities 1) Establishment of Assessment TWG (TWG2) TWG2 was established headed by the director of curriculum department which was respnsible for the development of learners’ assessment at LD. Considering the implementation of learners’ assessment in the field level, other departments’ staff in charge of monitoring activity of literacy course and facilitator training were also selected. The first TWG2 meeting was held in November 2010 and the meetings were held twice a week until the development of Learners’ Assessment Tools and Guidelines was completed. 2) Identification of Core Competencies to be Achieved by Literacy Learners and the Development

of Assessment Framework It was decided to identify core competencies to be achieved by literacy learners in order to develop the standerdized Learners’ Assessment Tools. For the identification of core competencies, TWG2 agreed to utilize the competencies of LAND Afghan2 curriculum which was introduced to liteacy courses as the national curriculum Duration of literacy course was 9 month. The first 6 month was for basic literacy while the last 3 month for post literacy. By the graduation of post literacy course, a graduate was entitled to the completion of the 3rd grade of formal education. The timing of implementation of learners’ assessment was agreed by TWG2 in the 1st project year and the assessment framework was drafted. Through several trials of the developed assessment tools and the experiences in the third country

2 Textbook which LD and ELA developed for literacy education in Afghanistan

54

trainings and dicussions, it was decided to conduct the pre-assessment before the literacy course: two assessments in the perid of basic literacy course (3 months and 6 months after the start of literacy course) and the last assessment at the end of post literacy course eventually. It was also agreed that the score of three assessments during the 9-month course would be reflected on a literacy certificate according to the rules and regulation of LD. These points were compiled in the revised assessment framework. 3) Development of Learners’ Assessment Tools and Guidelines All Learners’ Assessment Tools included questions of reading, writing, mathmatics and life skills based on the set competencies of LAND Afghan. Several trails were done for each learners’ assessment together with its guideline mainly in the pilot areas of the Project as Table 28 shows.

Table 28: Trial of Learners’ Assessment Tools Timing of trial Location Type of assessment

April 2011 Kabul Pre-assessmentl April 2011 Mazar-e-Sharif Pre-assessment September 2011 Jalalabad Pre-assessment June 2012 Kabul 1st assessment September to October 2012 Kabul 2nd assessment October 2012 Bamyan 1st and 2nd assessments November 2012 Mazar-e-Sharif 3rd assessment Source: LEAF2

According to the trial results, it turned out that the both literacy facilitators and learners were not familiar with the “learners’ assessment”. Some literacy facilitors told the correct answer to learners during the assessments while some others did not understand how to ask questions. More detailed instructions for literacy facilitators should have been written in the guideline. As for the questions in the assessment tools, they are discussed to include some illustration to increase the interest of learner and also the questions were revised to be more practical to encourage learners to utilize their literacy skills in their daily life such as calculation of money, reading store signs, writing invitations to Koran recitation meetings and a report on non-attendance at class. The progress of development of Learners’ Assessment Tools and Guidelines were shared with other TWGs through joint TWG meetings as well as all PLCs and other literacy stakeholders through output sharing workshops. It was also shared with DLC and PLC staff through the nationwide training and the literacy facilitators who cooperated for the trials of assessment tools. Feedback from various types and levels of stakeholders were obtained for the Learners’ Assessment Tools and Guidelines. Based on the feedback, TWG included “Frequently Asked

55

Questions” into the leaners’ assessment guidelines. Moreover, the assessment record sheet was improved so that facilitators would be able to record whether or not learners graduated the course, the information of which needs to be collected in the data collection form of Output 3.

Through a series of revisions, the Dari version of Learners’ Assessment Tools and Guidelines was approved by LD in November 2013 and the Pashto version was approved at the end of February 2014, and thus the indicator of Output 2 set in the PDM was successfully achieved. 4) Follow-up Survey on the use of Leaners’ Assessment Tools and Guidelines The follow-up survey on the use of developed manual and guidelines conducted from June to September 2014 had shown several challenges for the actual implementation of the learners’ assessment. For instance, the number of reading questions is less, or if a learner reads the reading questons aloud, other learners can hear the answer. In response to these challenges, TWG revised and finalized the Learners’ Assessment Tools and Guidelines and also added more drawings, so that the guidelines would be more reader-friendly. The finalized Learners’ Assessment Tools and Guidelines were printed out in December 2014 for distribution to all over the Afghanistan. The follow-up survey also revealed that facilitators did not understand clearly as to how to utilize the Learners’ Assessment Tools and Guidelines and how to conduct assessment of learners properly. Therefore, it was decided to add a session of “Assessment Training for Literacy Facilitators” to the agenda of the nationwide trainings and also to develop instruction video materials in order to develop facilitators’ capacity for the proper implementation of assessment in the 4th project year. (4) Issues and Challenges at the Beginning of the 4th Project Year As mentioned earlier, it was found that the literacy facilitators did not conduct the learners’ assessment according to the assessment guideline. Therefore, it was decided to revise the contents of the nationwide trainings and to develop assessment instruction videos in the 4th project year. In addition, it was discussed that the following challenges were remaining for the effective use of the Learners’ Assessment Tools. Assessment results needed to be utilized by literacy facilitators for promoting the learners’

learning in literacy course. Implementation of assessment needed to be monitored and improved continuously. With regard to these challenges, it was decided to cooperate with the members of TWG1 for literacy course monitoring and TWG4 for the capacity building of literacy facilitators to respond to the challenges.

56

(5) Implemented Activites in the 4th Project Year 1) Development of a supplimentary audio-visual material for learners’ assessment In order to build capacity of literacy facilitators on the proper implementation of learners’ assessment according to the assessment guideline, the supplementary audio-visual materials were developed. It was aimed that the materials promoted the understanding of literacy facilitators on the implementation process of learners’ assessment. Videos which explained how to deliver each assessment question to literacy learners and points of attention upon implementation of assessment were developed. By December 2015, audio-visual materials for all standardized assessments (pre-, the 1st, the 2nd and the 3rd assessments) in Dari and Pashto were developed. The training of facilitators on the pre-assessment, the 1st and 2nd assessment with the use of developed audio-visual materials were conducted in Balkh and Nangarhar provinces from June to October in 2015. As the table below shows, a total of 22 facilitators (including 17 female facilitators) in Balkh and 18 facilitators (including 8 female facilitators) in Nangarhar were trained. Prior to the facilitators’ training, Training of Trainers (ToT) was conducted for PLC staff, DLC managers and monitors by the TWG members and LEAF2 staff. All training was conducted in Mazar-e-Sharif city and Jalalabad city due to insecurity situation and lack of training facilities in districts.

Table 29: Training of Facilitators on Learners’ Assessment

Training Date Target city/district No. of participants

Total (female)

1st assessment

7 June Mazar-e-Sharif 8 8

8 June Balkh district 7 4

9 June Khulm district 7 5

Total (Balkh province) 22 17

2nd assessment 4 October

Mazar-e-Sharif 8 8

Balkh district 7 4

Khulm district 7 5

Total (Balkh province) 22 17

Pre-assessment 18 August

Jalalabad 8 8

Kama district 7 0

Rodat district 3 0

Total (Nangarhar province)

18 8

Source: LEAF2 There were comments from the literacy facilitators who participated in the training that they were able to understand more clearly through audio-visual materials as to how to conduct learners’ assessment, although they had been using the Learners’ Assessment Tools and Guidelines for the past one or two years. All the developed audio-visual materials were compiled into 3 DVDs for

57

the purpose of watching them on TV and computer, and 1 DVD for the use of mobile phones and smart phones. These 4 DVDs were made as one set and distributed to all PLCs and DLCs in the country at the end of December 2015. 2) Collecting and Analyzing the Leaners’ Assessment Results With the aim of understanding learning achievements at the completion of a 9-month literacy courses, the 3rd assessment results were collected and analyzed from literacy courses which run by the ELA as summarized below.

Table 30: Scope of Data Collection of Learners’ Assessment No. of province 6 provinces

(Badakhshan, Balkh, Bamyan, Herat, Kapisa, and Nangarhar)

No. of classes 24 classes (Male: 11, Female:13) No. of learners who took the assessment

461 learners

No. of learners whose assessment results were analyzed

395 learners（Male: 163, Female: 232）

Source: Report on analysis of the 3rd assessment results in the selected ELA courses

After conducting the assessment, collected data was input and analyzed. A report was made in November 2015. The average scores and correct answer percentages are shown below.

Table 31: Average Scores and Correct Answer Percentages (Total, by sex and areas) *CA%: Correct Answer Percentage

Source: Report on analysis of the 3rd assessment results in the selected ELA courses

Category No. of learner

Score Category

Writing(20 scores)

Math(10 scores)

Reading(10 scores) Total

Average 13.13 5.66 7.23 25.97CA% 65.6% 56.6% 72.3% 64.9%

Average 11.37 4.53 6.71 22.61CA% 56.9% 45.3% 67.1% 56.5%

Average 14.36 6.44 7.59 28.33CA% 71.8% 64.4% 75.9% 70.8%

Average 12.65 4.65 6.73 24.03CA% 63.2% 46.5% 67.3% 60.1%

Average 13.52 6.46 7.63 27.53CA% 67.6% 64.6% 76.3% 68.8%

Average 11.45 3.47 6.16 21.08CA% 57.3% 34.7% 61.6% 52.7%

Average 13.58 5.58 7.17 26.32CA% 67.9% 55.8% 71.7% 65.8%

Average 11.30 5.49 7.20 23.99CA% 56.5% 54.9% 72.0% 60.0%

Average 14.95 7.09 7.90 29.83CA% 74.7% 70.9% 79.0% 74.6%

City Female

District Male

District Female

395

163

232

176

219

City Male

Total

Male

Female

City

District

77

99

86

133

58

Moreover, there were following findings. The female learners gained higher scores than the male. The learners in the district gained higher scores than those in the city. The percentages of questions which were answered correctly in Writing and Reading were

over 60%, but that of Math was under 60%. Many leaners did not have enough calculation skill.

The average of the grand total of five classes was less than 20 scores (the percentage of correct answers was below 50%).

The average score of the age group of over 40 was lower than that of the younger generation. The result showed that there were certain number of learners who could not acquire the expected literacy skills at the completion of literacy course and teaching skills of literacy facilitator needed to be enhanced for the improvement of learners’ learning. It was decided that the capacity building of literacy facilitators on their teaching skills would be conducted through Facilitator Seminars which TWG4-FS worked for. 3) Monitoring on Implementation of Learners’ Assessment With the aim of achieving the following objectives, the telephone survey was conducted with all DLCs in Afghanistan. To find out whether or not DLCs have conducted training on learners’ assessments for LD

facilitators; To find out whether or not LD facilitators conducted learners’ assessments and submitted

assessment record sheets; To find out whether or not certificates are issued to graduates. Although efforts were made to interview 420 DLCs nationwide, valid data was collected from a total of 364 DLCs, since telephone coverage was not nationwide and there were some DLCs without ongoing literacy activities. As the graph below shows, 349 DLCs or 96% out of 364 DLCs mentioned that they “conducted training of facilitators on learners’ assessment for all 4 assessments”, 3 DLCs or 1% answered that they “conducted the training for some assessments”, and 12 DLCs or 3% mentioned that they “did not conduct the training at all”.

59

Source: LEAF2

Figure 2: Implementation Status of Literacy Facilitator Training on Learners’ Assessment A question about tools and activities in the facilitator training was asked to 352 DLCs, which answered that they conducted the facilitator training. Among them, all DLCs used the Learners’ Assessment Tools and Guidelines, 167 DLCs used supplementary audio-visual material/assessment video, and 311 DLCs conducted role playing activities. It was confirmed that the developed assessment tools and guidelines were widely used.

34996%

31%

123%

Litearcy facilitators training on leaners' assessment N=364

Yes, for all 4 assessments (Pre,1st, 2nd and 3rd assessments)

Yes, for some assessments

Not at all

60

Source: LEAF2

Figure 3: Activities Conducted in the Facilitator Training on Learners’ Assessment Forty seven percent of DLCs used the supplementary audio-visual material/assessment video developed by TWG2 in 2015. The main reasons for not using it were “unavailability of necessary equipment (such as computer)” (66.4%), “unavailability of electricity” (13.5%), and “other” (19.5%). One DLC did not answer to the question. From the experience in 2015, it had been heard from pilot DLCs and facilitators that they could understand better as to how to conduct learners’ assessments by watching the supplementary audio-visual material, but the interview revealed that while the supplementary audio-visual material was being utilized nationwide to some extent, there was a need to consider how to respond to areas where it could not be used. As shown in the figure below, 88% of DLCs out of 364 DLCs mentioned that all facilitators implemented all the 4 assessments, 11 % answered that some facilitators implemented 4 assessments, but others did not, and 1% said that there were no facilitators who implemented 4 assessments. The most common answer to explain a reason why some or all facilitators did not implement assessments was “lack of facilitators’ capacity (including education levels)”, which accounted for 93%, followed by “leaving job of facilitators” and “insecurity”.

352

167

311

00

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Assessment Toolsand Guideline

Assessment Video Role Play Other

Tools and Activities for the Facilitator Training N=352

61

Source: LEAF2

Figure 4: Implementation Status of 4 Assessments As for submission of record sheets of assessments results to DLCs from facilitators at the completion of a 9-month literacy course, 92% of DLCs answered that all facilitators submitted the record sheets, 6% answered that some of the facilitators did so, and 2% said that there were no facilitators who submitted record sheets. The major reasons why only some facilitators submitted record sheets or there was no facilitator who submitted record sheets were “distance from districts”.

Source: LEAF2

Figure 5: Submission Status of Assessment Record Sheets

31988%

4211%

31%

Implementation Status of 4 AssessmentsN=364

All facilitatorsimplemented 4assessments

Some facilitatorsimplemented 4assessments but someothers are not

No facilitatorimplemented 4assessments

33692%

206%

82%

Submission Status of Assessment Record SheetsN=364

All facilitators submitted.

Some facilitators submitted.

No facilitator submitted.

62

There are 292 DLCs (80%) answered that they issued certificates to graduated learners. The main reasons for not issuing certificates were “unavailability of certificates”, which accounted for 80.5%, followed by “other” (there were no graduates, DLCs sent certificates to PLCs for their signatures and currently waiting for their return, and learners did not want to receive certificates equivalent to grade three of formal school), which accounted for 13.9%, unavailability of a learner’s ID number to be written in certificate and insecurity.

Source: LEAF2

Figure 6: Issuance Status of Literacy Certificate The interview results showed that the Learners’ Assessment Tools and Guidelines were used nationwide and the learners’ assessments were conducted. 4) Ensuring Quality Implementation of Learners’ Assessment Although the implementation of both facilitator training and the learners’ assessment were confirmed from the telephone interview, measures for ensuring sustainability of these activities were discussed. As for the quality of implementation of learners’ assessment by literacy facilitators, TWG2 members and DLC monitors observed the implementation of learners’ assessments by facilitators in a total of 15 literacy classes in some areas. The observations were made with the use of checklist developed with the support of the Project. Most of the facilitators in the observed classes were able to implement assessments appropriately. However, the number of observations was not enough to recognize the situation of other areas. Therefore, it was discussed to develop a facilitator training system by which DLCs became able to provide an appropriate training to literacy facilitators.

Regarding DLCs’ supervision on the implementation of the assessment, each DLC supervised the implementation of the assessment by their own way without any decided measures. Therefore, the Project revised the observation checklist for the use of DLC’s supervision on the

29280%

7220%

Issuance Status of Literacy CertificateN=364

Yes No

63

implementation of learners’ assessment and LD distributed the revised checklist to all DLCs with the official letter which requested DLCs to use the checklist when DLCs visited literacy classes. Besides, TWG2 requested zone managers of the M&E unit to confirm the utilization of the checklist with DLC staff and instruct them how to use the checklist when they made a business trip for the monitoring of literacy activities in local areas in order to provide the continuous supervision from LD and PLCs on the implementation of the assessment by DLCs. For the purpose of achieving the above goal, the Project conducted the assessment training for the zone managers. By the end of the project period, it was observed that those trained M&E unit staff confirmed the DLC’s usage of the checklist in their business trips. In order that literacy facilitators conduct quality learners’ assessment, it was discussed to include the assessment training to implement the learners’ assessment and to utilize the assessment result for teaching in a Facilitator Seminar. The training content was developed by both TWG2 and TWG4-FS. It was decided that the Teacher Training Unit of LD would take responsibility for the implementation of the training. Also, TWG2 prepared the comparison list of a question and the competency for all questions asked for 4 assessments for the assessment training in a Facilitator Seminar. The table below is an example comparison list of calculation questions and the competencies for the 1st assessment.

Table 32: The Comparison List of Calculation Questions and the Competency

Source: LEAF2

Based on the comparison list, facilitators could understand that each question assessed whether learners had acquired required competency or not. The detail of assessment training in a

64

Facilitator Seminar is described in “4.2.5. Implemented Activities for Output 4 (Technical Support) (from the 4th project year)”. The training contents was included in the revised “Teaching and Observation Guideline” which was distributed to all DLC. Regarding the learners’ assessment, M&E unit of Program Directorate would take the responsibility for the supervision on the implementation of learners’ assessment while Teacher Training Unit for the capacity building of literacy facilitators on the learners’ assessment through the Facilitator Seminar. The responsibilities which TWG2 (mainly consisted of Curriculum Directorate staffs) had were taken over to other units inside of LD. Through the project activities, the necessary coordination among directorates of LD was facilitated and the system to ensure the implementation and quality learners’ assessment was established. 4.2.3 Activities of Output 3 Issues, countermeasures and outcomes about data collection and reporting are explained below. (1) Issues and Challenges at the Beginning of the Project In the beginning of the 1st year, 4 issues about data collection and reporting were confirmed. 1) Inaccurate Content of Statistics Report A statistics report was created in 2007 during the Project of LEAF1. However, in 2008 and 2009, only an A4 size data document was created and the report was not created. A director of LD planning unit explained the reason that the staff engaging in LEAF1 were transferred and there is a lack of staff who create the report. According to the data in 2009, 2 female facilitators and 13,437 female learners (more than 6,700 female learners per facilitator) in a PLC were reported while there were 190 male facilitators for 22,714 male learners in another PLC, which means 119 male leaners study in a male class. One of the reason could be found that when the data collected from the PLC, LD did not check and confirm the data, and opened it as the official data even the data contained inaccurate figures. The Deputy Minister at the time mentioned that some people said that LD’s report was inaccurate. Therefore, the accuracy of the data was regarded as an issue.

2) Incorrect Entry Method to the Data Collection Form LEAF1 created “Form and Guideline in 2008” as a data collection form. When entering this form, there were some points which puzzled the person who filled in the form. Also, as the interpretation was different from person to person, there was a possibility that incorrect data was filled in. In order to share the issue with TWG3, a data collection workshop was held. In the workshop, the participants used the data of quarterly learner’s attendance. They commented that there were some unclear points to fill in the data. In fact, the participants filled in different data. As a result of the workshop, it was confirmed that the PLC staff filled the wrong numbers, and due to this wrong data entry, the incorrect data were accumulated to LD. TWG3 discussed this issue in the workshop, and all participants including the director of the Planning unit recognized the necessity to improve the data collection form.

65

3) Complicated Data Entry Method LD created two types of data collection sheets in 2008 and 2009.

Province-based data collection sheet Organization-based data collection sheet

These sheets had been developed by LD. Since TWG3 members requested to continue to take this data collection method, it was decided that the statistics report be created by means of the same methods. However, there was a high possibility of miss-data entry and miss-calculation because of the complicated method: DLC data were entered into a DLC level data sheet, the DLC data was calculated by hand, and the calculated result was entered into a PLC level data sheets. If the data submitted by PLC was incorrect, hand calculation and revisions were necessary again. The Japanese experts decided to enter the PLC data directly into an Excel file for calculation. The Japanese experts explained this change with TWG3 members and they agreed.

4）Integration with NFE-MIS The ELA had developed a data base system using Microsoft Access, named Non-Formal Education Management Information System (NFE-MIS). The ELA conducted a pilot test about NFE-MIS system in Bamyan and understood the difficulty of its operation. There were two reasons for difficulty: a lack of knowledge and experience about the system management by PLCs/DLCs and insufficient infrastructure such as electricity. About the NFE-MIS system, LD expected to utilize this data entry system through the Internet rather than manual data entry by LD staff, but distribution of computers and provision of the Internet were remained as issues. On the other hand, through the survey on NFE-MIS system under development, some items needed to be added into the NFE-MIS data collection form in order to keep compatibility with a LD data collection form. This point was informed of the ELA staff in charge and he was supportive to improve. With the PLC and DLC staff’s knowledge of and experience in computers, they could enter the data into the NFE-MIS and the data can also be applied to the statistics report. Therefore, the Project recognized the advantage of the integration of existing data entry into the NFE-MIS, and the TWG3 members agreed this integration. With the possibility of the integration, the Project continued to collect the data. (2) Approaches by the Project Regarding the above issues, the Project took the approaches below. 1) Regular Publication of Statistics Report Two objectives of “Regular Publication of Statistics Report” were approved by a TWG3 meeting: A) annually publish the statistics report and distribute them to related organizations to widely

66

disseminate the presence of the report and B) change the mindset of LD/PLC/DLC staff to regard the activities for the statistics report as their routine work. In order to achieve these objectives, TWG3 focused on ensuring the continuity of issuance of the annual report, even though the report contained incorrect data. Although the submission rate and accuracy of the data of some PLC were needed to improve, the Project paced the most importance on collecting data from all PLCs aiming to increase the data submission rate. 2) Revision of the Data Collection Form As mentioned above, since it was found in the TWG3 meeting that each person filled in incorrect data because of the interpretations varied from person to person, the data collection form was decided to be revised. In addition to the revision of the form, a data collection guideline was created, which showed the ways to fill in the form.

3) Improvement of the Data Collection Method For the purpose of preventing mistakes caused by human error, TWG3 improved the complicated data entry method to be simpler and easier. In order to promote the TWG3 members’ understanding about this change, Japanese experts initiated training on the Excel for LD staff.

4) Coordination to Adopt NFE-MIS LD requested to develop a system for data collection, and the ELA was supportive to revise NFE-MIS data collection form. Therefore, the Project was positive to introduce NFE-MIS and decided to seek the timing of the system change in accordance with the situation of the test operation conducted in the pilot areas. It was also decided that, until the system change, TWG3 continued to create the statistics report by paper-based data collection. (3) Project Activity (from the 1st year to the 3rd year) Regarding the policies above, the Project conducted 4 activities below from the 1st to the 3rd year. 1) Statistics Report LEAF1 created a statistics report of 58 pages. For the continuity of issuing the annual report, TWG3 decided to reduce its page, and the statistics report for 2010 was created by 16 pages. Deputy Minister and a JICA survey of management and instruction requested to add analysis and suggestion into the statistics report, and the report had been improved including the request. As a result, the statistics report was created for three years continuously from 2010 to 2012. From 2014 at the timing to create the statistics report for 2013, the Japanese experts’ trip to Afghanistan was limited due to security reasons. Therefore, LD itself created the statistics report for 2013 with only one page. It meant that the content of the report was not maintained the same level as the reports of the last three years. Sustained continuity to issue the report became an issue.

67

2) Data Collection Form A Planning Unit director had an initiative to revise a data collection form. Since he engaged in the data collection form revision in LEAF1, he proposed the easy way to enter data without mistakes, and all TWG3 members approved it. TWG3 created “Data Collection Guideline” based on the revision content. Since the Project took into consideration to shift the system to NFE-MIS, the guideline included not only paper-based form but also NFE-MIS data collection form. In order to increase submission rate of the data collection form, TWG3 created a list of all PLCs, and telephoned to urge PLCs who had not submit the data to submit. As a result, the data submission rate had increased.

3) Data Collection Method Initially, the Japanese experts introduced the data collection method using Pivot Table of the Excel, however the person in charge of the data entry did not understand its effectiveness and this propose was not adopted. Therefore, the Japanese experts conducted training on Excel for the data entry staff as the first step, intending to improve the data collection method. However, the data entry staff took a long leave. The Project conducted the Excel training for the short-term contract staff as a substitute, but this staff left LD soon. Therefore, the continuous support was discontinued. There was no choice but to wait for the data entry staff’s return, and the improvement of data collection method suspended.

4) Integration with NFE-MIS A) System Development by ELA The ELA deployed the staff able to manage programming, and it was decided that the system based on the Microsoft Access was shifted to web application using ASP.NET3. Considering the data entry through the Internet in future, this system was better, and the planning unit director and ELA programming staff proceeded to develop the web base NFE-MIS.

B) Load of Data Entry For the data entry into the NFE-MIS, LD enters the data of each literacy class written on a paper form. Since DLCs and PLCs did not enter the data of the literacy classes, LD entered all data. Although LD and the Project were positive to utilize NFE-MIS, the concern remained whether LD prepared enough staff for the data entry. At the timing when NFE-MIS started its operation, the Deputy Minister of LD at the time prepared enough number of staff, more than 10 staff, and they tried to enter all the data. However, they could enter only half of the data. As a result, LD realized the feasibility of the operation by NFE-MIS, and it became an opportunity for LD to consider suitably modified operation method. 3 Web application frame work developed and provided by Microsoft. It develops and manages the active web site, web application and XML web service. ASP.NET is a system to shift Active Server Pages to .NET.

68

(4) Situation and Issues at the Beginning of the 4th Year in 2015 Situation and issues at the beginning of the 4th year in March 2015 are mentioned below. 1) Statistics report Due to the travel restriction for the Japanese experts, the Project support was limited to LD and the statistics report 2013 was not created. However, the data collection work had continued, and the data table was created on an A4 size paper. Since the Deputy Minister requested to add analysis in the statistics report, TWG prepared the staff for analysis work. Based on the limited number of the staff and their capacity, TWG3 decided to reduce their report making task, and to create statistics reports reflecting the request by the Deputy Minister. Also, it was regulated to urge PLCs who did not submit the data to submit the data by making a phone call, aiming to increase the submission rate.

2) Data Collection Form By the 2nd year, the revision of paper-based data collection form and creation of “Data Collection Guideline” were completed. Regarding the data collection, the TWG3 members kept collecting the data initiating improvement of the data collection items.

3) Data Collection Method The staff who took a long leave came back to office, and she kept using her own complicated data entry method instead of the method proposed by the Project. Also, the planning unit director did not have intention to improve the method. Therefore, the Japanese experts and TWG3 members needed to discuss the effective approaches through the meeting in India.

4) Integration with NFE-MIS Since the Deputy Minister who was positive about the introduction of NFE-MIS left LD, enough number of staff for data entry could not be prepared, and the operation of NFE-MIS became difficult. Based on the reduction of LD’s data entry work, the ELA had a plan to select 10 PLCs who had good infrastructure of electricity and the Internet, and to distribute computers for the PLCs to enter data. The Project decided to observe LD’s ways to introduce NFE-MIS, their plan and timing of the system transition to NFE-MIS. (5) Activity in the 4th year Activities planned by the Project at the beginning of the 4th year are mentioned below. 1) Statistics report Due to the travel restriction of the Japanese experts, the statistics report for 2013 was not created. However, the Project did not change the policy to create the statistics report every year and started the works to create the statistics report for 2014, 2015 and 2016. With reflecting the improvement points suggested by LD and TWG3 meetings, the statistics reports for three years were created.

69

2) Data Collection Form As mentioned above, the data form revision and the guideline creation were completed. The submission rate by PLCs increased year by year and it reached 100% in 2015 and 2016. Since the statistics report was created in 2014 and LD kept urging PLCs who did not submit the data, LD succeed to make PLCs understand that the data submission is an obligation. 3) Data Collection Method The staff who had knowledge about the Excel was deployed in LD from the 4th year. The Japanese experts transferred the skill of the Excel Pivot Table and instructed necessary operations to collect data. As a result, this staff understood the effectiveness of the Pivot Table well and could improve the Excel file by himself. In addition, he explained the necessary operations to the data entry staff and she understood the point of its effectiveness. As a result, instead of the manual calculation of the paper-based data, data collection method proposed by the Project has been utilized. By using this method, revision of data submitted by PLCs becomes easy to revise. 4) Utilization of NFE-MIS In order to improve the NFE-MIS, the Project checked the program in detail and created “NFE-MIS Issue Report” to submit to LD. The ELA hired a new staff in charge of the program, and ASP.NET based system was shifted to ASP.NET MVC5 based system, which allowed data entry by smart phone. As a result of discussion, LD decided to enter learners’ name, and the data entry work increased more. Although the data entry work increased, staff for the data entry was not prepared enough. It became unclear when all data entry would be finished. The ELA planned to distribute computers to PLCs with good electric power condition and to conduct data entry training for the PLCs, but the feasibility was uncertain. In addition, regarding NFE-MIS works by the ELA, they tend to improve the system not for LD’s request but for the ELA’s demand. This ELA’s attitude becomes a concern against LD’s NFE-MIS operation. Regarding the NFE-MIS, the paper-based data collection was decided to continue until the system transition. 4.2.4 Activities of Output 4 (Technical support) until the 3rd Project Year Problems, countermeasures and outputs about technical support during the 1st to the 3rd year are explained. (1) Problems about Technical Support before the Project Start Problems about technical support were extracted from a Baseline Survey and a monitoring survey conducted in August and October 2010.

Training to develop facilitator’s capacity was not provided. Technical support, which meets facilitator’s needs was not provided. Monitoring of classes carried out by PLCs/DLCs on daily basis was only consists of the

check of implementation of the lessons and attendance of the students of the class.

70

Quality of the lessons and their feedback were not checked or conducted at all. (the monitoring had not contributed to the improvement of facilitator’s teaching skills).

(2) Countermeasures about Technical Support Regarding the problems above, the Project had developed its technical support approaches based on the discussion with LD, PLC and DLC staff from the 1st year. Since the monitoring system had not been built yet in the 1st year and the first half of the 2nd year, TWG was organized by the staff of PLCs and DLCs from the pilot provinces, Nangarhar province and Balkh province, and discussed the technical support to solve the issues of the literacy class. Problems and countermeasures extracted from the discussion are as follows.

Table 33: Problems and Countermeasures Problems Countermeasures Timing

Lack of supplemental teaching material

Development of supplemental teaching materials (Alphabet card, a picture‐story show, etc.) Implementation of training of the way to create and use the

supplemental teaching materials

1st year

Lack of recognition and interest in literacy

Development of a community awareness raising campaign tool (awareness raising poster) and its implementation Implementation of TV campaign to spread importance of the

literacy

1st year 2nd year

Source: LEAF2

The development and implementation of the countermeasures were conducted regularly and continuously by the project national staff arranged in each prefecture, and the technical support had been formed in accordance with the needs of facilitators and learners. The details of the TV campaign conducted in the 2nd year are as follows.

Table 34: List of Created TV Spot for Campaign

Prefecture Target Theme of TV spot Broadcasting term Num. of

broadcasting

Balkh Adult men

Can’t read wedding invitation letter.

November 8, 2012 - February 13, 2013

30

Adult women

Can’t measure a size during sewing work.

November 8, 2012 - February 13, 2013

30

Nangarhar Adult men

Can’t register a name and a number in a mobile phone.

August 16 - October 11, 2012

48

Adult women

Mistake a medicine for spice October 3 – November 12, 2012

48

Source: LEAF2

71

After finishing all broadcasting programs in Nangarhar province, the impact survey was conducted in November 2012, which targeted PLC/DLC staff, facilitators and learners. As a result, although some learners who watched the TV spots were confirmed, due to a lack of electricity in district areas, it was suggested that using the radio was more effective. On the other hand, also in the Balkh prefecture, a simple questionnaire survey about TV campaign was conducted in the End-line Survey. Among the learners with electricity supply and access to television, many watched the TV spots. Some the effects turned out that the TV spots became an opportunity to go to a literacy classroom, it became the motivation to continue learning, and the inquiry to PLCs or DLCs about literacy class increased. Most of the TV spot watchers regarded this kind of campaign as important, and it was suggested that TV stations covering wide areas were suggested to broadcast more TV spots. As mentioned above, the effect of TV campaign was somehow confirmed, and more effective effects were expected by means of more frequent TV spots running by television stations covering larger area. In the second half of the 2nd year, by using the monthly monitoring report developed by the Project in December 2012, monitoring results of the pilot prefectures were able to be collected, and the following problems were confirmed. Problems

Facilitators did not prepare and use a lesson plan. Facilitators did not use various kinds of teaching methods to promote learners’

participation and taught in a one-sided manner. Facilitators did not relate teaching contents to learners’ daily life.

In order to solve the above issues, the TWG to develop technical support was newly organized by Teacher Training Unit staff and monitoring TWG members. The countermeasures were mainly implemented in the 3rd year, but Japanese experts were restricted to trip to Afghanistan from the middle of the 3rd year. Therefore, the improvement of facilitator’s teaching methods and the development of the technical support tool based on the problems extracted and analyzed from a monitoring result were discussed and confirmed the contents of the tasks to implement in Afghanistan, firstly with Japanese experts and the project national staff in India. Then the project national staff held the technical support TWG meeting and shared the contents confirmed in India. Implemented countermeasures are as follows.

72

Countermeasures ① A lesson plan guideline was created and 2-day training for PLC master trainers and DLC

facilitators in pilot areas were conducted.

Table 35: Overview of Lesson Plan Training Timing (Training period) February 2013 (Each training for 2 days)

Place (Implementation number)

Mazar-e-Sharif city (1 time), Jalalabad city (1 time)

Target PLC master trainer (2 master trainers in each training), Facilitator (20 facilitators in each training) (Total 44 persons)

Objective Through lectures and group work about the lesson plan guideline, the quality of a facilitator’s lesson plan improved.

Content Lectures and group work about the way to create a lesson plan and to utilize it.

Output Understanding of a lesson plan by the participants was promoted. The necessity of teaching based on a lesson plan was understood.

Source: LEAF2

② A textbook was created about three teaching methods often utilized in a literacy class;

question and answer, group work and brainstorming. Also, the related training was conducted.

Table 36: Overview of Facilitator’s Teaching Method Training Timing (Training period) February 2014 (Each training for 2 days)


Mazar-e-Sharif city (1 time), Jalalabad city (2 times)

Target DLC monitor, facilitator, etc. 30 persons attended in each training (Total 90 persons)

Objective Through lectures and group work about three teaching methods, it aims to improve facilitator’s teaching skills.

Content Lectures and group work about three teaching methods: question and answer, group work and brainstorming.

Output The participants understood three teaching methods and supplemental teaching materials and created model lesson plans and supplemental teaching materials. The created lesson plans and supplemental teaching materials were

introduced as a sample of technical support activities in “Teaching Method Guideline for Literacy Facilitators” (published in December 2014).

Source: LEAF2

73

In addition to the above trainings, for the purpose that facilitators utilize the training output in their literacy classes, a regular monitoring on a literacy class by DLC monitors and suggestions to improve facilitator’s teaching skills based on the observation results are necessary. However, according to the Baseline Survey result and collected monitoring forms, it became clear that most of the DLC monitors did not give suggestions during the class observation. Therefore, the activities on adequate class monitoring, suggestions to improve facilitator’s teaching and learner-centered teaching methods targeting LD, PLC and DLC staff in pilot areas from April 2014. The Training of Trainer (ToT) regarding the class monitoring and the learner-centered teaching was conducted by Japanese experts in Pakistan in April 2014, and technical support training based on the ToT was conducted in Afghanistan.

Table 37: Overview of Technical Support Training

Timing (Training period)

(1) Technical support training for LD and PLC staff July, November and December 2014 (Each training for 3 days)

(2) Technical support training for DLC staff May, September and October 2015 (Each training for 2 days)


(1) LD office in Kabul city (3 times) (2) Mazar-e-Sharif city (2 time), Jalalabad city (2 times)

Target (1) LD staff, PLC staff of Kabul city, Balkh province and Nangarhar province, etc. 30 persons attended in each training.

(2) DLC staff and facilitator. 20 persons attended in each training.

Objective To improve DLC staff’s ways to monitor literacy class and to provide suggestions to improve facilitator’s teaching methods.

Content Lectures and practices about 5 viewpoints to evaluate facilitator’s teaching methods (teaching and learning strategies/ skills, facilitator behaviors and communication skills, learner’s participation and interaction among leaners, confirmation of learner’s understanding, and logistics such as lesson plans, teaching materials and aids) and on the way to improve their teaching.

Output The quality of suggestions from the participants to facilitators were improved.

Lecture contents and effective suggestions from the participants were put in “Teaching and Observation Guideline” published in November 2015.

Source: LEAF2

In the technical support training, the participants understood the important teaching theories in literacy education such as the connection of “letter-sound-object”, mechanism of memory, and 5 viewpoints to evaluate facilitator’s teaching methods. The PLC staff who attended in LD office training served as a lecturer in the training for DLC staff. In addition, regarding the practice to provide suggestions to facilitators, in the beginning of the training, all suggestions proposed by

74

the participants were categorized as level 1, which included only pointing out without any countermeasure, or obscure or impractical measures for improvement. However, in the end, all suggestions improved to be level 2 or level 3, which included structural problems, measures and expected results. For the purpose of expanding the training content nationwide, “Teaching and Observation Guideline” including summary of the training was developed and distributed to all PLCs and DLCs.

Table 38: Overview of Teaching and Observation Guideline Year of Publication November 2015

Content - Overview of teaching methods in literacy education - Five viewpoints to evaluate facilitator’s teaching methods - Effective suggestions proposed by the participants in the technical

support training

Source: LEAF2

4.2.5 Activities of Output 4 (Technical support) from the 4th project year (1) Improvement on Facilitator Seminar As mentioned above, development of facilitator’s capacity is essential to improve the quality of literacy education. The Project conducted the capacity building of DLC staff in charge of technical support on a daily basis. However, there is no regular training to develop facilitator’s capacity. The Project decided to improve the content of a Facilitator Seminar (FS), which is regulated to conduct twice in a month by the LD and aimed to develop facilitator’s teaching skills in the pilot DLCs. The Project proposed the contents of the FS, which includes discussion on the issues of literacy courses and their solutions, improvement of lesson plans and Technical and Observation Guideline learning, shown as the figure below and TWG approved the contents.

75

Source: LEAF2

Figure 77: Activity of Model Facilitator Seminar TWG members and project national staff monitor the FS regularly and repot the observation results to Japanese experts. The implemented FS improvement activity is as below.

Table 39: Overview of Facilitator Seminar Improvement Activity Timing May 2016 - December 2017

Target DLC Kabul city (Area13), Kabul Province (Mirbacha Kot), Balkh Province (Mazar-e-sharif) and Nangarhar Province (Kama)

Target person DLC staff, facilitator

Objective Facilitator Seminar (FS) is regulated to be conducted once or twice a month, and a model FS is constructed to improve facilitator’s teaching skills.

1) Discussion on the issues of literacy courses and their solutions

Regarding the issues of literacy courses, DLC monitors and facilitators discuss and find the solutions

2) Improvement of lesson plans

1. DLC monitors and facilitators improve the lesson plans of language and math

2. DLC monitors report the result of class observation

3) TOG learning/Three activities (Alternative)

1. TOG learning 2. Teaching practice of improved lesson plan 3. Model lesson by DLC monitor or facilitator 4. Study the difficult topics of lesson

4) Assessment training

DLC monitors conduct the assessment training before and after the assessment (Pre, 1st, 2nd and 3rd)

Class observation based on the improved lesson plan

76

Content Four activities set as a content of a model FS are implemented: (1) discussion on the issues of literacy courses and their solutions, (2) improvement of lesson plans, (3) Technical and Observation Guideline learning and (4) assessment training. Also, good practices and lessons of each activity are collected.

Output Facilitator’s self-evaluation about their teaching skills was improved compared with the beginning of the activity. Also, project national staff’s evaluation on facilitator’s teaching skills was improved.

The content of the model FS, issues and solutions of literacy course, and the activity of the improvement of lesson plans are put into “Revised Teaching and Observation Guideline” published in November 2017.

Source: LEAF2

(2) Revision of Teaching and Observation Guideline In order to spread the model FS nationwide and share good practices and lessons of each activity, “Teaching and Observation Guideline” was revised and “Revised Teaching and Observation Guideline” was created. In the revised guideline, 20 exercise questions created by TWG members were included.

Table 40: Content of Revised Teaching and Observation Guideline

Source: LEAF2

(3) Expansion Activity of the Regular Facilitator Seminar Revised Teaching and Observation Guideline (TOG) was distributed to all PLCs and DLCs in February 2018 to expand the model FS to all DLCs along with the Revised TOG. However, the distribution of the guideline does not guarantee the implementation of FS based on the revised TOG. Therefore, TWG members developed the sample annual plan and conducted the training on planning and implementation of FS in Herat, Kabul and Nangarhar provinces to ensure the implementation of FS. After the training, it was confirmed that the trained DLCs conducted FS based on the developed annual plan. Besides, the training for M&E staff on the monitoring of FS was conducted so that M&E staff can monitor and support the implementation of FS when they visit DLCs at the routine monitoring activities.

Year of Publication November 2017

Content In addition to the content of “Teaching and Observation Guideline”, the following contents are included: problems and solution of literacy class management discussed in FS, model lesson plans, 20 exercise questions (7 reading questions, 7 writing questions (3 questions duplicated of reading and writing questions), and 9 math questions (9 number and calculation questions, and 3 quality and quantity questions) and lesson plans relating to the exercise questions.

77

4.2.6 Activities of Output 4 (Community Participation Activity） (1) Background of Community Participation Activity and Awareness Raising Activity on Literacy Education through Media LD has been struggling for decades to achieve its goal and there have been many successes. However, there are still many challenges in implementing the program. Some of the main challenges are:

• Lack of professional facilitators • Lack of community/people’s awareness about literacy programs and importance of

literacy in their lives • Lack of media and awareness campaign • Lack of support from the government, NGOs and community • Rules and regulations of LD are not flexible enough to meet the needs of the

community, learners and facilitators • Lack of budget • Lack of equipment, vehicles and offices

As a result, it becomes very difficult for some of the current literacy courses to attract literacy learners. Basically, literacy learners are adults, who have their own jobs and their own interests, and therefore, literacy courses should be flexible and meet learners’ needs. However, since the capacity of LD is limited, LD has not been able to provide flexible literacy education so far. In order to overcome this challenge, LD decided to take some initiatives to involve the community more in literacy education process so that the community people would have the sense of ownership of the literacy activities and support them in various ways. At the same time, to promote the awareness of the importance of literacy education which had been pointed out by inside and outside of LD, with considering the activity conducted in 2012, it was decided to implement awareness-raising activity through media. (2) Implementation of Awareness-Raising Activity on Literacy Education Through Media With the support of the Project, TWG consisting of LD and Radio and Television in Afghanistan (RTA) was established. The TWG developed TV and Radio programs for awareness raising on literacy education between March and July 2015. Upon the development of these TV and Radio programs, trainings by Japanese experts were conducted 4 times in total. The list of the training is shown in Table 41.

78

Table 41: List of Awareness-Raising Activity Training No. Timing Place Participants Training contents

1 May 2015 India (Delhi)

3 persons from LD, 8 persons from RTA

Setting up the target of the TV and radio program and its theme

2 June 2015 Japan (Tokyo)

8 persons from RTA Lectures, site visits and workshops on technical aspect of development of audiovisual materials

3 July 2015 India (Delhi)


Review and final revision of programs and their scripts which were developed in Afghanistan

4 October 2015 India (Delhi)


Analysis and sharing of response from audience and listeners after broadcasting the programs; Discussion on effective broadcasting of programs

Source: LEAF2

From the first to the third training, Japanese experts instructed the technical points on TV and radio programs development and 4 TV programs (by gender, Dari and Pashto, approximately 3 minutes each) and 2 radio programs (the same scripts, Dari and Pashto, approximately 90 seconds each) were developed and broadcasted in August 2015. At the end of each program, LD’s contact numbers were informed so that LD can make records of how the information reached to illiterates. These programs were broadcasted by ERTV, RTA and Hewad Private TV. As of January 2018, they are still on the air at ERTV (TV programs) and Radio Afghanistan (radio programs), and LD keeps responding to telephone calls from the audience. The number of telephone calls from the audience is approximately 20-25 per month on average and the largest content of telephone calls is the request for establishing literacy courses including the request for hiring the caller as a facilitator. Besides, LD requested TV stations to allocate some time in their current programs to LD so that LD staff can explain the importance of literacy education and activities of LD. According to the request, RTA and Maiwand Private TV set up some time for LD in their programs. (3) Survey on Present Situations and Needs of Adult Literacy in Selected Communities in Afghanistan (Community Needs Survey) In order to obtain support for literacy education from communities, it is necessary to obtain information on community needs and how to get their support. Therefore, it was decided to conduct ‘Survey on Present Situations and Needs of Adult Literacy in Selected Communities in Afghanistan’ (hereinafter Community Needs Survey). Community survey TWG was formulated in LD in February 2015, then the Community Needs Survey by semi-structured interviews using questionnaires was conducted between July and August 2015. It took 11 months from March 2015 to January 2016 to prepare the survey, compile results, analyze the data using SWOT analysis and develop strategies. Target areas were 2 villages and 1 area, that is, Kakal Bajawri village, Kama

79

district in Nangarhar province, Area 7, Mazar-e-Sharif city in Balkh province and Now Abad village, Khulm district in Balkh province. Target interviewees in each target area were 17 relevant people and organizations, which are shown in Table 42. The total number of interviews was 80. The breakdown of interviews is shown in Table 43. Also, the list of TWG members and survey schedule are shown in Table 44 and Figure 8.

Table 42: List of Target Interviewees and Interview Methods No. Target Interviewees Interview Methods

1 PLC Group Interview

2 DLC Group Interview

3 Facilitators Group Interview and Individual Interview

4 PED Group Interview

5 DED Group Interview

6 School Teachers Group Interview

7 Literacy Learners Individual Interview

8 Family of Literacy Learners Individual Interview

9 Graduated Literacy Learners Individual Interview

10 Illiterate People Individual Interview

11 Family of Illiterate People Individual Interview

12 District Development Assembly (DDA) Group Interview

13 Community Development Council (CDC) Group Interview

14 Malik/ Wakil Gozar Individual Interview

15 Mullah Imam Individual Interview

16 Local Business People Individual Interview

17 NGO Individual Interview

Source: LEAF2

80

Table 43: Number of Interviews in Each Target Village and Area Balkh Nangarhar

Total Target Interviewees

Provincial level

Mazar-e-Sharif City

Khulm District Provincial level

Kama District

Male Female Male Female Male Female

PLC 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2

DLC 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 3

Facilitator (Group)

0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 3

Facilitator (Individual)

0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2

PED 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2

DED 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 3

School teacher (Group)

0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 2

Learner 0 0 3 0 4 0 0 0 7

Family of learner

0 0 3 1 3 0 0 0 7

Graduate 0 0 4 0 2 0 0 0 6

Illiterate 0 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 12

Family of illiterate

0 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 12

DDA 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 2

CDC 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 2

Malik/Wakil Gozar

0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 3

Mullah Imam 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 3

Local business people

0 2 0 2 0 0 1 0 5

NGOs 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4

TOTAL 4 9 18 13 15 4 12 5 80

Source: LEAF2

81

Table 44: List of Community Survey TWG members No. Name Position

1 Mr. Allah Baz Jam Program Director

2 Ms. Rahima Asmar Head of M&E Unit

3 Ms. Shahla Hafize Developing Project Officer

4 Mr. Hidayatullah Hashimy Distance Learning Manager

5 Mr. Ehsanullah Mosawi Solidarity & Coordination Manager

6 Mr. Fazil Elahi M&E Manager

7 Mr. Mujtaba Paikar Deputy Minister Secretariat

8 Mr. Rahmanullah Rahimy Textbook Editing Department Manager

Source: LEAF2

Source: LEAF2

Figure 8: Brief Schedule of the Survey Each area’s survey results were analyzed by SWOT analysis. In this SWOT analysis, one objective was set, and effective strategies to achieve this objective in each area were analyzed based on the collected data from the interviews. The objective was set as ‘To increase literacy learners and graduates with the supports from LD’s partners (especially communities)’. The following 4 common strategies were derived from strategies of each area.

Involvement of community in promoting literacy education Strengthening of public awareness Review and revise of the current literacy curriculum to fit people’s needs Necessity of flexibility on the provision of literacy courses based on learners’ demands

20162 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1

TWG was established

Survey framework was developed

Questionnaires were developed (includingtrial and revision of the questionnaires)

General information of the target provinceswere collected

Local surveyors were employed andtrained

Individual and group interviews wereconducted in the target villages and area

The collected data were reviewed andcompiled

The survey results were analyzed

2015

82

(4) Development of Community Participation Manual From the Community Needs Survey results, it was found that literacy education was not known by community people, and because of that, literacy education could not receive community support. In order to obtain community support, it is required to review the current implementation measure and try to involve communities in the literacy education implementation process. Therefore, it was decided that the Project would find the way and administer it as a trial. In this purpose, Community Participation TWG (TWG5) was established. Considering relevance and continuity from the Community Needs Survey, TWG5 members were the same as those of the Community Survey TWG. Prior to the trial at pilot areas, TWG5 and the Project developed the first version of ‘Community Participation Manual’ from February to July 2016. It was the first time for LD to promote literacy education by community support; therefore, prior to this activity, the Project reviewed the documents and interviewed National Federation of UNESCO Associations in Japan (NFUAJ) and UN-Habitat who had experience of community involvement before. Based on the first version of Community Participation Manual, the pilot activity in Kama district, Nangarhar province commenced. The second version was completed in January 2017 based on the findings from pilot activities and the third country training, which was conducted in India in December 2016. In the second version, selection criteria of target villages and the way to establish the VLC were revised, and awareness raising activities and new activities which intend to keep motivating learners were added. The final version was completed in November 2017 and distributed to all PLCs, pilot DLCs, Ministry of Education, NGOs and donors at Output Sharing Workshop in November 2017. In the final version, the measures were differentiated between cities and districts based on the findings from pilot activities in Mirbacha Kot district in Kabul province and Mazar-e-Sharif city in Balkh province.

83

Box 3：Outline of Community Participation Activity (From Community Participation Manual) Community participation in literacy education should be defined as that community people closely work with DLC staff and actively participate in the operation of literacy courses in their own community so that more illiterate people in the community can receive the quality literacy education in the proper environment. This will be realized by selecting target communities for literacy education together with the representatives of the area and by establishing a village literacy committee (GLC/VLC) in the communities where literacy courses are open. GLC/ VLC consists of several members who are from the community and are selected by the community influential people such as Malik/Wakil Gozar, Mullah Imam, CDC members, school principals/teachers, social activists and so on. GLC/VLC members are volunteers without obtaining any payment from this activity. GLC/VLC is supposed to start working with DLC staff before the establishment of literacy courses and continue working even after closing the courses. Major activities that GLC/VLC is expected to contribute to promoting literacy education with the support of DLC staff can be categorized as shown below:

• Before establishing the literacy course: o Raising awareness toward literacy education in the village o Introducing learners o Finding proper venues for the literacy class

• During implementation of literacy course:

o Contributing to organizing inauguration ceremony of the literacy class o Monitoring literacy class o Solving problems o Continuing awareness raising toward education

• After completion of the literacy course:

o Contributing to graduation ceremony of literacy class o Sharing the result of community participation with relevant departments and

people o Continuing awareness raising toward education in the village o Continuing other voluntary activities on promoting literacy education

Main actors in the community participation activities are DLCs and VLCs/GLC. Their main activities and the timing are shown in Figures 9 and 10. Since administrative organs and relevant organizations/people are different by districts and cities, activities and relevant organizations are a bit different. The concept of community participation activity at the district level is shown in Figure 11.

84

Figure 9: One Cycle of Literacy Courses with Community Participation (City type)

Sharing the results at District level by GLC and DLC

(Page 25)

Sharing the concept of CP activities at Provincial level by PLC

(Page 5)

Sharing the activities results at provincial level (Page 25)

Sharing the concepts of CP activities with Mayor at City

level by DLC (Page 6)

Sharing the concepts of CP activities with Heads of Areas

by Mayor and DLC (Page 6)

Sharing the concepts of CP activities with all Wakil Guzars

of selected Guzars (Page 7)

Closing of literacy courses by GLC and DLC

(Page 24)

Supporting and monitoring literacy courses by GLC and

DLC (Page 20)

Inaugurating literacy course

by GLC and DLC (Page 18)

Mobilizing Guzar people at target Guzars by DLC

(Page 13)

Establishing GLC and organizing orientation by DLC

(Page 13～ 15)

Preparing the establishment of literacy courses by GLC and DLC

(Page 17)

Starting time of following activities are about 2 months before

establishing of literacy courses

About 1.5 months before establishing of

literacy courses

March or August

2.5 Months before establishing of literacy courses

85

Sharing the concepts of CP activities at District level by DLC

(Page 9)

Sharing the concepts of CP activities with DDA by DLC

(Page 10)

Selecting target villages by DDA (Page 10)

Closing of literacy courses by VLC and DLC

(Page 24)

Supporting and monitoring literacy courses by GLC and

VLC (Page 20)

Inaugurating literacy course

by VLC and DLC (Page 18)

Mobilizing village people at target village by DLC

(Page 13)

Establishing VLC and organizing orientation by DLC

(Page 13～15)

Preparing the establishment of literacy courses by VLC and DLC

(Page 17)

Starting time of following activities are about 2

months before establishing of literacy courses

About 1.5 months before establishing of

literacy courses

March or August

Sharing the results at District level by VLC and DLC

(Page 25)

Sharing the concept of CP activities at Provincial level by PLC

(Page 5)

Sharing the activities results at provincial level (Page 25)

2.5 Months before establishing of literacy courses

Figure 10: One Cycle of Literacy Courses with Community Participation (District type)

86

Figure 11: Concept of Community Participation Activities in One District

(5) Implementation of Pilot Activities in Nangarhar Province The pilot activity based on the first draft of Community Participation Manual started on July 18, 2016 in Kama district, Nangarhar province where the literacy courses started at the end of August of the same year. TWG5 members and project national staff conducted the training for the staff of Nangarhar Provincial Education Department (PED), Nangarhar PLC and Kama DLC on July 18 and 19. The contents of the training were the concept of community participation in literacy education, contents of the developed Community Participation Manual and implementation steps of this activity. Besides, TWG5 members and project national staff had a meeting with Nangarhar Provincial Governor on July 18 and obtained his pledge of cooperation for this activity. Following to this meeting, the team had a meeting with Kama District Governor and Kama District Development Assembly (DDA) on July 20 to explain the contents of the activity and select the pilot villages. At that meeting, 7 villages were selected as the target villages for the

87

courses which started in August 2016. Selected villages are 1) Sangar Sarai, 2) Qala-e-Akhund, 3) Zar Shoee, 4) Kandai, 5) Peerzaee, 6) Arbapan and 7) Darbang. After the courses started, through the monitoring by DLCs, VLCs and project national staff, it was found that the courses in Qala-e-Akhund did not exist since the facilitator and the VLC could not gather enough learners. Therefore, the courses relocate to Bila where there was the need of literacy education at the end of October. Also, ‘Literacy Class Visit by Villagers’ and ‘Exchange Visit of Literacy Classes’ were added to Community Participation Manual from the experience in the third country training conducted in India in December 2016, and the former activity was implemented in each village at the beginning of March 2017. The purposes of these new activities are to increase villagers’ awareness toward literacy courses and obtain support from villagers and learners’ families as well as to increase the motivation of learners. Through the implementation of the activities, it was confirmed that these objectives were achieved to some extent. Throughout the course period, VLCs monitored and supported literacy courses continuously and courses successfully held closing ceremonies in July 2017. In total, 145 out of 203 learners (71.4%) successfully graduated from literacy courses in 7 villages. From activities in 2016, the increase in actual learners, the decrease of dropouts and opening courses in new villages were observed as positive impacts; therefore, Kama DLC decided to continue community participation activity for the courses started in 2017 in consultation with LD. In August, Kama DLC started preparation such as sharing results of the previous year courses to DDA and other relevant people, selecting target villages for the next year courses, establishing VLCs at each target village, etc. In September, courses for 2017 commenced in new 7 villages and literacy education with community participation has been implemented at the initiative of Kama DLC. LD monitored and supervised Kama DLC and VLCs regularly and 145 out of 173 learners (all were male) successfully graduated in June 2018. Graduation rate was 83.8%. From the courses which will start in August 2018, community participation activity is planned to be introduced to Bihsud district as well. The preparation for the new courses in Kama and Bihsud districts started in July 2018. (6) Implementation of Pilot Activities in Kabul Province In order to start the pilot activities in Mirbacha Kot district, Kabul Province where the courses start at the end of March, the training on Community Participation Manual was conducted at LD on January 30 and 31, 2017. The trainers were TWG5 members and the participants were staff from Kabul Province PED (Provincial Education Department), Kabul Province PLC, Mirbacha Kot DED (District Education Department), and Mirbacha Kot DLC. In addition, 2 staff from Kama DLC from Nangarhar Province participated in the training as observers. On February 4, the meeting with Kabul Province Governor was held to explain the activities and to obtain his support toward the activities. Mirbacha Kot DLC staff and project national staff had a meeting with Mirbacha Kot district governor on February 7. Then on February 12, meetings with Mirbacha Kot district governor, members of DDA (District Development Assembly), People’s Shura and Women’s Shura were held, and the explanation of the activities was given and target villages were selected. Assuming that there were 6 facilitators and each facilitator would establish literacy courses in one or two villages based on their needs, the following villages were selected.

88

1) Babaquchqar (Male courses) 2) Qala-e-Ahmad Khan and Mishwani (Male courses) 3) Arazi and Tootak Ha (Female courses) 4) Sheikhan Baqa Beg and Khawja Gian (Female courses) 5) Slaighan and Qala-e-Akhund (Female courses) 6) Maraki (Male courses)

At the end of February, Mirbacha Kot DLC staff and project national staff visited the target villages and established Village Literacy Committees (VLCs) and supported the VLCs to develop their work plans. After that, they monitored the activities conducted by VLCs who implemented activities based on their work plans. In Mirbacha Kot district, 6 VLCs were established, which meant that one VLC was established for one facilitator. If one course covers two villages, representatives of each village became members of the VLC for the course. It was found through the practices in Kama district, Nangarhar Province that villagers could get the information more easily by pictures than by a table with letters when the tasks of VLC members were explained because many villagers were illiterate. Therefore, a picture-card show describing the major tasks of VLCs was developed and utilized at the orientation in each village. VLC members in target villages raised public awareness of literacy education and shared the information of the literacy courses through Friday prayers at Mosques, village gatherings, door-to-door visits and posters. After that, they made a list of potential learners who wanted to learn at the new literacy courses and found several locations for the courses. Through this process, Mirbacha Kot DLC confirmed the situations and the needs of literacy education in target villages. Then the villages where DLC practically established literacy courses were decided as listed below. When changing the target villages, DLC consulted DDA and obtained its approval.

1) Babaquchqar (Male courses) 2) Share Naw (Male courses) (changed from Qala-e-Ahmad Khan and Mishwani) 3) Laghmani (Female courses) (changed from Arazi and Tootak Ha) 4) Sheikhan Baqa Beg and Khawja Gian (Female courses) 5) Slaighan and Qala-e-Akhund (Female courses) 6) Maraki (Male courses)

Since March 25, 2017, VLCs and DLCs held opening ceremonies for literacy courses and started its 9-months courses. After the opening ceremonies, DLC staff and project national staff monitored the literacy courses as well as VLCs. However, only DLC staff conducted monitoring for male courses since male courses were conducted in evenings based on learners’ request. During courses, some impacts from the community participation activities were observed such as VLC’s support (provision of lamps to evening courses, persuasion of family members to accept female learner’s participation in literacy courses, etc.) and villages’ behavior changes because of

89

the increase of understanding for literacy education (acceptance of women’s visit to a neighbor village as a part of literacy courses). Although the literacy course in Maraki village was closed in August 2017 because of the facilitator’s resignation to become a formal education teacher, other courses were smoothly operated and closing ceremonies were successfully held at the end of December 2017. Eventually, 189 out of 232 learners (among them, 76 out of 115 males, and 113 out of 117 females) successfully graduated in all 6 villages. Graduation rate was 81.5% (66.1% for male and 96.6% for female). In Kabul, preparation for the next courses started in January 2018. Based on the positive results in Mirbacha Kot district and other pilot areas, LD decided to expand the pilot areas to Guldara district in Kabul province. In this round, LD took the initiative and supervised Mirbacha Kot and Guldara districts’ DLCs. Basically, LD sent official letters and emails and made telephone calls to DLC staff to instruct the procedure as well as to give advice for some challenges. Also, TWG5 members and project national staff frequently visited DLCs, VLCs and literacy classes to monitor directly. At monitoring visits, TWG5 members and the project national staff found out that DLC staff did not understand detailed process of community participation activity; therefore, training for Kabul PLC and Mirbacha Kot and Guldara DLCs staff was held by TWG5 with the support of project national staff on May 2, 2018. In total, 25 people participated. As of July 2018, 12 courses in 6 villages are running in Mirbacha Kot district. Among them, 4 courses in 2 villages are for male and the rest of them are for female. The total number of learners are 229 (82 are male and 147 are female). In Guldara district, 7 courses in 6 villages are running. Among them, 3 courses in 2 villages are for male and the rest of them are for female. The total number of learners are 141 (62 are male and 79 are female). (7) Implementation of Pilot Activities in Balkh Province In Mazar-e-Sharif city, Balkh Province, the training for Community Participation Manual was conducted at Balkh PLC on February 6 and 7, 2017. The trainers were TWG5 members and the participants were staff from Balkh PED, Balkh PLC, Mazar-e-Sharif city DED and Mazar-e-Sharif city DLC. In addition, Kama DLC staff from Nangarhar Province attended the training as an observer and shared the experience in Kama district. On February 8, the meeting with the acting governor of Balkh Province was held to explain the activities and to ask for his support. On the same day, the meeting with Mazar mayor was also conducted for the same purpose as the meeting with the governor. If the activity was conducted in districts, the selection of target villages would be done by a district-level assembly such as DDA as a next step. However, there was no such assembly at the city level. Instead, Mazar-e-Sharif city is divided into ten areas and each area is composed of about 50 settlements called Gozar, where a head of each area calls representatives of Gozars (called Wakil Gozar) in the area and holds discussions. Therefore, when selecting target Gozars

90

for literacy courses (in the case of Mazar-e-Sharif, Gozars were selected instead of villages), the areas where the female facilitators of Mazar DLC could commute were selected at first. Then the heads of selected areas and representatives of Gozars gathered in the selected area discussed which Gozars they would like to establish literacy courses. Through the process, the 6th, the 7th, the 8th and the 9th areas were selected. Mazar DLC and project national staff visited the heads of the selected areas. Then they explained about the activities to them and asked them to select target Gozars. There were 5 female facilitators in Mazar DLC and therefore, 5 Gozars were selected as listed below.

Table 45: Target Gozars in Mazar-e-Sharif Area Gozar

The 6th Area Behind Juma Asik Base and Hasa Awal Gozar Hayat

The 7th Area Amani No.2

The 8th Area Nawbahar No.2

The 9th Area Karta Jafare

Source: LEAF2

Around the end of February, Mazar DLC staff and project national staff visited the selected Gozars and explained about their activities. Then they established Gozar Literacy Committees (GLCs) and supported GLCs to develop their work plans. In some Gozars, the first visit was only with the representative from Gozar for the explanation of the activities. The second visit was with influential people of the Gozar who were invited by its representative for the explanation of the activities and the establishment of GLC. Members of the established GLC were influential people like the representative of Gozar and religious leaders for male members and literacy learners for female members. Male members conducted awareness-raising activities about literacy education and literacy courses through prayers at Mosque, gatherings at Gozar and putting up posters. On the other hand, female members conducted awareness-raising activities through visits of each household and participation in private gatherings. After that, they made a list of potential learners and looked for suitable venues for literacy courses. Then opening ceremonies of the literacy courses were held at each literacy class between the end of March and the beginning of April. After the literacy courses started, Mazar DLC staff and project national staff monitored the literacy courses and GLC activities. Through the monitoring, it was found that the attendance of the literacy course at Hasa Awal Gozar Hayat was not good. The main reason was assumed that there was a literacy course before in the Gozar and most of the registered learners actually wanted to receive vocational training rather than the literacy education courses. DLC discussed this matter and the possibility of changing Gozars with the head of the 6th area, however the head replied that there was no more Gozar, which had interests in the literacy course in the area. As a result, the

91

literacy course at Hasa Awal Gozar Hayat was closed and DLC staff and project national staff tried to open another literacy course in the 5th area because there was a Gozar which was interested in the literacy course. However, opening a course in other areas was given up due to the difficulty in finding learners, understanding of communities, accessibility of facilitators, and etc. Similar to Mirbacha Kot district in Kabul province, some support from GLCs were observed in Mazar-e-Sharif city in Balkh province. For instance, provision of a water-cooler to literacy courses, persuasion of female learners’ families so that they would allow female learners to attend the literacy courses, securement of a substitute facilitator while the original facilitator took her marriage leave, and etc. In January 2018, all courses held the closing ceremonies and 127 out of 139 female learners (91.4%) successfully graduated the courses. The preparation for the second round of the courses started in February 2018. This time, community participation activity was introduced to not only Mazar-e-Sharif city but also Nahre Shahi district. LD regularly monitored and supervised by phone and emails. They also made monitoring visits in March and June 2018. As of July 2018, 10 courses in 5 Gozars are running in Mazar-e-Sharif city. All courses are for female and there are 202 learners. In Nahre Shahi district, 10 courses in 5 villages were established and 245 female learners are currently learning. The number of learners and graduates in the 7 pilot areas are shown in Table 46.

Table 46: Number of Learners and Graduates in 7 Pilot Areas

Area

Number of learners

Number of graduates

Graduation rate4

Male Female Male Female Male Female

Kama district, Nangarhar province (August 2016 - July 2017)

203 0 145 0 71.4% 0%

Kama district, Nangarhar province (August 2017 - July 2018)

173 0 145 0 83.8% 0%

Mirbacha Kot district, Kabul province (March - December 2017)

115 117 76 113 66.1% 96.6%

Mirbacha Kot district, Kabul province (March - December 2018)

82 147 NA NA NA NA

Guldara district, Kabul province (March - December 2018)

62 79 NA NA NA NA

Mazar-e-Sharif city, Balkh province (March 2017 - January 2018)

0 139 0 127 0% 91.4%

4 Graduation rate is calculated based on only the completed courses.

92

Mazar-e-Sharif city, Balkh province (March 2018 - January 2019)

0 202 NA NA NA NA

Nahre Shahi district, Balkh province (March 2018 - January 2019)

0 245 NA NA NA NA

Herat city, Herat province (March – December 2018)

28 177 NA NA NA NA

Yakawlang district, Bamyan province (March – December 2018)

0 300 NA NA NA NA

Total 663 1,406 366 240 74.5% 93.8%

Source: LEAF2

(8) Impact Measuring of Community Participation Activity by Baseline Survey and End-line Survey In order to measure the impact of community participation activity, the Project conducted a Baseline Survey and the End-line Survey just after the start and the end of the courses respectively. At these surveys, data collection from DLCs and interview surveys to the villagers and facilitators were conducted on the points which are mentioned below. When the Baseline Survey was conducted, the Project was supposed to end in February 2018. Accordingly, it was considered that in Mirbacha Kot district, Kabul province and Mazar-e-Sharif city, Balkh province, the courses could not finish within the project period. Therefore, instead of the End-line Survey, the interim survey after a half year of the commencement of the courses was conducted. However, the Project extended the project period for half a year, therefore, the End-line Survey for the 2 areas were held in February 2018. Survey areas of the Baseline Survey and the End-line Survey were the villages in the pilot districts where the same facilitators conducted the literacy courses in the last and this year as well as some villages in neighboring districts. The data of villages in the pilot districts where community participation activity was conducted this year and the data of villages in the pilot districts where community participation activity was not conducted but the same facilitators conducted the literacy courses in the last year and neighboring districts where the literacy courses were conducted this year were compared. Timing and areas of the survey are shown in Tables 47 and 48. Compared items are following 6 indicators, namely, 1) the number of graduates, 2) learners’ learning achievement, 3) awareness and feeling of villagers toward literacy courses, 4) monitoring activity, 5) supports from the community (from the facilitator’s aspect) and 6) supports from the community (from the community’s aspect).

93

Table 47: Timing of Surveys Baseline Survey Interim survey End-line Survey

Timing September 2016 (Nangarhar province) April–May 2017 (Kabul province and Balkh province)

August 2017 (Balkh province) August–September 2017 (Kabul province)

August 2017 (Nangarhar province) February 2018 (Kabul province and Balkh province)

Source: LEAF2

Table 48: Survey Areas

Province Target district/city Control district/city

Nangarhar Kama district Kama district, Bihsud district

Kabul Mirbacha Kot district Mirbacha Kot district, Guldara district

Balkh Mazar-e-Sharif city Mazar-e-Sharif city

Source: LEAF2

The number of samples of the Baseline Survey and the End-line Survey is shown in Table 49.

Table 49: Number of Samples in Baseline Survey and End-line Survey

Note: The figure in parentheses is the number of females Source: LEAF2 Major findings from these surveys are as follows. 1) Awareness of community people toward literacy courses increased by more than 20% in all

areas where community participation activity was conducted. 2) Through the community participation activity, the information sources to know the existence

of literacy courses widened. Traditionally, family, relatives and friends are the most common information sources in all areas; however, public information sharing such as Friday prayers,

94

posters and meetings became common as the new information source by the community participation activity.

3) In the areas where community participation activity was not introduced, in most cases, literacy courses had been conducted at the same villages such as where facilitators lived for many years. Through the community participation activity, literacy courses became conducted in the villages different from the past years (improved the equality of opportunity).

4) In areas where community participation activity was conducted, both variety and quantity of community’s support toward literacy courses increased. For instance, about the question, ‘do you receive support from community people?’, 0~86%5 of facilitators answered before community participation activity, but it reached 100% after the activity. To the question ‘what kind of community support do you receive from community?’, the facilitators answered 3 kinds of community support in the Baseline Survey, but it increased 7 in the End-line Survey, which means that the number improved dramatically. On the other hand, the same questions were asked to community leaders. Regarding the community support, 40~75% of them answered in the Baseline Survey, and it reached 100% in the End-line Survey. About the kinds of community support, they answered 4 kinds in the Baseline Survey and it became 7 in the End-line Survey. The same tendency was observed from both facilitators’ work and community leaders’ work.

(9) Expansion of Implementation Areas of Community Participation Activity Examining the monitoring results of pilot activities from 2016 to 2017 and results from Baseline Survey and End-line Survey, LD considered that LD’s literacy education activity is known by more community people through the community participation activity, and concrete literacy education will be provided to more people in wider areas by the support of community people in the community participation activity. Therefore, LD decided to continue the community participation activity. Although nationwide implementation of this activity in the future is anticipated, considering the limited personnel and budget, LD decided to continue the community participation activity in the current implemented areas as well as to introduce the activity in the neighboring districts of these areas and some new provinces in October 2017. Then LD developed the work plan for its implementation. The details were decided from December 2017 to January 2018 and preparation for the courses to start in March was started. Regarding the pilot areas, a total of 8 districts/cities were selected in October 2017. The selected areas were Kama district and Bihsud district in Nangarhar province, Mirbacha Kot district and Guldara district in Kabul province, Mazar-e-Sharif city and Nahre Shahi district in Balkh province, Herat city in Herat province and Yakawlang district in Bamyan province. The DLC staff of these pilot areas were invited to Output Sharing Workshop conducted from November 30 to December 3, 2017 so that they were able to be aware of the project activities including community participation activity. Considering the sustainability, the Project encouraged LD to take the

5 Since there are 3 target areas, the results become different. The same applies to other results in this part.

95

initiative in community participation activity from the second round of courses and the Project just supported and advised LD. The Project developed the formats for LD’s monitoring of entire progress and situation of the literacy classes in each area in consultation with LD. LD regularly monitored the progress in the pilot areas by telephone calls, emails, etc. and when the budget allowed, visited the pilot areas and directly instructed. The situations in Nangarhar province, Kabul province and Balkh province were already explained in 4.2.6 (5), (6) and (7). The situations in Herat city in Herat province and Yakawlang district in Bamyan province are stated below. In Herat city in Herat province, the preparation started in January 2018. LD regularly communicated with DLC staff by phone and emails and visited for monitoring in May and June 2018. Since there was some misunderstanding of procedures, the training on community participation activity was held for PLC and DLC staff in May. As of July 2018, 8 courses in 5 Gozars are running. Among them, 1 course in 1 Gozar is for male and the rest of them are for female. In total, 205 learners (among them, 28 are male and 177 are female) participate. In Yakawlang district in Bamyan province, the preparation started in January 2018. PLC and other stakeholders were very active, and they introduced community participation activity not only to the LD courses but also to the NGO, UNESCO-ELA and other volunteer courses. LD communicated PLC and DLC regularly by phone and emails and visited for monitoring from March to April 2018. As of July 2018, 12 courses in 6 villages are running and all courses are for female learners. In total, 300 learners participate the courses.

96

5. Measures and Lessons upon Implementation and Operation of the Project 5.1 Change of Project Implementation Structure in Response to Unstable Security Situation Due to the security deterioration in Afghanistan, the Project implementation structure had been changed for several times. The number of Japanese experts who could stay in Afghanistan at the same time was limited to 2 persons in 2012 and the travel of Japanese experts was basically prohibited from the end of June 2013. In response, face-to-face meetings and workshops in the 3rd countries such as India, Pakistan and United Arab Emirates easy to access from Afghanistan as well as remote communication such as emails, telephone calls and Skype were combined to implement the project activities. The 3rd country activities were basically conducted every 1.5 - 2 months for about 1 week - 10 days. Japanese experts and project national staff had meetings and workshops to share the progress of activities and to make detailed plans for implementation of activities for the next 2 months according to their progress. After the 3rd country activities, the project national staff took the initiative in implementing activities together with C/P with the supervision of Japanese experts through emails, telephone calls and Skype. During the 3rd project year, 7 meetings in India, 4 meetings in Pakistan and 1 meeting in UAE were held. Face-to-face meetings and workshops with C/P were conducted for the activities which were considered inefficient if they were conducted by only indirect support through project national staff. Besides, considering the benefit of C/P in Afghanistan, ToT was conducted in the 3rd

countries (once in India and twice in Pakistan), then those who received ToT trained other C/Ps in Afghanistan. This measure created more beneficiaries than conducting trainings in the 3rd countries only. On the other hand, there had been a lot of logistic works necessary for the arrangement of each meeting and workshop in the 3rd countries and the difference of weekend (the weekends in Afghanistan are Thursday and Friday while Saturday and Sunday in Japan) and time difference between Afghanistan and Japan delayed the project activities. Therefore, the Project set up the Project Office in Delhi from March 2015 in order to secure the close communication with Afghanistan and the Project could conduct project activities smoothly. Besides, the Project adjusted its working time and holidays to those in Afghanistan. The project activities supported from Delhi were done more smoothly than those from Japan since the timely communication could be made through Skype and video conferences adjusted to the working time and holidays in Afghanistan. The face-to-face meetings and workshops with C/P were also continued in quarterly-basis in Delhi. As a result of these efforts, the good relationship between the Project and C/P was maintained and the Project could achieve its expected project purpose.

97

5.2 Cooperation with ELA Members in Charge of Creating New Textbook The issue was pointed out by DLC staff and literacy class facilitators that there were less exercise questions in Land Afghan, a textbook of literacy classes. As a result of TWG4 meeting, it was considered to create exercise questions based on the contents of Land Afghan. However, it was revealed that ELA had a policy to revise the content completely and to create a new textbook. The Project decided to create exercise questions to be utilized for both Land Afghan and the ELA new text book. In order to ensure consistency between the old and new textbooks and the exercise questions, the Project included LD staff who are the member of ELA in charge of the new textbook into TWG, and created the exercise questions based on the contents of the new textbook. The Project intended to develop the capacity of the TWG members through creating the exercise questions. In addition, in order to enhance the content of the new textbook, the Project created the tables of teaching steps on reading, writing and math, and exercise question category tables, which can be adapted to the new textbook. The tables were approved by ELA new textbook members and utilized during the creation of the new textbook. 5.3 Measures for Technical Transfer 5.3.1 Fostering a Sense of Ownership of Counterparts toward the Project The Project aimed at improvement of literacy education through the improvement of administration concerning literacy education, and so the major project activities were to review general tasks of LD and to implement improvement measures. Therefore, it was very important that counterparts considered the Project as their own and they thought of improvement measures by themselves and took the initiative in spreading the improvement measures. However, at the beginning of the Project, LD staff preferred implementing whatever Japanese experts suggested rather than thinking of its own improvement measures. So, technical working groups (TWGs) were set up for each output, which consisted of staff of relevant departments of LD, and TWG meetings were held frequently for the development of outputs (manuals and guidelines) so that TWG members were forced to think about each topic and to discuss what and how to do on each topic. Japanese experts and project national staff tried not to provide concrete ideas but to facilitate TWG members to develop better manuals and guidelines through various supporting activities such as facilitation of discussions, advice to the contents (including provisions of other countries’ examples), suggestions for methodologies, and progress management. As a result, a sense of ownership of counterparts became stronger when the Monitoring Manual was developed, and the counterparts changed their attitudes that they believed themselves that they would improve literacy education administration. Furthermore, when other manuals and guidelines were developed, a sense of ownership of more counterparts became stronger. Experiencing through the Project that they completed various manuals and guidelines as well as conducted trainings, they became confident that they could improve literacy education administration by themselves and they spontaneously started to implement improvement measures aside from project activities. Some of these improvement measures (such as improvement of NFE-MIS, promotion of

98

community participation and improvement of Facilitator Seminars) were supported by the Project later. As shown here, some project activities were originally initiated by LD, which increased a sense of ownership of counterparts toward the Project more and more and made them participate in the project activities much more actively. This contributed a lot to the development and dissemination of the manuals and guidelines widely accepted by literacy government officers in Afghanistan such as LD, PLC, and DLC. 5.3.2 Promotion of Collaboration among Outputs Establishment of TWGs for each output made it possible that each TWG concentrated on considering and discussing about its own output. However, it was also important to have consistencies, avoid duplications and increase synergy effects among outputs (manuals and guidelines) developed by each TWG because each output was closely linked with the Project purpose: enhancement of monitoring and technical support in literacy education. Therefore, the Project tried to hold joint TWG meetings from time to time in order to share the progress of TWG activities and to discuss about contents of manuals and guidelines. There was not much custom of working cooperatively inside LD. Rather, competition among TWGs sometimes became strong and they preferred having discussion inside each TWG to sharing the discussion with other TWGs. In addition, it was difficult to set up a meeting because major members of each TWG were busy. As a result, the frequency of the joint TWG meetings was less than expected and few discussions generated even when the joint TWG meetings were held. Therefore, the Project gave up holding joint TWG meetings frequently. Instead, when there were matters which should be shared and discussed with relevant people of LD, the Project asked each TWG to decide how and with whom they share the matters, and they put the decision into action accordingly. With the information sharing, they can grasp each other’s activities and progress, and positively cooperate on the part where they can do so. Accordingly, more effective and efficient activities could be implemented. For instance, taking the opportunity of monitoring visits to local areas, they check the progress of other TWG’s activities and give suggestion on PLCs and DLCs. 5.3.3 Development of Rules and Manuals and Capacity Building of LD, PLC and DLC Staff by Full Utilization of Pilot Areas Utilizing the lessons from the former project, the Project set up pilot districts in Balkh province, Nangarhar province and Kabul province. Then, upon the development of policies, activity implementation measures and manuals, LD did the trial at pilot areas and finalize them by reflecting the lessons and confirming the effectiveness. Also, not only implementing the pilot activities and reflecting the results but also inviting pilot DLC staff to domestic and overseas workshops and the third country training so that they had opportunities to discuss with LD staff. By these activities, opinions from the field have reflected the policies and activity methods so that the better system and manuals which met the field situation and needs were developed. Simultaneously, capacity building of field staff such as DLC staff could be done. Also, at the

99

beginning of the Project, LD staff rarely visited PLCs, DLCs and literacy courses. The Project encouraged LD staff to make monitoring visits to PLCs, DLCs and literacy courses in accordance with the activities in the pilot areas in order to know real situations in the fields. As a result, LD staff recognized the gap between the ideal situation and the reality and tried to face their reasons and countermeasures squarely. In terms of the formulation of policies and activity implementation measures, the momentum, of which the more realistic formulation based on the current situation was needed, was fostered, and that led to the capacity building of LD staff. 5.4 Consideration of Gender Equality (Securing Women’s Participation) Female’s literacy rate is approximately one-third of male’s in Afghanistan and LD has been tried to increase female literacy learners. In order to consider the contents and operation of literacy courses which women feel easy to attend, the participation of female counterparts and female project national staff was essential. Therefore, the Project requested LD to include female staff in TWG members. Simultaneously, the Project tried to establish the project structure in which women would be involved in the activities such as recruitment of project national staff and assignment for each activity. Also, in community participation activities, women’s participation was obligated by the VLC/GLC constitution which states a certain number of female members should be included in VLC/GLC. By the measure, there were some cases such as when female learners could not attend the literacy courses or were about to drop out the courses due to family members’ opposition and etc., female VLC/GLC members discussed and convinced female family members while male VLC/GLC members discussed and convinced male family members so that they allow female learners to attend literacy courses. Also, considering the custom of Afghanistan, the Project set up and operated the rules which enable female staff to work easily, such as allowing them to be accompanied by a mahram (a sort of a guardian) at domestic and overseas business trips and allowing them to work in short-time before and after giving a birth. This enabled female counterparts and female project national staff to attend the training and meeting actively. With these attempts, monitoring, analysis and sharing of the monitoring results from the women’s perspective as well as capacity building of female counterparts and project national staff at the same level as that of males became possible.

100

6. Project Output 6.1 Achievement Status of Each Output 6.1.1 Achievement Status of Output 1

Output/Indicator Achievement status

Output 1 Framework of monitoring and technical support coverings all literacy courses, is developed.

Achieved

Indicator 1-1

Monitoring Manual is developed with the consensus of stakeholders.

Developed and approved by LD

1-2 Training for DLCs is conducted by PLC trainers, at least twice during the project period with 60% of DLC monitors in attendance.

Participation rate: 81.9%

Framework of monitoring and technical support was developed. Monitoring Manual and other relevant manuals and guidelines were developed and distributed to PLCs and DLCs nationwide in 2014 and 2015. Also, the nationwide training on monitoring system and the use of these manuals and guidelines was held from 2012 to 2016 targeting all of the PLC and DLC monitors of all provinces. In total, 1,525 people participated in 4 batches and the participation rate of DLC monitors was 81.9%. Moreover, LD and the Project developed the checklists for Monitoring and Evaluation unit of LD in 2017 so that the zone managers in the unit can check the necessary points and give appropriate advice to PLCs and DLCs upon their field monitoring. These checklists consist of 2-3 pages and to be printed out by the members of M&E unit whenever necessary for conducting monitoring. Lastly, LD currently schedules to hold Facilitator Seminar twice a month with “Revised Teaching and Observation Guideline” developed by LD based on the monitoring results, and the Guideline was distributed to all PLCs and DLCs in February 2018. TWG defines the roles and responsibilities of LD/PLCs/DLCs in monitoring and technical support in all developed manuals and guidelines, and these manuals and guidelines were officially approved and disseminated to LD, PLCs and DLCs. Therefore, it can be said that roles and responsibilities of LD, PLCs and DLCs decided by TWG were defined as official duties. 6.1.2 Achievement Status of Output 2


Output 2 Measures for assessing the learning achievement of learners after completion of courses are developed.

Achieved

Indicator 2-1

Assessment tools are approved by LD by the end of the Project.

Developed and approved by LD

Measures for assessing the learning achievement of learners after completion of the literacy courses were developed. In total, 4 kinds of assessment tools and the guidelines for the assessment

101

implementation were developed in both Dari and Pashto languages. The developed tools and guidelines were officially approved by LD by February 2014. To obtain the certificate (Grade A, B, C or Repeater6), a learner needs to score 30 points or higher in total during the 1st to 3rd assessments and simultaneously the attendance rate should be higher than 60% (for male) or 50% (for female). For recording the assessment score of each learner, the assessment record sheets were included in the developed guidelines. Expected users of these tools and guidelines were literacy facilitators. However, since the number of literacy facilitators was large and DLCs and PLCs were expected to instruct new facilitators how to implement the learners’ assessment, DLC and PLC staff together with other literacy stakeholders were training on the learners’ assessment through nationwide training. Those trained staff taught literacy facilitators the implementation methods of learners’ assessment afterwards. The total number of printed copies of tools and guidelines was 4,700 (Dari version: 2,700 and Pashto version: 2,000) and they were distributed to all PLCs, DLCs and literacy facilitators. The tools and guidelines were uploaded to LD website so that other literacy stakeholders could download them. During the process of distribution through the nationwide training, it was officially introduced to other literacy stakeholders in LIFE meeting in May 2015. 6.1.3 Achievement Status of Output 3

Output/Indicator Achievement status Output 3 Measures for reporting and information sharing are

developed and implemented. Achieved

Indicator

3-1 At least 65% of PLCs report data on all literacy courses of all districts to LD quarterly.

100% in 2015 and 2016

3-2 85% of DLCs report data on all literacy courses to PLCs quarterly.

100% in 2015 and 2016

3-3 Annual status reports on literacy activities with analysis and recommendation are developed and published at least twice during the project period.

Developed for 2010 to 2012 and 2014 to 2016

3-4 Completion rate of learners is derived. Not achieved Regarding indicator 3-1, prior to the commencement of the Project, the submission rate from PLCs to LDs quarterly on all literacy courses of all districts was only 5.7%. After the Project commenced, with the support of the Project, LD started calling to PLCs which did not submit the

6 Grade A: The total score of 3 assessments (1st, 2nd and 3rd) is higher than 75 points (full mark: 100 points). Simultaneously, the attendance rate should be higher than 50% (or 108 days) for female and 60% (or 129 days) for male learners. Grade B: The total score of 3 assessments is between 50 to 74 points with the above attendance rate. Grade C: The total score of 3 assessments is between 30 to 49 points with the above attendance rate. Repeater: Repeater cannot get a certificate and needs to take a literacy course again.

102

data, and the submission rate improved. However, the submission rate dropped in 2013 because 1) some PLC did not update information from the previous submission without data collection, and 2) registration form for NFE-MIS was newly introduced and some PLCs were confused. With the support of the Project, LD resumed encouraging PLCs to submit the data by telephone calls. This attempt contributed to achieving 100% submission rate in 2015 and 2016 excluding the areas where there were security issues (Table 50). Considering the improvement of the submission rate, LD intended to continue to keep 100% submission rate by telephone calls.

Table 50: Quarterly Data Submission Rate on Literacy Courses by PLC Before

the Project commenced

Project implemented period

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Number of PLC 35 35 35 35 35 35 35

Number of PLC which submitted the data

2 18 29 9 21 35 35

Submission rate (%) 5.7 51.4 82.9 25.7 60.0 100.0 100.0

Source: LEAF2

Regarding indicator 3-2, prior to the commencement of the Project, LD did not collect the data from DLCs. After the Project started, the submission rate rapidly increased by 2012. However, by the same reasons as indicator 3-1, the submission rate was dropped in 2013. With the support of the Project, LD resumed telephone calls to PLCs to encourage them to submit the data. This attempt contributed to achieve 100% submission rate in 2015 and 2016 excluding the areas where there were security issues. Therefore, LD decided to continue the confirmation of the data submission by telephone calls.

Table 51: Quarterly Data Submission Rate on Literacy Courses by DLC Before

the Project commenced

Project implemented period

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Number of DLC n.a. 412 386 416 409 3857 3928

Number of DLC which submitted the data

0 267 351 157 312 385 392

Submission rate (%) 0 64.8 90.9 37.7 76.3 100.0 100.0

Source: LEAF2

7 Excluding 35 DLC which were in insecure areas. 8 Excluding 28 DLC which were in insecure areas.

103

Regarding indicator 3-3, annual status report was developed in 2010, 2011 and 2012, and its analysis and recommendations were included in the report from 2011. Since the data submission rate from PLCs and DLCs significantly dropped, the report of 2013 was not developed by LD. The Project resumed its support for the data collection and reporting, and annual status reports for 2014, 2015 and 2016 were developed and approved in 2017. Up to the report for 2012, the Project supported a lot. However, from the report for 2014, the Project started shifting the initiative to LD members gradually so that they could develop the reports by themselves. Indicator 3-4 was added on January 4, 2016 with the assumption that the NFE-MIS development by UNESCO-ELA completed in 2015 would be operationalized soon and that would enable the calculation of the completion rate from the learners’ data. However, since the data entry of NFE-MIS takes much time, LD and ELA are not able to calculate the completion rate by NFE-MIS until now. Since the main purposes of current data collection system developed by LD and the Project are to know the situation of literacy courses quarterly, such as the existence of repeaters and drop-outs, the number of current courses, etc., each course data is not collected. Start dates of the literacy courses are different even in the same DLC. If a literacy course starts in April and ends in December, the beginning data is included in the 2nd quarter, and the end data is included in 4th quarter. However, since the course period extends for one month due to some reasons, the end data will be included in the next 1st quarter of the next year. As mentioned above, the literacy course data is compiled by each DLC quarterly. Since it is impossible to compare numbers of learners in the beginning of the course and in the end, precise graduation rate cannot be calculated. Therefore, it is expected that operationalization of NFE-MIS collecting literacy data by each course would enable derivation of proper completion rate. 6.1.4 Achievement Status of Output 4 (Technical Support)

Output/Indicator Achievement status Output 4 Measures for technical support are developed. Achieved Indicator

4-1 At least 3 technical support tools are experimented in the pilot areas.

9 tools were developed

4-2 At least 2 measures of technical support are included in Monitoring Manual.

Lesson plan manual and Teaching Methods Guideline were included.

4-3 Self-evaluation regarding the teaching ability of the participants of Facilitator Seminars becomes higher.

Average of self-evaluation increased from 3.26 to 3.42 (out of 4)

Regarding indicator 4-1, total 9 technical support tools were developed and experimented by respective pilot areas. The list of technical support tools developed by LD and the Project is shown in Table 52.

104

Table 52: Technical Support Tools Developed by LD and the Project

No Province Project

year Developed technical support tools

Inclusion in Monitoring

Manual

1

Balkh

1st year

Posters for awareness raising campaign; supplementary teaching material (picture-story show)

-

2 Supplementary teaching material (alphabet card, number card)

-

3 2nd year Two TV spots for TV campaign -

4

Nangarhar

1st year Posters for awareness raising campaign; supplementary teaching material (picture-story show); drama

-

5 1st to 2nd year

Supplementary teaching material (multiplication chart; alphabet card; number card; literacy telescope)

-

6 2nd year Two TV spots for TV campaign -

7

Kabul

2nd year Lesson Plan Manual; training agenda; session plan for the Manual

Included

8 3rd year Teaching Method Guideline for literacy facilitators; training agenda and session plan including the content of the guideline for teaching method

Included

9 Kabul, Nangarhar and Balkh

4th year Teaching and Observation Guideline; Revised Teaching and Observation Guideline

-

Source: LEAF2

Regarding indicator 4-2, ‘Lesson Plan Manual’ and ‘Teaching Methods Guideline’ were included in the final Monitoring Manual. Regarding indicator 4-3, by using the opportunity of Facilitator Seminars, the Project tried to improve facilitators’ teaching skills regularly through the improvement of lesson plan activity. Table 53 shows average scores of the facilitator’s self-evaluation, the evaluation by DLC Monitor and LEAF2 staff. Although no significant change was observed with the evaluation results by DLC Monitor, the scores of facilitators’ self-evaluation and facilitator evaluation by the Project staff were both increased.

105

Table 53: Average Scores of Facilitator’s Self-Evaluation and Evaluation by DLC Monitor and LEAF2 Staff

(Full score is 4)

Period Number Average of facilitator’s

self-evaluation Average of DLC

monitor’s evaluation Average of LEAF2 staff’s evaluation

Oct. 2016 - Feb. 2017

11 3.26

(11 facilitators) 2.88


(11 facilitators)

Mar. - Jun. 2017 9 3.42



(9 facilitators)

Source: LEAF2

6.1.5 Achievement Status of Output 4 (Community Participation Activity)


Output 4 Measures for technical support are developed.

Achieved.

Indicator 4-4

Literacy education activities involved community people are conducted at least twice.

They were implemented twice in 3 pilot areas (Kama district in Nangarhar province, Mirbacha Kot district in Kabul province and Mazar-e-Sharif city in Balkh province). Besides, they were introduced to other 4 pilot areas (Guldara district in Kabul province, Nahre Shahi district in Balkh province, Herat city in Herat province and Yakawlang district in Bamyan province) and the first round of the courses are currently being conducted.

This indicator was added in the fourth version of PDM on January 4, 2016. As has been described in 4.2.6 Output 4 (community participation activity), prior to the implementation of this activity, the Project conducted the Community Needs Survey in 2015. From this survey results, the following 4 strategies were derived; 1) involvement of community for promoting literacy education, 2) strengthening of public awareness, 3) review and revise of the current literacy curriculum to fit people’s needs and 4) necessity of flexibility on the provision of literacy courses based on learners’ demands. After this survey, utilizing the survey results, LD and the Project developed the first version of ‘Community Participation Manual for Establishment and Implementation of Literacy Courses’ in July 2016. The results of the survey were also shared with ELA through LD for their reference. Based on the developed Community Participation Manual, literacy education activities, which involved community people started from July 2016. In this activity, literacy course information is

106

shared with local authorities, such as provincial governors and district governors. Then, DLCs, DDA and other stakeholders select the target villages/Gozars of the year. After that, DLC formulates a literacy committee at each target village/Gozar in consultation with villagers/residents of Gozar. Village/Gozar Literacy Committee will support the literacy courses in finding learners and venues, advertising courses, monitoring, etc. It was firstly implemented in Kama district, Nangarhar province where new literacy courses start in August. Following Nangarhar province, it was introduced to Mirbacha Kot district, Kabul province and Mazar-e-Sharif city, Balkh province in January 2017 where new literacy courses start in March. During the project period, Kama district completed 2 cycles of the courses, and Mirbacha Kot district and Mazar-e-Sharif city completed 1 cycle of the courses. With the positive impact in the field, such as decrease in drop-outs and wider and increased support from community people toward the implementation of the literacy courses, LD and these pilot DLCs decided to continue literacy education with the community participation for the following year’s courses. Observing the good practices and impacts in the field as well as the results of baseline and End-line Survey upon this activity, LD decided to expand this activity even after the Project and selected new pilot areas in October 2017. From the second round of the courses with community participation, LD took the initiative to run this activity and the Project supported them. By June 2018, LD learnt how to develop the work plan and monitor the whole process of activity and courses in pilot areas. 6.2 Achievement Status of Project Purpose

Project purpose Monitoring and technical support capacity of literacy administration is enhanced for quality improvement of literacy education

Achievement status Indicator 2 was not verified yet; however, other indicators were achieved. Therefore, it can be said that the project purpose is ‘mostly achieved’.

Indicator 1 Utilization of Monitoring Manual by PLC/DLC and other

stakeholders is increased. Achievement status Achieved

In pilot areas, the utilization rate of Monitoring Manual increased from 44.7% to 87.9% comparing the results of the Baseline Survey conducted in 2010 and those of End-line Survey conducted in 2013. Monitoring Manual was printed and distributed to all PLCs and DLCs nationwide and used in nationwide trainings. Therefore, during the second nationwide training conducted in 2013 and 2014, 96.6% (751 out of 777) of PLCs/DLCs responded in interviews that they utilized the Monitoring Manual. To increase the utilization of the Monitoring Manual by not only PLCs/DLCs but also other stakeholders, the Project invited 29 staff members from

107

development partners/NGOs to the third and fourth batches nationwide trainings. According to the interview survey in October 2017, 96.4% (317 out of 329) of PLCs/DLCs and other stakeholders responded they utilized the Monitoring Manual. Therefore, it can be said that the utilization of the Monitoring Manual increased and keeps its high utilization rate.

Indicator 2 Facilitators’ satisfaction with technical support is improved. (ex. increase of technical support)

Achievement status Achieved The satisfaction rate of facilitators in pilot areas decreased from 70.3% (26 out of 37 persons) at the Baseline Survey in August 2010 to 64.3% (18 out of 28 persons) at the End-line Survey in October 2013. However, it has been 4 years since the last End-line Survey was conducted, and many technical support activities were conducted in the last 3 years. Therefore, the Project conducted interviews with facilitators at pilot district about their satisfaction for technical support in November 2017. The satisfaction rate was 100% (26 out of 26 persons). The result shows that the regular technical support through the Facilitator Seminar for the extended period satisfied all the facilitators at pilot areas. Regarding the target area of this survey to be conducted in November 2017, although it was recommended to target nationwide in the second terminal evaluation, it was decided to be only pilot areas. This is because, although the Project tried to expand the technical support activity to other areas, security situation did not allow it. To expand the technical support, the Project developed Revised Teaching and Observation Guideline by November 2017 and sent it to PLCs and DLCs nationwide in January 2018. After the distribution and follow-up, it will be appropriate to evaluate the facilitators’ satisfaction rate nationwide. Meanwhile, even if the data was collected from other areas in November 2017, it could not be the impact of the project activity since the Project could not reach other areas yet. Therefore, this indicator shall be evaluated by the data of pilot areas for now. In the future, it would be desirable to target nationwide.

Indicator 3 70% of stakeholders are aware of the status report and their satisfaction with the report is more than 60%

Achievement status Achieved Originally, the indicator was stated as “Stakeholders’ satisfaction of the status report is improved” in R/D. Then, at the first modification of PDM, the target value was set, but at the second modification of PDM, it was revised to the current value. “Stakeholders” refer to LD, PLCs, DLCs, other donors and NGOs nationwide. The stakeholders’ recognition rate of the status report increased from 23.3% (17 out of 73 persons) at the Baseline Survey to 73.1% (49 out of 67 persons) at the End-line Survey. Regarding

108

stakeholders’ satisfaction with the status report, it was not asked at the Baseline Survey; however, 91.8% of the respondents who knew the existence of the status report answered, ‘easy to understand’. Also, at the End-line Survey, 85.6% of the respondents who knew the existence of the status report answered they were satisfied with it. Therefore, the first terminal evaluation judged this indicator was achieved. However, at the Baseline and End-line Surveys, only LD, PLCs and DLCs of pilot areas and part of stakeholders (e.g. NGOs, UNESCO) were the targets. The second terminal evaluation suggested that nationwide status should be confirmed. Therefore, the Project conducted an interview survey on recognition and satisfaction of the status report targeting LD, PLCs, DLCs, other development partners and NGOs nationwide in October 2017. According to the survey, the recognition rate was 72.3% (253 out of 350 respondents) and satisfaction rate was 97.2% (246 out of 253 respondents). Therefore, this indicator was achieved. 6.3 List of Product

Year Report Submittal Period Language and the number of copies

1st year

Inception Report (IC/R)

1 months after the start of Project (May 2010)

English: 15 copies Dari: 15 copies Japanese (Summary): 5 copies CD-ROM (English, Japanese and Dari)

Baseline Survey Report

August 2010 English: 15 copies Dari: 15 copies Japanese (Summary): 5 copies CD-ROM (English, Japanese and Dari)

Progress Report (No. 1)

6 months after the start of Project (October 2010)


Literacy Annual Statistics Report

September 2011 English: 15 copies Dari: 180 copies Pashto: 120 copies CD-ROM (English, Dari and Pashto)

Monitoring Manual September 2011 Dari: 300 copies Pashto: 200 copies

Training Manual September 2011 Dari: 180 copies Pashto: 120 copies

Work Completion Report (1st project year)

October 2011 English: 15 copies Dari: 15 copies Japanese (Summary): 5 copies

109

CD-ROM (English, Japanese and Dari)

2nd year


May 2012 English: 15 copies Dari: 15 copies Japanese (Summary): 5 copies CD-ROM (English, Japanese and Dari)

Literacy Annual Statistics Report

February 2013 English: 15 copies Dari, Pashto: 1000 copies CD-ROM (English, Dari and Pashto)

Learning Achievement Standard and Development Tool


Revised Monitoring Manual


Revised Training Manual


Development Material


Work Completion Report (2nd project year)

February 2013 English: 15 copies Dari: 15 copies Japanese (Summary): 5 copies CD-ROM (English, Japanese and Dari)

3rd year


40 months after the start of Project (July 2013)


End-line Survey Report

October 2013 English: 15 copies Dari: 15 copies Japanese (Summary): 5 copies CD-ROM (English, Japanese and Dari)

Literacy Annual Statistics Report (3)

May 2014 English: 15 copies Dari, Pashto: 600 copies CD-ROM (English, Dari and Pashto)

Technical Support Tool

March 2014 English: 15 copies Dari, Pashto: 150 copies CD-ROM (English, Dari and Pashto)

Finalized Monitoring March 2014 (Simple English: 15 copies

110

Manual binding) Dari, Pashto: 1,400 copies CD-ROM (English, Dari and Pashto)

December 2014

English: 15 copies Dari, Pashto: 1,400 copies CD-ROM (English, Dari and Pashto)

Finalized Training Manual

March 2014

English: 15 copies Dari, Pashto: 100 copies CD-ROM (English, Dari and Pashto)

The Assessment Tools and Guidelines

March 2014 (Simple binding)


January 2015


Data Collection Guideline

March 2014 (Simple binding)


January 2015



49 months after the start of Project (April 2014)


Work Completion Report (3rd project year)

January 2015


4th year


63 months after the start of Project (July 2015)


Technical Support Tool

November 2015 English: 15 copies Dari, Pashto: 150 copies in total CD-ROM (English, Dari and Pashto)

Supplementary audio-visual material

December 2015 Dari, Pashto: 500 copies in total CD-ROM (Dari and Pashto)

Community Needs Survey Report

January 2016 English: 15 copies Dari, Pashto: 15 copies Japanese (Summary): 5 copies

111

Source: ToR of LEAF2

CD-ROM (English, Japanese and Dari)


69 months after the start of Project (February 2016)


4th year extension


79 months after the start of the Project (November 2016)



87 months after the start of the Project (July 2017)


Annual Statistics Report

October 2017 English: 15 copies Dari, Pashto: 600 copies each CD-ROM (English, Dari and Pashto)

Revised Technical Support Tool

October 2017 English: 15 copies Dari, Pashto: 350 copies each CD-ROM (English, Dari and Pashto)

Project Completion Report (Draft)

February 2018 Japanese: 3 copies CD-ROM (Japanese)


The end of the contract of the 4th year (August 2018）


112

7. Measurements to Achieve Project Overall Goal 7.1 Prospect to Achieve Project Overall Goal

Overall Goal Prospect for achievement

Management and quality of literacy education in Afghanistan will be improved.

Could be achieved if LD continues current activities. To evaluate achievement of indicators, collection of accurate data is necessary.

Indicator Current status

Indicator 1: Completion rate of LD courses’ learners reaches 70%.

Partly reached. To expand the effect nationwide, community participation activity and close monitoring are necessary.

Indicator 2: Learning achievement rate of LD courses’ learners reaches 70%.

Partly reached. To expand the effect nationwide, Facilitator Seminar, community participation activity and close monitoring are necessary.

The indicators for the Project Overall Goal were changed in July 2018 as below. The change was reflected in the PDM ver.6.

Indicator Old New

Indicator 1

Completion rates are improved. (NESP: at least 70% of learners complete one round of literacy training)

Completion rate of LD courses’ learners reaches 70%.

Indicator 2 Learning achievement of learners is improved.

Learning achievement rate of LD courses’ learners reaches 70%.

There are mainly 2 reasons for the change of indicators as follows.

① There is no baseline data collected for the both indicators. Therefore, “improvement” of completion rate and learners’ achievement cannot be measured at the time of post project evaluation.

② LD cannot access to the literacy courses for army forces and polices due to some security reasons. Unlike other organizations’ courses, LD cannot implement monitoring and data collection over those courses. Therefore, those courses which are out of LD’s quality control need to be excluded from the target courses of the indicators.

LD usually makes a protocol with organizations which run literacy course and take responsibility for the quality of those literacy courses. Therefore, those courses under the protocol will be

113

recognized as “LD courses” when the achievement of indicators are examined. The values for both indicators are set to 70% based on the expectation that the community participation activity and Facilitator Seminar are expanded to other areas in future. The completion rate can be collected either from the statistic reports or NFE-MIS. Though the completion rate cannot be calculated from the result of statistic report for each year, the last 3 to 5 years’ result can be referred to know a tendency of completion rate. In case NFE-MIS is functioning at the time of post evaluation, the result from NFE-MIS needs to be referred for examining the indicator. As for the learners’ learning achievement, it is recommended that learners’ assessment results are collected randomly from the areas where the community participation activity is/is not implemented by LD. According to the survey conducted by the Project, the learning achievement in the pilot areas where the community participation activities were carried out was approximately 73%, while 65% in other areas. If LD continues the activities which were conducted together with the Project, the possibility of achieving the Overall Goal is moderately high. The methods of monitoring of literacy courses, learners’ assessment and literacy data collection were introduced all over the Afghanistan through the nationwide trainings and the distribution of manuals/guidelines. It was confirmed that most of all DLCs and PLCs practiced these activities. Although there are still points to be improved in their activities, some measures for self-improvement of their activities were introduced to LD during the project period, and it was confirmed that LD practiced those measures in their work. On the other hand, some activities, such as technical support through Facilitator Seminars and Teaching and Observation Guideline and literacy education supported by community participation, just started in 2016 and had been implemented only in the part of Afghanistan. These activities are keys to achieve the Overall Goal. Therefore, it is strongly recommended that LD receives regular monitoring and technical advice from time to time. Technical support for facilitators is the key to improve the quality of literacy education since facilitators’ teaching directly affects the learners’ learning and their achievement. The Revised Teaching and Observation Guideline which contains developed contents for Facilitator Seminars were distributed nationwide in the end of 2017 with the official letter to ask all PLCs and DLCs to implement the seminars. After the introduction of the annual schedule format for the Facilitator Seminar in Herat, Kabul and Nangarhar provinces in February 2018, implementation of the seminar according to the Revised Teaching and Observation Guideline was observed in those areas. However, implementation of the seminar has not confirmed in other areas. As for the community participation activity, the manual was distributed nationwide after the pilot

114

activities in 3 pilot areas. And a plan that LD independently conducts the activity to other areas after February 2018 was created. However, the budget for the implementation of the activity was not approved in 2018; therefore LD remotely introduced, supervised and monitored the activities at the new provinces by using emails, telephone calls, SNS and Skype. The opportunities of monitoring visits were also utilized for the follow-up of the community participation activities. With these efforts, accumulating further experience in the implementation of the activities and securing the budget for the implementation are the keys to expand the activities. 7.2 Establishment of Structure for the Sustainable Implementation of Project Activity All TWGs consisted of LD staffs whose official TOR were in align with the expected activities of each TWG in order to make the project effect sustainable. On the other hand, since it was required cross-department coordination for the smooth implementation of TWG activities, some LD staffs whose official TOR did not match with the TWG activities were also selected as the TWG members. TWG members were asked to participate in TWG activities twice in a week in the busiest time. Therefore, there were some TWG members who could not attend the TWG activities due to other work of them. However, all of the planned TWG activities were conducted in time because of the strong commitment of the both Deputy Minister and Director of Program Department who were in charge of project management and the core members of TWGs. In order to ensure the sustainability of the project effect, the project activities which TWGs implemented were taken over to departments of LD. Monitoring, learners’ assessment, data collection and sharing were already operated at the departments in charge as routine tasks using the tools and manuals developed by LD and the Project. In terms of capacity building of literacy facilitators through Facilitator Seminars and community participation activities, the plans of operation were also made including the period after project termination by departments responsible for each activity. Therefore, it can be said that Afghan side established the implementation structure and developed plans of operation to achieve the Overall Goal as shown in Table 54 below.

115

Table 54: Departments of LD Corresponding to the Prospective Outputs Outputs Departments in charge and their expected activities

Monitoring of literacy courses

M&E Unit uses the developed materials for supervising the monitoring activities conducted by PLCs and DLCs.

Learners’ assessment Teacher Training Unit together with PLCs supervise the Facilitator Seminars which DLCs conduct. M&E Unit confirms the implementation of Facilitator Seminars during their business trip to local areas.

Data collection and sharing Statistics & Planning General Department collects and analyzes the literacy data and develops annual status reports and share them with stakeholders.

Technical support (Facilitator Seminar)

Teacher Training Unit promotes the Facilitator Seminars nationwide using the Revised Teaching and Observation Guideline.

Technical support (Community participation for the promotion of literacy education)

National Mobilization & Analysis Directorate and Literacy Program Directorate promote literacy education involving communities nationwide using Community Participation Manual which was developed through the Project.

Source: LEAF2

7.3 Recommendations on Monitoring of Literacy Education In order to secure the sustainability of project outputs and to achieve the Overall Goal of the Project, it is required to have a state that monitoring of literacy education is conducted properly according to Monitoring Manual all over Afghanistan and monitoring results are compiled and analyzed for improving literacy education. As written in the previous chapter, in the 4th project year, the Project reviewed how PLCs and DLCs implemented the monitoring system which was introduced by the Project. As a result, it was found that it was difficult to say that the new monitoring system was firmly established and continuous follow-up was needed. So, as a sustainable follow-up activity was set up, a system that M&E unit staff of LD will check how PLCs and DLCs conducted monitoring activities on site when they visited them and instruct them what to do for improvement, utilizing the opportunities of official business trips to provinces by M&E unit staff which was already institutionalized in LD. Although this is a small step, this could definitely increase the number of PLCs and DLCs which implement proper monitoring little by little because the official business trips to provinces by M&E unit staff are annually conducted. Therefore, it is recommended that this should be continued even after completion of the Project.

116

When reviewing how PLCs and DLCs implemented the monitoring system, it was also found that there were institutional and systematic problems as reasons why PLCs and DLCs could not conduct monitoring activities properly. First of all, many DLCs did not have budgets for monitoring activities because the necessary budgets were not allocated or they were not disbursed even if they were allocated, although monitoring activities required certain amounts of money for printing Monitoring Forms and going to literacy courses regularly. Second, there was a lack of female DLC monitors and many female literacy courses were not actually monitored, although female monitors were required to monitor female literacy courses because it was culturally very difficult that men entered female literacy courses. Furthermore, monitoring related reports were not properly submitted nor managed because the general reporting system including monitoring reports was not established (especially, from PLCs to LD and from DLCs to PLCs) at LD, although it was necessary to report collected monitoring results timely to relevant offices to analyze the monitoring results. In order to improve the situations, the Project took several measures such as issuing official letters to PLCs and DLCs all over Afghanistan to improve the situations and establishing a system that M&E unit staff would check and instruct in terms of monitoring activities at the time of their business trips. While it is expected that PLCs and DLCs improve their monitoring activities little by little, it is also recommended that LD should review its current organization and institution and implement improvement measures because it is difficult for each PLC and DLC to solve these problems individually. 7.4 Recommendations on Learners’ Learning Assessments When the existing literacy textbook is replaced with a new literacy textbook developed by UNESCO, it is recommended to revise the questions of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd assessments in align with the contents of the new textbook. However, it is also recommended that the system of assessment such as the structure of assessment and the timing of assessment implementation should not be drastically changed to avoid confusion among DLCs and literacy facilitators. When the contents of the assessment are revised, it is recommended that PLC and DLC staff be provided with a training on the revised assessments. 7.5 Recommendations on Literacy Class Data Collection and Reporting 7.5.1 Continuous Support for PLCs/DLCs Although submission rate from PLCs improved, LD’s follow-up to PLCs will be necessary over the next few years in order to maintain the submission rate of reports. As has been mentioned, compilation of collected data into annual status report and publication by printing or uploading on their website are not so challenging for LD anymore. However, LD’s follow-up to PLCs and DLCs to collect proper data will remain essential, and LD needs to secure personnel and budget necessary to do the follow-up.

117

7.5.2 Calculation of Graduation Rate/Grasp of Learning Achievement To obtain graduation rate and learning achievement efficiently, utilization of NFE-MIS is necessary. To utilize NFE-MIS as soon as possible, data which is entered to NFE-MIS should be selected or the sufficient number of personnel for data entry should be placed. If these are difficult, considering other measures for collecting required data not relying on only NFE-MIS, such as sample survey, should remain as an issue. 7.6 Recommendations on Technical Support for Facilitators To improve the facilitators’ teaching skills, expansion of Facilitator Seminar using the Revised Teaching and Observation Guideline nationwide is necessary. LD is expected to continue their efforts on the expansion of the FS, as they have done in Herat, Kabul and Nangarhar, to other areas and also to monitor the implementation of the activities to confirm whether it is conducted based on the developed annual plan and the guideline. 7.7 Recommendations on Community Participation Activity 7.7.1 Flexible Application of Rules on Implementation of Literacy Education (Rules and Regulations) Through the implementation of community participation activity, it was pointed out that there are some issues caused by the rigid application of the Rules and Regulation. For example, each facilitator is obligated to have 2 classes whose learners total 15 – 25 per class. However, there are many cases when the number of learners was lower than this number, the facilitators reported a larger number than the actual number of learners or gave up opening the courses. Also, most male learners requested to hold the literacy courses after work, but evening time is outside working hours of facilitators and monitors. Therefore, opening evening courses responding to their request is difficult. Such a situation is one of the reasons for unavailability of learners in spite of a great number of illiterates and widespread fake reporting habit. Also, inconvenient time, period and place for the literacy courses will increase the number of dropouts. Therefore, it is required to apply the Rules and Regulations more flexibly to meet the learners’ needs and allow the implementing agencies in the field (such as DLC) to open and operate literacy courses flexibly. Until the middle of 2017, the Project considered the current Rules and Regulation itself rigid, however, it was found out that it has enough flexibility to meet the needs mentioned above but the application by LD, PLC and DLC staff is rigid. Therefore, it is required for LD to share common understanding on how to apply the Rules and Regulations among themselves and share the information with PLCs and DLCs so that they can be flexible about the application of the Rules and Regulations with confidence. This point was discussed and shared between LD and the Project in April 2018.

118

7.7.2 Expansion of Community Participation Activity Nationwide It was found out from DLC’s monitoring and the results of Baseline Survey and End-line Survey that community participation activity contributes to improvement of awareness and impression of community people toward literacy courses, increase of variety and amount of support from community people to literacy courses, assured operation of literacy courses by community people’s monitoring, improvement of attendance rate of facilitators and learners and decrease of the number of dropouts. Observing this result, LD decided to continue community participation activity and expand the implementation areas nationwide. However, it is not realistic to expand the areas nationwide at once due to the limitation of human resources and budget. Therefore, besides the continuation of activity in the first pilot areas, that is, Kama district in Nangarhar province, Mirbacha Kot district in Kabul province and Mazar-e-Sharif city in Balkh province, new target areas were decided to be included from the next cycle of the course. The new target areas are Bihsud district in Nangarhar province, Guldara district in Kabul province and Nahre Shahi district in Balkh province which are the neighboring districts of the current pilot areas, Herat city in Herat province and Yakawlang district in Bamyan province. Upon expansion of the areas, LD mainly introduced, supervised and monitored the activity at the new provinces by emails, telephone calls and monitoring visits. Simultaneously, Kama DLC, Mirbacha Kot DLC and Mazar-e-Sharif DLC which already had experience from the activities sometimes supported the neighbor districts. It is not so difficult to operate community participation activity after the first cycle. However, the introduction of the activity at the beginning is the most difficult for the DLC and PLC staff who are in lack of the similar experience in the past. From the experience in the new pilot areas, it was found out that, before implementation of the activity, provision of the training for PLC and DLC staff on the contents of the Community Participation Manual and procedures of community participation activity is a must. Also, since it is required to monitor and support DLCs from time to time, it is better to implement the training near Kabul city. LD tried to secure the monitoring trip budget for community participation activity, but the requested budget was not approved by the Ministry of Education in 2018. Such difficulty might happen in the future as well. In that case, it is appropriate to gradually expand the areas, beginning from a location near Kabul, so that LD can monitor and support closely. Besides, to continue and expand this activity, the proper TOR for each staff of relevant departments is necessary. Although the department in charge is already fixed, the clear TOR including the tasks of the community participation activity has not yet issued. Also, during the project period, TWG5 is in charge of this activity, however after the Project, this working group might not continue to exist. Therefore, to secure the continuous implementation of the community participation activity, development of TOR for each staff in the relevant departments was suggested from the Project to LD in July 2018 and LD is currently working on it.

119

8. Lessons and Recommendations for the Similar Projects and Sector 8.1 Limitations of Disseminations of Manuals and Guidelines through Training Project developed many manuals and guidelines regarding literacy education administration. Assuming that it would be very difficult for PLCs and DLCs to implement the new system properly if the manuals and guidelines were just distributed without any explanations, the Project conducted the nationwide training on them which targeted even DLC monitors who were responsible for monitoring literacy courses in the field when the developed manuals and guidelines were disseminated. While there were PLC and DLC staff members who started implementing the tasks according to the manuals and guidelines after the training, it was found as well that many PLC and DLC staff members did not think that they were required to implement what they learnt at the training as their ordinary tasks because they did not receive any official letters. The Project made efforts to make the training participants (PLC and DLC staff members) think that the contents of the manuals and guidelines became their ordinary tasks after the training. For example, cover pages of the manuals and guidelines had an official logo of LD and trainers of the training were from LD and PLCs. However, this was not enough. One reason for this could be that there were many general training programs for government officials which were implemented by various donor agencies and NGOs after the Taliban regime was collapsed, and the training participants considered that even the training program for the manuals and guidelines developed by the Project was one of such general training programs. Besides, as mentioned above, another reason could be that LD did not issue official letters to PLCs and DLCs for the manuals and guidelines even though they were distributed to PLCs and DLCs. Furthermore, although the tasks required by the manuals and guidelines need certain budgets, which were not a lot at all, the required budgets were not secured and PLC and DLC staff members were forced to pay the necessary amounts from their own pockets. This could hinder the implementation of activities written in the manuals and guidelines. When any training programs on public administration manuals and guidelines are conducted in countries where many international supports exist, it is necessary to emphasize that the training program is directly related to participants’ ordinary tasks and what they learn at the training should be implemented right after the training. Also, when new manuals and guidelines which improve ordinary tasks of governmental offices are disseminated, it is necessary to follow the common procedures of the governmental offices: for example, official letters should be issued if they are usually issued. Moreover, when the improvement of ordinary tasks of governmental offices requires additional budgets, it is necessary to minimize the increase of budgets when manuals and guidelines are developed and to try to secure the additional budgets as soon as possible if the additional budgets are required.

120

8.2 Improvement of Facilitator-Centered Teaching Method Regarding the teaching method of school education in Afghanistan in recent years, a learner-centered teaching method proposed by UNESCO is implemented. The teaching method focusing on learners’ understanding is introduced at the teacher training course of universities and in-service training of school teachers, and the method is promoted to implement in school education. In literacy education, on the other hand, it is not mandatory that literacy class facilitators graduate from the teacher training course, and most of them had less opportunity to learn the teaching method systematically. Therefore, their familiar teaching method, one-sided explanation by a teacher, was the mainstream in former school education in Afghanistan. Even now, most of the facilitators follow this method, and some of LD/PLC/DLC staff still consider such teaching methods are not problem. Considering the learner-centered teaching method, the Project mainly introduced the teaching method of “how to teach” rather than “what to teach” through trainings and developed “Teaching and Observation Guideline”. In the beginning, not all counterparts approved this teaching method. However, since the Project explained the effective teaching theories and skills to them in the polite way and discussed a lot, the Project was able to obtain their understanding. When the similar projects are implemented, these approaches might be effective. 8.3 Caution and Measures for Fake Reporting such as Report of an Excessive Number of Learners LD has a regulation that at least 15 learners are necessary to establish a literacy course. However, it was reported that when the number of learners was less than 15 in a literacy course, the number was inflated, and the literacy course was established. In addition, when the Project visited the literacy classes, fake learners who did not register for the literacy course or learners under 15-year-old attended the class. The same problems are reported not only in literacy education but also in other fields of Afghanistan. Therefore, it is necessary to acknowledge the fake reporting. In addition, the first step to reform the political system is to grasp the situation and find problems. However, at the same time, it is necessary to look out for this kind of fake reports, not taking the collected data literally and carefully observing what happens in the field. In case a fake report is found, an antidote to prevent such behavior becomes necessary. The project found that a system to monitor activities together with communities and acceptance of flexible management according to the actual condition of the area was effective in such cases. 8.4 Importance of Promotion of Understanding of Surrounding People and Support of Influential People in Community In adult literacy education, not only motivation of the learners themselves but understanding and support from the people around them are vitally important. This point was focused on from the beginning of community participation activity, and influential people in the area such as

121

provincial governor, district governor, the village head, elders and religious leaders were involved from the planning stage. This was very effective to promote positive understanding of learners’ family members and community people toward literacy education. Prior to the introduction of the community participation activity, DLC monitors and facilitators conducted awareness raising activities for literacy education; however, it was found that explanation and persuasion from influential people in the village are far more effective than those from DLC staff. Especially regarding female illiterates, there were some family members who opposed to their registration and attending the literacy courses; however, in some cases, they changed their mind due to the explanation and persuasion from VLC and GLC whose members were influential people in the area. Therefore, to create a cooperative atmosphere and environment for education (especially adult education), it is the key to let the influential people in the area understand contents of the activities and establish the structure to obtain their support. Simultaneously, upon creation of such a committee, the inclusion of female members is a must especially when female courses are planned to be conducted. It is assumed that there are not so many women who have socially higher positions or are respected in Afghanistan. However, culturally, it is difficult for men to meet women; therefore, committees consisting of only men are quite limited to know the women’s needs and their thoughts. Thus, it is desirable to let elder women who are culturally respected and leaders of female Shura (committee) and women’s group participate in this activity. 8.5 Necessity of Finding Opportunities for Collaboration with Skills Training In adult literacy education, how to attract learners’ interest and motivate them to keep learning are vitally important since they are busy with their work, household chores, and child-rearing. LD’s literacy course is basically only for learning literacy, however it faces a large challenge to collect learners. To make the courses more attractive, as learners and graduates often requested, it might be better to combine some skill training which is useful for learners’ life with literacy courses. Such training can be the skills training such as embroidery, food processing, tailoring, agriculture, livestock raising and business training such as entrepreneurship, marketing and household accounts keeping. In the current situation, it is difficult for LD to implement such courses by themselves due to financial, personnel and technical aspects. However, in order to further develop the literacy education, it is essential to enrich the educational contents considering the collaboration with JICA projects which support other sectors, NGOs, international organizations and companies which conduct such skills training. Learning which leads to livelihood betterment as well could not only increase learners’ motivation but also help to obtain family members’ understanding and support; therefore, the possibility to collaborate with such training is recommended to be considered.

the project on improvement of literacy education...

Documents