Group 8Phil Rose (UK),Eiad Yafi (Syria),Magdalena Belof (PL),Jii Neuberg (CZ),Petra Novkov (CZ) rka Mertov (CZ)Jitka Rabitsch Adamikov (CZ)

EPDET 2011, Vilanec

HRDP (World Bank)$ 24 Mio8 years4 components: Comunity Education PilotGirls Secondary Education Support PilotCapacity Building for Schools / CommunityPolicy Development Planning & Resaarch

Has primary education enrolment increased in the project areas?

Was primary education quality improved in project areas?

Was girls attendance in secondary school increased as planned?

Has the project led to changes in policy planning or education systems?

Has the project led to an increase in paternal participation? 6. Could all or part of the project be scaled up or replicated elsewhere in the country?

Wider Macroeconomic EvolutionInputsActivitiesOutputsInformationTrainingExpertsCEF ExpandedTrained staffFunds for poor girls (in secondary education) Better stats.MoneyPSGFunding allocationTA SupportResearch

Wider Macroeconomic EvolutionInputsActivitiesOutputsInformationM/ L OutcomesS/T OutcomesTrainingExpertsCEF ExpandedTrained staffFunds for poor girls (in secondary education) Better stats.MoneyPSGFunding allocationTA SupportResearchParental participationPilot mainstreamed in MOEC + then expanded Improved quality in primary ed.Raised primary enrolmentImproved opportunity & quality for sec. ed.for girlsImpactWider education benefits:

Economic, Health, Etc..Stronger ed. systems, policy and planning

Wider Macroeconomic EvolutionInputsActivitiesOutputsInformationM/ L OutcomesS/T OutcomesTrainingExpertsCEF ExpandedTrained staffFunds for poor girls (in secondary education) Better stats.MoneyPSGFunding allocationTA SupportResearchParental participationPilot mainstreamed in MOEC + then expanded Improved quality in primary ed.Raised primary enrolmentImproved opportunity & quality for sec. ed.for girlsImpactWider education benefits:

Economic, Health, Etc..AssumptionsStronger ed. systems, policy and planningAll other required complementary efforts to improve access & quality

Elite capture

Teachers cooperatee

Trained staff will retainGovt. policy stableOther donor & Govt. programmsPilot areas characteristicsWorld Bank policy & proceduresContext:

1. Has primary education enrolment increased in the project areas?

SUB-QUESTIONTYPE OF Q.DESIGNDATA SOURCESSAMPLE OR CENCUSDATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTDATA ANALYSIS1.A. How much?DBEF.& AF.without comparison groupEducation Management Information System (EMIS)CENSUSPrimary enrolment figuresDescriptive statistics 1.B How many children enrolled are attending regularly and how many complete? DBEF.& AF.without comparison groupEMISCENSUSAttendance & completion figures Descriptive statistics1.C Is there a difference between girls and boys?NBEF.& AF.without comparison groupEMISCENSUSGender disaggregationDescriptive statistics1.D. Can any improvement be attributed to the 4 program components?C+EPRE & POSTNoneqiv. comparison Project reports, stakeholdersStratified random samplesSurvey structured inteviewContent analysis

2. Was primary education quality improved in project areas?

SUB-QUESTIONTYPE OF Q.DESIGNDATA SOURCESSAMPLE OR CENCUSDATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTDATA ANALYSIS2.A Has there been an increase in transition to secondary schools?NBEF.& AF.without comparison groupEMISCENSUSSecondary enrolment figuresDescriptive statistics 2.B Has early grade reading improved?NBEF.& AF.without comparison groupTest soresSimple random sampleTest recordsDescriptive statistics2.C. Is there a difference between boys and girls?NBEF.& AF.without comparison groupEMISCENSUSGender disaggregationDescriptive statistics2.D What is the attitude of teachers has their behavior change?DONE SHOTStakeholdersStratified random samplesFocus groups of teachers, pupils, parents, heads + expert judgment Content analysis

6. Could all or part of the project be scaled up or replicated elsewhere in the country?

SUB-QUESTIONTYPE OF Q.DESIGNDATA SOURCESSAMPLE OR CENCUSDATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTDATA ANALYSIS6.A. Has the project approach been adopted by MOEC staff other than those than in the PSG?DONE SHOTMOEC records + staffPurposeful samplePolicy documents and semi-structured interviewsCoded content analysis 6.B. Are any/all of the components cost effective comparing to other programs in Tanzania?NCORRELATIONALBudgetCENSUSBudget filesCost benefit analysis6.C. Have any project benefits operated on support from other external programs?DONE SHOT6.D. Are there any pilar/characteristic in the project area which may not be apply elsewhere?DSIMPLE CROSS -SEC

3. Was girls attendance in secondary school increased as planned?

SUB-QUESTIONTYPE OF Q.DESIGNDATA SOURCESSAMPLE OR CENCUSDATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTDATA ANALYSIS3.A. Has the project targeted for lower secondary been met?NONE SHOT3.B. Has the target for upper secondary been met?NONE SHOT3.C. How many girls have graduated at each level?DONE SHOT3.D. Has there been an improvement in livelihoods for those graduating? C+ECASE STUDIES

4. Has the project led to changes in policy planning or education systems?

SUB-QUESTIONTYPE OF Q.DESIGNDATA SOURCESSAMPLE OR CENCUSDATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTDATA ANALYSIS4.A. What changes has been made as a result of the project? C+ECASUAL TRACINGSTRATEGY4.B. How has schools governance changed in the project areas?C+ECASE STUDIES4.C. What changes have taken place in community involvement in education?C+ECASE STUDIES

5. Has the project led to an increase in paternal participation?

SUB-QUESTIONTYPE OF Q.DESIGNDATA SOURCESSAMPLE OR CENCUSDATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTDATA ANALYSIS5.A. How much has participation increased?NBEF.& AF.without comparison group5.B. Are there significant differences in different project areas?DSIMPLE CROSS-SEC.5.C. What are the main reasons that parents are participating?DPANEL DESIGN

This shows the need

****