Final Flor Gonzales & Flor Ver 2

8/9/2019 Final Flor Gonzales & Flor Ver 2

1/22

Purpose of the Evaluation

To determine the effectiveness of community-basedinterventions under theSecond Education Development Project (EDPII) in termsof:

Education Outcomes; Economic Outcomes; and Institutional Empowerment Outcomes.

1


2/22

Background:What is EDP II?

2

Second Education Development Project (EDP II)

Lao education sectors response to MDG No. 2: UniversalAccess to Primary Education.

Financed by the World Bank and implemented by theMinistry of Education of Government of Laos (GOL).

Goal: To increase primary school enrollment andcompletion of the 19 poorest districts of the six poorestprovinces in Lao PDR.


3/22

Background:Components of EDP II

3

Component One: increase access and completionof primary education in the 19 poorest districtsthrough financing community-based contracting forclassroom construction, giving community grantsfor schooling program and providing in-service

teacher training. Component Two: improve the quality of primary

education by financing textbooks and teachers'guides, and strengthening the assessment ofstudent learning outcomes

Component Three: strengthen capacities forpolicy analysis and management within the Ministryof Education


4/22

Background:EDPII Sites

4

Phongsaly Luang Namtha Oudomxay Houaphan Xekong Attapeu


5/22

Evaluation Method and Design

5

Data Gathering

Secondary Data AnalysisSurvey Questionnaires

Focus Group DiscussionSurvey QuestionnairesKey Informant Interviews

Secondary Data AnalysisSurvey QuestionnairesFocus Group DiscussionKey Informant Interviews

Case Study

Baseline

October-November 2005

Midterm

April-May 2007

Terminal

November-December 2009


6/22


7/22

Education Outcomes

Promotion Rate

7

Beneficiary:Baseline to Midterm: 22.19 (p>.01)Baseline to Terminal: 19.78% (p>.05)ComparisonBaseline to Terminal: 9.71% (p>.05)

Beneficiary Female:Baseline to Terminal: 28.86% (p>.01)Comparison Female:Baseline to Terminal: 5.56% (n.s.)


8/22

Education Outcomes

Repetition Rate

8

Total:Baseline to Terminal: 28.67% (p>.01)Beneficiary:Baseline to Terminal: -32.02% (p>.01)ComparisonBaseline to Terminal: -27.29% (p>.01)

Total Female:Baseline to Terminal: 29.00% (p>.01)Beneficiary:Baseline to Terminal: -40.30% (p>.001)ComparisonBaseline to Terminal: -16.54% (p>.05)


9/22


10/22


11/22

Economic Outcomes

Observations on Community-Based Construction

11

Lower costs are due to low overhead district level procurement resulting to economies of scale savings on contractors fees

Quality of construction materials are generally good but may not becompliant to school facilities standards

Substantial savings on manpower costs Volunteerism and collective effort account for savings of 10 to 90 percent in

manpower costs. Savings are used to build toilets and tap water supply Labor cost estimated at Kip 30,000-40,000/person-day, a portion of which is

contributed as Sweat Equity.


12/22

Institutional Empowerment

Social capital: Networking Links

12


13/22

Institutional EmpowermentSocial capital: Community Participation

13

Most significant change in sample villages was fullparticipation of members in school and villagedevelopment

Indicative of CBCs potential as ideal model for schooldevelopment


14/22

Institutional EmpowermentSocial capital: Community Initiatives for Project Sustainability

14

Redirect support on childrens needs and schoolmaintenance

Increase students, parents and teachers accountability. Develop VEDC School Management Manual Introduce village-wide income generating projects Introduce social protection measures such as forced savings,

village education fund

Sustain information campaigns on value of education Introduce village support system


15/22


Social capital: Community Equity

15


16/22


VEDC Empowerment: Observations

16

Autonomy in decision-making

Shift of VEDC leadership style from consultative toparticipative

More focused aspirations for secondary school andpre-school

Heightened sense of project ownership amongmembers


17/22


School development: Before and After

17

BEFORE AFTER


18/22


Community Impression of EDPII: Assistance Received

18

Provision of work opportunities

Conduct of business activities

Implementation of teacher training

Awarding of community grants

Construction of permanent schools

Strengthening social capital


19/22

Impact of Community Interventions

A) Education Outcomes

19

Significant increases in:Enrollment in beneficiary villagesFemale enrollmentGrades 1 and 2 enrollmentPromotion and completion rate

Significant decrease repetition rate


20/22

Impactof Community Intervention:


20

Improved village heads capacity inschool management

Enhanced community participation Improved community initiatives for

project sustainability

Increased community equity foreducation

Increased empowerment Heightened sense of project ownership Increased female representation in

VEDC


21/22


22/22

In terms of Community Learning

EDP II has shown us that there is more toeducational evaluation than the assessment of

individual, group, or cohort learning outcomes

Through educational development projectinterventions, communities like individuals canlearn.

22

Final Flor Gonzales & Flor Ver 2

Documents

Transcript of Final Flor Gonzales & Flor Ver 2