Rapport sur la mise en œuvre et les résultats : Répondre aux besoins en enseignants pour le projet Éducation pour tous

i Document of The World Bank Report No: ICR2427 IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT (IDA-H4600) ON A PROPOSED GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR3.8 MILLION (US$6.0 MILLION EQUIVALENT) TO THE REPUBLIC OF HAITI FOR A MEETING TEACHER NEEDS FOR EDUCATION FOR ALL PROJECT December 19, 2012 Human Development Sector Caribbean Country Management Unit-Haiti Latin America and the Caribbean Region Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized ii CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (Exchange Rate Effective August 30, 2012) Currency Unit = Haitian Gourdes (HTG) HTG1.00 = US$ 0.0238 US$ 1.00 = 42.05 FISCAL YEAR January 1 – December 31 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS AFD Agence F rançaise de D éveloppement (French Development Agency) APG - 1 First Adaptable Program Grant APG - 2 Second Adaptable Program Grant BUDEX Bureau D épartemental des E xamens (Regional Examinations Office) BUNEX Bureau N ational des E xamens (National Examinations Office) CAS Country Assistance Strategy CFAA Country Financial Accountability Assessment CIDA Canadian International Development Agency COSPE Consortium des Organisations du Secteur Priv é de l' Education (Consortium of Private Sector Education Organizations) CPAR Country Procurement Assessment Review CS - FIA Comité de suivi - FIA (FIA Steering Committee ) DAA Direction des A ffaires A dministratives ( Department of Administrative Affairs ) DCQ Direction du C urriculum et de la Q ualité ( Department of Curriculum and Quality ) DDE Directions D épartementales de l ’ E ducation (Regional Education Departments) DEF Direction de l’ E ns eignement F ondamentale (Department of Basic Education) DFP Direction de la F ormation et du P erfectionnement (Department of Training and Professional Development) DRH Direction des R essources H umaines ( Department of Human Ressources) ECD Early Childhood Development EFA Education For All EFA FTI Education For All Fast Track Initiative EFACAP Ecole Fondamentale d’Application et Centre d ’Appui Pédagogique ( Teacher Professional Development Center ) EFCU External Financing Coordination Unit EGRA Early Grade Reading Assessment EGRO I/II Economic Governance and Reform Operations (I/II) EU European Union FIA Formation I nitial A ccélerée (Accelerated Teacher Training) FMR Financial Management Reports GDP Gross Domestic Product GER Gross Enrollment Rate (total number of students enrolled in a particular level (s) divided by the total population of school - age children for the same level (s) ) iii GIR Gross Intake Rate (total number of students enrolled in first grade (or other entry year such as kindergarten) divided by the total population of entry year-age children) GoH Government of Haiti HIPC Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative HIPC II Enhanced Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative ICT Information and Communication Technology IDA International Development Association IDB Inter-American Development Bank IES Institutions de l’Enseignement Superièure (Higher Education Institutions) IFM Institut s de formation des maîtres (Teacher Preparation Institutes) IFR Interim Financial Report ISN Interim Strategy Note LOI Language of Instruction M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MDG Millennium Development Goals MENFP Ministère de l’Education Nationale et de la Formation Professionnelle (National Ministry of Education and Professional Training) MINUSTAH United Nations Military Force for Stabilization in Haiti MOF Ministry of Finance MPCE Ministry of Planning and External Cooperation NER Net Enrollment Rates (total number of students of the appropriate school-age for a particular level, divided by the total population of that age) NGO Non-Governmental Organization PCF Post-Conflict Fund PCU Project Coordination Unit PEMFAR Public Expenditure Management and Financial Accountability Review PFM Public Financial Management PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper PTU Project Technical Unit SNA/EPT Stratégie N ationale de l ’ A lphabétisation et de l’ E ducation P our T ous (National Literacy and Education For All Strategy) UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization UNICEF United Nations Childrens’ Fund USAID United States Agency for International Development Vice President: Hasan Tuluy Country Director (Special Envoy): Alexandre Abrantes Sector Manager: Reema Nayar Project Team Leader: Patrick Ramanantoinina ICR Team Leader: Patrick Ramanantoinina ICR Primary Author: Richard J. Carroll iv HAITI Meeting Teacher Needs for Education for All Project CONTENTS Data Sheet A. B ASIC I NFORMATION .............................................................................................................. V B. K EY D ATES ............................................................................................................................. V C. R ATINGS S UMMARY ............................................................................................................... V D. S ECTOR AND T HEME C ODES .................................................................................................. VI E. B ANK S TAFF ........................................................................................................................... VI F. R ESULTS F RAMEWORK A NALYSIS ......................................................................................... VI G. R ATINGS OF P ROJECT P ERFORMANCE IN ISR S ...................................................................... IX H. R ESTRUCTURING ( IF ANY ) ..................................................................................................... IX I. D ISBURSEMENT P ROFILE ......................................................................................................... X 1. P ROJECT C ONTEXT , D EVELOPMENT O BJECTIVES AND D ESIGN .............................................. 1 1.1 Context at Appraisal ......................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Original Project Development Objectives (PDO) and Key Indicators............................. 2 1.3 Revised PDO (as approved by original approving authority) and Key Indicators, and reasons/justification................................................................................................................ 3 1.4 Main Beneficiaries ............................................................................................................ 3 1.5 Original Components........................................................................................................ 3 1.6 Revised Components ......................................................................................................... 4 1.7 Other significant changes ................................................................................................. 4 2. K EY F ACTORS A FFECTING I MPLEMENTATION AND O UTCOMES ............................................. 4 2.1 Project Preparation, Design and Quality at Entry ........................................................... 4 2.2 Implementation ................................................................................................................. 6 2.3 Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Design, Implementation and Utilization .................. 7 2.4 Safeguard and Fiduciary Compliance .............................................................................. 8 2.5 Post-completion Operation/Next Phase............................................................................ 8 3. A SSESSMENT OF O UTCOMES ................................................................................................... 8 3.1 Relevance of Objectives, Design and Implementation ...................................................... 8 3.2 Achievement of Project Development Objectives ........................................................... 10 3.3 Efficiency ........................................................................................................................ 11 3.4 Justification of Overall Outcome Rating ........................................................................ 12 3.5 Overarching Themes, Other Outcomes and Impacts ...................................................... 12 3.6 Summary of Findings of Beneficiary Survey and/or Stakeholder Workshops ................ 12 4. A SSESSMENT OF R ISK TO D EVELOPMENT O UTCOME ............................................................ 13 5. A SSESSMENT OF B ANK AND B ORROWER P ERFORMANCE ..................................................... 13 5.1 Bank Performance .......................................................................................................... 13 5.2 Borrower Performance ................................................................................................... 14 6. L ESSONS L EARNED ................................................................................................................ 15 7. C OMMENTS ON I SSUES R AISED BY B ORROWER /I MPLEMENTING A GENCIES /P ARTNERS ...... 16 A NNEX 1. P ROJECT C OSTS AND F INANCING ............................................................................. 17 A NNEX 2. O UTPUTS BY C OMPONENT ........................................................................................ 18 A NNEX 3. E CONOMIC AND F INANCIAL A NALYSIS .................................................................... 19 A NNEX 4. B ANK L ENDING AND I MPLEMENTATION S UPPORT /S UPERVISION P ROCESSES ......... 21 A NNEX 5. B ENEFICIARY S URVEY R ESULTS .............................................................................. 23 A NNEX 6. S TAKEHOLDER W ORKSHOP R EPORT AND R ESULTS ................................................. 24 A NNEX 7. S UMMARY OF B ORROWER ' S ICR AND / OR C OMMENTS ON D RAFT ICR .................... 25 A NNEX 8. C OMMENTS OF C OFINANCIERS AND O THER P ARTNERS /S TAKEHOLDERS ................ 38 A NNEX 9. L IST OF S UPPORTING D OCUMENTS ........................................................................... 39 v A. Basic Information Country: Haiti Project Name: HT - MEETING TEACHER NEEDS FOR EFA Project ID: P106621 L/C/TF Number(s): IDA-H3750 ICR Date: 11/30/2012 ICR Type: Core ICR Lending Instrument: SIL Borrower: GOVERNMENT OF HAITI Original Total Commitment: XDR 3.80M Disbursed Amount: XDR 3.76M Revised Amount: XDR 3.80M Environmental Category: C Implementing Agencies: Ministry of Education , Fonds d'Assistance Economique at Sociale Cofinanciers and Other External Partners: B. Key Dates Process Date Process Original Date Revised / Actual Date(s) Concept Review: 10/30/2007 Effectiveness: 09/26/2008 09/26/2008 Appraisal: 03/03/2008 Restructuring(s): 10/27/2010 4/27/2012 Approval: 04/29/2008 Mid-term Review: Closing: 01/15/2013 06/30/2012 C. Ratings Summary C.1 Performance Rating by ICR Outcomes: MS Risk to Development Outcome: Substantial Bank Performance: MS Borrower Performance: MS C.2 Detailed Ratings of Bank and Borrower Performance (by ICR) Bank Ratings Borrower Ratings Quality at Entry: MU Government: MU Quality of Supervision: S Implementing Agency/Agencies: MS vi Overall Bank Performance: MS Overall Borrower Performance: MS C.3 Quality at Entry and Implementation Performance Indicators Implementation Performance Indicators QAG Assessments (if any) Rating Potential Problem Project at any time (Yes/No): Yes Quality at Entry (QEA): None Problem Project at any time (Yes/No): Yes Quality of Supervision (QSA): None DO rating before Closing/Inactive status: Moderately Satisfactory D. Sector and Theme Codes Original Actual Sector Code (as % of total Bank financing) Central government administration 35 35 Sub-national government administration 17 17 Tertiary education 48 48 Theme Code (as % of total Bank financing) Education for all 100 100 E. Bank Staff Positions At ICR At Approval Vice President: Hasan Tuluy Pamela Cox Country Director: Alexander V. Abrantes (Special Envoy) Yvonne M. Tsikata Sector Manager: Reema Nayar Eduardo Velez Project Team Leader: Patrick Philippe Ramanantoanina Raja Bentaouet Kattan ICR Team Leader: Patrick Philippe Ramanantoanina ICR Primary Author: Richard J. Carroll F. Results Framework Analysis Project Development Objectives (from Project Appraisal Document) This project would support the Government of Haiti (GoH) in the development and implementation of an accelerated teacher preparation program. Revised Project Development Objectives (as approved by original approving authority) No revisions. vii (a) PDO Indicator(s) Indicator Baseline Value Original Target Values (from approval documents) Formally Revised Target Values Actual Value Achieved at Completion or Target Years Indicator 1 : 900 new teachers certified by program end and 1,400 complete the first year of practice teaching Value (quantitative or Qualitative) less than 500 less than 1,000 2,500 2,500 2,500 (Cohort 3) 900 1,400 Dropped 1,390 1,526 Dropped Date achieved 04/01/2008 01/15/2013 06/30/2012 06/30/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) First and second revised targets met and exceeded. Targets were revised at 10/27/2010 restructuring because of capacity constraints that were exacerbated by the 2010 earthquake. Cohort 3 was dropped in 4/27/2012 restructuring, because of earlier than planned Project closure, but was picked up by the Second Adaptable Program Grant (APG-2). Indicator 2 : Of those certified, at least 80% are employed as teachers; at least 10% of those are employed in the public sector Value (quantitative or Qualitative) N/A N/A 80% 50% 80% 10% Data to be collected in early 2013 Date achieved 04/01/2008 01/15/2013 09/30/2012 10/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) Target revised downward to 10% at the 04/27/2012 restructuring because of uncertainties in the overall government’s ability to hire employees, and because many public sector teachers are hired on a contractual basis. The Bank is working with the Government to collect data for this indicator prior to final ICR review by Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) of the Bank. Indicator 3 : Newly certified teachers complete high school (Bac II) and three-year teacher preparation program. At least 90% of student teachers who complete three-year program are successfully certified Value (quantitative or Qualitative) N/A 90% No revision 100% Date achieved 04/01/2008 01/15/2013 08/31/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) Target met and exceeded. All 1,390 student teachers who have completed the three-year training are certified. Indicator 4 : At least 40% of newly certified teachers work in rural areas Value (quantitative or Qualitative) N/A 70% 40% 60% estimated. Data to be verified in early 2013 Date achieved 04/01/2008 01/15/2013 09/30/2012 10/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) Target was reduced at the 10/27/2010 restructuring because of the new geographic dispersion of IFMs that could continue their participation in the Project after the earthquake. The remaining IFMs were more oriented to urban areas than the original group of IFMs. The Bank is working with the Government to collect data for this indicator prior to final ICR review by IEG. viii Indicator 5 : Auditors find satisfactory financial implementation of MENFP-IFM contracts Value (quantitative or Qualitative) N/A Yes No revision Yes Date achieved 04/01/2008 01/15/2013 06/30/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) Target met. Audit opinion was unqualified and was submitted to the Bank in May 2012. (b) Intermediate Outcome Indicator(s) Indicator Baseline Value Original Target Values (from approval documents) Formally Revised Target Values Actual Value Achieved at Completion or Target Years Indicator 1 : At least two cohorts recruited with at least 1,800 qualified candidates selected for each cohort by at least eight regional Departments for participation in teacher education Value (quantitative or Qualitative) N/A 8,250 4,574 4,574 Date achieved 04/01/2008 01/15/2013 06/30/2012 06/06/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) Target met. Target was revised at the 04/27/2012 restructuring because of early Project closing and dropping cohort 3. Indicator changed from reference to ten rather than eight regions. Indicator 2 : Revised curriculum produced and distributed to IFM; teacher educators trained and materials produced accordingly Value (quantitative or Qualitative) 1 1 No revision 1 Date achieved 04/01/2008 01/15/2013 10/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) Target met. The curriculum was revised throughout the Project, and new modules introduced. The draft of the whole curriculum has been produced and distributed to students and teachers. Plan is to distribute final revised curriculum for use in IFMs in Jan./Feb., 2013. Training materials were distributed to student-teachers (11/14/2011). Teacher educators were also trained at IFM, though number was not monitored. Indicator 3 : Financial systems for transfers from MENFP/MOF to IFMs operational for 100% of IFMs Value (quantitative or Qualitative) N/A Yes No revision Yes Date achieved 04/01/2008 01/15/2013 06/06/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) Target met The IFMs produced the financial reports as required for the release of each tranche. ix G. Ratings of Project Performance in ISRs No. Date ISR Archived DO IP Actual Disbursements (USD millions) 1 06/30/2008 Satisfactory Satisfactory 0.00 2 11/28/2008 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 0.00 3 06/05/2009 Moderately Unsatisfactory Moderately Unsatisfactory 0.00 4 07/31/2009 Moderately Unsatisfactory Moderately Unsatisfactory 0.00 5 12/13/2009 Moderately Unsatisfactory Moderately Unsatisfactory 0.80 6 06/21/2010 Unsatisfactory Moderately Unsatisfactory 1.39 7 02/15/2011 Moderately Unsatisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 2.08 8 04/12/2011 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 2.62 9 12/04/2011 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Unsatisfactory 3.95 10 06/06/2012 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 5.50 H. Restructuring (if any) Restructuring Date(s) Board Approved PDO Change ISR Ratings at Restructuring Amount Disbursed at Restructuring in USDMillions Reason for Restructuring & Key Changes Made DO IP 10 /27/2010 No U MU 1.39 1. A reduction in the targets for two outcomes and one intermediate indicator because of capacity constraints exacerbated by the January 2010 earthquake. 2. Strengthening of IFM capacity to ensure that revised targets are met. 4/27/2012 No MS MU 5.50 In the context of an overall portfolio consolidation in the Haiti education sector: 1. Scale down selection of teacher candidates and Strengthening Management of Teacher Training Program related to dropping Cohort 3 (which was picked up by the currently ongoing APG-2 x project). 2. Include teacher stipends in Participation Performance Agreements 3. A reduction in the targets for one outcome and one intermediate indicator. 4. Project close moved up to 6/30/12, 6.5 months early. I. Disbursement Profile 1. Project Context, Development Objectives and Design 1.1 Context at Appraisal 1. Haiti, at appraisal, was the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere, with a majority of the population living in extreme poverty (less than US$1 a day). With an infant mortality rate of 76 per 1,000 births, an illiteracy rate of 47 percent, and the highest incidence of HIV/AIDS outside sub-Saharan Africa, Haiti ranked 146th of 177 countries worldwide on the United Nations 2007 Human Development Index. Nearly one-half of Haitian children did not have access to primary education. The public sector provided only 20 percent of the primary schools in the country, and government spending on education was only 2.5 percent of GDP, about half the Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) region average. Because 80 percent of the schools were private, there was a financial burden on poor people who sent their children to school. 2. The Meeting Teacher Needs for Education for All Project ( Formation Initial Accélerée —FIA) originated as a component of the first Adaptable Program Grant (APG-1) Project. Additional resources under the Highly Indebted Poor Country Initiative (HIPC) became available so that a separate teacher training program could be financed. Teacher training had not yet been initiated under APG-1, so FIA was the real beginning of accelerated teacher training in Haiti. Traditional teacher training in Haiti consisted of three years of pedagogical training in institutions ( Ecoles Normales ), whereas the new accelerated training called for only one year of pedagogical training followed by two years of student teachers working in primary school classrooms. The FIA Project was consistent with Pillar II of the GOH Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) which focused on human development and education. The emphases of this strategy were to: (i) reorient the education supply towards poorer students; (ii) introduce a certification policy for teachers and school directors; (iii) improve support to schools, parents and students; (iv) improve coordination between sector actors; and (v) increase the sector’s financial resources. 3. The rationale for Bank involvement was to provide better quality education services which are essential for improving human development outcomes and in reducing poverty in the long-term. In addition, the Government of Haiti (GOH) and the Bank wanted to achieve “quick wins” to provide hope to Haitians who were suffering from an almost total lack of public social services. The Project aimed to support one of the strategic pillars in the Bank’s Interim Strategy Note (building human capital), and supported reforms outlined in the HIPC initiative and the Strategie Nationale d’Action/Education Pour Tous (SNA/EPT). 4. FIA extended what was intended to be a short-term program under APG-1 into a comprehensive reform of teacher preparation. This commitment to teacher preparation was essential if Haiti were to reach the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and Education For All (EFA) goals. The Project was designed to meet the supply-side need for a higher capacity and higher quality teacher preparation system, which complemented the demand-side APG-1 activities of tuition waivers and school nutrition. The APG-1 Project also facilitated the FIA Project by addressing implementation capacity issues such as financial management. The newly trained teachers were essential for achieving the long-term objective of expansion of both access to and quality of primary education. 2 5. Contributing to the urgency of Project preparation was that the Bank faced institutional pressures of “use it or lose it” for the funds to promote teacher training. The HIPC initiative required the GOH to meet certain requirements for selection of teacher training candidates. If the Project could not be prepared before the end of FY08 and if the Project did not commit to recruiting at least 2,750 teachers for each of three years, then the funds (US$6 million) would no longer be available to the teacher training initiative. 1.2 Original Project Development Objectives (PDO) and Key Indicators 6. The higher level national objective is for Haiti to improve access and learning in basic education and to reach Education For All (EFA) by 2015. In order to achieve this, a greater number of higher quality teachers is needed. The PAD states that the objective of the Project is to support the Government of Haiti (GoH) in the development and implementation of an accelerated teacher preparation program. The Development Credit Agreement (DCA) inappropriately mixed elements of the higher level objective into the Project objective. For assessment purposes, therefore, the ICR uses the PDO from the PAD. 7. Key indicators are presented in Table 1. The indicators went beyond the output of the training programs to include the appropriate placement of teachers to ensure improved access by students in rural areas. There was some confusion in the PAD regarding the PDO indicators as the Results Arrangements (p. 39) had a different set of PDO indicators than did the Results Framework (p. 37). TABLE 1: Summary of PDO Indicators and Revisions Original PAD Restructured/Revised- 10/27/10 Restructured/Revised-5/17/12 2,500 new teachers certified by June 2012 (program end) 900 new teachers certified by program end No revision at this restructuring 2,500 complete second year of practice teaching 1,400 complete first year of practice teaching No revision at this restructuring 2,500 complete first year of practice teaching 1,440 complete the IFM-based training Dropped—Cohort 3 no longer recruited under the Project (moved to APG-2) At least 80% are employed as teachers; at least 50% of those are employed in the public sector No revision at this restructuring Of those certified at least 80% are employed as teachers; at least 10% of those are employed in the public sector. Newly certified teachers complete high school (BacII) and three-year teacher preparation program. At least 90% of student teachers who complete three year program are successfully certified No revisions No revisions At least 70 percent of newly certified teachers work in rural areas At least 40 percent of newly certified teachers work in rural areas No revision at this restructuring Auditors find satisfactory financial and technical implementation of MENFP-IFM contracts No revisions No revisions 3 1.3 Revised PDO (as approved by original approving authority) and Key Indicators, and reasons/justification 8. There were no revisions to the PDO but a number of indicators and their targets were revised as shown in Table 1. 1.4 Main Beneficiaries 9. The main beneficiaries were the teachers who were trained and the students who are receiving a better education from the better qualified teachers. The planned and revised numbers of beneficiaries included: • Teachers: Original—7,500 teachers (later revised to 2,300). Actual—2,916 teachers. • Students: Original—6.0 million student years. Revised—2.3 million student- years. • Institutions de Formation des Maitres (IFMs) (capacity building): Original—18 IFMs. Revised and Actual—11 IFMs. 10. The number of student-years is based on the assumption that each teacher teaches 40 students per year over a 20 year career. Improved quality is an added benefit because the teachers are better trained. This increase in teacher training capacity also helps reduce excess demand for teachers in Haiti. 1.5 Original Components Component 1: Recruitment and Selection of Teacher Candidates 11. The Project financed the selection of teacher candidates, including screening of applicants through an entrance examination and review of qualifications for the teacher training program over three years. Component 2: Accelerated Teacher Preparation 12. This is the main component of the Project which financed: (i) the teacher training program; (ii) the iterative revision and piloting of curricula for formation initiale accelere (accelerated teacher training-FIA); (iii) the recruitment, professional development and payment of teacher educators in selected IFMs; (iv) certification and placement of teachers; and (v) related studies and evaluations. Component 3: Improved Management of Teacher Preparation 13. This component financed capacity building of the Direction de la Formation et du Perfectionnement (Department of Training and Professional Development-DFP) and other central and local agencies of the Ministry of Education (MENFP) to better manage teacher preparation and contribute to the implementation of the reform. The DFP led the implementation and operational coordination of the FIA. The Direction Departementales de l’Education (regional education offices-DDE) had responsibilities to recruit student graduates, certify graduates and identify primary schools for practice teaching locations. This component supplied staff training, office equipment and supplies, technical assistance and other inputs to implementing units. 4 1.6 Revised Components 14. During the 2010 restructuring, component 1 was reduced in scope as fewer student teachers were to be recruited into the program because of the earthquake, and because of drop outs and a number of student-teachers failing the mid-term exam. Components 2 and 3 were expanded. Under component 2 IFM capacity to train student teachers was strengthened through the addition of a Pedagogic Advisor and a Practice Teaching Advisor (to begin in 2011). Under component 3 project management was strengthened through the addition of four technical assistants and a project coordinator responsible for leading the implementation of project activities. The Project, however, no longer was to finance reinforcement of the Human Resources Division of the MENFP and the Regional Education Offices-- Directions Departementales de l’Education (DDEs), since there were not directly involved in project implementation. Component 2 was also revised later, during the 2012 restructuring, to include the payment of student-teacher stipends. 1.7 Other significant changes 15. The Project was restructured twice: 1. Level 2-October 27, 2010; percentage disbursed =$1.39m/$5.8m=24.0 percent. 2. Level 2-April 27, 2012; percentage disbursed =$5.50m/$5.8m=94.8 percent 16. The target for new certified teachers was scaled down in the 2010 restructuring (from 2,500 to 900 the first year and from 2,500 to 1,400 the second year) for the same reasons that the total recruited was reduced. The planned third cohort was dropped entirely from the Project because of earlier than planned Project close, but was picked up in the second phase of APG-2. The closing date of the Project was moved up to June 2012 from January 2013. The 2012 restructuring also reallocated funds from category 4 (goods and non-consultant services) to category 3 (eligible expenditures financed through Participation Performance Agreements (PPAs) under Part 2.3 of the Project) to pay student-teacher stipends. 2. Key Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcomes 2.1 Project Preparation, Design and Quality at Entry 17. The implementation arrangements were based on those of the APG-1, with the MENFP implementing the Project through technical departments, primarily the Direction de la Formation et du Perfectionnement (Department of Training and Professional Development-DFP). A Project coordinator was hired for FIA through APG-1. Administrative and fiduciary support to the technical departments was provided by the APG-1 Project Technical Unit (PTU), which worked with the Direction des Affaires Administratives (Department of Administrative Affairs—DAA) of the MENFP. The technical team and the joint PTU/DAA administrative/fiduciary team was supported by a Comité de suivi de la FIA (FIA Steering Committee, CS-FIA), the equivalent of APG-1’s Project Advisory Committee (PAC). The CS-FIA was responsible for the overall coordination of activities. Technical departments and agencies within MENFP were responsible for implementing the Project components. The MENFP was responsible for the consultations with non-public stakeholders and for providing sites for practice teaching. 18. The Project design was aligned with the PRSP and aimed to achieve the PRSP objectives through an increased supply of better-qualified teachers for which all stakeholders agreed there 5 was an acute need. A major advantage of the FIA approach was that teachers are in the classroom in the second year of the program and often teach independently in the third year; they are actually teaching students while improving their qualifications. However, with preparation on a compressed timetable, only five months for preparation, the Project did not have adequate time, prior to implementation, to fully upgrade the teacher training curriculum or to build ownership of the approach to teacher training at MENFP that could withstand changes in ministerial leadership. 19. The Project did take into account a major lesson from Bank experience that it is particularly important in a fragile state that the Project design incorporate close coordination with other donors to ensure comparative advantage for the Bank and avoid duplication of effort. In the FIA Project, the Bank opted to focus on the training of primary school teachers, which would address the problem of large numbers of out-of-school primary students. The USAID addressed a different education issue by financing a much larger project aimed at youth who were transitioning from school to employment. Similarly the Bank chose not to support pre- primary education because the IDB was already preparing an early childhood development project. 20. The Project incorporated a number of other lessons into its design by establishing entry level criteria to include high school graduation and to provide three months of instruction, Mis a Niveau (MNA), 1 in core subjects of the basic education curriculum to student-teacher candidates who needed it. This responded to the lesson in other Bank operations that maintained that teacher training programs are more effective when the candidates have at least a high school education. The Project design also provided for staff and financial resources for the supervision and monitoring of the student teaching program. However, these resources proved later to be insufficient and needed to be supplemented in the 2010 restructuring with the addition of the pedagogic and practice teaching advisors. Critical Risks 21. Institutional. The main risk to implementation was the education sector’s limited capacity and slow absorption which could slow Project execution. The management capacity of some of the selected IFMs was weak. The risk stated in the PAD that “The increase in the annual graduation rate of trained teachers will require maximizing the capacity of existing public and non-public teacher training providers” was not adequately addressed in the initial design. The PAD’s mitigation for this risk was that “The Project design is simple, with few components, and provides financing to the training institutes in order for them to expand their capacity and meet the agreed targets for graduates.” However, the Project also programmed technical assistance in financial management. The timeframe for building this capacity was absent from the mitigation measure. 22. Technical. To minimize the risk of miscommunications about the teacher training and certification program, Project preparation engaged a broad range of stakeholders. This process was important to getting the sequence of steps in the teacher training program right. Another 1 The portion of the selected student teachers who did not demonstrate adequate mastery of French and mathematics were required to take a three-month remedial course in these subjects. After the 3-month MNA, candidates must pass an examination to be admitted to the teacher training program at an IFM. 6 technical risk concerned the student-teacher stipends. The Bank had determined that including stipends as part of the Project through the PPA was not a necessary incentive to participate in the teacher training. Thus, the Project did not finance student teacher stipends. The risk that was cited in the PAD was that the “The stipends to student-teachers may represent too large an amount for the MENFP to sustain over the long term.” The mitigation measure for this risk was only that “The MENFP will determine stipend amounts in consultation with the Ministry of Economy and Finance,” which did not counter this risk in any meaningful way (see Section 2.2). However, this risk was addressed in the 2012 restructuring when the Bank decided to fund the payment of the student teacher stipend. 2.2 Implementation 23. A devastating earthquake occurred on January 10, 2010 that left more than 200,000 people, 5 percent of the population dead, including an unknown number of students and teachers. There was widespread destruction of infrastructure, schools and government buildings, including the MENFP and IFMs. From January to June 2010 very little could be done to move the Project forward. Implementation from January 2010 onward should be assessed in the context of this national calamity. 24. Under even favorable circumstances, teacher training is one of the more demanding types of projects from an implementation standpoint. The Project also was the first dedicated program to train primary school teachers in Haiti. The Project’s success can be attributed to the implementation and precise sequencing of a number of activities ranging from advertising the program through final selection of student teachers and remedial training (MNA). Sequencing activities was especially challenging because of the capacity constraints in Haiti. To support the timing of these steps, the TTL conducted unusually intensive supervision (“supervision plus”) including activities, such as following up with contractors and IFMs, as well as re-evaluating the IFMs after the earthquake. Sequencing was also made difficult because a revised curriculum was produced rapidly prior to the start of the Project, and needed to be further strengthened and introduced module by module as it became available. 25. In addition to sequencing challenges, there were partnership challenges. Keys to the success of the partnership between the MENFP and the IFMs were that both had to perform their roles: the MENFP had to develop curricula, provide money to the IFMs, and train trainers; the IFMs had to train and assess students. The Project branded the existing “Ecoles Normales” as IFMs, which enhanced their credibility as teaching institutions because they were identified with the new national program for accelerated teacher training. All IFMs signed contracts to participate in the program, which were sent to the PCU. 26. Although teachers were trained and certified, the partnership broke down in a number of instances. The Project provided small civil works and capacity building to the IFMs, which did improve their ability to carry out the pedagogical portion of the program. However, the IFMs were not able to provide adequate supervision of the in-class portion of the student-teaching program, though this improved somewhat with the additional resources after the 2010 restructuring. The degree of ownership of the Project from the MENFP side was not always clear, partly a result of the short preparation time for the Project. It was also a result of the fact that the Minister of Education changed three times during the Project, which had several negative effects. For example, it was difficult for the Project to sustain capacity-building with the turnover in the ministry. In addition, each minister had different positions on the new teacher 7 training approach, including: (i) the allocation of stipends to student teachers; (ii) the duration of the training; and (iii) the process for recruiting the student teachers. Some officials in the MENFP believed that teachers should follow the traditional route of a three-year university degree program. The effect gave a sometimes stop-and-start quality to implementation. 27. Project management within the MENFP did not work well in the beginning. The Project implementation also was mistimed, with the student-teacher cohort 1 beginning its pedagogical training in March. The March start date threw off the schedule in IFMs which had ongoing programs of students who had begun in September. By beginning the training in March 2009, the student teachers could not complete their pedagogical training (one-year duration) in time to begin their practical training in September to align with the school year. The policy matrix for HIPC obligated Haiti to go through with the March cohort rather than wait until the next academic year. After a year of unsatisfactory implementation ratings at the beginning of the Project, the Bank decided to recruit four consultants and one assistant project coordinator to implement the Project to replace the previous FIA Project coordinator. The Project Coordinator was the same person who managed APG-1). Project implementation began to improve as a result. 28. Stipend Issue for student teachers. A serious implementation problem was created by the MENFP’s pledge of an allocation, or stipend, for student teachers who were taking the accelerated teacher training. The Bank took the position that the stipend was not needed because student teachers typically paid for their education. The MENFP maintained that to reach remote areas a stipend would be necessary to ensure participation. The stipend was poorly implemented because the Ministry of Planning (MOP) constantly delayed approvals for the MENFP to provide the stipend, which had been budgeted by the Ministry of Finance (MOF). Delays and underpayment of the stipend undermined teacher morale and eventually led to a student-teacher strike. 29. Project Restructurings. The 2010 Project restructuring scaling down of targets was appropriate because of capacity constraints exacerbated by the January 2010 earthquake, as was the focus on strengthening of IFMs to ensure that revised targets were met. As documented in the 2012 restructuring paper, the Bank avoided further implementation delays and ended a student-teacher’s strike by agreeing to, what was viewed at the time as a “stopgap” measure, pay the stipends. Teacher stipends were put in PPAs. This move put the teacher training program back on track and the revised targets were met. The 2012 Project restructuring was carried out also in the context of an overall portfolio consolidation in the Haiti education sector. Shifting cohort 3 to APG-2 was a good move because the cohort timing could be re-set and coordinated with the school year, and did not have to start and finish by January 2013 to coincide with the Project closing date. Dropping cohort 3 made it possible to move the Project close date up to June 30, 2012 (6.5 months earlier). 2.3 Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Design, Implementation and Utilization 30. Design . The M&E framework was adequate for the purposes of assessing the achievement of the PDO from the standpoint of implementing the teacher training program through, for example, cohort completion and teacher placement. The M&E framework however relied on intermediate indicators to adequately assess the development of a teacher training program. Additional evidence of the development of a teacher training program was produced at the ICR stage. 8 31. Implementation. M&E was carried out by the Project coordinator (financed by APG I) and the assistant coordinator (financed by the FIA Project). These coordinators had responsibility for tracking progress related to all key indicators. The coordinators collaborated with DFP and DDE staff and were supported by the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) specialist from the External Financing Coordination Unit (EFCU) who supported APG I. Numbers of teachers recruited, enrolled and graduated and certified were all tracked closely through individual IFMs. 32. Utilization . The monitoring of implementation was critical in making key adjustments to the program. Project M&E revealed that teacher training targets needed to be scaled back. The often late and non-payment of the student-teacher stipend was also tracked, but not as carefully monitored because it was not part of the results framework. This also led to action taken by the Bank to remedy the stipend issue in the 2012 restructuring by reallocating Bank financing to cover it. 2.4 Safeguard and Fiduciary Compliance 33. Administrative and fiduciary support was provided to MENFP technical departments by the APG-1 Project Technical Unit (PTU) which worked with the Direction des Affaires Administratives (Department of Administrative Affairs-DAA). Despite some progress in building capacity, the overall fiduciary environment remained risky, with weak budget processes and financial controls throughout the government, and especially in the DAA of the MENFP. However, the Project did comply with FM audit requirements. An FM task was added with the Bank’s decision at the 2012 restructuring to pay of the student teacher stipend retroactively to 2011. Procurement requirements were complied with, although with some delays and implementation followed the Project procurement plan. 34. FIA was a Category C project and no environmental assessments were required. 2.5 Post-completion Operation/Next Phase 35. The first cohort of teachers was deployed to primary schools to take up their assignments in the current 2012/13 school year. The former third cohort of the FIA program has begun training under the APG-2. A fourth cohort is planned for 2013. APG-2 is also financing the student-teacher stipend under a revised more sustainable schedule agreed with the MENFP. 3. Assessment of Outcomes 2 3.1 Relevance of Objectives, Design and Implementation Ratings: Before restructuring—Substantial After restructuring—High Overall—High 2 Although the Project was restructured twice, it is rated at two rather than three stages. The reason is that only a miniscule amount of disbursement occurred after the second restructuring, and so the weight to a third outcome rating would be negligible. 9 36. Objectives. The objectives continue to be highly relevant because there is a continued deficit in trained teachers for primary schools. With 2,916 teachers trained under FIA, another 5,000-7,000 are expected to be needed to absorb out of school students. Though adjustments were made to the Project and to PDO indicators through the restructurings, the objectives were not changed. The original objectives are in line with the national priority to achieve universal primary education as articulated in the Declaration of General Policy of the Prime Minister— May 2012 (Enoncé de Politique Générale du Premier Ministre) and the national education strategy, the “Operational Plan for Education 2010-2015,” which calls for financing across nine strategic themes including the provision of support to basic education. They are also in line with strategic objective number 3 of the Interim Strategy Note (ISN) FY12-13, building human capital, by continuing the teacher training program, which improves access to primary education. 37. Design. The key feature of the Project was the accelerated and practical approach to teacher training. This new approach contrasted with the traditional training model of three years of institutional training in Ecoles Normales. The design of the program ensured better quality student-teachers because of stricter selection criteria (passing an examination, having completed high school and MNA). The higher quality of the student teacher made it possible to reduce the pedagogical component of teacher preparation from three years to one year. Current relevance of the Project’s design is also evidenced by the continuation of the FIA under APG-2, with a revised stipend formula to make the teacher training program more sustainable and aligning cohorts with the school year. The Project design also addressed the need for improved quality and addressed about one quarter of the need for new primary school teachers (assuming that all primary age students were to attend school). The design aimed to achieve higher quality teachers through an improved curriculum that was further strengthened and introduced module by module as it became available and through the supervision of the classroom training by the IFMs. About 70 percent of teachers are still not qualified. The FIA approach will continue to be relevant even when universal primary enrollment is eventually achieved, because there will still be a need to upgrade the qualifications of primary teachers in both public and private schools. The design of the program became more relevant when the teacher stipend was made part of the PPAs. 38. An additional design factor was how the Project fit complemented other Bank-funded education projects (APG-1 and the Emergency School Reconstruction Project—ESRP). The FIA Project, along with ESRP (school reconstruction), dealt with the supply-side problem for primary education, i.e., the need for more teachers and more schools. APG-1 dealt with the demand side of helping students access primary education. The design also took into account other donor support in the education sector to help ensure that financing was available for different aspects of the national strategy. 39. Implementation. The restructurings improved the relevance during implementation. The first restructuring in the aftermath of the earthquake focused the teacher training in the more capable IFMs, added support to IFM capacity, and scaled down teacher training targets to realistic levels. The second restructuring improved relevance by funding student-teacher stipends, the non-payment of which was seriously impeding the implementation of the Project. 40. As a result, the overall rating for the Project’s relevance