Document de projet sur un financement additionnel (rapport n° 89420-HT)
Resume — Document de projet de la Banque mondiale sollicitant un financement additionnel de 24,1 millions US$, dont la section de contexte stratégique chiffre les effets persistants du séisme de 2010 sur la population.
Constats Cles
- Seeks additional financing of US$24.1 million rather than appraising a new operation.
- Records that 60 percent of citizens had to live in camps and 20 percent of the population suffered loss of income after the earthquake.
- Report No. 89420-HT.
Description Complete
Document de projet de la Banque mondiale sollicitant un financement additionnel de 24,1 millions US$, dont la section de contexte stratégique chiffre les effets persistants du séisme de 2010 sur la population. Ce type de document consigne la manière dont une opération a été redimensionnée en cours de route, ce que l'évaluation initiale ne peut montrer.
Texte Integral du Document
Texte extrait du document original pour l'indexation.
Public Disclosure Authorized
Document of
The World Bank
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Report No: 89420-HT
Public Disclosure Authorized
PROJECT PAPER
ON A
PROPOSED RESTRUCTURING AND ADDITIONAL GRANT
IN THE AMOUNT OF US$24.1 MILLION
TO THE
Public Disclosure Authorized
REPUBLIC OF HAITI
FOR AN
EDUCATION FOR ALL PROJECT – PHASE II
IN SUPPORT OF THE EDUCATION FOR ALL PROGRAM
OCTOBER 10, 2014
Public Disclosure Authorized
Education Global Practice
Haiti Country Management Unit
Latin American and Caribbean Region
CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS
Currency Unit = Haitian Gourdes
HTG 40.35 = US$1
US$1.61 = SDR 1
FISCAL YEAR
October 1 – September 30
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
AF Additional Financing
AFD Agence Française de Développement (French Development Agency)
CA Coordinating Agency
CDB Caribbean Development Bank
DAA Direction des Affaires Administratives (Directorate of Administrative
Affairs)
DAEPP Direction d’Appui à l’Enseignement Privé et au Partenariat (Directorate of
Support to Private Education and Partnership)
DDE Direction Départementale de l’Education (Departmental Directorate of
Education)
DEF Direction de l’Enseignement Fondamental (Directorate of Basic Education)
DFP Direction de la Formation et du Perfectionnement (Directorate of Training
and Professional Developmen)
DGS Direction du Génie Scolaire (Directorate of School Civil Works)
DPCE Direction de la Planification et de la Coopération Externe (Directorate of
Planning and External Cooperation)
DPO Development Policy Operation
ECD Early Childhood Development
ECVMAS Enquête sur les Conditions de Vie des Ménages après le Séisme (National
Post-Earthquake Household Survey)
EFA-FTI Education For All Fast-Track Initiative Catalytic Fund
EGRA Early Grade Reading Assessment
EGMA Early Grade Mathematics Assessment
EMIS Education Management Information System
ESMF Environmental Safeguards Management Framework
FIA Formation Initiale Accélérée (Accelerated Teacher Training Program)
FM Financial Management
FNE Fonds National de l’Education (National Education Fund)
GoH Government of Haiti
GPE Global Partnership for Education
GSE Groupe Sectoriel d’Education (Local Education Group)
HRF Haiti Reconstruction Fund
ICT Information and Communications Technology
IDA International Development Association
IDB Inter-American Development Bank
IFM Institut de Formation des Maîtres (Teacher Training Institute)
IFR Interim Financial Report
ISN Interim Strategy Note
MDTF Multi-Donor Trust Fund
MAECD Ministère des Affaires Etrangères, Commerce et Développement du Canada
(Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development of Canada)
MENFP Ministère de l’Education Nationale et de la Formation Professionnelle)
(Ministry of National Education and Professional Training)
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
NCC National Consultative Committee
NGO Non-Governmental Organization
NPV Net Present Value
OP/BP Operational Procedure / Bank Policy
PDO Project Development Objective
PIPE Programme d’Interventions Prioritaires en Education (Transitional Sector
Plan)
PNCS Programme National de Cantines Scolaires (National School Feeding Program)
PTU Project Technical Unit
PSUGO Programme de Scolarisation Universelle, Gratuite et Obligatoire (Haitian
Government’s Universal, Free and Compulsory Primary Education Program)
RARAP Remedial Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan
RFP Resettlement Policy Framework
SE Supervising Entity
SHN School Health and Nutrition
SMC School Management Committee
SNA/EPT Stratégie Nationale d’Action pour l’Education Pour Tous (National Education
For All Strategy)
TOTAL Tout Timou Ap Li - All Children are Reading (USAID-financed Project
TWP Tuition Waiver Program
UEP Unité d’Etudes et de Programmation (Research and Planning Unit)
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
USAID U.S. Agency for International Development
WFP World Food Programme
Vice President: Jorge Familiar
Special Envoy: Mary A. Barton-Dock
Senior Global Practice Director Claudia Costin
Practice Manager: Reema Nayar
Task Team Leader: Patrick Ramanantoanina
HAITI
AF GPE Education for All Project - Phase II (P132756)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Project Paper Data Sheet…………………………………………………………………………............1
Project Paper
I. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 6
II. Background and Rationale for Additional Financing .............................................................. 6
III. Proposed Changes .................................................................................................................. 15
IV. Appraisal Summary ............................................................................................................... 15
Annexes
Annex 1: Revised Results Framework and Monitoring Indicators...……………………………...........28
Annex 2: Operational Risk Assessment Framework (ORAF) ................................................................. 37
Annex 3: Activities by source of financing ............................................................................................. 43
Annex 4: Revised Estimate of Project Costs ........................................................................................... 46
Annex 5: Institutional and Implementation Arrangements ...................................................................... 50
Annex 6: Excerpt from the Manual of Operation for the Tuition Waiver Program ................................ 59
Annex 7: Excerpt from the Manual of Operation for the School Health and Nutrition Program............ 65
Annex 8: Presentation of the Monitoring and Evaluation arrangement for the GPE funding ................. 70
Annex 9: Lessons Learned from Previous Operations ............................................................................ 72
Annex 10: Summary of Haiti Education Sector Development Partner Interventions ............................. 73
PROJECT PAPER DATA SHEET
Haiti
AF GPE to Haiti Education for All Project - Phase II ( P132756 )
EDUCATION GLOBAL PRACTICE
LATIN AMERICA AND CARIBBEAN
.
Basic Information – Parent
Parent Project ID: P124134 Original EA Category: B - Partial Assessment
Current Closing Date: 30-Sep-2016
Basic Information – Additional Financing (AF)
Additional Financing
Project ID: P132756 Scale Up / Restructuring
Type (from AUS):
Regional Vice President: Jorge Familiar Proposed EA Category: B - Partial Assessment
Expected Effectiveness
Country Director: Mary A. Barton-Dock 31-Oct-2014
Date:
Senior Global Practice
Claudia Maria Costin Expected Closing Date: 30-Jun-2017
Director:
Practice
Reema Nayar Report No: 89420-HT
Manager/Manager:
Patrick Philippe
Team Leader:
Ramanantoanina
PHAppA
uthTbl
Approval Authority
Approval Authority
RVP Decision
Borrower
Organization Name Contact Title Telephone Email
Ministère de l'Education
Nationale et de la Formation Nesmy Manigat Ministre 50936044545 nesgat@gmail.com
Professionnelle
Project Financing Data–Parent ( Haiti - Education for All Project - Phase II-P124134 )
Key Dates
Approval Effectiveness Original Revised
Project Ln/Cr/TF Status Signing Date
Date Date Closing Date Closing Date
P124134 IDA-H7400 Effective 01-Dec-2011 11-Jan-2012 03-Apr-2012 30-Jun-2015 30-Jun-2017
1
Disbursements
%
Currenc Cancelle Disburse Undisbur
Project Ln/Cr/TF Status Original Revised Disburse
y d d sed
d
P124134 IDA-H7400 Effective XDR 43.50 43.50 0.00 25.35 18.15 58.27
Project Financing Data –Additional Financing AF GPE to Haiti Education for All Project -
Phase II ( P132756 )
[ ] Loan [X] Grant [ ] IDA Grant
[ ] Credit [ ] Guarantee [ ] Other
Total Project Cost: 24.10 Total Bank Financing: 0.00
Financing Gap: 0.00
Financing Source – Additional Financing (AF) Amount
Borrower 0.00
Education for All Supervising Entity 24.10
Total 24.10
Policy Waivers
Does the project depart from the CAS in content or in other significant
No
respects?
Explanation
Does the project require any policy waiver(s)? No
Explanation
Team Composition
Bank Staff
Name Title Specialization Unit
Josue Akre Financial Management Financial Management GGODR
Specialist Specialist
Fernanda Balduino de Finance Analyst Finance Analyst CTRLN
Oliveira
Fabienne Mroczka Sr Financial Sr Financial GGODR
Management Specialist Management Specialist
Peter F. B. A. Lafere Social Development Social Development GURDR
Specialist Specialist
Axelle Latortue Education Spec. Education Spec. GEDDR
Melissa Adelman Economist Economist GEDDR
2
Ingrid Sandra Milord Office Assistant Office Assistant LCC8C
Ganna Musakova Senior Program Senior Program GEDDR
Assistant Assistant
Prosper Nindorera Senior Procurement Senior Procurement GGODR
Specialist Specialist
Rose Caline E T Consutant E T Consutant GGODR
Desruisseaux-Cadet
Aboubacar Magassouba Consultant Consultant GGODR
Victor Manuel Ordonez Senior Finance Officer Senior Finance Officer CTRLN
Conde
Patrick Philippe Senior Operations Team Lead GEDDR
Ramanantoanina Officer
Elena Segura Labadia Senior Counsel Senior Counsel LEGLE
Ghada Youness Senior Counsel Senior Counsel LEGLE
Sofia De Abreu Ferreira Counsel Counsel LEGEN
Ramiro Ignacio Counsel Counsel LEGLE
Jauregui-Zabalaga
Non Bank Staff
Name Title City
Locations
Country First Administrative Location Planned Actual Comments
Division
Haiti Departement du Departement du Sud- X
Sud-Est Est
Haiti Departement du Departement du Sud X
Sud
Haiti Departement de Departement de X
l'Ouest l'Ouest
Haiti Departement du Departement du X
Nord-Ouest Nord-Ouest
Haiti Departement du Departement du X
Nord-Est Nord-Est
Haiti Departement du Departement du X
Nord Nord
Haiti Departement de la Departement de la X
3
Grand'Anse Grand'Anse
Haiti Departement du Departement du X
Centre Centre
Haiti Departement de Departement de X
l'Artibonite l'Artibonite
Haiti Departement de Departement de X
Nippes Nippes
Institutional Data
Parent ( Haiti - Education for All Project - Phase II-P124134 )
Practice Area / Cross Cutting Solution Area
Education
Cross Cutting Areas
[ ] Climate Change
[ ] Fragile, Conflict & Violence
[ ] Gender
[ ] Jobs
[ ] Public Private Partnership
Sectors / Climate Change
Sector (Maximum 5 and total % must equal 100)
Major Sector Sector % Adaptation Mitigation Co-
Co-benefits % benefits %
Education Primary education 69
Public Administration, Law, and Public administration- 29
Justice Education
Education Pre-primary education 2
Total 100
Themes
Theme (Maximum 5 and total % must equal 100)
Major theme Theme %
Human development Education for all 82
Human development Nutrition and food security 11
Rural development Rural services and infrastructure 7
4
Total 100
Additional Financing AF GPE to Haiti Education for All Project - Phase II ( P132756 )
Practice Area / Cross Cutting Solution Area
Education
Cross Cutting Areas
[ ] Climate Change
[ X ] Fragile, Conflict & Violence
[ ] Gender
[ ] Jobs
[ ] Public Private Partnership
Sectors / Climate Change
Sector (Maximum 5 and total % must equal 100)
Major Sector Sector % Adaptation Mitigation Co-
Co-benefits % benefits %
Education Primary education 100
Total 100
I certify that there is no Adaptation and Mitigation Climate Change Co-benefits information
applicable to this project.
Themes
Theme (Maximum 5 and total % must equal 100)
Major theme Theme %
Human development Education for all 82
Human development Nutrition and food security 11
Rural development Rural services and infrastructure 7
Total 100
5
I. Introduction
1. This Project Paper seeks the approval of the Regional Vice President to provide an
additional grant from the Global Partnership for Education (GPE) Fund in the amount of US$24.1
million to the Haiti Education For All Project – Phase 2 (P124134/Grant No. 7400-HT) and a
related restructuring of the procjet.
2. The proposed additional grant from the Global Partnership for Education (GPE) would help
finance the implementation of the Haitian Ministry of Education’s (Ministère de l’Education
Nationale et de la Formation Professionnelle – MENFP) transitional education sector plan
(Programme d’Interventions Prioritaires en Education – PIPE). In particular, this additional
financing (AF) proposes to scale up existing activities to increase impact of the Project, namely: (i)
the Government of Haiti’s (GoH) Tuition Waiver Program (TWP) to support enrollment of
students in non-public schools in disadvantaged areas; (ii) its School Health and Nutrition (SHN)
Program and related activities to support student attendance in public and non-public schools in
disadvantaged areas; (iii) additional studies to improve budget programming and education system
accountability; and (iv) cover additional costs associated with Project management, Monitoring
and Evaluation (M&E). The AF would also cover the costs associated with proposed new
activities. The new activities are: (i) the annual independent verification of TWP and SHN
Program schools; (ii) the provision of training to TWP school directors and management
committees; (iii) a school information campaign to improve non-public school accountability; (iv)
the development of annual sector action plans based on the PIPE; (v) an assessment of the
potential for creating a pooled funding mechanism for the education sector; (vi) a pilot student
mentoring program; and (vii) the development and administration of student learning assessments
on a larger scale, to contribute to data-based policymaking. Revisions are also proposed to the
parent Project results framework to measure revised outcomes, add intermediate indicators, and
adjust indicator targets. In order to allow these activities to be implemented the closing date would
be extended to June 30, 2017. The AF would contribute to the human capital development of
Haitian children, particularly the disadvantaged, and thereby contribute to furthering the World
Bank’s twin goals of eliminating extreme poverty and boosting shared prosperity.
3. Partnership Arrangements. In addition to the funds provided to the project by the GPE
under this proposed AF, the Project previously received funding from the Haiti Reconstruction
Fund (HRF), through financing from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Trade, and Development of
Canada (Ministère des Affaires Etrangères, du Commerce et du Développement – MAECD).
Under the parent Project, the World Bank is also coordinating its technical and financial support
with the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), World Food Programme (WFP), Caribbean
Development Bank (CDB), and MAECD.
II. Background and Rationale for Additional Financing in the amount of US$24.1 million
Strategic Context
4. Human capital is an abundant yet underutilized resource in Haiti. Many Haitians, perceive
education as the only vector of economic and social mobility in a country where 56 percent of the
population is poor and entrepreneurship is hampered by lack of access to capital, and much of the
capital and power is concentrated in the hands of a few, reflected by a Gini coefficient of .5961
6
(World Bank GINI index). Despite its unenviable label as the poorest country in the Americas with
low GDP per capita (US$820) (IMF Article 4 consultation) and lagging in social indicators
(ranking 161 out of 186 in the 2013 UNDP Human Development Index), Haiti’s human capital
embodies tremendous potential for growth and investment in the children of Haiti is a key building
block for future economic dynamism.
5. The 2010 earthquake was a major setback to the economy and deepened existing
vulnerabilities. In addition to causing over 200,000 deaths, 60 percent of citizens had to live in
camps and 20 percent of the population suffered loss of income. The massive earthquake resulted
in damages and losses of US$7.9 billion (120 percent of GDP) and reconstruction needs were
estimated at US$11.3 billion (Haiti Post Disaster Needs Assessment). In 2010 the economy
contracted by 5.4 percent, reversing the trend of modest growth of the 5 preceding years (IMF).
According to the latest household survey (ECVMAS 2012), 6 million out of 10.4 million (59%)
Haitians live under the national poverty line of $ 2 per day and over 2.5 million (24%) live under
the national extreme poverty line of 1 dollar per day. Nearly 40 percent of 10 million people live
on less than US$1.60 per day, and approximately 55 percent live on less than US$2.30 per
day(World Bank Poverty Assessment). Unemployment remains high and employment is mostly
informal (only 19 percent of the adult population receives a regular wage and 79 percent are self-
employed, with women twice as likely to be unemployed (36 percent) than men (19 percent).
Faced with multiple challenges, over the years, roughly one million Haitians have migrated (World
Bank, 2010), mainly to the Dominican Republic, the United States, and Canada in search of better
opportunities.
6. Four years after the earthquake, Haiti’s overall economy is improving and the Government
is beginning to implement its vision for turning Haiti into an emerging country by 2030. President
Michel Martelly and his administration have been working with Haiti’s partners to deliver services
for its people, attract investment, and decentralize the economy. To build human capital, the
Government has started a national tuition waiver and school feeding program and launched several
safety net programs. Security indicators are improving with downward trends in homicides,
kidnappings, and incidents of violent civil unrest in 2013 compared with 2012. Growth is
estimated to have reached 4 3percent in the Haitian Fiscal Year (HFY) 13, up from 2.9 percent
observed in HFY12 (IMF), mainly due to a pick-up in agricultural production, construction and the
industrial sector, in particular the textile and garment industry. The Government has also
articulated a National Strategic Development Plan (PSDH), which sets social, territorial, economic,
and institutional rebuilding as the pillars for Haiti’s development. The national tuition waiver and
school feeding programs are cornerstones of Government’s plan under the social pillar.
GPE Financing Background, Project Background and Performance
7. GPE Financing Background. Haiti was the recipient of a first grant (US$22 million) from
the GPE in 2010. The World Bank was designated the Supervising Entity (SE) for this project
(called the Haiti Education for All Fast-Track Initiative Catalytic Fund (EFA-FTI grant–
P114174/Grant No. TF97009)), which has as its objective to assist the GoH in implementing its
National Education For All Strategy (Stratégie Nationale d’Action pour l’Education Pour Tous -
SNA/EPT) through the improvement of: (a) access to primary education for poor children aged 6
to 12; and (b) equity, quality and governance in the GoH’s education sector. The EFA-FTI grant is
7
93 percent disbursed as of September 2014, and fully implemented except for sub-components
financing education curriculum revision, and the development and implementation of an action
plan on Early Childhood Development (ECD). Results under this grant include helping students in
2,800 schools in all regions directly affected by the 2010 earthquake access school by financing
one-time grants allowing them to re-open and pay teachers; ensuring the continued enrollment of
about 83,300 students in non-public schools in 2011-12 by financing the TWP; helping to ensure
student readiness to learn for about 17,000 students in 2010-11 and 45,000 students in 2011-12 by
providing SHN services; developing of an ECD National Policy; and improving operational
capacity through provision of vehicles and equipment to MENFP central and regional levels.
8. Country-level GPE Application Process. The Local Education Group (Groupe Sectoriel
d’Education – GSE) is in place to coordinate technical and financial support to Haiti’s education
sector. The GSE, led by UNESCO, which also fulfills the role of Coordinating Agency (CA) in
Haiti’s GPE application process, comprises local representatives from bilateral and multilateral
development partners. The group meets regularly and has been fully associated in the development
of the PIPE and the AF design. Civil society, organizations representing non-public schools, and
the Ministry of Finance also participated in the PIPE and GPE application development process.
UNESCO, as the CA, serves as the primary communication link between the MENFP, GSE, and
the GPE. The World Bank was designated by the MENFP as the SE for the GPE grant; as such, the
World Bank has supported the preparation of Haiti’s GPE application in collaboration with
UNESCO and the other partners, and will assume full fiduciary oversight and implementation
support for the GPE grant.
9. Project Background. The parent Education For All – Phase 2 Project is a US$70 million
grant which was approved in December 2011 and became effective in April 2012. The Project
Development Objective (PDO) was revised in a June 2014 combined restructuring and AF. The
objective of the Project is to support: (i) enrollment of students in select non-public primary
schools in disadvantaged areas; (ii) student attendance in select public and non-public primary
schools in disadvantaged areas; and (iii) strengthened management of the Recipient’s primary
education sector. The Project is implemented through four components: Component 1, “Support to
Primary Education Enrollment”; Component 2, “Support to Improved Student Attendance”;
Components 3, “Strengthening Sector Management”; and Component 4, “Project Management and
Monitoring and Evaluation”. The main achievements of the Project, by component, are as follows:
a. Under Component 1, to date, the Project has surpassed expectations with respect to
enrollment: it has delivered timely tuition waivers to about 150,000 and 139,000
primary students in seven departments in the 2012-13 and 2013-14 school years,
respectively, enabling these students to enroll in school. It has also ensured the
provision of three textbooks per student in about 90 percent of schools participating
in the IDA-financed non-public school TWP. Under the community-based school
sub-component, 63 communities have received training and continue to receive
grants. Sixty-two of these communities are operating under temporary shelter with
seven community-based schools expected to be completed by end October 2014, and
one community-based school has been built and is operational.
8
b. Under Component 2, the Accelerated Teacher Training Program (Formation Initiale
Accélérée – FIA) has certified 2,669 teachers to date. The Project-financed third FIA
cohort is the most recent cohort recruited; these student-teachers are still in training
and are expected to graduate by September 2015. Given high numbers of FIA-
certified teachers not yet hired into the teaching profession, the MENFP and World
Bank are continuing a dialogue on measures to improve the uptake of FIA-certified
teachers into the profession. The GoH also adopted in May 2014 a new statute and
published in August 2014 a presidential decree regulating the teaching profession,
which compel teachers who wish to remain in the profession to have or obtain a
teaching license. The Project is also developing Teacher’s Guides with daily lesson
plans for use in the classroom. The structured reading instruction approach M Ap Li
Net Ale (“I Am Reading All the Way”) has been adapted for implementation under
the Project. This method, developed by MENFP with U.S. Agency for International
Development (USAID) support, builds on the Lekti se Lavni (“Reading is the
Future”) method developed under the parent Project. Firms are being recruited for M
Ap Li Net Ale implementation in selected TWP schools; implementation is expected
to launch during the 2014-15 school year. The SHN Program has surpassed targets,
providing deworming, micronutrients, and a morning snack and hot meal during
school days to about 81,000 students in public and non-public schools in the 2012-13
and 2013-14 school years.
c. Under Component 3, project-based budget agreements between the MENFP and
decentralized regional units (Direction Départementale de l’Education – DDE) are
under preparation, and would allow the Project to finance DDEs to supervise and
provide support to schools. These agreements are expected to be completed by the
end of October 2014, and will be piloted in three DDEs in 2014. With respect to the
strengthening of the accreditation system, the MENFP has launched a transition to a
decentralized and computerized non-public school accreditation system, and has
adopted a presidential decree on school accreditation. This decree requires that: (i) all
schools obtain an identify card recognizing their existence during 2014/2015 school
year; and (ii) within two years, undergo an accreditation process authorizing them to
operate. The Government is currently implementing this decree.
d. Under Component 4, an impact evaluation of a pilot program using ICT to strengthen
the monitoring capacity of MENFP’s inspectors has been completed. The pilot
program (Initiative de Renforcement des Services Scolaires – IRSS) offered school
directors small incentives to take and submit daily pictures of teachers, which were
then reviewed remotely by school inspectors in order to verify teacher presence. The
pilot was completed in June 2014, and analytical results will be finalized by
December 2014. A new impact evaluation of M ap Li Net Ale is also being planned;
implementation of the approach in classrooms, which was expected to launch at the
beginning of the 2014-15 school year, has been delayed to November because of a
lengthier than expected recruitment process for implementation firms. As a result, the
launch of the impact evaluation is also expected to begin with a delay, in November
2014.
9
10. Project Performance. In line with the parameters on project performance stipulated in
OP/BP 10.00, the Project is rated moderately satisfactory on both implementation progress and
progress toward achievement of the PDO, and has been consistently rated satisfactory or
moderately satisfactory over the past 12 months.
11. With respect to the Project’s legal covenants, two of the Project’s six legal covenants have
been fully complied with (no transfer of funds was made to School Management Committees
(SMCs) or beneficiary service providers prior to their entering into the Grant Agreement; and the
Recipient has ensured that the Project is carried out in accordance with the Environmental
Safeguards Management Framework (ESMF)); two covenants are partially complied with (the
Project has produced Environmental Management Plans for each construction site but
communities’ training has not yet begun; and the Project has not affected Natural Habitats, Forests
or Physical Cultural resources but one case of Involuntary Resettlement occurred related to works
carried out under the Project, on which corrective action was taken); and two covenants are not yet
complied with. These two covenants (the establishment of a nine-member steering committee and
the inclusion in Project Reports of information on the implementation of the Environmental and
Social Management Framework) are currently in progress by the MENFP and Project Technical
Unit (PTU), and the World Bank is closely following up on their implementation. The Project
Steering Committee is expected to be established in October 2014. Audit and financial reporting
requirements are consistently met, but generally with delays; the World Bank will continue to
work with the GoH to ensure satisfactory Financial Management (FM) performance and mitigate
financial and audit report delays.
12. With respect to the Project’s safeguards, OP/BP 4.12 on Involuntary Resettlement was
triggered in the June 2014 combined restructuring and AF following one case identified under the
community-based school component (Component 1) where six families, including 18 people, were
resettled to clear the lands for the construction of the school. Given the scarcity of available land
in some of the sub-project locations for construction of these schools, the safeguard policy was
triggered to allow municipalities to identify terrains where minor resettlement would be required
and to ensure that affected people would be provided with appropriate assistance. The ESMF was
updated and re-disclosed by the Government and the World Bank. A Resettlement Policy
Framework (RPF) requiring that land acquisition be carried out in accordance with OP/BP 4.12,
and a Remedial Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan (RARAP) were developed, consulted, and
published by the Government and the World Bank to ensure that all negative impacts of
resettlement are mitigated and that affected people are able to enjoy the full protection of the
safeguards accorded to them under World Bank policy.
Sector Context & Priorities
13. Access and quality remain pressing challenges in Haiti’s primary education sector. The
majority of the approximately 2.4 million Haitian children in primary school live in poverty (2010-
2011 School Census, Enquête sur les Conditions de Vie des Ménages après le Séisme –
ECVMAS). Households struggle to finance education, as over 80 percent of primary and
secondary schools are non-public (including for-profit, religious, and other types) (2010-2011
School Census, ECVMAS). At the same time, low instructional quality, poor nutrition, poor
infrastructure, and limited school materials limit the amount of learning and human capital
10
accumulation. Consequently, hundreds of thousands of children are believed to be out of school,
most children in primary school are over age for their grade, and many do not complete a full
course of fundamental education (defined in Haiti as primary and lower secondary). For example,
only 60 percent of 18 year olds in the 2012 national post-earthquake household survey (ECVMAS)
had reached at least lower secondary school.
14. Transparency and sustainability also constitute major challenges to effective sector
governance and to achieving improvements in educational outcomes. There have been delays in
adopting and implementing a transparent financial framework that reflects increasing financing
responsibility by the GoH for key policies to expand access. In 2011, the President announced the
creation of a National Education Fund (Fonds National de l’Education – FNE), financed through
fees from incoming international calls and wire transfers. Covering about two million students not
covered by development partners, the FNE would finance: (i) the Government’s universal, free and
compulsory primary education program (Programme de Scolarisation Universelle, Gratuite et
Obligatoire – PSUGO), which provides tuition waivers for non-public schools and fee waivers for
public schools, as well as school materials; and (ii) the Government’s National School Feeding
Program1— (Programme National de Cantines Scolaires – PNCS). The FNE therefore could
potentially ensure a stable source of public financing for the Government’s priorities in the
primary education sector. However, its legal creation is still pending Senate approval, the timeline
for the ratification of the FNE bill is unclear, and thus the prospects and timeline for sustainable
GoH co-financing of sector priorities remain uncertain. In the meantime, PSUGO and PNCS have
been under implementation, and there has been little public disclosure regarding the use of FNE
funds, which continue to be collected.
Rationale for Proposed Activities and for Additional Financing
15. The proposed AF activities are critical to implementation of the PIPE— the MENFP’s
three-year transitional sector plan (2013-16) based on its five-year Strategy for Rebuilding the
Education System. The PIPE articulates Haiti’s sector priorities and reduces the Strategy’s
financing gap from US$2.3 billion to US$260 million. It was finalized by the MENFP and
endorsed by the local development partner group in January 2014. The AF scales up successful
activities supported under the parent Project.
16. Among the top PIPE priorities are the expansion of access to and the improvement of
teaching and learning in primary education. To expand enrollment, the GoH therefore finances
PSUGO for a stated 1.3 million students2, while development partners financed the non-public
school TWP for about 233,000 students in 2013-14. To improve internal efficiency and retention
in the education system, the MENFP has also begun gradually implementing a policy of automatic
promotion of students in Grades 1 and 2. With this policy, an expected 20 percent of students
would not have attained the required academic competencies to succeed in the next grade. Thus,
the PIPE plans to implement a support system to bring these students to level. In addition, under
the existing TWP, improving non-public school accountability is a priority. TWP school
1
The GoH-financed PNCS school feeding program and the partner-financed SHN program are different in that non-
Governmental organizations implement the SHN and the PNCS supervises its implementation. Unit costs also differ:
the PNCS-implemented program provides a hot lunch, while the SHN provides a rapid breakfast and hot lunch.
2
Source: MENFP PSUGO Coordination Unit (Unité de Coordination du PSUGO).
11
supervision visits suggest that SMCs, which play an integral role in the functioning of the TWP—
including notably by co-signing on school expenditures—are often inactive or unaware of their
financial responsibilities. This often leaves school administrations to unilaterally make decisions
on the use of the TWP funds. The World Bank and GoH have launched a dialogue on how to
strengthen financial accountability in these schools.
17. The MENFP also articulates as a priority the expansion of PNCS, to 70 percent of the
primary student population by 2020-21. The PNCS, with national financing, provides school
feeding to about 110,000 beneficiaries annually,3 while several development partners have been
also financing SHN activities for about 889,000 primary students using multiple models. To
harmonize sub-sector interventions and expand its program sustainably, the GoH is preparing a
National SHN Policy, including a financial model for its sustainability. In the meantime, under the
parent Project and the EFA-FTI grant, a group of partners (IDA, CDB, GPE and HRF) have been
financing a SHN Program supervised by the PNCS, covering about 75,000 to 81,000 beneficiaries
annually in recent years. A gap remains to cover existing SHN beneficiaries in the coming years,
and the GoH has requested that development partners increase the number of SHN students they
finance to help meet its objective. Finally, within its institutional strengthening strategic theme, the
PIPE also prioritizes undertaking studies and making available regular and reliable education data
to inform strategic decision-making.
18. The AF would provide much-needed support and respond to the above challenges and
priorities. Through the TWP, the GoH and development partners directly reduce the financial
barrier to sustained school enrollment for the poorest children. Given the limitations of public
sector capacity, leveraging existing non-public schools continues to be the most direct route
through which access to education can be increased. The AF would help ensure the cohorts of
primary students currently financed in non-public schools can continue to enroll in school tuition-
free through the end of the basic education cycle (Grades 1-6)4. Information for Non-Public School
Accountability would support increased accountability at the local level of TWP schools to the
communities they serve, also strengthening the partnership between the GoH and non-public
schools.
19. Through the SHN Program, the GoH and development partners support student attendance
by attracting children to school with meals, and support children’s nutrition and readiness to learn.
These are critical prerequisites to improving learning outcomes over the long term. The AF would
contribute by covering a SHN financing gap. In addition, under the proposed AF, the MENFP
proposes to continue its move toward a programmatic approach to implementing its strategy and
plans to organize joint sector reviews.
20. The proposed AF is part of a coordinated approach, along with other development partners,
to financing the PIPE. Tables 1 and 2 below display partner coordination to contribute to filling
3
Source: MENFP (PNCS) / PTU.
4
The development partners together have been financing cohorts in the same schools since 2007, beginning with
Grade 1 in 2007 and taking on a new Grade 1 cohort each year to bring each cohort to graduate from Grade 6. In 2013-
14, all partners except the IDB stopped financing new Grade 1 cohorts due to the financing shortfall. The AF would
allow existing cohorts (excluding the Grade 1 cohort previously financed by the IDB) to continue to enroll tuition-free
(i.e., Grades 3-6 in 2014-15, Grades 4-6 in 2015-16, etc.).
12
the financing gaps in the TWP, and coordinated financing for school meals, including the SHN
Program.
Table 1: Financing for the Tuition Waiver Program from 2013 to 20175
Financing
IDB CDB WB (IDA) GPE Total GAP
2013-
2014 Students 80,571 12,986 139,253 - 232,810 -
Amount
(million US$) 7.25 1.17 12.53 - 20.95 -
2014-
2015 Students 19,333 8,561 - 102,000 129,894 -
Amount
(million US$) 1.74 0.77 - 9.18 11.69 -
2015-
2016 Students 35,000 6,031 - 35,444 76,475 39,839
Amount
(million US$) 3.15 0.54 - 3.19 3.19 3.52
Students 35,000 - - - 35,000 43,171
2016- Amount
2017 (million US$) 3.15 - - - 3.15 3.89
Table 2: Financing for School Meals from 2013 to 20166
WB
WFP HRF** CDB (IDA) GPE PNCS AFD**** Total
2013-
2014 Students 698,000 - - 81,000 - 110,000 - 889,000
Not
Amount Not Not Available
(million US$) Available* - - 7.74 - Available -
2014-
2015 Students 485,000 76,500 7,328 - 34,000
110,000 106,000 818,828
Amount Not Approx. Not
(million US$) Available*** 6.89 0.70 - 3.06 5.22 4.67 Available
2015- Not
2016 Students - 76,500 14,656 - 34,000 Available - 125,156
Amount Not
(million US$) - 6.89 1.40 - 3.06 Available - 11.35
(*) Includes CAD8.8 million from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Trade and development of Canada
(**) Financed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Trade and development of Canada
5
This table displays partner financing for the cohorts which will be in Grades 3-6 in the 2014-15 school year, Grades
4-6 in 2015-16, and Grades 5-6 in 2016-17. Beginning with the 2014-15 school year, the figures displayed are
estimates based on past enrollment figures; they may be adjusted annually based on actual enrollment. MENFP
numbers indicate 1.3 million additional students have benefited from tuition or fee waivers under PSUGO. However,
no financing framework for the PSUGO has been shared with the development partners, and it is not clear how much
has been spent on these activities.
6
This table displays financing and beneficiaries covered by development partners, as well as beneficiaries covered by
GoH funds through PNCS. HRF, CDB, IDA, GPE and AFD funds use the same (parent Project) model to provide
school health and nutrition services. WFP and PNCS each use other models for providing school meals.
13
(***) Includes US$6.3 million from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Trade and development of Canada and
US$625,000 from France
(****) The French Development Agency (AFD) is providing financing for 106,000 students through December 2014
21. Through the activities planned under Components 3 and 4, the GoH and development
partners would support studies and student learning assessments for knowledge-based
policymaking, as well as a pilot program to improve student progression through school.
22. Project-financed activities coupled with other partner-financed interventions would also
serve as an entry point to addressing transparency and sustainability issues. For instance, the
establishment of a sustainable budget and financing framework incorporating the FNE is a key
area of focus in the ongoing dialogue between GoH and development partners. As the GoH’s role
in providing tuition waivers (through PSUGO) and school health and nutrition (through PNCS)
increases, development partners are supporting several mechanisms to improve transparency in
budget programming and implementation, inter alia: integrated and comprehensive annual
budgets and action plans as prior actions through a World Bank-administered Development Policy
Operation (DPO); and technical and financial assistance for the development of a National SHN
Policy, including a financial model for its sustainability. An ongoing Public Expenditure Review is
expected to provide comprehensive analyses on public resources (including development partners’
contribution and non-Governmental resources) in the education sector.
23. The proposed restructuring and AF funded activities are fully aligned with the World Bank
Group Haiti Interim Strategy Note FY13-FY14 (Report# 71885-HT) discussed by the Executive
Directors on September 27, 2012. The restructuring and AF support Strategic Objective 3 of
Building Human Capital. They also support the Cross-cutting theme of Strengthening Governance.
The AF works in synergy with several other World Bank-financed operations under
implementation and advisory and analytical activities in preparation for the education sector,
which contribute to the shared World Bank and GoH sector strategic objectives.7 In addition, the
proposed AF contributes to achieving three of the five GPE objectives for 2012-15, namely: (i)
Fragile and conflict affected states able to develop and implement their education plans; (ii)
Dramatic increase in the number of children learning and demonstrating mastery of basic literacy
and numeracy skills by Grade 3; and (iii) Expand the volume, effectiveness, efficiency and
equitable allocation of external and domestic funding and support to education. The design of the
proposed AF also embeds core GPE principles, including country ownership by fully aligning with
the PIPE, strong coordination between partners, a focus on the most efficient approaches to
achieving measurable results, the promotion of transparency and strengthened accountability, and
the use of country systems to the extent possible.
24. Alternatives considered to AF. Other sources of financing were considered, including
integrating the recurrent costs of the TWP and SHN Program into the national education budget.
However, the integration of such costs in the education budget is pending finalization of the SHN
strategy and of a TWP financing model, and the legal creation of the FNE. Aside from the AF,
7
Five additional activities are also under preparation/implementation: a combined Restructuring and AF from the HRF
of the parent Education For All – Phase 2 Project (approved by the Board and RVP in June 2014); a DPO with actions
on education (approved in June 2014); a poverty assessment; programmatic knowledge services for Haiti’s social
sectors, including an evidence-based policy note on education; an education Public Expenditure Review; and a
political economy study and civil society engagement analysis in Haiti’s education sector.
14
alternative processing modalities were also considered: (i) to channel the GPE funds through the
Haiti Education Multi-Donor Trust Fund (MDTF) created in 2010, which was the mechanism
through which the EFA-FTI grant was channeled; and (ii) to process the GPE funds as a separate
investment project. The MDTF modality was not accepted because it has not fulfilled its intended
purpose—to facilitate the pooling of funds from various sources toward GoH sector objectives.
Development partner internal procedures hindered their making contributions through the MDTF,
such that to date, the EFA-FTI grant has been the only financing in the MDTF. In addition, given
the timeline by which the GoH needed to access additional funds in order to cover gaps in
education financing, and the fact that the activities proposed under the AF are fully aligned with
the parent Project, an AF was deemed the most appropriate and timely processing mechanism to
ensure uninterrupted education service delivery.
III. Proposed Changes
Summary of Proposed Changes
Changes in PDO, PDO Indicators and the Results Framework. There would be no changes to the PDO.
However, targets would be revised upward for the PDO indicators on: (i) enrollment, to account for the
students financed for additional years under the TWP; and (ii) strengthened sector management, to reflect
additional schools expected to be registered in the accreditation database during the AF implementation
period. In addition, the language of the PDO indicator on strengthened sector management would be
revised to more closely align with the MENFP’s accreditation terms. In particular, the word “licensing”
would be revised to “accreditation” because the MENFP refers to “licensing” as a school obtaining only the
first level of its accreditation process, while its school database registers data concerning all levels of
accreditation8.
Table 3: Expected Outcomes
Indicator June 2014 Proposed
Restructuring GPE AF
Outcome Targets Outcome Targets
Enrollment of students in select non-public
primary schools in disadvantaged areas: Number
of children enrolled through the provision of
tuition waivers 310,0009 423,00010
June 2014 Restructuring language:
Strengthened management of the Recipient’s
primary education sector: Percentage of schools
registered in the school licensing database
Proposed revised language: Strengthened At least 60% At least 70%
8
The existing licensing system entails four levels of criteria to be fulfilled, from operating license to full accreditation.
Schools obtaining Level 1 of the accreditation process are registered and authorized with a license to operate for one
year.
9
This is a cumulative amount.
10
This is a cumulative amount.
15
management of the Recipient’s primary
education sector: Percentage of schools
registered in the school accreditation database
Change in Implementing Agency Yes [ ] No [ X ]
Change in Project's Development Objectives Yes [ ] No [ X ]
Change in Results Framework Yes [ X ] No [ ]
Change in Safeguard Policies Triggered Yes [ ] No [ X ]
Change of EA category Yes [ ] No [ X ]
Other Changes to Safeguards Yes [ ] No [ X ]
Change in Legal Covenants Yes [ X ] No [ ]
Change in Loan Closing Date(s) Yes [ X ] No [ ]
Cancellations Proposed Yes [ ] No [ X ]
Change in Disbursement Arrangements Yes [ ] No [ X ]
Reallocation between Disbursement Categories Yes [ ] No [ X ]
Change in Disbursement Estimates Yes [ X ] No [ ]
Change to Components and Cost Yes [ X ] No [ ]
Change in Institutional Arrangements Yes [X ] No [ ]
Change in Financial Management Yes [ ] No [ X ]
Change in Procurement Yes [ ] No [ X ]
Change in Implementation Schedule Yes [ X ] No [ ]
Other Change(s) Yes [ ] No [ X ]
Development Objective/Results PHHHDO
Project’s Development Objectives
Original PDO
The objective of the Project is to support the Strategy for Rebuilding the Education System through the
implementation of sustainable programs to improve: (a) access, particularly of under-served populations, to
Primary Education; (b) quality of Primary Education; and (c) the institutional capacity in the Recipient's
education sector.
Current PDO PHCURRPDO
The objective of the Project is to support: (i) enrollment of students in select non-public primary schools in
disadvantaged areas;(ii) student attendance in select public and non-public primary schools in
disadvantaged areas; and (iii) strengthened management of the Recipient’s primary education sector.
Change in Results Framework PHHCRF
16
Explanation:
Three intermediate indicators would be added to monitor progress of the additional activities financed by
the AF. These are:
a. Percentage of TWP schools publicly posting annual expenditure reports. This indicator would be
added to monitor transparency in school-level TWP expenditures, to help improve financial accountability.
Improved financial accountability is critical to the success of the program and its continued support to
student enrollment.
b. Diagnostic sector study completed and student-mentoring program piloted. These activities will
provide data and lessons to adjust MENFP policies and inform annual action plan development. This
indicator would therefore be added to monitor progress toward the completion of these activities.
c. Education sector action plans are developed for 2014-15, 2015-16, and 2016-17. The MENFP has
committed to regularly updating its annual action plan to take into account sector achievements and new
knowledge produced from partner-financed interventions. This indicator would monitor the MENFP ability
to develop and make the annual action plan available in a timely manner.
In addition, targets would be revised for seven intermediate indicators in the 2014-15 and 2015-16 school
years, and new targets added for 2016-17. Explanations of these changes are below. The full revised results
framework is in Annex 1.
a. Number of additional classrooms built at the primary level resulting from the community-based
school sub-component. The targets for the number of additional classrooms built would be revised, as the
pace of construction is slower than expected and therefore fewer classrooms are expected to be built
annually than previously expected. The total number of classrooms to be built over the Project
implementation period would not change.
b. Direct Project beneficiaries, of which female. The targets for the number of beneficiaries decreased
in 2013-14 to reflect fewer children than initially planned participating in the IDA-financed TWP in this
school year, and would increase with respect to the originals in subsequent years because of the additional
children served in the TWP and SHN Program under the AF; the percent of female beneficiaries would be
the same, as the gender ratio of children served is expected to remain the same. The total number of direct
beneficiaries would decrease annually because of an overall drop in the number of TWP students financed
by the AF as cohorts graduate. There would be no SHN or TWP beneficiaries in 2016-17.
c. Children participating in the integrated nutrition/health program. The targets for this indicator
would increase because of the additional students expected to be benefit from the SHN program under the
AF during the 2014-15 and 2015-16 school years.
d. Teacher’s guide developed by MENFP. The targets for the development of teacher’s guides for
Grades 1 and 2 would be pushed back, given delays under the parent Project in the finalization of these
guides.
e. The school accreditation system is restructured. Targets for this indicator would be adjusted to take
into account a revised process put in place by the MENFP for restructuring the school accreditation system.
As with the PDO indicator in strengthened sector management, the indicator language would be revised by
replacing the term “licensing” with “accreditation”.
f. System for learning assessment at the primary level. The administration of and Early Grade
Reading Assessment (EGRA) on a larger scale and development and administration of an Early Grade
Mathematics Assessment (EGMA) would strengthen the learning assessment system. The indicator targets
would be changed to reflect this.
g. Impact evaluations completed. The target for this indicator for 2014-15 would be revised
downward to take into account the delays in launching implementation of the impact evaluation of the
Map Li Net Ale approach. The impact evaluation is expected to be completed in 2015-16, rather than
2014-15.
17
Compliance
Covenants - Additional Financing ( AF GPE to Haiti Education for All Project - Phase II - P132756 )
Source
Finance
of Recu Freque
Agreement Description of Covenants Date Due Action
Funds rrent ncy
Reference
The Recipient shall, no later than three
months after the beginning of each
school year during Project
implementation, disclose the list of
Schedule 2 schools, number of students covered and
EFAS Yearly New
Section I. A. 5 grade level of students benefiting from
the Universal, Free and Compulsory
Primary Education Program (“PSUGO -
Programme de Scolarisation Universelle,
Gratuite et Obligatoire”).
Covenants - Parent ( Haiti - Education for All Project - Phase II - P124134 )
Finance
Ln/Cr/ Date Recu Freque
Agreement Description of Covenants Status Action
TF Due rrent ncy
Reference
1. For purposes of appraising and
approving eligible Student
Enrollment Sub-projects, the
Recipient shall establish and
thereafter operate and maintain
throughout Project
Schedule 2 Not
IDA- implementation, a nine member No
Section complied Yearly
H7400 steering committee consisting of Change
I.A.2 with
representatives of MENFP, MEF,
non-public education providers,
parents’ associations and
teachers’ unions, all with
qualifications acceptable to the
Association.
2. No later than December 1,
2012, the Recipient shall
establish, and thereafter operate Marked
Schedule 2 30- Not
IDA- and maintain during Project for
Section Aug- complied
H7400 implementation ONAPE with a Deletio
I.A.3 2013 with
structure, functions and n
responsibilities acceptable to the
Association.
18
No transfer of Financing funds
shall be made to any SMC or
Beneficiary Service Provider, as
Schedule 2
IDA- the case may be, prior to the date Complied
Section Yearly Revised
H7400 on which the pertinent SMC or with
I.C.1.3
Beneficiary Service Provider has
entered into the pertinent Grant
Agreement.
No transfer of Subproject Grant
funds shall be made to any SMC or
Schedule 2 Beneficiary Service Provider, as the
IDA- case may be, prior to the date on Complied Propose
Section Yearly
H7400 which the pertinent SMC or with d
I.C.3 Beneficiary Service Provider has
entered into the pertinent Subproject
Grant Agreement.
Schedule 2 1. The Recipient shall ensure that
IDA- Complied
Section the Project is carried out in Yearly Revised
H7400 with
I.F. 1 accordance with the ESMF.
1. The Recipient shall ensure that
Schedule 2
IDA- the Project is carried out in Complied Propose
Section Yearly
H7400 accordance with the ESMF and with d
I.F. 1
RPF.
2. The Recipient shall include in
the Project Reports referred to in
Section II.A of Schedule 2 of the
Schedule 2 Partially
IDA- Financing Agreement adequate
Section complied Yearly Revised
H7400 information on the
I.F. 2 with
implementation of the ESMF, any
environmental management plan
or similar safeguard instrument.
2. The Recipient shall include in
the Project Reports referred to in
Schedule 2 Section II.A of this Schedule,
IDA- Not yet Propose
Section adequate information on the Yearly
H7400 due d
I.F. 2 implementation of the ESMF and
the RPF, any EMP, RAP or
similar safeguard instrument
3. The Recipient, through
MENFP, shall ensure that any
Schedule 2 Not
IDA- works to be carried out under the
Section complied Yearly Revised
H7400 Project do not involve any
I.F. 3 with
Involuntary Resettlement or affect
Natural Habitats, Forests or
19
Physical Cultural Resources.
3. The Recipient, through
MENFP, shall ensure that any
Schedule 2
IDA- works to be carried out under the Complied Propose
Section Yearly
H7400 Project do not affect Natural with d
I.F. 3
Habitats, Forests or Physical
Cultural Resources.
No later than September 30, 2014,
establish and thereafter operate
and maintain throughout Project
Schedule 2
implementation, a committee (the 30- Not
IDA- Section
National Strategic Committee) Sep- complied New
H7400 I.A.1 (b)
with a structure and functions and 2014 with
(ii)
responsibilities acceptable to the
Association, as set forth in detail
in the Operational Manual.
The Recipient shall carry out the
Schedule 2
IDA- RRAP in accordance with its Expected
Section Yearly New
H7400 terms and a manner satisfactory to soon
I.F.7
the Association.
By no later than October 30,
2014, the Recipient through
MENFP, shall appoint, and
thereafter maintain, where
applicable, throughout the
duration of the Project
Schedule 2 CONT
IDA- implementation, independent Not yet
Section INUO New
H7400 verification agencies, with due
I.A.3 US
qualifications, experience, and
terms of reference satisfactory to
the Association, for purposes of
the third-party verification of the
Subprojects to be carried out
under the Project.
Conditions
PHCondTbl
Source Of Fund Name Type
EFAS Project Operational Manual Effectiveness
Description of Condition
The Project Operational Manual will be updated and adopted by the Recipient in a manner
satisfactory to the Bank.
20
Risk PHHHRISKS
The assessed overall risk ratings for the Project continue to be “High” for implementation.
Capacity and governance risks are high, including high risk of procurement- and financial audit-
related delays. There is also a substantial level of risk related to the operating environment, as well
as delivery monitoring and sustainability of Project outcomes. Risk management measures would
rely on, inter alia, the use of technical assistance and external firms to implement certain sub-
components, robust operational manuals to mitigate governance issues, new arrangements with
respect to fiduciary processes—including establishing renewable contracts for selected activities
to reduce procurement-related delays and approving additional audit firms for Haiti to mitigate
risk of late financial audits from existing overburdened firms—and continued open dialogue with
the GoH on issues such as financial sustainability.
Finance
Loan Closing Date - Additional Financing ( AF GPE to Haiti Education for All Project
- Phase II - P132756 )
Source of Funds Proposed Additional Financing Loan Closing Date
Education for All - Fast Track Initiative 30-Jun-2017
Loan Closing Date(s) - Parent ( Haiti - Education for All Project - Phase II - P124134 ) PHHCLCD
Explanation:
The closing date of the Project is September 30, 2016, and would be extended to June 30, 2017 to allow for
the implementation of the scaled up and new activities under all components. The IDA, HRF and GPE
grants would all have closing dates of June 30, 2017.
Status Original Closing Current Closing Proposed Closing Previous Closing
Ln/Cr/TF
Date Date Date Date(s)
IDA-
Effective 30-Jun-2015 30-Sep-2016 30-Sep-2017 30-Sep-2016
H7400
Change in Disbursement Estimates (including all sources of Financing)PHHCDE
Explanation:
With this additional financing to the parent project, the project would be able to continue financing two
main activities (tuition waiver program and school health and nutrition program) until 2016/2017 school
year.
Expected Disbursements (in USD Million)(including all Sources of Financing)
Fiscal Year 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Annual 10.00 10.00 4.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cumulative 10.00 20.00 24.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Allocations - Additional Financing ( AF GPE to Haiti Education for All Project -
Phase II - P132756 )
Source of Currency Category of Allocation Disbursement %(Type
21
Fund Expenditure Total)
Proposed Proposed
EFAS PHAAFCY GO, CW, OP, TRN, CS 24.10 100.00
PHAAFCY Total: 24.10
Components
Change to Components and Cost PHHCCC
Explanation:
The AF maintains the parent Project structure, approach and components. It would finance existing and
new activities under the existing components, as explained below.
Component 1: Support to Primary Education Enrollment. Sub-component 1.1– “Enhance the TWP”,
under the parent Project, currently supports improving Primary Education enrollment under the TWP
through, inter alia: (a) the strengthening of School Management Committees, and (b) the provision of
Student Enrollment Grants for the carrying out of Student Enrollment Subprojects by School Management
Committees. The AF would scale up the sub-component by financing the provision of training to TWP
school directors and School Management Committees, as well as the annual independent verification of the
TWP. In addition, to make up for a financing shortfall from other development partners, the AF would
scale up parent Project coverage of the TWP by financing Student Enrollment Grants for about 102,000
students and 35,000 student in the 2014-15 and 2015-16 school years, respectively. These numbers were
agreed in coordination with other partner financing for the TWP, which combined, would ensure
enrollment of students in non-public primary schools for about 130,000 students in 2014-15 and 76,000
students in 2015-16.
There would be no changes to sub-component 1.2 – “Support to Communities”. This sub-component
would not be financed by the AF.
Sub-component 1.3 – “Information for Non-Public School Accountability”, is a new sub-component to be
financed solely by the AF. It would finance the design and implementation of an information campaign to
improve financial accountability of selected schools under the TWP through the provision of consultants’
services and Operating Costs. The campaign would target SMCs and other local-level stakeholders, and
would highlight the rights and responsibilities of SMCs, their intended function and minimum operating
procedures as a key part of the TWP, as well as resources at their disposal to monitor schools. The sub-
component would be implemented using a phased approach. In the first year of AF implementation, focus
groups would be conducted with TWP stakeholders (SMC members, parents, school directors…) to
identify key information gaps and impediments to optimal TWP functioning at the school level. Focus
group findings would inform the development of the approach and the campaign content; the tools would
be developed and tested in this first year. In the second year of implementation, the campaign would be
rolled out to a subset of TWP schools.
Component 2: Support to Improved Student Attendance. There would be no changes to sub-
components 2.1 – “Pre-service Teacher Training”, and 2.2 – “Support to the quality of Reading
Instruction”. These sub-components would not be financed by the AF.
Sub-component 2.3 – “School Health and Nutrition”, under the parent Project, supports the strengthening
22
of the SHN Program through, inter alia, (a) the provision of: (i) daily morning snacks and hot meals in
schools to be selected in accordance with criteria acceptable to the World Bank; and (ii) deworming
medication and micro-nutrients to participating schools twice a year; (b) the preparation of a study on fuel
efficient stoves for preparing school meals; (c) based on the said study, the introduction of fuel efficient
stoves in selected schools. The AF would scale up parent Project coverage of the SHN Program by
financing daily morning snacks and hot meals for about 68,000 students over four months in the 2014-15
school year and 34,000 students during the entire 2015-16 school year, helping to fill a financing gap as
other partners reduce their financing to school feeding. The AF would also scale up the sub-component by
financing independent verification of service provision under the SHN Program, and by providing
additional funds for the introduction of fuel-efficient stoves in selected schools.
Component 3: Strengthening Sector Management. Under the parent Project, this component supports
building the institutional capacity of MENFP to improve service delivery and overall educational
governance through, inter alia,: (a) the strengthening of selected directorates of MENFP at the central and
regional levels; (b) the strengthening of the school accreditation system through: (i) the revision of school
accreditation standards, methodologies and procedures; and (ii) the provision of training to: (A) school
committees for developing school improvement plans; and (B) staff, including those from independent
agencies, for schools’ evaluation for licensing and accreditation; and (c) the preparation of thematic studies
and pilot programs to improve budget programming and education system accountability. The AF would
scale up Component 3 by financing the following new activities exclusively with AF funds: the develop
ment of an annual education sector action plan, from 2014 to 2017; an assessment of the potential for
creating a multi-donor trust fund as a pooled funding mechanism for the sector; and the design and piloting
of a student mentoring program for children selected pursuant to the criteria set forth in the Operational
Manual. To support improved student learning and completion, the pilot would provide mentoring sessions
outside of school hours for primary children facing academic difficulties. The AF would also scale up an
existing set of activities under this component—namely, the preparation of thematic studies to improve
budget programming and education system accountability—by adding to the existing studies planned the
financing of a complete sector diagnostic. This diagnostic would provide updated data and analysis to
inform sector policymaking.
Component 4: Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation. Under the parent Project, this
component supports the strengthening of the MENFP’s M&E capacity through: (a) the improvement of
MENFP’s M&E systems; and (b) the carrying out of impact evaluations of selected Project activities. The
AF would expand the scope of the component by financing: (c) the provision of additional support to
oversee the implementation of Project activities, including audits; and (d) the carrying out of early grade
reading assessments (EGRA) and an early grade mathematics assessment (EGMA). Activities to oversee
Project implementation include, inter alia: the cost of consultancies associated with the PTU, including new
staff recruited in association with new activities; and workshops and operational costs for joint, semi-
annual reviews of PIPE implementation by the MENFP and other education stakeholders. With respect to
reading and mathematics assessments, the AF would exclusively finance two waves of EGRA in
coordination with USAID, which finances EGRA in selected cities; and developing and undertaking one
wave of EGMA. EGRA would be administered in 2014-15 and 2016-17 to selected Grade 3 cohorts in a
nationally and regionally representative sample of Haitian schools, also representative by category of
school (public, non-public, etc.) and location in an urban/rural setting. EGMA would be developed and
tested in 2014-15, and administered in 2016-17 along with the second wave of EGRA in the same sample
of Grade 3 schools. The AF would finance technical assistance for the development and administering of
these assessments, as well as the cost of data processing, reproduction of questionnaires and publication of
results. Given the proposed Project closing date in June 2017, EGRA and EGMA results for the 2016-17
school year would not be available by Project closing. The AF is expected to finance the tests and data
collection, while other development partner financing is expected to finance the data processing and
23
publication of results of the 2016-17 EGRA and EGMA.
Current Component Proposed Component Current Cost Proposed
Action
Name Name (US$M) Cost (US$M)
Improving Access to
Support to Primary
Quality Primary 45.00 14.20 Revised
Education Enrollment
Education
Support to Teaching Support to Improved
10.00 6.60 Revised
and Learning Student Attendance
Institutional
Strengthening Sector
Strenghtening and 4.00 0.50 Revised
Management
Governance
Project Management,
Monitoring and
Project Management,
Evaluation:
Monitoring and 6.00 2.80 Revised
Strengthening Evaluation
MENFP's monitoring
and evaluation capacity
Total: 65.00 24.10
Other Change(s) C
PHImplemeDel
Change in Institutional Arrangements
Explanation:
The proposed AF would largely use the existing implementation and institutional arrangements already
established under the parent Project. These arrangements would remain unchanged for the TWP and SHN
Program. For the new school information campaign under Component 1.3, the MENFP’s Private Education
and Partnership Directorate (Direction d’Appui à l’Enseignement Privé et au Partenariat – DAEPP) would
lead the technical aspects related to the content of the information campaign and functioning of TWP
School Management Committees, while the MENFP’s communications unit would lead the aspects related
to the development and implementation of the information campaign. The communications campaign and
training of SMCs would rely on the close involvement of the MENFP’s agents at the central and regional
levels. External firms would be hired to conduct focus groups and provide technical assistance in the
development and implementation of the campaign. For new Component 3 activities, the Basic Education
Directorate (Direction de l’Enseignement Fondamental – DEF) in collaboration with the multi-stakeholder
Committee for Support to Student Assessment would lead the implementation of activities on student
learning assessments (EGRA/EGMA) and the student-mentoring pilot; and the MENFP’s Research and
Planning Unit (Unité d’Etudes et de Programmation – UEP) would coordinate the sector study and
analytical work, using data and logistical support from the Planning and External Cooperation Directorate
(Direction de la Planification et de la Coopération Externe – DPCE). The existing PTU would continue to
provide support on fiduciary aspects of AF implementation. No constraints are expected to implementation
readiness, and AF implementation is expected to begin in a timely manner, in October 2014.
The same fiduciary arrangements would be used for the AF as under the parent Project. Financial
24
management arrangements under the parent Project continue to be appropriate. Procurement for the AF
would be carried out in accordance with the procurement arrangements for the parent Project. The
Procurement Plan would continue to be updated at least annually or as required to reflect actual Project
implementation needs. An assessment of procurement capacity has confirmed that the existing PTU is
adequately staffed, and with appropriate competencies, to implement all procurement activities related to
the proposed AF funded activities. The same disbursement arrangements and methods will continue to be
used, and a new segregated Designated Account will be opened for the AF, with a Fixed Ceiling of
$4,820,000.
Change in Implementation Schedule
Explanation:
The closing date of the Project is September 30, 2016, and would be extended to June 30, 2017 to allow
for: (i) additional time to build community-based schools for which there have been construction delays,
under Component 1.2; (ii) additional schools to be registered in the MENFP’s school accreditation
database, under Component 3; and (iii) the implementation of the scaled up and new activities under all
components. In particular, the 10 additional months would allow for the completion of a full wave of
EGMA, and continued financing in the transition period from the PIPE to the new sector strategy.
Appraisal Summary
Economic and Financial Analysis PHHASEFA
Explanation:
The updated economic analysis attributed substantial economic benefits to projects interventions
supporting increased educational attainment and improved educational quality. The analysis estimates the
economic benefits accruing from support to: (i) enrollment of students in select non-public primary schools
in disadvantaged areas; and (ii) student attendance in select public and non-public primary schools in
disadvantaged areas.
The analysis estimates the total increase in educational attainment due to the AF activities for participating
children. These estimates are similar to those made in the economic analysis conducted for the parent
Project, because the AF funds the continuation of two of the primary activities of the parent Project. The
analysis then calculates the monetary benefit of this increased attainment in terms of gains in lifetime
income. This calculation uses the most recent estimate of the increase in income from an additional year
of education in Haiti, which is 16 percent and comes from the 2006 Country Economic Memorandum.
Under Component 1, the AF finances one primary activity to support the achievement of the first
objective: the Tuition Waiver Program. The TWP is expected to enable continued school enrollment by
eliminating an important financial barrier to attending non-public school. The waivers are expected to
allow some children who would otherwise not have gone to school to continue to enroll, and to prevent
some children who would have dropped out to stay in school. These effects would lead to higher levels of
educational attainment and increased productivity and earnings over the lifetimes of these children.
Under Component 2, the AF includes one primary activity to support the achievement of the second
objective: the SNH Program. The SNH Program is expected to maintain student attendance because the
meals provided act as an incentive to continue to attend, and the health services provided (micronutrient
supplementation and deworming) improve students’ well-being, allowing them to attend school more.
This increased attendance and improved well-being are expected to increase learning and persistence
through school, contributing over the long term to greater educational attainment. The direct benefits of
improved health and nutrition are not measured in this analysis.
25
The analysis shows a net benefit and positive return for the AF. With an 8 percent discount rate, the AF
has a net present value (NPV) of US$17 million with an internal rate of return of 12.2 percent. In addition,
a “downside” alternative case was considered, in which the effects of AF activities on educational
attainment are assumed to be only two-thirds as large. Even in this alternative case, the AF appears to be a
good investment from an economic point of view, with an NPV of US$5.2 million and an internal rate of
return of 9.5 percent.
Several factors provide a strong economic rationale for public sector financing of primary education. First,
information and incentives are imperfect. Parents may be unaware of the importance of early investments
in the development of their children or, even if aware, be unable to finance these investments. This second
case appears to be the prevailing situation in Haiti, where poverty is widespread but parents make
concerted efforts to invest in schooling. Second, individual acquisition of education benefits society by
making individuals more engaged and responsible citizens and better parents, as well as by potentially
increasing the overall level of productivity and growth in the economy. To the extent that individuals do
not take these benefits into account when making investment decisions, Government funding can increase
the efficiency of investment in education.
The World Bank provides added value through this AF through its convening power and technical
expertise. For example, the World Bank has helped bring together multiple development partners to fund
the TWP. During AF implementation, the World Bank will continue to support the development of the
Government’s capacity, under Component 3, in support of the achievement of the third objective. In
addition, World Bank support will focus on innovation and learning by piloting different approaches to
increase public accountability in the sector under Components 3 and 4. These aspects of added value are
expected to increase the AF’s development impact, compared to what the AF could achieve without the
World Bank’s involvement.
Technical Analysis PHHASTA
Explanation:
Technical aspects of the AF remain unchanged from the parent Project for existing activities. With respect
to the school information campaign, the proposed approach is based on international research and
experience, as well as preliminary findings from parent Project supervision missions and structured
interviews with key stakeholders (school directors, SMCs, local elites and parents) in a few TWP schools.
This sub-component will continue to be adapted to the local context through focus groups to be conducted
in the early phases of AF implementation. The development of EGMA, pilots and sector plan
development would be based on lessons drawn from the Haiti context, namely through experience with
previous related activities (development and implementation of EGRA and EGMA on a small scale, and
the development of the PIPE under other financing).
Social Analysis PHHASSA
Explanation:
A social assessment was carried out during the preparation of the parent Project and remains valid under
the AF. Key issues that continue to be relevant to AF activities are: (i) elite capture by school directors, (ii)
conflict created by the infusion of money into schools/school management committees, and (iii) inequality
being exacerbated between beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries. The AF would continue to address these
issues through strengthening SMCs, providing information at the local level, and having a highly targeted
Project design, such that the Project benefits are enjoyed by those populations traditionally underserved by
public services.
Environmental Analysis
26
Explanation:
The Environmental Category B will remain the same for the AF. With the continued implementation of
parent Project activities on community-based schools and the scale-up of SHN activities, OP/BP 4.01
(Environmental Assessment) and OP 4.12 (Involuntary Resettlement) would continue to be triggered under
the Project. None of the activities under the AF are expected to have additional resettlement impacts. The
RPF (consulted and disclosed by the World Bank and the government in May 2014) and the updated
ESMF (consulted and disclosed by the World Bank and the government in June 2014) developed under the
June 2014 restructuring continue to be applicable under the AF. Although additional schools are expected
to participate in the SHN Program, these schools have already been receiving school meals previously
financed by other development partners, and are therefore expected to have the infrastructure in place to
participate in the SHN Program without requiring additional works or land acquisition. In addition, to
mitigate the risk of potential continued use of charcoal for cooking under the SHN Program, a feasibility
study and gradual introduction of improved cooking stoves into selected beneficiary schools are planned;
study results will feed into an updated ESMF.
27
Annex 1: Revised Results Framework and Monitoring Indicators
Haiti: Additional Grant to the Haiti Education for All Project Phase II (P132756)
Project Development Objective (PDO): The objective of the Project is to support: (i) enrollment of students in select non-public primary schools in
disadvantaged areas; (ii) student attendance in select public and non-public primary schools in disadvantaged areas; and (iii) strengthened management of the
Recipient’s primary education sector.
D=Dropped Cumulative Target Values Responsibi
C=Continue Unit of Description
Core 2012 / Data Source/ lity for
N= New Measure Baseline 2013 / 2014 / 2015 / 2016 / Frequency (indicator
201311 Methodology Data
R=Revised 2014 2015 2016 2017 definition etc.)
(actual) Collection
PDO LEVEL RESULTS INDICATORS
Indicator R # 80,000 152,853 290,000 390,000 423,000 423,000 Annual Technical audit DAEPP Cumulative number
One: by independent with of children that
Enrollment monitoring support benefit from the
of students in agency, EMIS from enrollment subsidy
select non- DPCE, provided using IDA
public UEP and GPE funds.
primary
schools in
disadvantage
d areas:
Number of
children
enrolled
through the
provision of
tuition
waivers
Indicator C % To be Baselin Baselin Not 2xa Technical audit PTU, A baseline would be
two: establish e e applica year report by PNCS, obtained prior to the
Student ed prior maintai maintai ble independent firm indepen 2014-15 school year
attendance in to the ned ned dent using verification
select public 2014-15 [not [not firm firms to confirm the
and non- school cumulat cumulat attendance rate in
public year ive] ive] SHN Program
primary schools. The
schools in attendance rate is
disadvantage the number of
11
Refers to school years.
28
D=Dropped Cumulative Target Values Responsibi
C=Continue Unit of Description
Core 2012 / Data Source/ lity for
N= New Measure Baseline 2013 / 2014 / 2015 / 2016 / Frequency (indicator
201311 Methodology Data
R=Revised 2014 2015 2016 2017 definition etc.)
(actual) Collection
d areas: primary
Attendance (beneficiary)
rate is students present at
maintained school on a daily
in schools basis over the course
benefiting of the school year
from the (usually September
school health to June), divided by
and nutrition the total number of
program primary
(beneficiary)
students in each
school, averaged
across all SHN
Program schools
Indicator R % 29% Not At least At least At least At least Annual DDEs and PTU, Percentage is the
Three: applicabl 30% 50% 60% 70% DAEPP Reports DAEPP total number of non-
Strengthened e public primary
management schools who have
of the submitted an
Recipient’s accreditation
primary application, are
education registered by the
sector: MENFP in the
Percentage accreditation
of schools database and have
registered in received at least the
the school level 1 of
accreditation accreditation ,
database divided by the total
number of non-
public schools as
measured by the
latest published
national school
census data on the
total number of non-
public schools in the
country.
29
D=Dropped Cumulative Target Values Responsibi
C=Continue Unit of Description
Core 2012 / Data Source/ lity for
N= New Measure Baseline 2013 / 2014 / 2015 / 2016 / Frequency (indicator
201311 Methodology Data
R=Revised 2014 2015 2016 2017 definition etc.)
(actual) Collection
INTERMEDIATE RESULTS
Intermediate Result (Component One): : Support to Primary Education Enrollment
Intermediate R # 0 0 8 60 110 160 Annual Verification/supe DDE, Number of
Result rvision by DGS, with classrooms built or
indicator DAEPP with support rehabilitated using
One: support of DEF, from IDA funds which
Number of and PTU with School meet minimum
additional support from Manage standards for school
classrooms school ment construction.
built at the management Commit
primary level committees tee,
resulting UEP
from the
community-
based school
sub-
component
Intermediate C # 0 10 63 80 80 80 Annual DAEPP DAA, In order to receive
Result disbursement with Grants,
indicator records support Communities must
Two: from participate in a
Communities DAEPP mobilization and
receiving , UEP training process
Grants supported by the
Project and elect
community
representatives
Intermediate C # 3 3 3 3 3 Not Annual Technical audit DAEPP Measures the
Result applica by independent , with number of textbooks
indicator ble verification support on average, per
Three: firms, Project from pupil in IDA- and
Textbooks implementation DPCE, GPE-supported
per pupil in reports UEP tuition waiver
tuition schools.
waiver
schools
30
D=Dropped Cumulative Target Values Responsibi
C=Continue Unit of Description
Core 2012 / Data Source/ lity for
N= New Measure Baseline 2013 / 2014 / 2015 / 2016 / Frequency (indicator
201311 Methodology Data
R=Revised 2014 2015 2016 2017 definition etc.)
(actual) Collection
Intermediate N % 0 Not Not 80% 95% Annual Technical audit DAEPP Measures the
Result applica applicabl by independent , with percentage of TWP
indicator ble e verification support schools (regardless
Four: firms, Project from of source of
Percentage implementation DPCE, financing) publicly
of TWP reports, inspector UEP posting a simple
schools visits expenditure report
publicly on school grounds,
posting at the beginning of
annual the school year
expenditure following the school
reports year of the use of
AF funds. Public
posting would begin
in the 2015-16
school year to report
on the 2014-15
school year.
Intermediate R # 150,000 230,000 224,000 225,000 156,000 0 Annual Technical audit DPCE, Approximate
Result [not [not [not [not [not by independent with number of students
indicator cumulat cumulati cumulat cumulat cumulat monitoring support directly benefiting
Five: Direct % 50 ive] ve] ive] ive] ive] agency from from the Project
Project 49 50 50 50 UEP, (TWP, SHN, M ap
beneficiaries, Inspect Li Net Ale and
of which ors, community-based
female School school sub-
Manage components) and the
ment approximate
Commit percentage which
tee are female.
Intermediate Result (Component Two): Support to Improved Student Attendance
Intermediate C # 0 1,385 2,600 3,700 3,700 3,700 Annual Certification DFP, Number of
Result from DFP, EMIS with individuals
indicator data and support graduated from the
Six: Number completion data from Pre-Service Teacher
of additional from pre-service UEP Training
qualified and in-service component. No new
primary training providers cohorts are recruited
teachers as of 2013-14 and
31
D=Dropped Cumulative Target Values Responsibi
C=Continue Unit of Description
Core 2012 / Data Source/ lity for
N= New Measure Baseline 2013 / 2014 / 2015 / 2016 / Frequency (indicator
201311 Methodology Data
R=Revised 2014 2015 2016 2017 definition etc.)
(actual) Collection
resulting Cohort 3 (last
from Project recruited cohort) is
intervention expected to be
certified in
September 2015.
Intermediate R # 70,000 81,365 81,000 110,500 110,500 0 Annual Technical audit PNCS, Students attending
Result by independent with schools which
Indicator [not [not [not [not [not verification support implement the IDA-,
Seven: cumulat cumulati cumulat cumulat cumulat firms, PNCS from HRF- and GPE-
Children ive] ve] ive] ive] ive] UEP financed SHN
participating program and are fed
in the one hot meal and
integrated one snack daily
nutrition/heal during the service
th program contract period.
Intermediate R Text Not Not Grade 1 Grade 1 Grade 1 Grade 1 Once Printed DEF, Teacher’s Guide
Result developed develop Teacher’ Teacher Teacher and document, DAEPP with daily lesson
indicator ed s Guide ’s ’s Grade 2 Verification/supe plans, workbook and
Eight: is under Guide Guide Teacher rvision by DEF, teaching activities
Teacher’s develop is tested is in use ’s PTU with support developed by
Guide ment and in in Guides from school MENFP for primary
developed by use in classroo are in management Grades 1 and 2.
MENFP classroo ms; use in committees, Grades 1 and 2
ms; Grade 2 classroo verification firms Teacher’s guides are
Grade 2 Teacher ms in use in IDA- and
Teacher ’s GPE-financed TWP
’s Guide schools and
Guide is tested community-based
is for use schools.
develop in
ed classroo
ms
Intermediate C # 0 Not Not 9,000 8,000 0 Annual Technical audit DEF Measures the
Result applica applicabl by independent number of students
indicator ble e [not [not [not monitoring (Grades 1 and 2) in
Nine: cumulat cumulat cumulat agency, EMIS, (i) schools
Students ive] ive] ive] Project participating in the
benefiting implementation TWP (with IDA
from reports funding or other
improved sources of funding),
reading and (ii) in
32
D=Dropped Cumulative Target Values Responsibi
C=Continue Unit of Description
Core 2012 / Data Source/ lity for
N= New Measure Baseline 2013 / 2014 / 2015 / 2016 / Frequency (indicator
201311 Methodology Data
R=Revised 2014 2015 2016 2017 definition etc.)
(actual) Collection
instruction community-based
approach (M schools,
ap Li Net implementing the M
Ale) ap Li Net Ale
approach to literacy
in Creole using
technical
observation protocol
disaggregated by
gender.
Intermediate Result (Component Three): Strengthening Sector Management
Intermediate R Text No Not President The MENF MENF Once DAEPP report DAEPP National
Results applica ial Nationa P pilots P Consultative
Indicator ble Decree l revised enforce Committee (NCC)
Ten: The on Consult school s new members meet at
school school ative accredit school least twice in 2014-
accreditation accredita Commit ation accredit 15. The NCC
system is tion tee for standar ation proposes to MENFP
restructured adopted School ds standar revised school
by Accredi ds accreditation
MENFP tation standards, also in
meets 2014-15. In 2015-16
at least revised school
twice, accreditation
and standards are piloted
propose at a small scale. In
s 2016-17, all schools
revised applying for
school accreditation are
accredit judged against the
ation revised accreditation
standar standards.
ds
Intermediate C % 0 70 85 95 95 95 Annual Technical audit DAEPP The percentage of
Result by independent , with schools (donor-
indicator monitoring support financed TWP,
Eleven: agency, EMIS from SHN, community-
Percentage UEP, based, and pilot
of school DDE, schools using new
support visits School technologies to
33
D=Dropped Cumulative Target Values Responsibi
C=Continue Unit of Description
Core 2012 / Data Source/ lity for
N= New Measure Baseline 2013 / 2014 / 2015 / 2016 / Frequency (indicator
201311 Methodology Data
R=Revised 2014 2015 2016 2017 definition etc.)
(actual) Collection
conducted at Manage monitor teacher
least once ment attendance)
per year by Commit receiving one or
the MENFP tees more support visits
annually from a
MENFP inspector
during the Project
execution period.
Intermediate N Text Diagnostic Not Not Diagno Diagno Diagno Once Reports on study UEP, Diagnostic sector
Result sector applica applicabl stic stic stic findings and DEF, study completed
indicator study not ble e study study study successes and with provides data on,
twelve: designed designe under complet lessons learned support inter alia: (i)
Diagnostic and d and implem ed; from pilots from enrollment, system
sector study student- implem entation Student DPCE effectiveness and
completed mentoring entation ; - efficiency, and
and student- pilot not launche Student mentori gender disparities;
mentoring developed d; - ng Student-mentoring
program Student mentori progra program for students
piloted - ng pilot m facing academic
mentori under piloted difficulties pilot
ng pilot implem tested.
designe entation
d
Intermediate N Text Five-year Educati Educati Educati Once Printed UEP Annual, costed
Result Operation on on on documents sector action plans
indicator al Plan Sector Sector Sector developed based on
Thirteen: (OP) Action Action Action the OP/Transitional
Education 2010-15 Plan Plan Plan Sector Plan. Action
sector action and three- 2014- 2015- 2016- plans integrate
plans are year 15 is 16 is 17 is findings from
developed Transition availabl availabl availabl Project-financed
for 2014-15, al Sector e e e Component 3
2015-16, and Plan activities (regardless
2016-17 2013-16 of source of
are financing),
available; including: sector
Developm studies; pilots
ent of experimenting new
sector approaches in
action education; the
plan for administering of
34
D=Dropped Cumulative Target Values Responsibi
C=Continue Unit of Description
Core 2012 / Data Source/ lity for
N= New Measure Baseline 2013 / 2014 / 2015 / 2016 / Frequency (indicator
201311 Methodology Data
R=Revised 2014 2015 2016 2017 definition etc.)
(actual) Collection
2013-14 is EGRA and EGMA;
in and impact
progress evaluations
completed.
Intermediate Result (Component 4): Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation
Intermediate R Text No No No Yes12 Yes Yes Once EGRA and DEF EGRA is
Result (Stage (Stage 1) (Stage (Stage (Stage every EGMA results administered in
indicator 1) 1) 1) 1) two reports 2014-15 and 2016-
fourteen: [not years 17 to selected Grade
System for [not cumulati No13 No No 3 cohorts in a
learning cumulat ve] (Stage (Stage (Stage nationally and
assessment at ive] 2) 2) 2) regionally
the primary representative
level [not [not [not sample of Haitian
cumulat cumulat cumulat schools, also
ive] ive] ive] representative by
category of school
and location in an
urban/rural setting.
EGMA is developed
in 2014-15 and
administered in
2016-17 in the same
sample of Grade 3
schools as EGRA.
Intermediate R # 0 0 1 1 2 2 Once Impact evaluation PTU, Impact evaluations
Result reports Indepen completed for M ap
indicator dent Li Net Ale in TWP
Fifteen: Firms, schools (in 2014-15)
Impact WB and for pilot schools
evaluations Impact using new
12
To qualify as a Stage 1 learning assessment, the assessment activity must fulfill the following two criteria: (i) the official purpose of the assessment is to
measure overall student progress toward agreed system learning goals; and (ii) the assessment is given to a representative sample or census of the target grades or
age levels.
13
To qualify as a Stage 2 learning assessment system, the activity should possess the following characteristics, providing useful information for enhancing
student learning in the system: (i) data are analyzed and results are reported to education policymakers and/or the public; (ii) results are reported for at least one
of the following student subgroups: gender, urban/rural, geographic region; and (iii) the assessment exercise is repeated at least once every 5 years for the same
subject area(s) and grade(s).
35
D=Dropped Cumulative Target Values Responsibi
C=Continue Unit of Description
Core 2012 / Data Source/ lity for
N= New Measure Baseline 2013 / 2014 / 2015 / 2016 / Frequency (indicator
201311 Methodology Data
R=Revised 2014 2015 2016 2017 definition etc.)
(actual) Collection
completed evaluati technologies to
on team monitor teacher
attendance (in 2013-
14)
36
Annex 2: Operational Risk Assessment Framework (ORAF)
Haiti: Additional Grant to the Haiti Education for All Project Phase II (P132756)
.
Risks
.
Project Stakeholder Risks
Stakeholder Risk Rating Moderate
Risk Description: Risk Management:
There is a risk that sector stakeholders, The MENFP’s transitional sector plan and proposed AF activities have been subject to a
and particularly the private sector, fail consultative process which has allowed all sector stakeholders a voice in the priorities and
to fully buy in to the activities proposed activities selected for financing, and this is a mitigating factor. The MENFP, the World Bank
for financing. Buy-in from non-public as Supervising Entity for the GPE funds, and UNESCO as the Coordinating Agency, would
schools is key to the success of also mitigate stakeholder buy-in risk by continuing to engage and communicate with sector
activities requiring their stakeholders including the private sector, to address potential stakeholder concerns and
partnership/compliance (i.e., TWP; highlight the benefits of the activities requiring their partnership.
accreditation activities).
Resp: Both Stage Both Recurrent Due Frequenc Status: Not
: : Date: y: Yet
Continuo Due
us
Implementing Agency (IA) Risks (including Fiduciary Risks)
Capacity Rating High
Risk Description: Risk Management:
There is a risk of market constraints Consultations with the PTU and MENFP technical teams and an initial round of recruitment of
37
(i.e., an insufficient number of qualified firms for the verification of SHN services provided during the 2013-14 school have confirmed
independent verification firms/NGOs in that sufficient firms should exist to justify the proposed external verification approach. The
departments of intervention) delaying PTU would ensure close follow-up during recruitment processes with potential qualified
the delivery of results, particularly with candidates to ensure sufficient bids by these firms and prevent implementation delays. The
the school health and nutrition and Project would also continue to mitigate risks related to market constraints and delayed delivery
community-based school interventions. by beginning recruitment processes well in advance of expected implementation start dates
during AF implementation.
There is a risk of continued To mitigate the risk of procurement delays, the MENFP and Ministry of Finance will establish
procurement-related delays, which direct contact between them to eliminate customs delays. In the meantime, the Project will
could negatively impact multiple launch procurement and recruitment processes on time (in alignment with the established
Project sub-components. (For example, procurement plan reviewed and approved by the World Bank), and is exercising the option of
late recruitment of SHN service establishing renewable contracts for selected activities that are implemented every year but for
providers can lead to students receiving which currently a new bidding process is launched each year. The Project procurement team
these services only a portion of the will also actively follow up with bidding processes of key activities at risk of having delays
school year, and late recruitment of due to late or slow bidding processes, to ensure a minimum acceptable number of bidders
external verification firms can delay present offers.
payments to tuition waiver schools and
affect their ability to adhere to the terms
of their contract with the MENFP.)
There is an ongoing risk of financial With respect to late financial audits, the World Bank financial management team has approved
audits being completed late due to additional audit firms for Haiti, doubling the number of firms authorized for Project audits.
overstretched or low-capacity audit This change is expected to relieve the pressure on existing approved audit firms. The World
firms. Bank and PTU will review audit firm Terms of Reference to ensure the appropriate number of
audit firm staff and qualifications are clearly outlined. The Project will also closely follow the
audit firm activities to minimize the risk of the selected audit firms delivering the expected
work late.
Resp: Both Stage Both Recurrent Due Frequenc Status: Not
: : Date: y: Yet
Continuo Due
us
Governance Rating High
38
Risk Description: Risk Management:
Weak governance and/or poor change All contracts for consultants and technical assistance to the MENFP are performance-based.
management could lead to a straying The Project will ensure the continued relevance of operational manuals and will work to
from the Project operational manuals continue to inform key MENFP officials on operational manuals and World Bank procedures.
and World Bank procedures.
The World Bank and local development partners are and will continue to engage a dialogue
There is a risk of the steering and with the MENFP to support the establishment of the oversight structures in the sector plan.
oversight structures in the MENFP Resp: Both Stage Both Recurrent Due Frequenc Status: Not
sector plan—i.e., the National Strategic : : Date: y: Yet
Committee, which should oversee Continuo Due
sector plan implementation—not being us
operationalized. This could negatively
impact GoH ownership of Project-
financed activities.
Project Risks
Design Rating Moderate
Risk Description: Risk Management:
There is a risk that the Project design The schools benefiting from the TWP were selected for participation based on their
does not enable it to reach the classification on the poverty map of Haiti as being extremely weak in terms of basic access to
poorest/most vulnerable children, but education. The Project was also designed to target the poorest and most vulnerable children by
rather, reaches the children whose making it a part of TWP School Management Committee responsibilities to recruit the targeted
parents would have enrolled them in children in their communities of school-going age but unable to enroll. The training and
school and assured their attendance information campaign for SMCs will reinforce the Project design and help ensure the targeting
regardless of the Project’s intervention. is implemented as planned. Under the parent Project, community-based schools are also being
created in low-income, rural areas in which there are currently no schools, making it very
difficult for children to enroll.
SHN Program participating schools were selected in 2006, also based on their classification on
the poverty map of Haiti. In addition, focus group feedback obtained during ICR missions for
the Haiti Education For All Project – Phase I—which initiated IDA-supported financing of the
39
SHN Program—confirms that many students in participating schools, prior to the program,
were listless and had poor attendance because of lack of nutrition at home; school attendance
was reported to be higher and more regular and sustained in beneficiary schools. A baseline
on student attendance in relation to measuring SHN Program impact on attendance will be
established prior to the 2014-15 school year. Baseline findings will also allow the Project to
adjust its approach as needed for this sub-component.
Resp: Both Stage Both Recurrent Due Frequenc Status: Not
: : Date: y: Yet
Continuo Due
us
Social and Environmental Rating Moderate
Risk Description: Risk Management:
There is a risk that cooking practices The World Bank is exploring with other stakeholders (PNCS, other partners involved in school
involving the use of charcoal as health and nutrition activities) the use of environmentally friendly cooking technologies that
cooking fuel may contribute to adverse could be applied systematically to Project-financed SHN Program interventions. A feasibility
environmental impacts if not adequately study for the replacement of traditional stoves used in schools with improved stoves is planned
managed. in 2014, and it is expected that the Project will begin investing in this technology in schools in
2015.
Small-scale construction activities for The Project’s environmental and social management framework will help guide the client in
educational infrastructure by how to mitigate and manage any adverse consequences of Project activities. The design of the
communities could cause minor adverse community-based approach provides mechanisms through which communities can
environmental and social impacts if not communicate and seek solutions with the Government via local authorities, about potential
adequately managed. adverse environmental and social impacts caused by the Project. In addition, the Project is
hiring a social and environmental specialist who will support the MENFP in the
There is a risk of involuntary implementation of the ESMF.
resettlement occurring on sites where
community-based construction is The World Bank’s Operational Policy 4.12 on Involuntary Resettlement was triggered under
planned, due to the scarcity of land in the June 2014 restructuring, and the Project developed a Resettlement Policy Framework
some Project locations. which clarifies the resettlement principles, organizational arrangements and criteria for land
acquisition and minor resettlement, and will help guide the Government in managing cases of
resettlement. The Project social and environmental specialist will also support the proper
40
implementation of the Resettlement Policy Framework.
Resp: Both Stage Both Recurrent Due Frequenc Status: In
: : Date: y: Progre
Continuo ss
us
Program and Donor Rating Low
Risk Description: Risk Management:
There is a small risk of overlap with the The Project mitigates this risk through close collaboration with other development partners,
interventions of other development particularly the IDB, MAECD, WFP, USAID, AFD and the CDB. The World Bank is an
partners, particularly with respect to active member of the local education development partner group, a dynamic group of partners
health and nutrition activities, which is that meets monthly. As part of the GPE application process the AF has also been presented to
a sub-sector with a multitude of actors. development partners and other stakeholders at several stages of its preparation, which has
allowed for coordination on areas where multiple partners are active. An education sector
roundtable has also been established (led by the MENFP) and development partners have
signed a partnership agreement to coordinate their interventions.
With respect to SHN, the Project is developing a joint partner action plan for the strengthening
of the PNCS taking into consideration PNCS needs and funding planned by various partners,
including WFP and MAECD.
Resp: Both Stage Both Recurrent Due Frequenc Status: In
: : Date: y: Progre
Continuo ss
us
Delivery Monitoring and
Rating Substantial
Sustainability
Risk Description: Risk Management:
There is also a risk of the SHN Program The PNCS as well as the PTU would be responsible for the supervision of activities of the
attendance data collection firms recruited firms, as well as the management of their service contracts to ensure satisfactory
providing inaccurate information, or not delivery of services. The World Bank would closely follow up on these activities during the
making the data available in a timely establishment period of the monitoring mechanism.
41
manner.
Lack of clarity with the Government’s To ensure the financial sustainability of its efforts, the GoH developed in August 2014 a
financing plan and long-term position preliminary financing strategy for the donor-financed TWP, and is currently preparing policies
with respect to certain components on teacher training and on school health and nutrition. The World Bank and other partners
(national financing of tuition waivers, would continue supporting the MENFP to finalize the TWP financing strategy. The World
SHN and community-based schools, Bank would continue to closely collaborate with other sector partners and keep a harmonized
policy on accelerated teacher training) dialogue with the GoH on the potential impacts of policy measures on education access and
could preclude the sustainability of quality, as well as on adopting and implementing a transparent financial framework that
Project-financed activities. New policy reflects increasing financing responsibility by the GoH for key policies to expand access.
measures to focus national financing on Resp: Both Stage Imple Recurrent Due Frequenc Status: In
the public sector may also threaten : ment : Date: y: Progre
financial sustainability of key Project- ation Continuo ss
financed activities involving non-public us
schools, including notably the TWP.
Overall Risk
Overall Implementation Risk Rating: High
Risk Description:
The overall risk rating is high driven largely by high governance and capacity risks, including the risk of procurement- and financial
audit delays.
42
Annex 3: Activities by source of financing
Component/Subcomponent IDA (March 2014-September HRF (September 2014-September GPE (September 2014-
2016) 2016) September 2017)
Component 1: Support to Primary Education Enrollment
Sub-component 1.1. Enhance Grants to School Management No activities Grants to School Management
the Tuition Waiver Program. Committees - Verification firms Committees - Verification firms
(until June 2014) (for 2014-2015 and 2015-2016
school years). Training of SMCs
and School Directors
Sub-component 1.2. Support Grants, training and school No activities No activities
to Communities. construction to selected
communities including
constructing rural schools.
Sub component 1.3. Information campaign –
Information for Non-Public Training – Focus group
School Accountability
Component 2: Support to Improved Student Attendance.
Sub-component 2.1. Pre- The costs of classroom-based No activities No activities
service Teacher Training. practice for a third cohort (until
September 2014) and the
finalization of the curriculum for
the Accelerated Teacher
Training Program (Formation
Initiale Accélérée) (FIA).
Sub-component 2.2. Support Introduction of new reading No activities No activities
to the quality of Reading method (M ap Li Net Ale) in
Instruction. project participating schools.
Teacher training and coaching,
student and teacher assessment,
provision of teacher and student
materials etc.. Distribution of
teacher guides for grades 1 and
43
2.
Sub-component 2.3. School School canteens, provision of School canteens, provision of Retargeting - School canteens,
Health and Nutrition. nutrients and deworming, nutrients and deworming, operating provision of nutrients and
operating costs of the National costs of the National School Feeding deworming, operating costs of
School Feeding Program (until Program. Gradual introduction of the National School Feeding
June 2014). Firms for the improved stoves Firms for the Program (for 2014-2015 and
verification of the services verification of the services delivery at 2015-2016 school years).
delivery at school. school. (For 2014-2015 school and Gradual introduction of
2015-2016 school years). improved stoves. Firms for the
verification of the services
delivery at school.
Component 3: Strengthening Sector Management.
Strengthening of the School accreditation system No activities Development of Annual Action
MENFP’s Capacity. including financing of the Plans – Pilot study on student
National Consultative mentoring – Education Country
Committee for Accreditation, Status Report – Technical
development/revision of assistance for key national
accreditation standards, policies on request.
methodologies and procedures;
training for central level MENFP
and DDE staff, independent
agencies, schools committees;
equipment.
Support to the DDEs for the
school supervision/inspection.
Key studies such as a Public
Expenditures Tracking Survey
(PETS) and other similar studies
on the education sector.
Implementation of an ICT-based
pilot experimentation to monitor
44
teacher absenteeism:
consultancies, training for school
directors and inspectors,
provision of equipment and
incentives to schools and an
impact evaluation of the pilot.
Component 4. Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation.
Project Management, Impact evaluation of the M Ap Li Financial audit Financial audit Project
Monitoring and Evaluation Net Ale approach, other Management and
(M&E). evaluation activities, technical implementation coordination
assistance to oversee the costs, strengthening of MENFP
implementation of Project monitoring and evaluation
activities. Implementation systems. Monitoring PIPE,
coordination costs. Financial EGRA, EGMA.
audit
45
Annex 4: Revised Estimate of Project Costs
Table A: Cost per sub-component and by source of financing in US$
Component/Subcomponent IDA (September HRF* (September GPE (September 2014- CDB* Total
2014-September 2014-September September 2017) (September
2016) 2016) 2014- September
2017)
Component 1: Support to 5,203,959 0 14,199,100 5,700,000 25,103,059
Primary Education
Enrollment
Sub-component 1.1. Enhance Grants:12,374,100 3,200,000 16,974,100
the Tuition Waiver Program. Verification Firms:
500,000
Training: 900,000
s/total : 13,774,100
Sub-component 1.2. Support 5,203,959 2,500,000 7,703,959
to Communities.
Sub component 1.3. Focus group: 75,000 425,000
Information for Non-Public Campaign Development:
School Accountability 50,000
Campaign
Implementation: 300,000
s/total: 425,000
Component 2: Support to 4,677,534 14,370,000 6,615,000 3,600,000 29,262,534
Improved Student
Attendance
Sub-component 2.1. Pre- 500,000 500,000 1,000,000
service Teacher Training.
Sub-component 2.2. Support 4,177,534 500,000 4,677,534
to the quality of Reading (Materials for
Instruction. ECD and
Multigrade)
46
Component/Subcomponent IDA (September HRF* (September GPE (September 2014- CDB* Total
2014-September 2014-September September 2017) (September
2016) 2016) 2014- September
2017)
Sub-component 2.3. School NGOs: 13,770,000 NGOs: 6,120,000 2,600,000 23,585,000
Health and Nutrition. Verification Firms: Verification Firms:
400,000 200,000
Study on improved Study on improved
stoves: 0 stoves: 45,000
Introduction of Introduction of improved
improved stoves : stoves : 250,000
200,000 s/total: 6,615,000
s/total: 14,370,000
Component 3: 2,117,596 539,000 700,000 3,356,596
Strengthening Sector
Management
Strengthening of the 2,117,596 Annual Action Plan: 700,000 3,356,596
MENFP’s Capacity. 74,000
Student Mentoring:
130,000
Country Status Report:
200,000
Technical Assistance:
135,000
s/total: 539,000
Component 4: Project 1,945,370 380,000 2,746,900 500,000 5,572,270
Management, Monitoring
and Evaluation
Project Management and 1,945,370 Operating Costs: Operating Costs: 799,900 500,000 5,572,270
Monitoring and Evaluation 340,000 EGRA: 1,250,000
(M&E). Financial Audit: EGMA: 625,000
40,000 Financial Audit: 72,000
s/total: 380,000 s/total: 2,746,900
47
Component/Subcomponent IDA (September HRF* (September GPE (September 2014- CDB* Total
2014-September 2014-September September 2017) (September
2016) 2016) 2014- September
2017)
Unallocated 1,525,155 500,000 2,025,155
Total 15,469,614 14,750,000 24,100,000 11,000,000 65,319,614
(*) The figures are budget estimates and they are subject to the signature of the HRF and CDB Grant agreements.
Table B: Annual disbursement for the GPE Program (in US$)
Sub-component 1.1. Enhance the Tuition Waiver Program.
2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 Total Comments
Grant 8,829,000 3,545,100 12,374,100 90US$ per student per year
Verification Firms 400,000 100,000 500,000 3US$ to 4US$ per student per
year
Training 450,000 450,000 900,000 450US$ per school per year
Total 9,679,000 4,095,100 - 13,774,100
Sub component 1.3. Information for Non-Public School Accountability
2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 Total Comments
Focus group (3months) 75,000 75,000 6 National consultants
(including workshop etc)
Campaign Development 50,000 50,000 Firm
Campaign implementation 300,000 300,000 Spots etc…..
Total 125,000 300,000 - 425,000
Sub-component 2.3. School Health and Nutrition.
2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 Total Comments
NGOs 3,060,000 3,060,000 6,120,000 0.60US$ per student per day
48
for 150 days a year
Verification firms 100,000 100,000 200,000 3US$ per student per year
Study on improved stoves 45,000 45,000 One international consultant
(45 days) and one National consultant
Introduction of improved 250,000 250,000 1,250US$ per school
stoves
Total 3,205,000 3,410,000 - 6,615,000
Component 3. Strengthening Sector Management.
2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 Total Comments
Annual Action Plan 25,000 25,000 24000 74,000 3 National consultants
(including workshops etc..)
Student Mentoring 5,000 125,000 130,000 One National Consultant and
Payment of school grant
(2000US$ per school per
year)
CSR 25,000 150000 25000 200,000 3 National consultants and 2
International consultants and
Thematic studies
Technical Assistance 45,000 45,000 45,000 135,000 2 International Consultants
for one month per year
Total 100,000 345,000 94,000 539,000
Component 4. Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E).
2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 Total Comments
Operating Costs 200,000 200,000 399,900 799,900
EGRA 750,000 500,000 1,250,000 Firm
EGMA 125,000 500,000 625,000 Firm
Audit 25,000 25000 22,000 72,000 Firm
Total 1,100,000 225,000 1,421,900 2,746,900
49
Annex 5: Institutional and Implementation Arrangements14
A. Institutional arrangements
1. This Annex will present only the institutional and implementation arrangement for
the sub-components financed through the GPE grant, although they are part of the
arrangements currently in place for the parent Education for All Project Phase 2 Project.
The parent Project Steering Committee would serve as the steering committee for this operation.
The MENFP would be responsible for Project implementation, with support from the existing
Project Technical Unit (PTU) for the parent Project. The PTU team is led by a Project
Coordinator and consists of two units: a technical unit (reporting to the relevant technical
directorates), which provides technical assistance for implementation of the activities according
to the proposed components; and an administrative unit (reporting jointly to the Project
Coordinator and the Directorate of Administrative Affairs (Direction des Affaires
Administratives -DAA)). The administrative unit is composed of consultants and officials from
the DAA.
2. Each sub-component financed through the GPE program would be under the
implementation and supervision of one Directorate at the central MENFP. The Directorate
of Support to Private Education and Partnership (DAEPP) would be responsible for (i) sub-
component 1.1 (Enhance the Tuition Waiver Program) and (ii) the Communication Unit of the
MENFP (in collaboration of the would be responsible for sub-component 1.3 (Information for
Non-Public School Accountability). The National School Feeding Program (Programme
National des Cantines Scolaires) (PNCS) would be responsible for sub-component 2.3. (School
Health and Nutrition). Under sub-component 3, (Strengthening Sector Management) the UEP
would be responsible for Annual Action Plans and thematic and sectoral studies, the Technical
Unit (Cellule Technique) of the General Directorate would be responsible for the TA for key
policies. Under sub Sub-component 4, (Project Management and Monitoring and Evaluation),
the PTU would be responsible for Financial and Procurement management and overall project
coordination, the DEF would be responsible for EGRA and EGMA and the UEP would be in
charge of monitoring the transitional sector plan (PIPE).
B. Implementation arrangements
3. The implementation arrangements for the GPE Program are part of the overall
implementation arrangement of the parent EFA Phase 2 Project as described in the project
Operational Manual (OM). For the purpose of the GPE Program a summary of the main
arrangements are presented hereafter.
Subcomponent 1.1. Enhance the Tuition Waiver Program
4. In its current form, the program lowers the cost of schooling for participating families by
waiving the tuition in select non-public schools. The next phase would focus more sharply
on providing quality inputs to participating schools to improve student learning gains.
14
Elements of the arrangements outlined in this annex are subject to change, as the MENFP periodically updates the
Project operational manual.
50
5. Selection of schools: In order to qualify for the program, schools must be registered with the
state as legal, non-public providers of education. Requirements for participation include
providing all participating students with textbooks, having a functioning School Management
Committee (SMC), and respecting the procedures as established in the operational manual,
including the positive list of eligible expenditures. A long-list of qualifying schools is
assembled by the Departmental Education Offices (Direction Départemental d’Education –
DDEs), and submitted to the Tuition Waiver Steering Committee (Comité Paritaire) that
validates the list. Upon validation, participating schools are selected at random, with the
total number of schools to be selected being a function of the available financing for the
program.
6. Selection of students: All students entering grade one for the first time that are between the
ages of 6-8 are eligible for support under the program. Once in the program, the
participating cohort and future cohorts entering grade 1 would be eligible for support if
program requirements described above are met.
7. Management of transfers: The School Management Committees of participating schools
open bank accounts in a local commercial bank (Banque Nationale de Credit), to which
funds are transferred from the MENFP’s DAA at the beginning of the school year. The first
transfer represents an advance of 60 percent of the total annual subsidy. Funds are managed
by the President of the SMC and the school director, both of whom must sign on the
checking account of the SMC. Payments are made according to a positive list of 10
expenditure categories.
8. Strengthening the SMCs: As per under Phase 1 of the parent Project, specific activities
would be undertaken to strengthen the capacities of SMCs in the areas of school
management, and financial management. Training would be provided around a simple FM
training manual. This would be undertaken by NGOs, as is currently the case under the
existing operation.
9. Monitoring: All schools are subject to inspection by the MENFP’s inspectorate. School
Management Committees must submit financial reports to inspectors, which are then
transferred to the DDEs for validation. Contrary to the original program design, financial
reports are no longer transferred to the DAA, and do not trigger payments of the second
tranche. Rather, a third party verification firm is contracted to conduct a technical audit of
100 percent of participating schools. The audit assesses compliance with program
regulations as outlined in the operational manual, and verifies the number of participating
children. The technical audit report then confirms the number of beneficiary children, and
the payment of the second tranche to the school is authorized.
10. Proposed improvements: Among the proposed innovations and improvements of the program
under APG 2 is a continued evolution toward a results-based model, the introduction of
greater accountability of participating schools, and the strengthening of sanctions for non-
compliance. In addition to conditioning payments on the findings of the technical audit (see
above), schools performing well according to certain standards might be eligible for top-ups.
51
To enhance the quality of instruction at the school level, a bonus would be paid to
participating schools that employ graduates from the accelerated teacher training program
(FIA). In addition, the role of SMCs would be heightened in order to improve the
transparency of the program and foster greater accountability of teachers and school directors
to parents for student learning outcomes through instruments such as a school scorecard.
Local authorities would also be expected to play a greater supervisory role in the program.
Finally, as per the lessons learned under Phase 1, sanctions for non-compliance need to be
better defined and used more widely.
11. Sustainability: As the tuition waiver program is expanded, the likelihood that the
Government of Haiti could absorb the overall fiscal burden is diminished. A medium to
long-term transition strategy is currently being finalized. This includes a mix of mobilizing
increased public resources for the eventual transfer of the program to the Government, as
well as a number of measures that would render the program more affordable. This could
include: i) a lowering of the per student subsidy (from the current level of US$90), ii)
introducing a cap on how much each school can receive, either per year or cumulatively, iii)
clearly defining a graduation from the program for participating schools, such as capping
participation at six years, once the initial cohort has graduated. This will be part of ongoing
discussions between the MENFP, the MEF and the World Bank.
12. At the central level: As per the existing implementation arrangements for the tuition
waiver program, the Private Education and Partnerships Unit (Direction de l’Appui à
l’Enseignement Privé et du Partenariat – DAEPP) would continue to be responsible for
executing the Project, through its decentralized offices at the departmental level. The DAEPP’s
main responsibilities relating to managing the tuition waiver are as follows:
Broadcast information relating to the program, including qualification rules and selection
procedures;
Assemble list of qualifying schools, to be submitted to the Tuition Waiver Program
steering Committee (Comité Paritaire)
Undertake random selection of schools;
Gather financial information of schools, to be communicated to PTU for payment;
Inform communities of selected schools, publish lists of schools in newspaper, outside of
MENFP decentralized offices at Departmental and local levels;
Announce participating schools on the radio;
Manage complaint systems; and
Process the recruitment of verification firms and manage their contracts.
13. At the departmental level: The implementation would be coordinated at the
departmental level by the regional representatives of the DAEPP, known as “SAEPPs”, in close
collaboration with the inspectorate. Inspectors would be responsible for assisting with the
overall communication between the MENFP and the communities and schools. Among the
responsibilities of the DAEPPs (and inspectors) would be:
Conduct an awareness raising workshop broadcasting the rules of the program, as per the
operational manual;
52
Receive expressions of interest from schools to participate in the program, hereby serving
as the foundation of the ‘long lists’ of qualifying schools from which participating schools
would be selected;
Inform communities of selected schools, publish lists of schools in newspaper, outside of
DDEs, BDSs, and BIZs;
Facilitate and participate in the training of the SMCs by NGOs;
Facilitate the access to schools for the independent verification agency undertaking the
technical audit of the tuition waiver program;
Regularly visit schools, and receive the financial management reports from SMCs;
Keep on file financial management reports of SMCs and facilitate access to reports by
financial auditors in coordination with the DGA.
14. At the community and school level: School Management Committees are responsible
for the management of funds transferred and for ensuring compliance with program operational
procedures. SMCs are typically composed of five people: two representatives of parents, two
representatives of the community, and one teacher. These five vote for a President, who has
signing authority over the account, together with the schools director. The SMC is responsible
for:
Open the bank account at the local branch of the National Bank of Credit (Banque
National de Credit) (BNC);
Sign the agreement with the MENFP, committing to implementing the program as per the
rules outlined in the operational manual;
Receive training from NGO and SAEPP/inspectors in program procedures, and basic
financial management;
Undertake all expenditures relating to the subsidy program, using procedures of financial
management procedures acceptable to the World Bank;
Prepare financial reports, to be submitted to the local school inspector.
Sub-component1.3 School Health and Nutrition
15. Implemented by the National School Feeding Program (Programme National des Cantines
Scolaires) (PNCS), the program is delivered by non-Governmental organizations (NGOs)
subcontracted by the MENFP through the PNCS. International and national evidence have
demonstrated the value of such programs.15 In Haiti, the program serves both the objective
of increasing school attendance, through providing an added incentive for families to enroll
and send their children to school every day, and student readiness to learn, as otherwise
hungry and unhealthy children have difficulty concentrating in the classroom.
16. Selection of NGOs: Using World Bank procurement procedures, NGOs (or firms) are
contracting according to a national bidding process. Recruitment is done according to pre-
identified target areas of the country, at the local level (section communales).
15
For a complete review of international evidence, including experiences in Haiti, see Bundy, D. (2009). Rethinking
School Feeding: Social Safety Nets. Child Development and the Education Sector. The World Bank/World Food
Programme.
53
17. Package of services delivered: As per the contracts, the NGOs deliver both morning snacks
and a hot meal daily to participating schools. The program also contains a de-worming
component, with the distribution of albendazole to all schools twice a year. Service
providers are meant to deliver approximately 1,500 kilocalories per day per child, or an
estimated 75 percent of the daily kilocalories needed per child.
18. At the central level: The overall strategic directions for the Government’s School
Health and Nutrition program are provided by the National School Feeding Steering Committee
(NSFSC).16 Implementation is the responsibility of the PNCS. Responsibilities include:
Determine the package of services to be delivered, including establishing a unit price for
the agreed upon services, to be validated by the NSFSC;
Recruit the NGOs to serve as service providers, together with the PTU, and according to
World Bank procedures;
Coordinate with the WFP and UNICEF with regards to the provision of albendazole for
the de-worming activities;
Supervise the NGOs selected for the delivery of services;
Evaluate the performance of NGOs.
19. Role of NGOs: The execution of the activities under the School Health and Nutrition
program are carried out by selected non-Governmental organizations. NGOs enter into contracts
with the PNCS, stipulating the package of services to be delivered, the agreed upon unit prices,
and the geographic region to be served. Responsibilities include:
Provide daily services to schools, as per the terms of the contract;
Carry out all procurement and financial management, in accordance with contractual
agreements and as detailed in the Project’s operational manual;
Maintain accurate records of service delivery;
Provide performance reports every six months;
Facilitate supervision visits of the PNCS.
C. Financial Management, Disbursements and Procurement
20. The financial, disbursement and procurement management of the GPE Program is part of
the overall management of the parent EFA Phase 2 Project as described in the project
Operational Manual (OM). For the purpose of the GPE Program a summary of the main
arrangements are presented hereafter.
a. Financial Management
21. Institutional Arrangements. The Project17 Steering Committee would in general have
responsibility for the overall strategic direction, including financial management aspects, of the
Project. Within the MENFP, the administrative unit of the DAA would have the primary
16
The NSFSC is comprised of representatives of the National School Feeding Program (NSFP), the Ministries and
Education and Health, the WFP, UNICEF, USAID, Fonds d’ Assistance Economique et Sociale (FAES), Pan-
American Development Fund (PADF), Centre National d’Information Geo-Spatiale (CNIGS), and NGOs involved
in school feeding.
17
In the text the Project refers to EFA APG2 which also includes the GPE Program.
54
responsibility for maintaining adequate financial management arrangements for the Project. Such
arrangements include those related to budgeting, accounting, funds flow, internal controls,
financial reporting and auditing. The administrative unit of the DAA would thus record all
Project transactions and prepare financial reports and have the annual financial statements
audited. The Steering Committee would be responsible for ensuring that the DAA address all
issues identified in the audit of the financial statements. In addition, various other entities would
play a role, albeit limited, in maintaining records of Project transactions, and submitting a
summary of such records to the DAA on a regular basis. These would include School
Management Committees (SMC) for the implementation of the Tuition Waiver Program and
support to the communities, and the beneficiary NGOs for the implementation of the School
Health and Nutrition Program. SMCs and beneficiary NGOs should maintain a financial
management system and prepare financial statements in accordance with consistently applied
accounting standards acceptable to the Association, both in a manner adequate to reflect the
operations, resources and expenditures related to the subprojects; and at the Association’s or the
Recipient’s request to have such financial statements audited by independent auditors acceptable
to the Association.
22. Key risks and mitigating measures. The key risks that affect financial management of
the Project emanate from the decentralized nature of the targeted communities that are dispersed
across the country, the need to disburse funds to these communities in order to implement the
Project activities and achieve its objectives and the challenge in consolidated financial records of
transactions in these communities. The key risks are therefore that funds may not reach their
intended destination and thus may not be used for their intended purposes, that financial flows
may be delayed, that accounting records may not be properly maintained by the DAA, and that
the DAA may not be able to monitor the use of Project funds and ensure proper controls thereon.
23. In mitigation of these, and in view of increasing sustainable fiduciary capacity within the
DAA, an international consultancy should help the DAA (i) produce a manual of administrative
and fiduciary procedures (which could or could not be included in the Project operational
manual) as well as a simple fiduciary guide for local communities; (ii) train DAA fiduciary staff
in World Bank procedures in financial management and procurement; (iii) help the DAA
dialogue with Tomate team and set up the Tompro accounting software in order to enable the
DAA to use properly not only the accounting module but also the budget, the DRF, the capital
assets, the World Bank reconciliation modules and to produce directly IFRs and financial
statements acceptable to the World Bank; (iv) produce a financial management assessment of the
Education sector and a multi-year action plan for strengthening capacity of the DAA to (a)
prepare annual budget submissions to the MEF and include external funding in it; (b) prepare
and monitor a sector MTEF; (c) monitor external funding at the sector level and build a bridging
table between charts of accounts of Projects and the chart of central Government; (d) Implement
and follow-up budget execution; (e) increase decentralization (deconcentration) at DDE level of
administrative and financial workflow.
24. The PTU has a reasonable amount of experience in the implementation of World Bank
financed Projects on which the DAA would build. Community mobilization teams would be
equipped to provide basic training in financial management to all SMC. The DAA would
produce and disseminate among SMC a very simple fiduciary guide (1-4 pages) to provide a
basis for training/reference and to make sure financial management is harmonized among SMC.
55
This is intended to ensure that basic financial records of transactions are maintained.
Mobilization teams would also have access to computerized systems that would be used to track
Project related expenditures facilitate the task of the DAA in consolidating financial records. For
the purposes of disbursing funds to remote locations, a money transfer agency would be used.
The DDE, and in particular the representative of the DAA, would be responsible for carrying
inspections of the use of Project funds in their constituencies. These risks and mitigation
measures are included in the ORAF.
25. Staffing and Training. The PTU is led by a Project Coordinator and consists of two
units: the technical unit, reporting to the Minister’s Cabinet, which oversees the implementation
of the activities according to the proposed components, and the administrative team, housed in
the DAA. The administrative unit is based in Port-au-Prince, and would be in charge of
maintaining all records of Project transactions, including a consolidation of records submitted by
the SMCs. The administrative unit would report jointly to the Director of the DAA and to the
Project Coordinator.
26. An internal auditor was recruited for the APG2 (including the GPE Program) and would
continue to work closely with the school inspectors that would carry technical audits to verify
student attendance and the availability of teaching materials. The auditor hired would be
responsible for assuring that the overall MENFP’s internal control environment, including for
activities financed by this Project, are adequate to meet the World Bank’s requirements and
would develop an action plan to support Project activities.
27. Given the added responsibilities for the DAA, the Project would support the
strengthening of the fiduciary capabilities of the agency through an international consultancy. It
would support intensive training on both financial management and procurement procedures to
staff in the DAA. The Project would also support the provision of training to relevant officials of
the beneficiary agencies such as the school management committees.
28. In addition, community mobilization teams would be equipped to provide basic training
in financial management to all SMCs. This training would be aimed at equipping SMCs with
skills to maintain basic financial records.
29. Accounting Systems and Procedures. The accounting systems, policies and procedures
used to manage Project funds would be documented in the Project’s manual of administrative
and fiduciary procedures. These would be used to identify, assemble, analyze, classify, record
and report the transactions of the Project, and to maintain accountability for the related assets and
liabilities. The following aspects would be covered in the manual: low of funds; financial and
accounting policies for the Project; accounting system (including centers for maintenance of
accounting records, chart of accounts, formats of books and records, accounting and financial
procedures); authorization procedures for transactions; budgeting system; financial reporting
(including formats of reports, linkages with chart of accounts and procedures for reviewing
financial information); auditing arrangements; and human resource aspects.
30. The DAA is using a new system capable (Tompro) of producing all the accounting and
financial data required to ensure that Project expenditures are maintained efficiently and
accurately for timely financial reporting to the World Bank, including financial statements,
56
World Bank reconciliation statements, and all financial reports, such as the Interim Financial
Reports (IFRs). The accounting records would be kept up-to-date and the financial statements
summarizing these would be presented for audit from time to time. World Bank reconciliations
would be undertaken regularly to ensure accuracy of the accounting records. Any new staff
would be trained in the use of the system. In addition, the chart of accounts used to record the
transactions would be amended to accommodate any accounting codes necessary to capture
transactions under this Project.
31. Mobilization teams would also have access to computerized systems that would be used
to track Project related expenditures facilitate the task of the DAA in consolidating financial
records.
32. Staff in the DDE regional offices would use Excel spreadsheets to prepare summarized
financial reports that would be transmitted to the DAA periodically to provide the information
supporting the payment of salaries to the instructor.
33. Internal controls and procedures. The DAA would maintain a strong system of
internal controls and procedures. These would be documented in the manual of administrative
and fiduciary procedures to ensure that all stakeholders of the School Health and Nutrition and
Tuition Waiver Program have sufficient information on the Project’s operating guidelines. The
manual would document the financial management arrangements for the Project, and describe
the key transaction cycles for the Project activities. These would include the approval of
transactions, procedures for recording them, formats of key accounting documents and financial
reports, and where relevant, a description of duties for key staff in the Administrative Unit. The
manual would also describe the administrative controls to be adopted by the SMCs to ensure that
they maintain accurate records of transactions, and that these are transmitted to the PTU
regularly and in a timely manner.
b. Disbursement Arrangements
34. The proceeds of the GPE Grant would be disbursed in accordance with the traditional
disbursement procedures of the World Bank and would be used to finance Project activities
through the disbursement procedures currently used: i.e. Advances, Direct Payment,
Reimbursement and Special Commitment accompanied by appropriate supporting
documentation (Summary Sheets with records and/or Statement of Expenditures (SOEs)) in
accordance with the procedures described in the Disbursement Letter and the World Bank's
"Disbursement Guidelines".
35. A new segregated Designated Account would be created for the GPE AF at Banque de la
République d'Haiti . DAA would be responsible for submitting quarterly replenishment
applications with appropriate supporting documentation along with a reconciled bank statement.
Through the Designated Account, DAA would make payments to SMCs, IFMs and NGOs. In
general, payments to cover activities implemented by SMCs, PNCS and IFMs would be made by
the PTU following the achievement of agreed triggers. The disbursement flow from the
Designated Account to each of these entities is described below:
57
- DAA would transfer funds to SMCs upon receipt of the list of approved block grants to
be issued to the communities as authorized by the steering committees. Also, Community
Instructors would be paid based on the payroll records authorized by the SMCs for instructor's
salaries.
- Grants to SMCs: Grants would be made to the SMCs to cover tuition waiver and school
construction. The tuition waiver payments would be calculated based on the number of students.
Block grants for school construction would be determined based on applications by SMCs to the
relevant committees. The DAA would compile a list of approved block grants and of payments
due to be made to various schools to cover tuition fees. It would then make requested payments
through the Designated Account to the bank account of the relevant SMC.
- Payments for services rendered to PNCS for the School Nutrition and Health Program:
Payments under the School Nutrition and Health Program would include fees to NGOs for their
services. Payments would be made in accordance with the relevant terms of the contracts. They
would be made following the submission of financial reports by the PNCS to the DAA. The
reports would indicate the amounts payable to the NGOs. Following their verification of the
amounts, the DAA would make payments to the NGOs.
- DDE: Agents of the DDE would implement a program of controls of beneficiaries of
Project funds and would prepare and implement a multi-year program of controls to check the
use of the grants.
58
Annex 6: Excerpt from the Manual of Operation for the Tuition Waiver Program18
1. JUSTIFICATION
Access to free basic education, one of the strategies laid out by the Dakar Forum that has been
embraced by the National Education for All Strategy (SNA/EPT) consistent with the specific
features of the Haitian education context, today poses one of the most important challenges that
the Government of Haiti needs to resolve in order to achieve Education for All.
One component of the Education for All project falls within the scope of the SNA/EPT strategic
decision to promote greater fairness in access to basic education by facilitating school enrollment
for six-year-olds from low-income households. This strategic decision also calls for action to be
taken first of all in the municipalities of departments at the bottom of the poverty scale and those
where access to education is difficult.
Indeed, the non-public sector, a good portion of which is for-profit,19 occupies a large space in
the Haitian education network, i.e., 91 percent of all schools, and receives 81.5 percent of all
students attending the first two cycles of basic education. Most of these schools are unaccredited
and located in very poor areas. In this sense, weak public supply seriously hinders the
Government’s capacity to promote free basic education.
Tuition fees for each child are equivalent to roughly 15 to 25 percent of total annual income,
which means 45 to 60 percent of annual income for an average family with three school-age
children20 in the poorest 20 percent of the population in a country currently ranked 154th
according to the most recent UNDP report on human development. The social analysis21
commissioned by the World Bank reports that fees directly payable to schools and expenses for
the acquisition of textbooks, averaging US$80 in 2005, are indeed prohibitive and pose a major
obstacle to school enrollment.
It thus becomes difficult to meet the strong demand for education which, moreover, only grows
larger from year to year. Fully 55 percent of households live below the extreme poverty line of
US$1 per person per day, and 76 percent fall below the poverty threshold of US$2 per person per
day, with 82 percent of households in rural areas living below this threshold.22
A significant increase in inequality, due, quite clearly, to declining income for the most
disadvantaged segments of the population, has thus occurred, and underprivileged households
have a hard time sending their children to school, unable as they are to afford steadily growing
tuition fees.
18
Procedures outlined in this annex are subject to change, as the MENFP periodically updates the Project
operational manual.
19
Cf. Annex 1 for identification of types of schools based on category.
20
CCI – Education, Youth, and Sports Focus Group, June 2004.
21
Comments gathered from families.
22
Ministry of Planning and External Cooperation, Carte de Pauvreté (Version 2004).
59
2. NATURE AND PURPOSE OF THE PER STUDENT TUITION FEES SUBSIDY
From the perspective of facilitating access to basic education, especially for children from
economically disadvantaged segments of the population, both the SNA/EPT and the Operational
Plan for Education System Reform call for offsetting the tuition fees. In the same vein, several
funds (IDA, CDB, CIDA, IDB, Office of the Haitian President) plan to provide a subsidy that
will be specifically intended to eliminate tuition fees directly payable to schools and expenses for
the acquisition of textbooks. It will be provided secondarily with the twin goals of (i) reducing
the burden of paying for basic education that weighs on households and thus helping the parents
of beneficiary children overcome the barrier to school enrollment created by tuition fees; and (ii)
for schools, offsetting the losses of income resulting from the elimination of tuition fees.
Since fees directly payable to schools are targeted for elimination, the income generated by the
parents’ contribution to non-public schools needs to be offset in order for them to be able to
operate. Accordingly, the selected schools will receive, for each enrolled student, a subsidy to
cover operating costs.
Schools will be invited to adopt measures designed to improve the quality of education services
they provide, based on standards established by MENFP. For that purpose, they may offer a
minimum package of quality education services in an appropriate school environment, while
simultaneously envisioning an increase in their capacity to accommodate students.
The subsidy has an individual character, i.e. it will be granted on a per student basis. Starting in
the first year of the project, each of the selected schools will receive the amount of US$90 per
enrolled student as compensation for fees directly payable to the school and to make textbooks
available. Other fees that could be required of parents are not taken into account in the context of
this financial support and should not be prohibitive. They could, however, be subject to
negotiation with the parents.
The subsidy will also serve to strengthen associations and communities surrounding the schools
with an eye to facilitating their participation in the transparent management of financial
resources, as well as in the planning and execution of actions designed to boost quality. As such,
the subsidy will help create and strengthen local capacity to implement good governance and
decentralization.
Apart from the financial support that it will indirectly provide to households lacking income, the
financial contribution from donors will also have a social effect and contribute to poverty
reduction insofar as some parents will be able to invest the money they would have paid to the
school in income-generating activities or, for example, deal with health care problems facing
their family.
The subsidy is based on the following principles:
o The principle of fairness, which promotes equal opportunity in access to education for all
children;
o The principle of efficiency, which ensures that the money spent will provide maximum
benefits in relation to the stated objectives;
60
o The principle of transparency, which requires open and reciprocal information between
partners and MENFP and public information concerning the progress of activity programs;
o The principle of consistency or integration, where complementarity is sought between the
subsidy program and other actions initiated by MENFP, as well as other partners, with an eye
to achieving the priority objectives of the Operational Plan; and
o The principle of accountability, which requires that every beneficiary be held responsible and
accountable for resources coming from taxpayers.
3. SCOPE OF INTERVENTION AND BENEFICIARIES OF THE SUBSIDY
The subsidy is extended to accredited schools or schools recognized by MENFP that are of
course part of the non-public sector, on the condition that the funds not be used for personal
purposes. The idea is to intervene in some of the poorest municipalities where access to basic
services is generally weak and, more specifically, where access to education is difficult because
of tuition fees payable directly to the schools. The children of displaced families in makeshift
camps set up after the earthquake are also potential beneficiaries.
Given the difficulties of managing and monitoring direct support to families, which, in addition
to creating a dependency on the part of the families, requires fairly complex monitoring and
oversight mechanisms, the subsidy is paid directly to the selected schools. To be clear, since
tuition fees are not a major obstacle to enrollment in the public schools, the subsidy will be
allocated, for this reason, to schools that belong to the non-public sector. This decision can also
be justified by the fact that public supply is very limited for guaranteeing children’s broad access
to basic education.
The subsidy arrangement, as formulated, aims specifically to promote enrollment of 6-8 year-old
children in the first year of school. In the current context, the financial support could also bear
fruit by reducing the size of the problem of children who are “too old” in the education system,
at least in areas covered by the program.
The subsidy is granted gradually over time and space, thus mitigating the negative effects of a
sudden explosion of demand. The financial support is accordingly spread through 2015. In total,
some 235,000 children are covered.
4. MECHANISMS AND PROCEDURES
The mechanisms and procedures determine how the subsidy is to be regulated in light of the
principles of transparency and responsibility that apply to the process, especially with respect to
how the financing is awarded and used. They serve to guarantee transparency throughout the
entire process. They also provide a frame of reference for actors and entities that will intervene
at different stages from this one.
The regulatory framework for the subsidy establishes preconditions for setting in place the
related system, its award requirements, content, and application processing. Management,
monitoring, and evaluation of the use of funds intended to guarantee access for selected students
enrolled in basic education are also taken into account.
61
5. PRECONDITIONS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SUBSIDY PROGRAM
To facilitate decision making for managing, monitoring, and evaluating the use of funds, the
process is steered by DAEPP at the central level and the SAEPPs at the departmental level, under
the authority of the Minister and under the supervision of the Director General and the Deputy
Director General in charge of DDEs.
Inasmuch as the non-public sector is a vital part of the education sector that complements the
Government’s efforts by establishing schools to meet the strong demand for education, the
development of a partnership framework seems altogether necessary. The partnership in fact
consists of “a relationship through which actors freely come together to accomplish, jointly, a
mutual project. It reflects an agreement between the two parties, or more, based on a mutual
interest and a shared understanding of the objectives and other provisions of the agreement.”23
The main partners of the education sector are (i) networks of schools forming the non-public
sector consortium; (ii) public and private education trade unions; (iii) associations of parents of
students; and (iv) regional education associations from which the departmental advisory panels
are formed.
It is also essential to involve partners, as well as regional and local administrations, in this
process. Given the inactivity of most advisory panels, there is an urgent need to revitalize them
so that their participation becomes possible, as it is subsequently defined.
Based on the preceding, it seems important to develop—at both the central and departmental
levels, and under concrete conditions appropriate to the prevailing context—mechanisms and
procedures for joint collaboration with the non-public sector in examining subsidy applications
and monitoring their use, and then to entrust final selection of the application to an entity, with
joint committees charged with conducting verifications of consistency necessary for validating
the subsidy proposals (cf. Annex 3 of the present Volume III).
To truly facilitate the inclusion of partners, it will be useful to set in place two types of
mechanism that will play a key role in the subsidization process, namely a Departmental Joint
Committee (CPD) and a Joint Committee for the Subsidy Program (CPPS), composed in both
cases of members of the public and non-public sectors. More specifically:
o CPD is composed of two representatives from the departmental advisory panel, two
representatives from regional and local administrations, and two representatives from DDE
(the official responsible for SAEPP and a representative appointed by the Departmental
Director).
Its main role is to verify that the dossier submitted for the subsidy application is in
compliance and to cast light, through remarks and comments, on the substance of the
information submitted and on the degree of credibility of the applicant institution.
23
Cf. Le partenariat dans l’enseignement technique et la formation professionnelle: le concept et son application, by David
Atchoarena, IIPE – UNESCO, April 1998, p.14. Arguments repeated by DAEPP in its subsidy policy.
62
It provides an interface between the departmental directorate and CEC without being a
decision-making body and it participates in the monitoring and oversight of the use of funds
at the regional level.
o CPPS has nine members:
- the Director General (Chairman);
- a member of the Minister’s cabinet;
- the Director of DAEPP;
- a representative from the Ministry of Finance;
- a representative from the parent association;
- two trade union representatives; and
- two representatives from the non-public sector.
As a decision-making body for the subsidy, CPPS is also a space of consultation, exchange,
dialogue, and partnership. In this regard, it is called upon to make relevant recommendations to
MENFP in connection with project implementation. More specifically, the support provided by
this particular committee will consist of lending credibility to the validation of subsidy
applications and authorizing the financing.
6. RECRUITMENT OF CHILDREN AND SCHOOL SELECTION
CEC is charged with recruiting, with the support of CPD, children who will benefit from the
subsidy. In the case of schools that have no CEC, during the first semester, an application may
be produced by the director, who must however agree to form a CEC and make it operational for
the following semester. Preparation of the application, however, follows the same procedure.
o Subsidy award arrangements: conditions and eligibility criteria for schools
The subsidy cannot be awarded spontaneously. Schools will be invited to submit an application
with the Departmental Directorate, more specifically SAEPP. It is up to CEC, and CEC alone, to
produce the application upon presentation of a dossier. After examining the latter, the authorized
entity may or may not award the subsidy. SAEEP will in fact reach a decision on the quality of
each dossier based on established criteria and the preselection of schools that meet the criteria.
Given the fact that all the retained applications cannot be satisfied at the same time, mainly for
lack of financing, it is important to act impartially and guarantee the fairness of the school
selection process. School selection will thus be carried out by random selection or the drawing
of lots among preselected schools. To be clear, there is no inherent right to the subsidy.
Accredited non-public schools selected for the subsidy will receive a budget appropriation to
accommodate the flow of students that the elimination of tuition fees will produce and thus to
meet the costs of operations and quality improvements. The process requires opening a bank
account for each school to receive the funds and it will be necessary to use formal or approved
63
channels for transferring the money. The authorized signatures are those of the CEC chairman
and the school director.
They will be selected on the basis of specific conditions and criteria, including accreditation or
recognition by MENFP, the school director’s acceptance that the support in any event covers
services constituting the minimum package of education services, and the creation of a functional
CEC closely involved in managing the funds.
Although it aims to expand school access, the subsidy will be awarded cautiously in order to
avoid any slippage of quality. As such, in addition to the textbooks to be provided to children,
the schools must meet certain conditions to receive the financing: qualified teachers, a maximum
teacher-student ratio of 45:1, classrooms that meet MENFP standards (1 m² per student).
The use of official bank accounts is indispensable in order to guarantee some degree of
transparency, through applicable oversight and regulatory mechanisms. This can also facilitate
financial tracking of the use of funds. Accordingly, donors will transfer funds to a MENFP
account opened at BRH or they will transfer funds directly to BNC.
BRH transfers money to a suspense account at BNC24 where the directors and CECs also open
their school accounts. BNC then dispatches the money to the school accounts.
To enable DDEs to perform oversight of subsidized non-public schools and optimally regulate
the subsector, CECs report to DDEs, and BNC provides DDEs with school account statements.
To clarify, schools that may receive a subsidy are those that:
o are accredited;
o have a functional CEC;
o are located in municipalities that show deficiencies in access to basic services;
o offer a minimum package of quality services (qualified teachers, classrooms measuring at
least 55 m² and containing no more than 45 students); and
o have the necessary capacity to accommodate the subsidized children and subsequent cohorts.
24 BNC is a public institution that has a representative branch in each of the country’s departments.
64
Annex 7: Excerpt from the Manual of Operation for the School Health and Nutrition
Program25
Institutional framework and school selection
This program will target on a priority basis the schools having participated in the first phase of
EPT (Education for All) in the South, Artibonite, West, and Central departments, if these schools
are not taken up by other programs.
Otherwise, PNCS, in consultation with CNCS, will determine the departments and municipalities
where the School Health and Nutrition component could be expanded. Geographical targeting
and the choice of operational methodology will thus reflect the policy of geographical coverage
and the school feeding approach which PNCS, in consultation with CNCS, intends to stimulate at
the national level, in a transparent fashion. Selection of the criteria will be guided by information
provided by the school feeding map. This map would specify and contain the following
information: rate of access to education in departments and municipalities, the names and
number of schools served by school feeding programs, the names and types of operators, the
existence of school health programs and the entities in charge, the existence and quality of health
and cooking infrastructure, and the existing type of feeding service. The program has also
reached students at public schools under community management since September 2011 in the
South and Southeast departments.
The criteria will aim to limit the negative externalities of school feeding programs, such as the
displacement of students from schools that provide quality education toward schools where
quality and efforts to improve the environment are less than satisfactory, thus impacting the
ultimate goal of the school feeding program. Accordingly, lists of schools proposed by NGOs
should be accompanied by a commitment to make a gradual and cumulative effort to improve the
quality of education and the environment in which schoolchildren are learning. Such
improvements could be related to: (i) a stable teacher/student ratio per class that meets standards
to be developed by PNCS and CNCS; (ii) teacher training; (iii) cleanliness of basic infrastructure
(kitchen, courtyard, latrines) or potential for adding this type of infrastructure. Finally, the
proposed lists of beneficiary schools should provide some justification in relation to other
schools that were not selected.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF INVITATIONS FOR EXPRESSION OF INTEREST AND
PROCEDURES
Preparation of the invitations for expression of interest will be placed under the responsibility of
PNCS in consultation with CNCS. They will be as specific as possible concerning the choice of
departments and municipalities based on information drawn from the school map. The final
terms of reference should be given to the EPT procurement office which is charged with
announcing the invitations for expression of interest and receiving the proposals.
25
Procedures outlined in this annex are subject to change, as the MENFP periodically updates the Project
operational manual.
65
The invitations for expression of interest should be announced in April of the first year. They
will pertain to implementation of a program that will run for three years, with a renewal
condition each year based on the results obtained.
Bids should be received by the end of June, and selection of the applications should be
completed by the end of July of the same year, a period at which the selected NGOs should be
alerted by PNCS so they can prepare to begin operations in September of the same year,
coinciding with the start of the school cycles.
The period from late June to late July for selecting the NGOs will include two phases: (i) the first
is the selection of proposals based on their convergence with the terms of reference, and (ii) the
second is due diligence performed by PNCS.
Selection of applications
The applications submitted by NGOs should include specific elements in the documents
submitted (cf. Annex 1 of the present Volume IV): (i) types of meals and their nutritional value,
plus their ingredients; (ii) related unit costs; (iii) supply and delivery arrangements and the
associated costs; (iv) proposed training activities for communities and the associated costs; (v)
number of daily meals to be served and number of targeted beneficiary students; (vi) planned
oversight arrangements based on performance indicators such as students’ school attendance,
absenteeism and drop-outs and their causes, measurements of height and weight for a sample
group of schoolchildren; (vii) planned parasite control arrangements if the schools are not
covered by the school health program; (viii) the cost of supervision; (ix) the program to improve
the quality of education over three years.
An Independent Commission made up of the project’s steering committee and other directorates
designated by the Ministry if necessary, as well as CNCS, will select applications received in
response to the invitations to bid based on criteria determined for this purpose (cf. Standard
Evaluation Form developed by the Independent Commission, Annex 3 of the present Volume
IV).
Validation of selection
PNCS should conduct a verification of the information provided by NGOs and confirm it by
letter to the Independent Commission, which should then approve it. This stage should take
place between late June and late July. In the event that PNCS and the Independent Commission
should arrive at conclusions different from those presented by the NGO, the Independent
Commission should invite the NGO by letter for purposes of clarification.
If corrective measures need to be taken, the Independent Commission will make this known and
will determine with the NGO the corrective actions to be taken within a period of time that
would not keep the start of operations from coinciding with the start of the school year. In the
event that a serious dispute makes it impossible to reach a consensus, the Independent
Commission may turn instead to another NGO that submitted a proposal following the same
procedures.
66
Disbursement
Disbursements for funding the activities of the NGOs will be made twice a year: (i) at the
beginning of the fiscal year, and no later than August of the current year, in an amount
equivalent to half the annual budget after final validation by the Independent Commission; and
(ii) at the start of the second quarter upon satisfactory presentation of the first operational and
accounting reports for the first quarter to PNCS and approval by CNCS. The disbursement
request should be sent by the NGOs to MENFP through the EPT technical unit. The transfer will
take place directly from EPT to the NGOs.
Reassignment of funds. An internal reassignment of funds, not to exceed 10 percent of each
expenditure category, may be authorized by the World Bank subject to justification of costs and
the necessity of such action.
Contract renewal
Every year, the PNCS evaluation will serve to determine whether the program has been
satisfactory or not, based on the terms of reference and the results obtained. Any deviation from
these benchmarks deemed important by PNCS and CNCS could result in cancelation of the
contract with the NGO, based on justification approved by the World Bank, in which case the
operation could be turned over to another entity. In addition, in the event that the national
program should take on some or all of these schools, subsequent requests for bids would target
other schools according to the criteria established by CNCS.
Operational responsibilities of the various institutional entities
PNCS
PNCS, with the direct involvement of relevant DDEs, is responsible for establishing the criteria
for targeting beneficiary schools and producing the terms of reference for project activities in
consultation with CNCS. To that end, PNCS is responsible for coordination of the updating of
the school map by CNIGS while ensuring that the entities involved in the school feeding
program provide the necessary data. PNCS is also responsible for coordination of needs and
related information to be provided to competent authorities charged with supplying pills for
parasite control, Vitamin A, immunizations, and therapeutic milk from the Ministry of Health
and UNICEF. Over time, this activity would be gradually expanded to all schools that have a
school feeding program.
From a fiduciary perspective, it will coordinate the selection of applications with the Independent
Commission and see to validation of the information provided by NGOs.
67
PNCS must review and approve the quarterly and annual reports that the NGOs submit in
connection with monitoring their activities. These reports will also be discussed with CNCS and
sent to the EPT Project Technical Unit and, through the latter, to the World Bank.
PNCS will supervise the programs carried out by the NGOs with regular field visits once every
quarter. PNCS will formalize and summarize the results of these visits, discuss them with
CNCS, and consult with the latter on any problem requiring corrective action on the part of the
NGO and will make suggestions to the latter if necessary.
PNCS will establish the elements to be used by the NGOs to measure the expected impacts of
this component. PNCS will thus need to define the elements to be targeted for monitoring and
evaluation. This methodology and the baseline elements will be submitted for approval by the
members of CNCS before being used.
At the end of each year, it will accordingly conduct surveys of samples of schools with and
without the program, the number of which will be determined by PNCS in consultation with
CNCS. This will complement, and should be coordinated with, the independent qualitative
evaluation at the end of the project’s first year of operation as planned under the project. These
evaluations should be sent to the steering unit and, through the latter, to the World Bank, and
should be accompanied by a wrap-up of national programs.
Consequently, PNCS should collect data that can be used for annually updating information on
school feeding and for refining the school feeding map and the national school feeding strategy.
The objective of this approach is to coordinate the national programs of all actors in consultation
with CNCS.
A technical unit financed by the project was created within PNCS to perform this role of
analysis, coordination, and supervision of the project and the national school feeding programs.
The technical unit’s performance will be evaluated by the World Bank in relation to the
achievement and quality of these tasks.
NGOs
NGOs will be responsible for (i) providing meals or food in accordance with methodologies set
forth in bids that are submitted and validated; (ii) implementing parasite control and distributing
Vitamin A if it is not included in the national school health program, as well as therapeutic milk
for identified cases of acute malnutrition; (iii) training communities and school councils and
developing with them a plan to improve the quality of education; (iv) promoting a contribution
and collaboration from communities and school councils in project implementation.
In addition, the NGOs should prepare quarterly and annual operational and accounting reports
for PNCS. These reports should contain (i) the number of daily meals served; (ii) the frequency
of deliveries of commodities; (iii) the number of beneficiary schoolchildren; (iv) progress of the
operations, including problems and positive aspects; (v) performance indicators concerning
students’ school attendance, rates of absenteeism and drop-outs and their causes; (vi)
68
measurements of height and weight for a school sample; (vii) progress with respect to parasite
control and the distribution of Vitamin A, as well as therapeutic milk if necessary.
The NGOs will be charged with establishing a baseline at the start of the project, based on
elements provided by PNCS, so as to be able to perform monitoring and evaluation of program
benefits during this phase. They will also be charged with identifying control schools, and the
annual reports should contain a comparison of the two samples, the results of which will be
analyzed from year to year in order to refine national policy in this sector.
National School Feeding Committee (CNCS)
CNCS will serve in an advisory role to PNCS. It will discuss intermediate and annual project
reports in order to refine the national school feeding strategy. In addition, it will (i) contribute to
discussions fueling coordination of national school feeding programs; (ii) promote
implementation of the Healthy Schools policy (Ecoles Promotrices de la Santé) by coordinating
school feeding with basic infrastructure (kitchen, latrines, safe drinking water) and hold
responsibility for coordinating supplies of Albendazole, Vitamin A, and immunizations for
schools covered by the program, along with therapeutic milk in certain cases of acute
malnutrition; (iii) establish standards and regulations necessary for improving governance in this
sector, especially with respect to minimum caloric intake and the choice of schools based on
their characteristics (quality of education, accredited or unaccredited). These standards will be
applied to the project, with the end goal of expanding their reach to schools benefiting from the
school feeding program; (iv) take charge of developing the contents of a school health and
nutrition curriculum upon which school health and feeding policies would be based and which
NGOs could draw upon to provide training. In addition, this would permit some degree of
standardization of information and encourage evolution of the health themes to be addressed.
Independent Commission
The Independent Commission will select qualified bids for the operation and validate them after
verification by PNCS. The NGO selection criteria are shown in Annex 1-C of the Manual of
Operation.
69
Annex 8: Presentation of the Monitoring and Evaluation arrangement for the GPE funding
1. This Annex presents the monitoring and evaluation arrangements for the proposed GPE
Program. It is divided into three parts: i) a description of the arrangements to implement the
proposed monitoring plan, ii) the data currently available, and iii) the proposed evaluations to
inform the MENFP’s future policy directions.
2. Demographic data are outdated in Haiti and education statistics are too fragmented to
calculate reliable enrollment rates and to measure access to education. Likewise data on
education quality are lacking, with limited information produced under some development
partner-financed projects in specific areas. Given this situation the proposed outcome indicators
to monitor the GPE-financed AF are limited to the Program’s contribution to (i) student
enrollment instead of education access; (ii) student attendance, on the basis that higher student
attendance is a critical prerequisite to improving student learning outcomes; and (iii)
strengthened management of the primary education sector.
3. Different entities are involved in the implementation of the proposed monitoring
plan. The MENFP would be the main entity responsible for implementing the monitoring plan,
using the monitoring arrangements for the ongoing parent Education for All Project – Phase 2
(Grant No. H7400-HT, P124134). The MENFP is currently enhancing its information system in
close collaboration and with significant technical and financial support from other development
partners (IDB, UNESCO, MAECID, etc…) with the main objective to produce updated
education indicators every year, starting from July 2011. The third school census is underway
and the computerized information management system is being constantly improved. With the
new Education Management Information System (EMIS), the MENFP would be able to produce
data by level of administration, National, Department and District. With regard to the
intermediate results indicators for the three Program components, several data sources and
methodologies would be used. For the tuition waiver sub-component, independent agencies
would be recruited to monitor the effectiveness of the delivery and the use of the school grants
and to conduct parents and community surveys. For the school health and nutrition program two
mechanisms developed during Education for All Program – Phase 1 (APG1) (Grant No. H2860-
HT, P099918) would be continued. The PNCS would still be in charge of collecting school data
and communities’ and parents’ opinions, while the NGOs recruited to deliver the school health
and nutrition to schools would produce two reports (a progress report and a final report) of the
services rendered. In addition, independent agencies would be recruited to monitor the
effectiveness of the delivery of the foods, to collect data on student attendance and to conduct
parents and community surveys. For the monitoring of improvements in teaching and learning,
the Basic Education Unit of the MENFP would have overall responsibility; an independent
agency would be recruited to carry out EGRA and EGMA assessments, in collaboration with the
MENFP.
4. The data currently available includes the resources discussed in the paragraph
above, as well as numerous studies at various regional levels. The primary national datasets
commonly used in the education sector are a school census carried out in 2011, Demographic
and Health surveys, and the General Census of the Haitian Population (Recensement General de
la Population Haïtienne) (2002). In addition to these, the proposed Program would also make
70
use of other studies, such as the Haiti Early Grade Reading Assessment (2010), the poverty map
undertaken by the Ministry of Planning (2004), a study on costs of education inputs (Merisier,
2004), the nutrition vulnerability map (CNSA 2013) in order to help fill information gaps.
5. Analytical work would be undertaken through the Project, and through the
implementation of the MENFP’s sector plan more generally. First, to fill the knowledge gap
with regards to the education sector, in collaboration with other partners, MENFP would prepare
a Country Status Report along with an Education Public Expenditure Review. Those activities
would provide not only a deeper knowledge of the education sector but also the possible options
for further sustainability of Program-financed activities. Secondly, with regard to improvements
in reading instruction, under the parent Project, an impact evaluation will be carried out to
measure the extent to which the introduction of the M Ap Li Net Ale reading instruction approach
in participating TWP schools is contributing to increased student reading skills. Third, education
analyses based on Haiti’s most recent national household survey (ECVMAS 2012) are underway
to inform further public education policies. Finally, an external consultant would be hired to
undertake an ex-post evaluation in the context of the Program Implementation Completion
Report.
71
Annex 9: Lessons Learned from Previous Operations
BOX 1: Lessons Learned about the Tuition Waiver Program from EFA Project Phase 1
Programmatic Reports for 2007-2010 and Early Grade Reading Assessment 2010
Payments to Schools were delayed and had negative impacts on textbook purchases, infrastructure
improvements and other Project-mandated changes. The Project was restructured in mid-2010 and
changes made to regularize payments.
Licensing was in place for a majority of schools, though approximately ten percent of participating
schools lack licensing.
Textbook provision average was four per student, one above the Project mandated minimum but a
small number of schools provided no textbooks at all.
Teacher qualification requirements were met by less than 15 percent of teachers for all years, and
increases in teacher salaries were generally not provided.
Class size and student enrollment targets were generally met, though the average values mask some
significant variations in actual class size and enrollment levels.
School councils were found to present in almost all schools surveyed, though some of them exist in
name only.
Financial documentation has proven difficult to provide for a large number of schools. Direct
inspection replaced financial reporting as a trigger for disbursement under the 2010 Project
restructuring. Basic financial information should nevertheless be produced by schools.
Supervision and support has been provided by MENFP and multiple NGOs, though some schools did
not receive any visits from Ministry employees and many beneficiaries request additional quality
training in financial matters. Additional support to MENFP and its regional units is provided under
the parent Project.
Student learning as measured by literacy levels in Creole and French were exceedingly low. While
the sample was not representative of the Project as a whole, it is believed that student learning levels
remain low throughout the participating schools.
Information management has room for improvement, particularly in determining the number of
children enrolled in participating schools. An independent audit agency to monitor enrollment was in
place as a part of the restructuring.
Recommendations include additional technical support to schools which fail to meet targets and
maintain accurate records while removing those who consistently fail from the program. The parent
Project calls for MENFP to define appropriate sanctions. Financial management needs to be
improved in schools and school councils, and financial flows regularized on the part of the subsidy,
outcomes expected under the restructuring.
72
Annex 10: Summary of Haiti Education Sector Development Partner Interventions
Partner Intervention
CDB Non-public school tuition waivers
School health and nutrition
Pre-service teacher training
Institutional Strengthening
Support to Early Childhood Development
Support to secondary education
Support to vocational training
EU Provision of school Textbooks
Institutional Strengthening
Development of Vocational Training Quality and
Availability
France School health and nutrition
Institutional Strengthening/Human Resources
Management
Vocational Training
In-service teacher training
ICTs in education
Higher education
IDB Non-public school tuition waivers
School Construction
Provision of school textbooks
School health
In-service teacher training
Provision of student kits and uniforms
Provision of teacher/school kits
Student learning assessments
Institutional Strengthening
Public Private Partnership
Support to vocational training
JICA School Construction
In-service teacher training
MAECD Non-public school tuition waivers
School health and nutrition
Teacher training
School reconstruction
Provision of student kits and uniforms
Provision of school textbooks
Institutional strengthening
Support to vocational training
Spain School Construction
In-service teacher training
73
Institutional Strengthening
Switzerland School Construction
UNICEF School Construction
Provision of school textbooks
Provision of teacher and/or school kits
Provision of student kits
In-service teacher training
Institutional Strengthening
Support to Early Childhood Development
UNESCO Institutional strengthening
National policy and strategy on teachers
Teacher training
National curriculum reform
EMIS
Literacy
Higher education
School health
School construction
Peace education
USAID Provision of school textbooks
In-service teacher training
Provision of teacher and/or school kits
Improved reading competencies
Student learning assessments
WFP School health and nutrition
Institutional Strengthening
GPE (EFA-FTI Grant) Non-public school tuition waivers
School health and nutrition
Curriculum revision
Institutional Strengthening
Support to Early Childhood Development
World Bank Non-public school tuition waivers
Community-based schools
School health and nutrition
Pre-service teacher training
Improved reading competencies
Student learning assessments
Institutional Strengthening
Support to school accreditation
74