Document of The World Bank Report No.: 86027-NG PROJECT PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA STATE EDUCATION SECTOR PROJECT (P096151) April 16, 2014 IEG Public Sector Evaluation Independent Evaluation Group ii Currency Equivalents (annual averages) Currency Unit = Nigerian Naira 2006 US$1.00 NGN128.65 2007 US$1.00 NGN125.81 2008 US$1.00 NGN118.55 2009 US$1.00 NGN148.90 2010 US$1.00 NGN150.30 2011 US$1.00 NGN154.70 Abbreviations and Acronyms ADB Asian Development Bank CCT Conditional Cash Transfer ECD Early Childhood Development CUBE Capacity for Universal Basic Education DfID Department for International Development EMIS Education Management Information System ESSPIN Education Sector Support Education Sector Support Programme in Nigeria HDI Human Development Index ICR Implementation Completion and Results Report IEG Independent Evaluation Group IEGPS IEG Public Sector Evaluation JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency JSS Junior Secondary School LGAs Local Government Authorities M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MDGs Millennium Development Goals PPAR Project Performance Assessment Report SESP Nigeria State Education Sector Project SUBEB State Universal Basic Education Boards UNICEF United Nations Children's Fund USAID U.S. Agency for International Development Fiscal Year Government: January 1 – December 31 Director-General, Independent Evaluation : Ms. Caroline Heider Director, IEG Public Sector Evaluation : Mr. Emmanuel Jimenez Manager, IEG Public Sector Evaluation : Mr. Mark Sundberg Task Manager : Ms. Susan Ann Caceres iii Contents Principal Ratings ................................................................................................................. v Key Staff Responsible......................................................................................................... v Preface............................................................................................................................... vii Summary ............................................................................................................................ ix 1. Background and Context................................................................................................. 1 Socio-Economic Context of Nigeria ............................................................................... 1 Education in Nigeria ....................................................................................................... 2 2. Objectives, Design, and their Relevance ........................................................................ 5 Relevance of Objective ................................................................................................... 5 Design ............................................................................................................................. 6 Implementation Arrangements........................................................................................ 9 Monitoring and Evaluation Design ................................................................................. 9 Relevance of Design ..................................................................................................... 11 3. Implementation ............................................................................................................. 13 Implementation Experience ...................................................................................... 14 Safeguards ..................................................................................................................... 15 Fiduciary ....................................................................................................................... 16 Implementation of Monitoring and Evaluation............................................................. 16 4. Achievement of the Objectives ..................................................................................... 17 Improve the Quality of Basic Education ....................................................................... 17 Improve Girls Participation........................................................................................... 23 5. Efficiency ...................................................................................................................... 27 6. Ratings .......................................................................................................................... 28 Outcome ........................................................................................................................ 28 Bank Performance ......................................................................................................... 30 Quality of Supervision .................................................................................................. 31 Borrower Performance .................................................................................................. 32 Monitoring and Evaluation ........................................................................................... 33 7. Lessons .......................................................................................................................... 34 References ......................................................................................................................... 37 This report was prepared by Susan Ann Caceres, who assessed the project in May and June 2013. The report was peer reviewed by Xiaoyan Liang and panel reviewed by Denise Vaillancourt. Viktoriya Yevsyeyeva provided administrative support. iv Annex A. Basic Data Sheet ............................................................................................... 39 Annex B. School Conditions in Project LGAs in Kwara, Kaduna, and Kano 2009-2011 41 KWARA SCHOOL CONDITIONS ............................................................................. 41 KADUNA SCHOOL CONDITIONS ........................................................................... 42 KANO SCHOOL CONDITIONS................................................................................. 43 Annex C. List of Persons Met ........................................................................................... 53 Annex D. Borrower Comments ........................................................................................ 57 Tables Table 1. Poverty Distribution across Geo-political Zones, 1999 ........................................ 2 Table 2. Gross Enrollment by Level by Year (%) .............................................................. 3 Table 3. Gross Primary and Secondary Enrollment by Geo-political Zone, 2006 (%) ...... 3 Table 4. Gross Enrollment by Level and Gender, 2006 ..................................................... 4 Table 5. Activities within each Component and Planned Costs ......................................... 7 Table 6. Project Results Framework ................................................................................. 10 Table 7. Appraisal and Actual Cost of Project by Component ......................................... 13 Table 8. Reported Use of Grant Funds (% of surveyed schools)...................................... 18 Table 9. Primary Public Enrollment Total and Girls (number and percentage) 2009-2011 ........................................................................................................................................... 25 Table 10. JSS Public Enrollment, Total and Girls (number and percentage) 2009-2011 . 26 Table 11. Comparison of Project and Government Unit Costs (Naira) ............................ 28 Table 12. Primary School (2009-2011) ............................................................................ 41 Table 13. Junior Secondary Schools (2009-2011) ............................................................ 41 Table 14. Primary School (2009-2011) ............................................................................ 42 Table 15. Junior Secondary Schools (2009-2011) ............................................................ 42 Table 16. Primary School (2009-2011) ............................................................................ 43 Table 17. Junior Secondary Schools (2009-2011) ............................................................ 43 Table 18. Public Primary School Enrollment - Kaduna ................................................... 45 Table 19. Public Junior Secondary School Enrollment – Kaduna .................................... 46 Table 20. Public Primary School Enrollment - Kwara ..................................................... 46 Table 21. Public Junior Secondary School Enrollment - Kwara ...................................... 47 Table 22. Public Primary School Enrollment – Kano....................................................... 48 Table 23. Public Junior Secondary School Enrollment – Kano........................................ 49 Table 24. Percentage of Schools with no Toilets – Kwara ............................................... 50 Table 25. Percentage of Schools with no Toilets – Kaduna ............................................. 50 Table 26. Percentage of Schools with no Toilets – Kano ................................................. 51 Table 27. States in Reading Comprehension and Mathematics 2007 and 2011 (mean percentage score) .............................................................................................................. 51 v Principal Ratings ICR* ICR Review* PPAR Outcome Moderately Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Risk to Development Moderate Moderate Significant Outcome Bank Performance Moderately Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Borrower Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory Performance * The Implementation Completion and Results (ICR) report is a self-evaluation by the responsible Bank department. The ICR Review is an intermediate IEG product that seeks to independently verify the findings of the ICR. Key Staff Responsible Division Chief/ Project Task Manager/Leader Country Director Sector Director Appraisal Halil Dundar Laura Frigenti Hafez M.H. Ghanem Completion Olatunde Adetoyese Adekola Peter Nicolas Materu Marie Francoise Marie-Nelly vi IEG Mission: Improving World Bank Group development results through excellence in independent evaluation. About this Report The Independent Evaluation Group assesses the programs and activities of the World Bank for two purposes: first, to ensure the integrity of the Bank’s self-evaluation process and to verify that the Bank’s work is producing the expected results, and second, to help develop improved directions, policies, and procedures through the dissemination of lessons drawn from experience. As part of this work, IEG annually assesses 20-25 percent of the Bank’s lending operations through field work. In selecting operations for assessment, preference is given to those that are innovative, large, or complex; those that are relevant to upcoming studies or country evaluations; those for which Executive Directors or Bank management have requested assessments; and those that are likely to generate important lessons. To prepare a Project Performance Assessment Report (PPAR), IEG staff examine project files and other documents, visit the borrowing country to discuss the operation with the government, and other in-country stakeholders, and interview Bank staff and other donor agency staff both at headquarters and in local offices as appropriate. Each PPAR is subject to internal IEG peer review, Panel review, and management approval. Once cleared internally, the PPAR is commented on by the responsible Bank department. The PPAR is also sent to the borrower for review. IEG incorporates both Bank and borrower comments as appropriate, and the borrowers' comments are attached to the document that is sent to the Bank's Board of Executive Directors. After an assessment report has been sent to the Board, it is disclosed to the public. About the IEG Rating System for Public Sector Evaluations IEG’s use of multiple evaluation methods offers both rigor and a necessary level of flexibility to adapt to lending instrument, project design, or sectoral approach. IEG evaluators all apply the same basic method to arrive at their project ratings. Following is the definition and rating scale used for each evaluation criterion (additional information is available on the IEG website: http://ieg.worldbankgroup.org). Outcome: The extent to which the operation’s major relevant objectives were achieved, or are expected to be achieved, efficiently. The rating has three dimensions: relevance, efficacy, and efficiency. Relevance includes relevance of objectives and relevance of design. Relevance of objectives is the extent to which the project’s objectives are consistent with the country’s current development priorities and with current Bank country and sectoral assistance strategies and corporate goals (expressed in Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers, Country Assistance Strategies, Sector Strategy Papers, Operational Policies). Relevance of design is the extent to which the project’s design is consistent with the stated objectives. Efficacy is the extent to which the project’s objectives were achieved, or are expected to be achieved, taking into account their relative importance. Efficiency is the extent to which the project achieved, or is expected to achieve, a return higher than the opportunity cost of capital and benefits at least cost compared to alternatives. The efficiency dimension generally is not applied to adjustment operations. Possible ratings for Outcome: Highly Satisfactory, Satisfactory, Moderately Satisfactory, Moderately Unsatisfactory, Unsatisfactory, Highly Unsatisfactory. Risk to Development Outcome: The risk, at the time of evaluation, that development outcomes (or expected outcomes) will not be maintained (or realized). Possible ratings for Risk to Development Outcome: High, Significant, Moderate, Negligible to Low, Not Evaluable. Bank Performance: The extent to which services provided by the Bank ensured quality at entry of the operation and supported effective implementation through appropriate supervision (including ensuring adequate transition arrangements for regular operation of supported activities after loan/credit closing, toward the achievement of development outcomes. The rating has two dimensions: quality at entry and quality of supervision. Possible ratings for Bank Performance: Highly Satisfactory, Satisfactory, Moderately Satisfactory, Moderately Unsatisfactory, Unsatisfactory, Highly Unsatisfactory. Borrower Performance: The extent to which the borrower (including the government and implementing agency or agencies) ensured quality of preparation and implementation, and complied with covenants and agreements, toward the achievement of development outcomes. The rating has two dimensions: government performance and implementing agency(ies) performance. Possible ratings for Borrower Performance: Highly Satisfactory, Satisfactory, Moderately Satisfactory, Moderately Unsatisfactory, Unsatisfactory, Highly Unsatisfactory. vii Preface This is a Project Performance Assessment Report of the State Education Sector Project in the Federal Republic of Nigeria, financed through IBRD Loan No. 42950, in the amount of US$65 million equivalent (SDR43.3 million). The project was approved on April 26, 2007, became effective on April 25, 2008, because of the time it took with Nigeria’s Federal processes approving and ratifying a World Bank project. It closed on July 1, 2011 without any extension. This report was prepared by Susan Caceres, Senior Education Specialist, IEG. Data analyses of the Annual School Census Reports was provided by Ms. Segen Teklu Moges, under the supervision of Susan Caceres. The findings are largely based on a two-week mission to Nigeria from May 28, 2013 to June 7, 2013, conducted by Susan Caceres, Senior Education Specialist. During the same time period, Ms. Elena Bardasi, Senior Economist, also conducted a mission to examine the Community Based Poverty Reduction Project (P069086). The mission met with education authorities in the implementing agency, the State Ministry of Education and State Universal Basic Education Board in Kwara and interviewed representatives from the States of Kano and Kaduna. Representatives from the Federal Ministry of Education were also interviewed. The mission only visited schools in Kwara, as security conditions did not permit visits to Kaduna and Kano. During the mission in Kwara, a representative of the Federal Ministry of Finance accompanied the visits to schools and the interviews. The mission also met with key staff and managers of the Bank in Washington and Abuja, as well as key staff and managers of DfID. The list of persons met is in Annex C. Preparation for the mission and report involved examination of: (a) World Bank project files, (b) Project related reporting documents and evaluations, and (c) Education studies with data from the government and other development partners, as well as the relevant research literature. The IEG team gratefully acknowledges the logistical assistance and support of the staff in the Abuja Office of the World Bank and the support from the Kwara State Ministry of Education personnel, particularly Mr. Rasaq Alabare. Following standard IEG procedures, a copy of the draft report was sent to the relevant government officials and agencies for their review and feedback. Their comments are presented in Annex D. IX Summary Context In Nigeria national school enrollment data mask differences across the six geo-political zones. The North East and North West have respective primary gross enrollment rates of 67 percent and 64 percent, while rates in the North Central, South East, South West, and South South are 100 percent. There are also inequalities in enrollment in terms of gender. In the Northern Regions enrollment rates are the lowest in the country for girls. At the start of the project the gap in primary enrollment between boys and girls was 17 percent in Kano, while the difference between boys and girls enrollment in Kaduna was 11 percent and 3 percent in Kwara (World Bank 2007). State Education Support Project The objective of the US$65.40 million equivalent State Education Support Project (2008- 2011), as stated in the Credit Agreement (p. 5) was "to improve the quality of basic education in targeted Local Government Areas (LGAs) in the participating States, focusing particularly on girls' participation", as measured by improved learning conditions 1, increased transition and completion rates for boys and girls in targeted LGAs. The same objective was noted in the appraisal documents. The activities to attain the objective of improving the quality of basic education included: provision of school grants, textbooks, rehabilitation of targeted schools, teacher training, state and local government capacity building, reform of the inspection services, and an Early Childhood Development pilot. Design focused on improving inputs into learning, but neglected others that more needed to improve education quality and learning outcomes such as teachers and their unequal distribution among schools, particularly rural ones. Textbooks were printed in English, despite a national policy specifying a gradual transition to English as the medium of instruction during the primary grades (fourth to sixth). There were few targeted activities to increase the participation of girls. The conditional cash transfer pilot implemented in Kano after the midterm review, only supported the first grant payment to girls. The pilot continued with the support of ESSPIN and the Kano State Ministry of Education, but its future was uncertain2 . The relevance of objectives is high given the commitment, consistent with the Federal Ministry of Education's Ten Year Strategic Plan, to promote delivery of quality education and establishment of quality assurance procedures. The project's objective was also highly relevant to each State Education Sector Plan, which aimed to accelerate progress toward the key education Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), creating the basis for sustainable development by emphasizing improvements to quality in areas with low schooling participation levels, especially among girls. The Bank's current Country Partnership Strategy (20 10-2013, current at lEG Mission) stresses a state (rather than 1 This key performance indicator was subsequently changed to the measurement of student learning. 2 The Bank is supporting a conditional cash transfer program for poor households. This program is not targeted at girls. X federal-level) approach to improve access, quality, efficiency, and equity in education, with a particular emphasis on girls' education. During the project, 3 million textbooks were distributed to primary and junior secondary schools within the three States, which achieved a 1: 1 student to textbook ratio in the core subject areas in Kwara and Kaduna, but their effective use has not been assessed. School renovations improved the physical conditions for learning and helped reduce overcrowding in classrooms. Professional development was provided to 6,456 teachers in the States of Kaduna, Kwara, and Kario, but there were problems related to the relevance and impact of training, and many teachers were subsequently transferred to other schools, which head teachers reported was a barrier to sustaining pedagogical changes. The percentage of girls enrolled in primary schools in Kano increased slightly more in project LGAs (47 percent in 2009 to 50 percent in 2011) than in non-project LGAs (47 percent to 48 percent in 2011). The rate remained steady in primary schools in Kwara and Kaduna in both project and non-project LGAs. The project's outcome is rated Moderately Unsatisfactory, and is based upon high relevance of the objectives, modest relevance of design, modest achievement in improving quality, and modest achievement of increasing girls' participation. Efficiency was rated substantial because of the cost savings the project demonstrated from its use of competitive bidding for civil works and textbooks. The risk to development outcome is significant, given weak institutional management capacity, teacher posting policies, and changing government priorities. The performance of the Bank is rated moderately unsatisfactory at entry, during supervision, and overall. The Borrower's performance is rated moderately satisfactory. The Government and States remained committed to improving education and increasing girls' participation, but there were some shortcomings in performance. Both Government and implementing agency performance were moderately satisfactory. Lessons Based on the experience of this project, several lessons can be drawn: • Learning and sustainability of pilot activities are limited when there is an absence of clear design, an explicit mechanism for evaluating, and a sufficient implementation time frame. Initiating the girls CCT during the last year of the project provided insufficient time to implement the pilot. As well, it is difficult to determine the benefits and effectiveness of the pilot ECD activities, given the absence of the monitoring and evaluation system and implementation plan. Without strong design and evaluation, there is no way to identify whether the pilot activity is worthy of scaling-up or sustaining. Pilots generate further interest in sustaining or scaling-up when robust data are collected. • Setting up a monitoring and evaluation system takes more time than Governments and TTLs often recogniz;e and provide. An overly complex system was designed and replaced with a simplified one. In environments with low capacity, understanding the critical data needs of the Government is essential, as well as the amount of technical assistance that will be required. During this xi project, it took considerable time for the s·tates to collect and analyze the Annual School Census. • A prior unsuccessful project can result in learning, but it depends upon an accurate understanding of performance issues. This project avoided some of the shortcomings in the predecessor Bank project, Universal Basic Education Project. DfiD's TAwas aligned with the objective of this project. However, each partner worked separately to complete respective responsibilities within the project. Better coordination between the work of the Bank and DfiD could have enhanced the EMIS, state and local capacity building efforts and teacher professional development. • Even with a State-focused project, the involvement of the Federal Ministry of Education is critical given its central role in policy. The difficulties related to the Federal implementation in the Universal Basic Education project were not fully understood. During preparation, instead of designing approaches to overcome the challenges experienced by the Federal Ministry of Education with the Universal Basic Education Project, the Federal role was minimal. This reduced the buy-in by the Federal Ministry of Education and likelihood of replicating project activities in other states. • Improving inputs into learning (facilities, textbooks, etc.) needs to be accompanied by defining and addressing quality requirements in terms of minimum standards for student learning. While this project improved the inputs and physical conditions for learning, these may not translate into improved student learning, as the key issue of teachers' capacities was insufficiently addressed by the project. When teachers' numeracy, literacy, and language skills are low, children's learning will be compromised. This is particularly true in rural areas as more skill deficiencies were found among rural teachers. There also continue to be issues in how teachers are allocated amongst schools. 6~~~ M,·~~ -fv~ Caroline Heider Director-General Evaluation 1. Background and Context 1.1 This Project Performance Assessment Report (PPAR) reviews the experience and achievements of World Bank support for basic education in the Nigeria State Education Sector Project (SESP). It was approved on April 26, 2007, and became effective on April 25, 2008, because of the time it took with the Federal processes for approving and ratifying a World Bank project. The project was financed by an International Development Association (IDA) credit of US$65.40 million equivalent. The British Department for International Development provided US$1.67 million in parallel financing for the components related to Education Management Information System (EMIS), Reform of the Inspectorate, and Capacity Building for Planning and Management. 1.2 This project was selected for a field-based assessment since it focused on improving the quality of education, increasing the participation of girls, and also implemented pilot activities to support early childhood development. The information gained from this field- based study will be utilized as an input into IEG’s upcoming evaluation of Bank support for early childhood development and nutrition programs. Socio-Economic Context of Nigeria 1.3 In the period 2001-2009 Nigeria experienced rapid economic growth. Growth has averaged 9.2 percent annually, then slowed in the later years to 6.4 percent (World Bank 2011). Despite this robust growth, there has not been significant improvement in social indicators. In the midst of dynamic economic growth, the poverty headcount ratio increased from 63.07 percent in 2004 to 67.98 percent in 2010. In 2011 Nigeria’s Human Development Index, HDI, was 0.459, ranking 156 out of a total of 187 countries, sharing that position with Senegal, and just one position above Haiti (0. 454), both countries with a much lower per capita gross domestic product. Nigeria’s 2011 HDI revealed that life expectancy at birth, mean years of schooling, and expected years of schooling are lower than those of other Sub Saharan African countries. The levels of stunting and wasting in Nigeria are 41% and 26.7% respectively, which are higher than those of other Sub Saharan African countries such as Gambia, Uganda, Togo, and Cote d’Ivoire. 1.4 Across the six geo-political zones, there are sharp socioeconomic disparities. The southern region has lower levels of poverty than the more populated Northern region (See Table 1). The north western and north eastern zones have the highest children malnutrition rates of 35 and 34 percent respectively, while the south east and south south regions have the lowest rates of 10 percent and 12 percent respectively (World Bank 2011). The three States covered by this project are Kwara, Kano, and Kaduna. Kwara is part of the north central Zone, while Kano and Kaduna are in the north west. 2 Table 1. Poverty Distribution across Geo-political Zones, 1999 Zone Non-poor Moderately Poor Core Poor North East 29.9 35.7 34.4 North West 22.8 39.9 37.3 Central 35.4 36.7 28.0 South East 46.5 35.3 18.2 South West 39.1 33.4 27.5 South South 41.8 34.8 23.4 Source: Federal Office of Statistics 1999 in World Bank 2003. Education in Nigeria 1.5 The education system includes primary (six years), junior secondary (three years), senior secondary (three years), and tertiary education (various years with at least four years for university). Basic education is composed of early childhood care and development, primary, and junior secondary education. State Universal Basic Education Boards (SUBEB) and the State Ministry of Education work with Local Government Authorities (LGAs) to manage and provide basic education. States also have responsibility for secondary education. Tertiary education is managed and financed by both the Federal and State governments. However, more than three-quarters of students attend federal institutions. Federal policies have not been uniformly implemented across the States. At all levels, the Federal government is responsible for policy setting and monitoring of education standards. 1.6 In 2004 the Federal Government introduced the Universal Basic Education law, which has been ratified by the States. The intent of this legislation was to provide nine years of free compulsory basic education (six years for primary and three years at junior secondary)3. The law established the Universal Basic Education Commission which oversees the allocation of the guaranteed funding of not less than two percent of the Consolidated Revenue Fund to the States. 1.7 Most of the funding for basic education is from the local governments' allocation from the Federation Account. The Federal government is not responsible for basic education, but provides financial support through the Education Trust Fund, Virtual Poverty Fund, and Universal Basic Education Commission. Because there are differences between States and local governments in their efforts to fund education, the total share of education expenditure varies across States (World Bank 2003). National enrollment figures show an increase and then decline in primary education, while secondary is steadily growing (See Table 2). Some respondents interviewed for this report speculated that the decline may be related to unreliability in data, as well as the discontinuation of the school feeding program. The gross enrollment rate for pre-primary has remained around 14 percent; however, private providers 3 There are efforts to add one year of pre-primary. 3 accounted for more than 80 percent of preschool enrollment (World Bank 2008). Official data show that gross primary enrollment reached 100 percent in 2005, but declined to 83 percent in 2010. Secondary enrollment has steadily increased. Data are viewed by many as unreliable. Table 2. Gross Enrollment by Level by Year (%) Level 2000 2005 2010 Pre-primary na 14 14 Primary 98 102 83 Secondary 24 34 44 Tertiary na 10 na Source: WDI. 1.8 National enrollment data mask differences across geo-political zones. As Table 3 shows, primary enrollment was over 100 percent in the North Central, South East, South West, and South South. In comparison, the North East and North West had respective primary enrollment rates of 67 percent and 64 percent. In 2006 the state of Kano had an even lower rate for primary education (48 percent), while Kwara (80 percent) and Kaduna (66 percent) were higher. The Junior Secondary School enrollment rate was 42 percent in Kaduna, 48 percent in Kwara, and 27 percent in Kano. Thus, at the beginning of the project, Kwara had the highest enrollment rates in primary and junior secondary, while Kano had the lowest. Table 3. Gross Primary and Secondary Enrollment by Geo-political Zone, 2006 (%) Zone Primary Secondary North East 67 45 North West 64 41 North Central 114 81 South East 124 95 South West 116 96 South South 114 99 Source: World Bank 2007 data from household survey (CWIQ). 1.10 There are inequalities in enrollment in terms of gender. Across the country, the gap in enrollment between boys and girls is largest at the postsecondary (10.7), with primary (7.6) and junior secondary levels (6.7) having slightly smaller gap (See Table 4). At the senior secondary level, the difference is the smallest (4.3), since many boys enter the labor market and drop out. In the Northern Regions enrollment rates are the lowest in the country for girls. In Kano the gap in primary enrollment between boys and girls was 17 percent, while the difference between boys and girls enrollment in Kaduna was 11 percent and 3 percent in Kwara (World Bank 2007). At the junior secondary level, Kano also had the largest enrollment gap between boys and girls (23 percent), while the difference between boys and girls in junior secondary enrollment was 13 percentage points in Kaduna and 4 Kwara. Thus, increasing girls’ enrollment in the Northern geo-political zones was key for Nigeria to meet the Millennium Development Goals. Table 4. Gross Enrollment by Level and Gender, 2006 Level Female Male Difference Primary 88.5 96.1 7.6 Junior Secondary 67.9 74.6 6.7 Senior Secondary 65.2 69.5 4.3 Postsecondary 22.1 32.8 10.7 Source: World Bank 2008. 1.11 Private schools comprise a low percentage of total enrollment at the primary (13 percent for male and 11 percent for female) and secondary levels (10 percent of male and 13 percent of female) (World Bank 2008). However, private schools are increasing in the south where there is demand and ability to pay for education. There are a large number of non- formal religious schools in the north, but data is not available, since these schools fall outside the monitoring of the state government. 1.12 Data and monitoring capacity are challenges in the education sector. While educational data are available, it is not viewed as reliable. There is also the need to strengthen the data from schools. Monitoring and evaluation capacity is low, according to respondents. Inadequate monitoring from the inspectorate services in the State Ministry of Education is another limitation. 1.13 There are inadequate conditions for learning. There are shortage of core textbooks and teaching and learning materials. Before the project, approximately three students had to share core textbooks in Kwara, Kaduna and Kano (World Bank 2007). The physical conditions of learning is poor, since there is overcrowding in primary schools in Kaduna, Kano, and Kwara and insufficient number of classrooms to meet the demand to achieve universal enrollment. Buildings are based on outdated construction standards. Schools are poorly maintained. Across States there are large differences in the deployment of teachers with the teacher-student ratio ranging from 1:36 in Kwara, 1:88 in Kaduna and 1:100 in Kano (Abe, 2011). 1.14 Improvements are needed in the teaching-learning process. Teachers utilize few methods to develop literacy skills. Many teachers also do not have a good command of the English language and so they are unable to explain lessons and effectively utilize English textbooks. Teachers’ rely on chalk and talk techniques and do not understand how to engage students actively in learning. Students do not spend enough time on productive learning activities (Adekola 2007). Teachers do not have tools and techniques to monitor students’ progress. Primary school teachers do not regularly plan their lessons or prepare instructional materials for use in their lesson (Adekola 2007). 1.15 Learning assessment data in primary grades have shown low student achievement. In 2003 the Universal Basic Education Commission carried out a criterion referenced test in the subject areas of English, mathematics, science, and social studies, for a sample of students in 5 grades four, five, and six. Students in fourth grade answered 25-50 percent of the questions correctly. Fifth grade scores ranged from 25-39 percent across the four subjects, while scores of sixth graders were 21-40 percent (World Bank 2008). In cross-national studies Nigerian children also did worse in comparison to other African countries (Adekola 2007). Reasons for this relate to students’ limited fluency in English and basic knowledge of the concepts (Adekola 2007). 2. Objectives, Design, and their Relevance 2.1 According to the Financing Agreement (World Bank 2007 p. 5) and the Project Appraisal Document (World Bank 2007 p. 9), the objective of the project was "to improve the quality of basic education in targeted Local Government Areas (LGAs) in the participating States, focusing particularly on girls’ participation." The project operated in the States of Kano, Kwara, and Kaduna. While the objectives remained the same during the course of the project, one of the key performance indicators was changed during a project restructuring. 2.2 The project selected the three States based on their demonstrated commitment to the education sector, quality of Sector Plan, and poor educational indicators; all three were northern States, but not those with the highest level of poverty, or the lowest education indicators. Within the States, Local Government Areas were targeted (e.g. six in Kaduna, nine in Kano, and six in Kwara) using criteria such as poverty, readiness and willingness of key officials to implement reforms, enrollment rate in basic education, per capita public spending on primary and secondary education, and absence of other externally funded projects. Gender disparity was another criterion used to select the 21 Local Government Areas from which 1,523 schools were selected. Relevance of Objective 2.3 Relevance of Objective is rated High. Nigeria was significantly behind its goal to achieve universal basic education, with low primary and junior secondary enrollment rates in the Northern areas, especially among girls. In Kano the gross junior secondary enrollment rate was 56 percent for boys and 31 percent for girls (World Bank 2007). In Kaduna the gross junior secondary enrollment rate was 74 percent for boys and 61 percent for girls (World Bank 2007). In Kwara the gross junior secondary enrollment rate was 82 percent for boys and 69 percent for girls (World Bank 2007). Moreover, improving the quality of education was a priority within each state. Thus, the focus on girls’ participation and improving quality was highly relevant for each of the States. 2.4 The Country Partnership Strategy (2010-2013) at project closure stressed a state (rather than federal-level) approach to improve access, quality, efficiency, and equality in education, with a particular emphasis on girls’ education. The Country Partnership Strategy also promotes the use of school-based management committees as a means to improve governance in the education sector to ensure proper use of resources, and hold teachers and schools accountable for good quality education. This is consistent with the project’s use of school grants and school management committees to improve quality and girls’ participation. 6 2.5 The project's objective is also highly relevant to each State’s Education Sector Plan, which aim to accelerate progress toward the key education Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), creating the basis for sustainable development by emphasizing improvements to quality in areas with low schooling participation levels, especially among girls. It also aligns with the Federal Ministry of Education Ten Year Strategic Plan to promote delivery of quality education, as well as the establishment of quality assurance procedures. The strategy affirms that “every Nigerian shall have a right to equal education opportunity irrespective of gender, social status, age, religion, ethnic background, geographical locations and any peculiar challenges”. Design 2.6 Components. The project had four components. Table 5 summarizes the main activities of each component. The first component provided school grants. The second component focused on teacher training, textbooks, and school rehabilitation, expansion, and upgrading. The third component strengthened aspects of the State Ministry of Education such as school inspection services, data collection and monitoring, and developed an Education Management Information System. The fourth component supported project implementation, monitoring, and an information strategy to communicate the benefits of girls’ education. The subsequent section provides an overview of the design. 7 Table 5. Activities within each Component and Planned Costs Component 3: Institutional Development for Key Functions at State Ministries of Component 2: Quality Education and Local Component 4: Project Component 1: School Improvement in Basic Government Management and Development Scheme Education in Targeted Education Authorities Monitoring and (US$19.48 million LGAs (US$32.42 (US$4.98 million Evaluation (US$2.50 equivalent) million equivalent) equivalent) million equivalent) 1a. Schools in targeted 2a. Professional 3a. Strengthening the 4a. Support for project LGAs receive grants to development activities EMIS at the state level implementation and improve the quality of to benefit 18,900 to plan, manage, and information and teaching and learning teachers to implement monitor the education communication strategy and mange resources. the basic education sector more effectively. highlighting the curriculum. benefits of education for girls. 2b. Textbook, 3b. Strengthening 4b. Establishment of a instructional materials, management planning, robust M&E system at and equipment to attain budgeting, financial the state level. agreed upon ratios in management, and core subjects. establishing a mechanism to publicize educational data. 2c. Expansion, 3c. Reform of rehabilitation, and inspection services and upgrading of basic training for inspectors school facilities in and supervisors. targeted LGAs. Source: World Bank 2007. 2.7 The project focused on the basic inputs as the means to improve quality. It provided school grants, in-service training to teachers, learning materials/textbooks to classrooms, and infrastructure enhancements. School committees were provided training to develop school plans and manage the school grants, which were intended to be used for investments to improve education quality (as well as improve girls’ participation). The involvement of the community was to create transparency in the use of the funds. The teacher training related to learner-centered activities. Professional development included: training for teachers, follow- up mentoring visits, peer assisted learning, as well as leadership support for head teachers, school principals, and school supervisors. 2.8 Another strategy the project employed to improve education quality was enhancing the functioning of each State’s school inspection services and building State and LGA capacity. A Basic Education Inspectorate was to be developed to improve accountability for the delivery of education services. The process was to ensure the appropriate linkages between the federal and state level reforms and the rationalization of units currently 8 providing inspectorate services. New inspection instruments were to focus on education quality and learning, rather than the physical infrastructure in the school. 2.9 The project focused on building state-level capacity to collect better data and ensure that budgetary allocations were properly directed towards activities and recurrent costs. State Sector Plans and Operational Plans were to be developed and used to improve budgeting and financial management and teacher recruitment/ deployment. Given the unreliability of data, the project focused on collecting and disseminating data, as well as developing an Education Information Management System for State Ministry of Education and State Universal Basic Education Board. These activities were intended to improve strategic planning and budgeting. 2.10 By improving quality, it was also thought that more parents would send their children (and daughters) to school. Thus, the design of the project utilized a whole school approach to improve quality and girls’ participation and integrated a focus on girls within the main activities. Respondents told the IEG Mission that improving quality was an appropriate strategy for Nigerian schools, since access to learning was what was needed. 2.11 To address attitudes towards girls' enrollment the project employed sensitization and training for selected school committee members. It was thought that with the training, they would then identify areas within their school plans and resources from the school grant scheme to encourage girls' participation. However, changing cultural attitudes towards girls' enrollment would likely need additional interventions to foster behavioral changes among men, the decision-makers within the families, as well as additional advocacy efforts beyond the project's information and awareness strategy may have also been needed. 2.12 Schools were encouraged to spend at least 35 percent of the grant annually on activities to benefit girls (World Bank 2007). Interventions that schools could finance with their grants and outlined in the manual were: school uniforms, after-school activities, and vocational training. Given the lack of decision-making of women and their constrained status, it seems optimistic to expect school-management committees would prioritize resources for girls’ participation, considering the dilapidated school conditions that were noted in the Aide Memoires during project preparation. 2.13 After the midterm review, two activities were added to the project from the unallocated funds and savings from exchange rate fluctuation, which combined amounted to US$ 20 million. A pilot project was implemented in the state of Kano to improve the participation of girls through a Conditional Cash Transfer program. Since this activity was added and needed to be timed with the start of the school year it began in September 2010, which permitted funding only one round of grants4 to support the transition of girls from primary to junior secondary school during the project. A local information dissemination campaign of the Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT) program was included so that the community would know about the program and enroll their daughters in it. Second, early 4 The second round of funding did not get to the Implementing Agency’s account before the closing date of the project. 9 childhood education5 activities were implemented in each state, which supported both project objectives of improving girls’ participation and education quality. While project documents report an Early Childhood pilot, the implementation was not designed to test the effectiveness of an approach or strategy that could later scaled-up, if warranted. However, each State developed a list of activities and corresponding budgets. Activities included: (1) providing additional grant money in schools that offered early childhood services, (2) examining pre-service training institutes within the States to identify capacities and constraints, (3) developing state plans for early childhood education, and (4) study tours. Implementation Arrangements 2.14 The project was implemented by the State Ministry of Education in the States of Kaduna, Kano, and Kwara in close coordination with the state parastatal organization (SUBEB) and federal parastatal organization, Universal Basic Education Commission (UBEC), as well as the 21 participating Local Government Agencies. The State Ministry of Education oversaw all activities under the project, with support from a project implementation unit that assisted with the coordination and fiduciary management. The unit was filled with staff on secondment from the State Ministry of Education. The project implementation unit collaborated with each State technical department to monitor project implementation and ensured smooth disbursement of funds. A Consultative Steering Committee was planned to share knowledge about the project at the State and Federal level. Monitoring and Evaluation Design 2.15 The Project Appraisal Document provided a detailed plan for monitoring and evaluation. It specified anticipated uses for the project’s data including empowering communities to better manage their schools, informing policy, planning and management of basic education, ensuring effective quality and supervision and public accountability. There was a clear timeline for data collection and analysis, and explicit assignment of responsibility for various types and levels of data collection. At the time of preparation, baseline enrollment data was not available by LGA, and the State figures were reported to be unreliable. 2.16 The Results Framework specified a mix of outcome and output indicators to measure attainment of the objectives (See Table 6). Key performance indicators were (i) improved learning conditions from 2007 baseline, (ii) increased primary and junior secondary completion rates (disaggregated by gender) and (iii) increased transition rate from primary to junior secondary (disaggregated by gender). During restructuring, improved learning conditions was replaced with a new key performance indicator, the measurement of student learning. Output indicators included: number of school implementing school development plans, number of teachers trained, pupil-to-textbook ratio, teacher-to-textbook ratio, pupil-to- classroom ratio, number of schools with upgraded facilities, annual education statistics report and sector analysis, school report card, quality assurance inspection in schools, and 5 Early childhood education interventions “provide opportunities for children to interact with responsive adults and actively learn with peers to prepare for primary school entry; generally refers to interventions for children age 36-83 months of age” (World Bank forthcoming). 10 establishment and implementation of a results-based monitoring and evaluation system (See Relevance of Design for analysis of weakness in the Results Framework). Table 6. Project Results Framework Quality Girls’ Participation Outcomes  Improve learning conditions in project  Increased primary completion rates for schools based on 2007 baseline boys and girls in targeted LGAs. benchmarks.  Increased junior secondary completion rates for boys and girls in targeted  Later changed to the measurement of LGAs. reading and mathematics learning.  Increased transition rates from primary to junior secondary for girls and boys in targeted LGAs. Intermediate Outcomes Outputs  Number of target schools implementing  Annual Education Statistics Report approved School Development Plans. produced by EMIS and disseminated to  Number of head teachers trained that stakeholders for planning and demonstrate enhanced school monitoring purposes. management and leadership skills.  School report cards produced and  Number of teachers trained. disseminated annually for school  Pupils have access to and use of key planning and monitoring. core subject textbooks on a pupil to book ratio of 3:1 in primary and 4:1 in JSS in target schools.  Teacher to book ratio of 1:1 for teacher guides and workbooks in target schools.  Pupil to classroom ratio reduced in primary and JSS targeted schools.  Increase number of schools with newly upgraded learning facilities.  Annual Education Statistics Report produced by EMIS and disseminated to stakeholders for planning and monitoring purposes.  School report cards produced and disseminated annually for school planning and monitoring.  Education sector analysis produced by 2008 and leading to improved strategic planning and budgeting.  All primary and junior secondary schools have quality assurance inspection resulting in Annual Basic Education Report.  Results-based Monitoring and Evaluation system established and implemented continuously. Source: Author adapted from World Bank 2007. 11 2.17 An impact evaluation was designed for the pilot conditional cash transfer program to provide evidence of the results, and monitor fidelity of the implementation. The study was designed to provide information related to effectiveness of various operational mechanisms, cost-effectiveness, and measure whether the poorest were reached. Since two groups of students (e.g. students with junior secondary schools in surrounding area and those without) would be evaluated, ( the evaluation was designed to test whether the CCT could counteract school supply or distance constraints to secondary education. The study was financed by DfID’s Education Sector Support Programme in Nigeria (ESSPIN) and Bank provided technical assistance (See Achievement of Objectives, para 4.35, for preliminary evaluation findings). 2.18 Project documents indicate plans for an impact evaluation of the Early Childhood Development (ECD) pilot, but project records provide no evidence of its design. No impact evaluation was conducted of the ECD pilot activities; however there was low feasibility of completing an impact evaluation with what was implemented. Indicators could have been developed, but none were. Relevance of Design 2.19 Relevance of design is modest. The project's objectives, components, sub- components, and outcome measures were linked logically, but there were weaknesses. 2.20 The project design (See Components) provided a cohesive and consistent framework of common technical guidelines, activities, and monitoring, but there were appropriate allowances for variations across States in implementation of the activities. The variations were based on the needs identified in each State’s education Sector Plan. For example, there were differences across the States in length of training time, use of different service providers, and provision of follow-up support. This was consistent with the Federalized responsibility for education, as well as consistent with the Education Sector Support Plan developed by each State. 2.21 There were a number of design shortcomings, especially in relation to the underlying results chain. There were no targeted activities to increase girls’ participation, with the exception of a planned information education campaign to highlight the benefits of girls’ education. While the project appraisal document noted that culture and poverty were the main reason why girls did not participate in school, there were no demand-side interventions. As the project was ending, a pilot conditional cash transfer was implemented in one state to address poverty constraints to girls' enrollment. The conditional cash transfer program was targeted to girls (fifth, sixth, and JSS1) from the poorest families in an effort to encourage continued participation into junior secondary school and counter early marriage, which was common reason for girls dropping out of school. The highest rate of girls' primary school drop-out occurs in sixth grade, according to the Annual School Census. 2.22 Design focused on improving inputs into learning (i.e. grants, textbooks, renovations etc.), and neglected others that would be needed to improve education quality and learning outcomes such as teachers and their unequal distribution among schools, particularly rural ones. Inservice training would not be sufficient to address teachers’ literacy, numeracy, and 12 English language skills, as many of them did not have sixth grade levels when tested. The project did not produce materials for students or teachers in languages other than English. There was no implementation plan for the early childhood pilot and it as well as the girls conditional cash transfer pilot were implemented too late in the project’s life (World Bank 2012). Grants were to be allocated to improving quality and girls’ participation, which did not match local priorities. 2.23 Important project activities were to be supported by DfID’s Capacity for Universal Basic Education (CUBE) and specified in the project appraisal document, yet CUBE was scheduled to end in July 2008, around the time the project was just effective. Specific roles included: capacity building for LGEAs, and States Ministries of Education, design and development of the teacher professional support program and materials, provision of professional architectural and engineering expertise, and support to States related to EMIS, reform of inspectorate and capacity development for management and planning. While DfID was expected to continue working with the Bank in Nigeria beyond 2008 (and has continued working in Nigeria), the scope of DfID’s follow-up project would not have been known at the time of preparation. Technical assistance was important, given the lack of State capacity. The complexity of the task and the time it would take was underestimated. Integrating another development partner’s project which was slated to end during the early stage of implementation meant that the States had to utilize IDA resources to cover aspect’s not originally planned, as an agreement for a more limited scope of work was reached between ESSPIN and the Bank. 2.24 The design provided a very limited role for the Federal Ministry of Education in the implementation of the project. A Consultative Forum was established (no funding was allocated, but the appraisal document stated that DfID’s CUBE would subsidize expenses for workshops). Given the Federal Ministry’s responsibility to coordinate policy across the States, a role in the project may have resulted in improved synergies between the States and Federal involvement in the project. Respondents indicated that this was a poor decision and subsequent Bank projects have defined a role for the Federal Ministry of Education. 2.25 Several of the key performance indicators were not defined and thus making them open to interpretation and difficult to measure. For example, the intent of “improved learning conditions from baseline survey” and “measurement of student learning” were not clear. Was the original indicator aimed at changes in physical infrastructure in a classroom or school, changes in how teachers taught, or changes in student learning? Was the goal of the revised indicator to establish a system of student performance, measure the learning at one point in time from a sample of students, or improve the learning of students? The lack of precision in the wording of both of versions of indicators creates challenges in determining the attainment of the objective (improved quality of basic education). These indicators do not define the minimum conditions for learning. 2.26 There were also shortcomings with the key performance indicators to measure girls’ participation. Some of these issues related to data limitations, but also due to the choice of 13 indicators. Considering the unreliability in the Nigerian Population Census 2006 6, enrollment rates (e.g. overall and by gender) were logically not selected as a key performance indicator. Completion and transition rates were to provide measures of girls staying longer in school. However, the Annual School Census did not report all the information needed to calculate these rates by LGA (e.g. repeaters by LGA and the total number of public enrolled children of official graduation age). Thus, the primary completion rate can reliably only be calculated on a state basis, making the comparison between project LGAs and non-project not feasible. Other proxies to measure the increasing duration of girls in school were not selected. The other key performance indicator, transition rate between primary and secondary, was sensitive to space constraints in junior secondary schools, which was beyond the scope of the project’s interventions. 2.27 Several of the intermediate outcome indicators were also poorly defined making them difficult to measure (i.e. Results based monitoring and evaluation system established and implemented continuously, primary and junior secondary schools have quality assurance inspection resulting in Annual Basic Education Report, education sector analysis produced by 2008 leading to improved strategic planning and budgeting, number of head teachers and principals trained that demonstrate enhanced school management and leadership skills). 3. Implementation 3.1 The project was approved on April 26, 2007, became effective on April 25, 2008, and closed on July 1, 2011. Despite the delay in effectiveness due to the revisions in the Federal Government’s process for approving World Bank projects, there were no extensions. During preparation and prior to project effectiveness, training in monitoring and evaluation, procurement and financial management, and sensitization workshops were financed by DfID for officials in the 21 participating Local Government Agencies. During this time, Terms of References, Request for Proposals, and bidding documents were also prepared. Table 7. Appraisal and Actual Cost of Project by Component Percentage of Component Appraisal Estimate Actual Cost Appraisal School Development Scheme 19.48 19.09 98 Quality Improvement 32.42 38.41 118 Institutional Development for State and LGAs 4.98 3.65 73 Project management, monitoring and evaluation 2.5 4.25 170 Total Baseline Cost 59.38 Physical Contingencies 6.82 Price Contingencies 2.31 Total Project Cost 68.51 65.40 95 Source: World Bank 2012. 6 In Kano and Kaduna, population census of primary age children reported fewer than the number of children enrolled. 14 3.2 Throughout the implementation, the project was rated satisfactory for implementation progress and progress on the development objective in the Implementation Status Reports. Disbursement took place at a pace close to the planned schedule. Due to exchange rate fluctuations, some of the revised credit went undisbursed; however, 95 percent of the original Credit, US$65.4 million disbursed. As Table 7 shows, the components where spending was higher were Quality Improvement and Project Management (World Bank 2012). IMPLEMENTATION EXPERIENCE 3.3 The predecessor Bank project, Universal Basic Education Project, closed two years early at the request of the Government with cancellation of 35 percent of the credit. While the state activities performed better than the federal ones, the project had several implementation challenges. The technical assistance provided by DfID was not coordinated with the project objective and there was the need for more supervision of the TA by the Bank (IEG 2008). There were fundamental flaws in the design of the project, and weak readiness for implementation (IEG 2008). After that experience, all parties reported the desire to learn from the mistakes and avoid them again. 3.4 During preparation, technical assistance was provided by DfID to the States Ministries of Education, as well as LGAs and SUBEB. This support directly addressed key aspects of implementation (i.e., procurement, monitoring and evaluation, development of sector plans). CUBE consultants worked with each state team. For example, the criteria to select schools for infrastructure enhancements were developed, lists of schools receiving grants and civil works were identified, as well as Terms of Reference for the teacher professional development providers, among other things. Because of DfID’s assistance through CUBE, each state was ready to implement and was able to accelerate the procurement schedule, despite the delay in effectiveness. 3.5 Each State Ministry of Education initiated its own parallel civil works projects to renovate and build additional classrooms. In the State of Kwara SUBEB constructed 534 new primary classrooms and 140 new classrooms in junior secondary schools, as well as renovated 65 primary classrooms and 17 classrooms in junior secondary schools between 2008 and 2011, according to Ministry data. In addition, the Kwara State Ministry of Education renovated 40 classrooms in Grammar Schools and 8 classrooms in junior secondary schools. The number of additional classrooms created outside the project in Kaduna and Kano could not be confirmed. 3.6 There were delays in establishing the State Education Information Management System. The system was to be a tool to monitor progress of the project and outcomes of the State Education Sector Plan. The system was expected to track data on teacher training, school enrollment, and school facilities, but by mid-term review was not functioning in any of the States. A system was developed, but it was never operationalized because of its complexity. There was resistance from the Federal Ministry of Education, which left the States unsure how to proceed with the development of the management information systems and collect school census data. As a result, for much of the project the States were not able to report project outcome data except intermediate indicators, until the States published the 15 2009/2010 school census. This was the only annual school census that was published during project implementation, resulting in limited data to assess attainment of objectives. 3.7 While a Consultative Steering Committee was planned, as a means to share knowledge about the project at the State and Federal level, this Committee was not established until the final year of the project. Only one meeting was held. As a result, there was limited involvement in the project from the Federal Ministry of Education. 3.8 There were political factors in Kwara which assisted the State in making further implementation advances. Leaders in the state of Kwara made personnel changes in the SUBEB and the LGA and supported the redefinition and restructuring of organization roles and responsibilities. In Kwara a needs assessment of teachers was conducted, and reform of the preservice teacher education colleges was done. This facilitated further changes in Kwara, not experienced in the other States, which may be one explanation why project implementation and results were noted in supervision reports to have been more advanced. 3.9 There were several other donors that were involved in education in Nigeria, including: DfID, USAID, ADB, JICA, and UNICEF. The Bank partnered with DfID which provided parallel financing for capacity development, EMIS, and reform of the inspectorate. DfID and the Bank largely worked separately related to their areas of responsibility, but there was a joint midterm review and joint supervision missions. While JICA and USAID worked within similar States, the Bank did not coordinate its activities with them, instead advised the State teams to engage these donors with their education sector support plans. After mid-term review, when the project implemented activities related to ECD, the Bank partnered with UNICEF and USAID related to this work to complement efforts and avoid duplication. 3.10 The mid-term review occurred in November 2009, at which time about 70 percent of the project funds had been disbursed or committed, according to project records. At the review, plans for the new activities (ECD and CCT) were discussed. Other topics noted at the meeting were the Consultative Steering Committee, Education Management Information System, and implementation progress. Safeguards 3.11 The project was classified as category B for Environmental Assessment (OP 4.01) due to enhancement/rehabilitation activities in schools in the States of Kaduna, Kwara, and Kano. The government disclosed the Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) on January 10, 2007, prior to appraisal. This document contained a screening mechanism to identify adverse impacts from proposed construction activities (World Bank 2008). The implementing agency in each state monitored the Framework. Supervisory firms were hired to ensure contractors complied with environmental protections. Satisfactory ratings for safeguard compliance were noted in Implementation Supervision Reports throughout the project and no issues were noted in project records or reported. By the close of the project each implementing agency submitted to the Bank an Environmental Report detailing its safeguard compliance. At the time of the IEG Mission, there were three unfinished civil works in the State of Kwara. The completion status of all civil works activities was reported by Kwara to the Bank before the close of the project. The IEG 16 Mission did not visit any of the three sites. The safety impact to students from the unfinished buildings in these three schools cannot be determined. Fiduciary 3.12 Project ratings for fiduciary compliance were satisfactory. Acceptable financial arrangements were established in Kaduna and Kwara, but it took longer to establish them in Kano. Financial statements from each state were submitted on time and were unqualified, but interim financial reports were delayed. There were no outstanding financial reports. 3.13 Procurement compliance was rated satisfactory, but there were a few shortcomings. There were issues in the quality of tender documents, execution of bid documents and contracts, and maintenance of proper documentation. It took longer to receive No Objections from the Bank because incomplete documents were submitted. The Bank provided training for the officers in the Project Implementation Unit. The Bank addressed procurement issues with the Implementing Agency via dialogue and monthly meetings. Respondents in Kwara noted that once they became familiar with the Bank’s procedures, they were able to easily follow its guidelines even though this was the first Bank project that they had implemented. Implementation of Monitoring and Evaluation 3.14 The Project Implementation Unit was responsible for monitoring project performance indicators. Baseline data were updated in 2010, since the data contained in the appraisal document were unreliable and based on state-wide numbers. The Results Framework was not updated to provide measures in relation to the activities added after the midterm review (ECD and CCT). However, an impact evaluation was implemented to assess the effectiveness of the Conditional Cash Transfer Program. Preliminary findings were shared with IEG, but not the final report (See Achievement of Objectives, para 4.35). 3.15 Given the delay in establishing the State-level EMIS (partly related to delays in Federal EMIS) and the delay for States to produce and analyze the data, project outcome data were not available until the end of project implementation. However, intermediate indicators were tracked throughout the project. ESSPIN supported school censuses in each project state. 3.16 Consultants conducted evaluations of the main project activities. These included: School Development Scheme Assessment, Learning Assessment (pre and post), and Teacher Professional Development Evaluation. These reports provided descriptive and qualitative data to assist in making determinations of the effectiveness of the interventions. 3.17 Ratings in Supervision Reports for M&E were satisfactory and moderately satisfactory over the course of the project, but one was rated moderately unsatisfactory. The low rating was given after delay in updating baseline data and questions on the reliability of what was submitted. A consultant was hired to analyze and review collected data from the school census survey. By the end of the project, there were improvements in M&E capacity at the State level, as well as improvements in the quality of data. 17 4. Achievement of the Objectives Improve the Quality of Basic Education 4.1 The objective of improving the quality of basic education was modestly achieved. 4.2 There were seven activities that the project supported to improve quality: provision of school grants, textbooks, rehabilitation of targeted schools, teacher training, state and local government capacity building, reform of the inspection services, and top-up grants for pre- primary classrooms. The evidence of the implementation of these activities and their impact is presented below. Outputs 4.3 Schools grants. School grants were provided and utilized by schools, which tended to use them primarily for construction and repair and not for originally intended activities aimed at improving quality and student learning. Over the course of two years (2009-2011), school grants were awarded to 1,974 schools, with 499 of them receiving two years of funding. Grants in one year averaged N597,127 (US$ 3,852) per school, which represented approximately N41,154 per student (US$265) (Balarabe, Zakariaya, & Garba 2011). Schools7 developed the plans according to the guidelines and each school established a committee (Balarabe, Zakariaya, & Garba 2011). Schools welcomed the opportunity to manage their own resources. Based on reports to the IEG Mission, community participation increased and the resources were a catalyst for leveraging addition funding for complementary investments in some schools, which is consistent with finding of grant programs in other settings (Krishnaratne, White, Carpenter 2013). Minimal cases of grant misuse were reported in project records. School management committees enhanced the accountability of the resources to the community; however, female participation in the committees was much lower than male. Since the closure of the project, ESSPIN has found it necessary to create women’s committees as a way to facilitate the participation of women in decision-making. 4.4 After the first round of grants to 499 schools, the Bank requested that States ensure that schools use the money to improve quality and student learning; however committees primarily used the grants for construction and repair. Additional sensitization training for school committees was conducted so that they identified interventions to support learning. However, construction continued to be prevalent, rather than learning materials (See Table 8). The most common type of general renovation was replacement and repair of windows and doors, construction and repair of latrines, and flooring and patching of walls and floors (State of Kwara Ministry of Education Science and Technology 2009). The school grants helped to improve the adequacy and supply of facilities (Abe 2011). They also improve the dilapidated conditions with the rehabilitation and painting of classrooms and construction of toilets, as reported by respondents. 7 849 schools in 9 LGAs in Kano, 500 schools in 6 LGAs in Kaduna, and 627 schools in 6 LGAs in Kwara. 18 Table 8. Reported Use of Grant Funds (% of surveyed schools) Activity Kano Kwara Classroom renovation 62 20 Headmaster office, staff room, dormitory 27 5 Furniture for students or teachers 47 49 Toilet or borehole 14 36 Renovation to ceiling, floor, roof, or painting 26 51 Library 3 0.8 Science or computer lab 3 5 Source: Balarabe, Zakariaya, & Garba 2011. 4.5 Committee members reported that there was a conflict between the grant guidelines on how to spend the money and the actual needs of the school (Balarabe, Zakariaya, & Garba 2011). They felt that schools had pressing renovation needs, while the guidelines indicated that no more than 40 percent should be spent on renovation, provision of water and sanitation. Survey respondents reported that the grants contributed to improving quality, since the classrooms became more conducive for teaching and learning (Balarabe, Zakariaya, & Garba 2011). Similarly, they reported that parents were more inclined to send their children to the schools after the repairs. If schools do not have adequate protection, students can lose valuable instructional time due to leaking roofs (White 2004). For this reason, community members indicated to the IEG Mission that the conditions of the school were of primary importance and improved the environment where their children learned. 4.6 School Renovations. School renovations improved the physical conditions for learning and helped reduce overcrowding in classrooms. 98 schools were provided with upgraded learning facilities, which improved the physical conditions for learning. These schools were selected during preparation, based upon a needs assessment. This work prioritized the building of classrooms, laboratories, libraries and toilets, aspects to support learning through a whole-school approach. It also selected schools with serious overcrowding issues. By the end of the project, there was construction or upgrading of 640 classrooms, and installation of 720 toilets and 75 boreholes. Given the poor conditions that were reported in the appraisal document and the fundamental necessity of ensuring adequate learning environment, these investments were needed. Deprivation of school resources affects the educational attainment, as well as future returns to education (Case & Yogo 1999). School inputs such as adequate sitting and writing space for children, education materials such as textbooks, and other learning resources contribute to student learning (Glewwe, Hanushek, Humpage & Ravina 2011). In schools visited by the IEG mission, construction appeared to be of adequate quality with no evident deficiencies. However, in Kwara all civil works activities were not completed by the close of the project, as three projects were still unfinished at the time of the IEG mission. 4.7 While classroom overcrowding was reduced within each state, this is largely attributable to SUBEB, and less so to the project. Annual School Census shows a decrease in the classroom to pupil ratios in 2011 (i.e., average 59:1 for Kaduna, 87:1 for Kano, and in 19 Kwara 34:1 ) from the start of the project as noted in the appraisal document (i.e., 93:1 for Kaduna, 192:1 for Kano, and 48:1 in Kwara). The scale of new classrooms constructed by this project was much smaller than what SUBEB conducted on its own. For example, in Kwara 135 new classrooms were constructed by this project. While SUBEB in Kwara constructed 534 new primary classrooms and 140 new classrooms in junior secondary schools, according to State Ministry of Education data. 4.8 Quality improvements in the conditions of schools and classrooms were noted by respondents, which are likely attributed to SUBEB and the project. Kwara Annual School Census Data overall demonstrate a trend in project LGAs in terms of decreasing percentages of classrooms needing major repair, having insufficient seating, and containing no source of water (See Anne B). For example, the percentage of classrooms in primary schools in need of major repair declined in 5 out of 6 project LGAs in Kwara and 4 out of 6 project LGAs in Kaduna. The percentage of schools without a source for water declined from 2009-2011 in primary schools in two out of six project LGAs in Kwara and four out of six project LGAs in Kaduna. Unfortunately, data from the Annual School Census Reports in Kano showed no consistent pattern, suggesting possible inaccuracies in its collection. (See Annex B) 4.9 Provision of Textbooks. The provision of textbooks under the project enabled the achievement of 1:1 student-to-textbook and teacher-to-textbook ratios in the targeted states, but their effective use has not been assessed. 3 million textbooks were distributed to primary and junior secondary schools within the three States, which achieved a 1:1 ratio in the core subject areas in Kwara and Kaduna. This was a significant improvement from the baseline in Kwara, where the ratio was 3.3:1 in 2006. Since no baseline was established in Kano and Kaduna the extent of improvement is not determinable. Within each of the three States, the primary teacher-to-textbook ratio improved from 5:1 in 2006 to 1:1 in 2011, so that now all teachers have curriculum guides and core subject textbooks. Learning materials help students follow along and support teachers in their lessons. There are also positive impacts in mathematic scores, when learning materials are provided (Krisnaratne, White, Carpenter 2013). However, no data were collected during the project to assess the effective use of the textbooks by teachers and students, despite the fact that this was noted in the appraisal document. During the IEG mission to schools in Kwara, which were selected by the Ministry of Education8, textbooks were available in the classrooms. During approximately 5 out of 8 observations in primary and JSS classrooms, students were using the textbooks during their learning activities. It was beyond the scope of this mission to analyze the content of the textbooks. 4.10 While national policy specifies a gradual transition to English as the medium of instruction during the primary grades four through six, it has not been implemented in the States. English has become the default language of instruction at all levels of primary school (World Bank 2007), even though there are benefits to teaching children in a language they understand. During IEG mission, English language instruction was observed in all pre- primary and primary classrooms, while two JSS classrooms utilized some mother tongue. Lack of textbooks in languages other than English is one of the reasons the mother-tongue 8 IEG requested to visit schools that had civil works, but the specific schools were selected by the State Ministry in Kwara. 20 policy has not been implemented. Local language textbooks were not evident during IEG’s visits to schools and classroom. Yet, the project printed textbooks in English, which was a decision of the State Ministry textbook committee. 4.11 Another challenge to implementing the mother-tongue policy is the difficulty in finding teachers able to instruct in all of the main Nigerian languages, as a classrooms can be filled with students speaking more than one language. There are three dominant languages: Yoruba, Hausa, and Igbo. 4.12 On the other hand, a consequence of having teachers instruct in English, is the difficulty recruiting teachers (particularly in rural areas) with adequate English language competencies. Given that children may only be exposed to English during school, they need an appropriate English speaking and writing model, which may be lacking particularly in rural schools. In the classrooms visited by the IEG Mission in urban and rural schools (which were selected by the State Ministry of Education), teachers had adequate command of English; however, teachers’ spelling errors could be seen in a few classrooms. 4.13 Teacher Inservice Training. Teacher inservice training targets were exceeded, albeit with some issues related to the quality and impact of the training. The relevance of the training and the large number of trained teachers transferred out of project schools indicated issues requiring further follow-up. Professional development was provided to 6,456 teachers in the States of Kaduna, Kwara, and Kano, which is more than what was planned (5,808). Inservice addressed topics such as: teaching methods to promote student-centered learning, use of assessment methods to monitor learners’ progress, and content within the areas of science, social studies, mathematics, and English. However, the predominant topic was student-centered learning, based on content analysis of the training modules. The modules could have benefited from more emphasis on subject area content. The materials developed by the project were only written in English. 4.14 The training was followed up by mentoring visits and teacher meetings to give additional opportunities to share experiences and support, which is needed for teachers to be able to apply what was learned (Garet and others 2001). As well, the mentors provided assistance to other teachers in the school who did not attend the training, which was a way of furthering the impact of the training. 4.15 Project records and the evaluation of the training program pointed to issues with the training. Head teachers had limited involvement in the selection of teachers. Other concerns about the training were that more men than women participated. At the initial stage of the project, there was conflicting information between what was presented in workshops and quality assurance supervisors’ advice, suggesting a lack of coherence between the training for teachers and inspectors. Respondents believed that many of these issues were addressed during the project. 4.16 After the first round of training, some changes were made to the program and its delivery. Bank staff reported that the training was adapted to accommodate teachers with lower levels of education. As well, the state of Kwara conducted an assessment of teachers to identify their needs in relation to teaching literacy and numeracy. This was used to 21 identify effective teachers for future appointment as lead teachers instead of appointment by political patronage. Even with the changes made to the professional development program, teachers who were surveyed perceived the training to have limited relevance (Abe 2011)9. 4.17 In basic instructional skills such as setting the purpose of the lesson, ensuring the participation of children in the activity and reinforcing was what learned, there was minimal improvement from baseline (Abe 2011). However, the same teachers were not assessed from baseline. No data were collected to demonstrate that trained teachers were effectively using the textbooks and guides, despite being noted in the appraisal document. During the IEG visit to schools selected by the Kwara State Ministry, teachers applied learner-centered techniques. In several of the observations, teachers had prepared materials or props that they incorporated into the lesson to make the lesson more engaging for students. However, these observations showed a continued need for content specific pedagogical training. As well, during observations of mathematics lessons by the IEG Mission, teachers stressed rote techniques as opposed to conceptual understanding. In primary classrooms there was a particular need for literacy and numeracy training. In primary classrooms more heterogeneity was observed in the skills of children, suggesting that basic skill-building and monitoring of the “slower learners” was required. 4.18 Two factors have diminished the expected results from the professional development. First, a large number of trained primary teachers were transferred to Junior Secondary Schools (Abe 2011) or other primary schools. The topic of teacher transfer was noted by Head teachers and principals during the IEG Mission. Similarly, some pre-primary teachers went to other schools. Transferring trained teachers was an obstacle to sustaining instructional improvements in the schools and created the need for further follow-up. 4.19 Another factor that impacted the effectiveness of the training was the teachers’ knowledge. Unfortunately, many of the teachers in the project schools did not have sixth grade literacy and numeracy skills (Abe 2011). A sample of urban teachers scored 91 percent in literacy and 45 percent in numeracy, while a sample of rural teachers scored 9 percent in literacy and 6 percent in numeracy (Abe 2011). This points to the much deeper skill formation need that may be present amongst rural teachers beyond the scope of the in- service training employed by this project. 4.20 State and Local Government Capacity Building. State and local government capacity building has culminated in improved use of data in the budget preparation process, but the results-based monitoring and evaluation system did not materialize as planned. It is not possible to isolate the effect of ESSPIN’s training during this project from its continued support provided to the States. Trainings in management, administration, state education budget preparation were provided during the project by ESSPIN and after the project ended. For example, respondents from the State Ministry of Education in Kwara reported that the budget preparation process is now different, as it utilizes data to help in its formulation. The 9 IEG Mission was not able to talk with teachers to obtain their views, as they were busy with classroom instruction during the observation. 22 amount devoted to renovation is based on the Annual School Census data, while previously there was no basis for the determination of the amount. Project records noted that the Medium-term sector strategies were finalized. 4.21 School Inspections and Reform of Inspectorate. The project supported reform of the school inspection services to enable a stronger focus on learning. However, there was no evidence from project documents or respondents to show that these reforms improved accountability or service delivery. The school inspection services were reformed to focus on the learning environment, rather than documentation of physical facility. A Handbook and National Policy for Quality Assurance was developed under the support of ESSPIN. As well, a Quality Assurance Manual was created. Twenty inspectors were trained. The first cycle of outcome-based school inspections were implemented in 2009/2010 and this has continued to present. This gave feedback to school staff and parents on ways to improve teaching and student learning. In Kwara schools completed a self-evaluation to help them identify areas needing improvement and strategies. Prior to the project, there was inadequate logistical support for transportation to schools, but improvements were realized as motorbikes were purchased for inspectors during the project. 4.22 Early Childhood Development Pilot. The early childhood development pilot does not appear to have culminated in the establishment of centers that provide the minimum standards for preschool that would contribute to improved learning prospects in primary school. Moreover, this pilot was developed too late in the project life to enable a true learning and evaluative process inherent in a pilot design. The quality of children’s lives, their family and community circumstances, greatly influence the kind of learners they become. For this reason, compensatory interventions such as early childhood development can be viewed as proactive measures to improve student learning, since it can increase children’s readiness for school. This pilot focused exclusively on education interventions at the pre-primary level, and did not integrate other aspects such as child health, nutrition, or child protection. The Bank team reported that other child development interventions were supported by other partner agencies. 4.23 In communities where there were preprimary classrooms attached to primary schools, the project augmented the school grants to provide resources for early learning. In Kwara 408 Pre-primary classrooms in 9 LGAs received 41,583,000 Naira in grants (approximately US$268, 277 or $657 per classroom). In Kano 784 Pre-primary classrooms received 78,400,000 Naira in grants (approximately US$ 500, 806 or $645 for each classroom). In Kaduna there was 61, 500,000 Naira (approximately US$ 396,774) allocated for pre-primary grants. The number of children attending these classrooms and supported by these grants was not tracked by the project. Given the young age (three to five years old), only those located in close proximity are those who are likely to attend. 4.24 During the IEG Mission head teachers in Kwara pointed out the classroom supplies (e.g. tables, chairs, mats) and learning materials such as pictures and teacher materials purchased. Pre-primary classrooms (for children age 3-5) observed by the IEG Mission had limited supplies and so the additional materials were needed to create a developmentally appropriate learning environment. None of the pre-primary classrooms observed by the IEG Mission had an adequate amount of resources. 23 4.25 During the IEG Mission, head teachers reported that many of the pre-primary teachers who were trained during the project had been transferred. This was viewed as a constraint to improving education quality. In the pre-primary classrooms visited by the IEG Mission, there was a continued need to improve the practices to make them more developmentally focused. While the IEG Mission did not stay for the entire class period, across all pre-primary classrooms visited the same weaknesses were observed. Children were engaged only in whole group instruction. No small group or individualized instruction occurred. Children were seated in chairs the whole time and rose when the teacher prompted during an activity or song. Students were not engaged in dramatic or play activities. Teachers directed the instructional activities in the English language, which provided the children’s first exposure to English. Lessons focused on exposure to letters and English words. No reading activities were observed- either teachers reading aloud or children interacting with books. Teachers did not utilize manipulatives to give children a concrete way to understand the concept, instead the teachers pointed to numbers. No snack was provided. 4.26 The States also engaged in other early childhood related activities. Thirty early childhood education personnel obtained international diplomas in Early Childhood Development from a ‘virtual University’. It was anticipated that the training beneficiaries would become leaders within the States on the topic of early childhood development. States completed work plans, stock taking exercise, and assessment of the pre-service teacher programs related to ECD with the assistance of hired consultants and specialists from the Bank and UNICEF. Staff from the Ministry participated in study tours of other African countries. Copies of ECD curriculum and Teachers Guides were printed. During the IEG Mission, head teachers showed the guides, which were utilized by teachers. 4.27 Outcomes. State-level reading comprehension and math skills of 4th and 6th graders were assessed in 2007 and 2011, but are not comparable for methodological reasons (Annex B). Nevertheless, both assessments suggest a continued low level of learning (World Bank 2012; Abe 2011; Johnson, Hsief, Oniborn, 2007). For example, the majority (55 percent) of fourth and sixth graders who were tested in 2011 did not answer any question correctly, and even with the enumerator reading the test, the mean percentage score for reading ranged between 20 to 25 percent (Abe 2011). As well, in mathematics the mean percentage score in grade four was 20 percent (Abel 2011). Improve Girls Participation 4.28 Improve girls participation is rated modest. There were three specific activities that the project supported to improve girls participation: conditional cash transfer pilot, dedicating resources from the school grant to encourage girls’ participation, and provision of toilets. As well, respondents reported to the IEG Mission that the broad strategy of the project, improving the quality of education, encouraged more parents to send their daughters to school; however, data from Annual School Census do not support this claim. 24 Outputs 4.29 Pilot Conditional Cash Transfer Program. Because of the late start, the Bank only financed the first round payment under the pilot conditional cash transfer program, after which the program was suspended for a period of time. The CCT pilot in Kano State to encourage girls’ participation was targeted to 12,000 of them in twelve LGAs. The first round of payment was made in February 2011 for a total of 41 million Naira (approximately US$260,000) was distributed to 11,000 girls, as some of the identified and eligible girls did not show up to receive the grant money. For this payment, the Bank provided 75 percent of the amount and ESSPIN gave the remaining 25 percent. The second payment was scheduled for June 2011. However, the Bank’s transfer did not get to the Implementing Agency’s account before the project closing date (June 30, 2011). As a result, the Governor of Kano initiated a review and suspended the program. In November 2011 ESSPIN and the Kano State Ministry of Education restarted the program, but there was a delay with the Memorandum of Understanding, which resulted in further postponement in the second payment. By the time of the IEG Mission, respondents noted that the program had continued with the support of ESSPIN and the Kano State Ministry of Education, but the future of the program was uncertain. 4.30 School Grants. While school grants were designed to emphasize the participation of girls, the spending patterns benefited both boys and girls. The school grants helped to improve health practices (i.e. sanitation and toilets) and make more attractive and welcoming schools (State of Kwara Ministry of Education and Science Technology 2009). Parents and school officials reported to the IEG Mission that the renovations made to the school (as well as the provision of additional toilets) encouraged more families to send their children to school, including girls. However, in rural LGAs with higher concentration of poor students, grant resources were used to purchase school uniforms for poor children, which were reported to be a barrier to enrollment (State of Kwara Ministry of Education and Science and Technology). 4.31 Toilets to Encourage Girls Participation. The project increased girls’ access to proper sanitation facilities, but data are inconsistent. Proper water and sanitation are one component of a safe and healthy school environment. Lack of female-only sanitation can be a barrier to girls’ participation, particularly as they enter puberty. At the start of the project there were high percentages of schools containing no toilets ranging from 43 percent to 95 percent of primary schools in LGAs in Kwara and 64 percent to 88 percent in primary schools in LGAs in Kano10 (See Appendix B). At the end of the project, there was a clear decreasing trend of the percentage of primary schools without toilets in Kwara (e.g. ranging from 13 percent to 71 percent) and Kano11 (e.g. ranging from 39 percent to 63 percent ). In Kaduna that data were inconsistent, as the percentage reported in a subsequent year was higher than a previous year, suggesting issues with the data collection. Similar trends were 10 Data in Kaduna was reported to be over 100 percent. 11 However, there was a pattern of inconsistent data in 3 of the LGAs, as the percentage was reported to be higher in a subsequent year. 25 also observed in JSS in Kwara while the data was inconsistent in Kaduna and Kano (See Appendix B). Outcomes 4.32 There was an increase in the number of girls enrolled in primary schools in Kwara, Kaduna, and Kano during the project years in both project LGAs and non-project LGAs, but the share did not change (See Table 9). In project LGAs the percentage of girls enrolled in primary schools remained steady in Kaduna (44 percent in 2009 to 45 percent in 2011) and Kwara (46 percent in 2009 to 47 percent in 2011). In Kano the share of girls enrolled slightly increased more in project LGAs (47 percent in 2009 to 50 percent in 2011) than in non-project LGAs (47 percent to 48 percent in 2011). It should be noted that Kano had the lowest primary enrolment of girls from the three States at the beginning of the project. Table 9. Primary Public Enrollment Total and Girls (number and percentage) 2009-2011 2009 2010 2011   GIRLS TOTAL % GIRLS TOTAL % GIRLS TOTAL % Kawara Project LGAs 44,261 94,902 46.6 45,722 96,562 47.3 47,386 99,804 47.5 Non project 49,925 104,702 47.7 48,943 102,746 47.6 53,426 111,689 47.8 LGAs Kaduna Project LGAs 135,578 303,078 44.7 146,432 323,389 45.3 141,383 313,472 45.1 Non project 305,759 676,581 45.2 347,255 751,732 46.2 346,379 753,803 46.0 LGAs Kano Project LGAs 168,082 355,397 47.3 185,379 387,477 47.8 203,851 411,230 49.6 Non project 724,334 1,528,075 47.4 752,286 1,576,992 47.7 828,348 1,723,558 48.1 LGAs Source: Annual School Census Kwara, Kaduna, Kano 2009, 2010, 2011. 4.33 Across the three States there were differences in relation to the upward progression of girls into later grades of primary school, as measured by the ratio of girls enrolled between class 6 and 1 (See Appendix B)12. Using this proxy, girls in Kwara participate longer in primary school than in the other States, as this ratio increased from 2009 to 2011 in project LGAs (78 percent in 2009 to 79 percent in 2011), while it decreased in non-project LGAs (77 percent in 2009 to 70 percent in 2011). In Kaduna, this ratio increased from 2009 to 2011 in project LGAs (from 57 percent to 58 percent) and non-project LGAs (from 53 percent to 55 percent). In other words, in 2009 in project LGAs in Kaduna 57 percent of the girls enrolled in class one were in class six, while in 2011 58 percent of those enrolled in class one were in class six. In Kano, this ratio decreased from 2009 to 2011, with a lower proportion in project LGAs than non-project LGAs. In Kano in 2009, 47 percent of girls enrolled in class one 12 Because of limitations in the data, enrollment, transition, and completion rate were not calculated. See sections on M&E for explanation. 26 enrolled in class six in project LGAs, while in 2011 only 41 percent of those enrolled in class one were in class six. This ratio also decreased slightly in non-project LGAs in Kano from 57 percent in 2009 to 53 percent in 2011. 4.34 There was a consistent positive pattern in girls’ enrollment at the JSS level in Kwara and Kano, but not in Kaduna. In Kwara the number of girls enrolled in JSS schools increased in project LGAs and non-project LGAs, and the percentage of girls enrolled remained steady in project LGAs (48 percent) and slightly declined in non-project LGAs (46 percent to 45 percent). (See Table 10). In Kano, there was a large increase in the number of girls enrolled in JSS from 2009-2010 and 2011-2012 in project and non-project LGAs, with slightly greater gains in the percentage girls enrolled in project LGAs in Kano (from 24 percent to 33 percent) than non-project LGAs (from 37 percent to 42 percent). In Kaduna the number of girls enrolled in JSS steadily increased in non-project LGAs, but declined in project LGAs between 2009/2010 and 201113. It should be noted that an examination of the ratio between class three to class one in JSS is not presented, as each state reported more girls enrolled in class three than in class one, which may suggest issues with the reliability of the data14. Other factors that might have also contributed to these observed outcomes were the Government of Kano’s increased focus on girls, and the program implemented by the Universal Basic Education Commission (World Bank 2012). Table 10. JSS Public Enrollment, Total and Girls (number and percentage) 2009-2011 2009 2010 2011   GIRLS TOTAL % GIRLS TOTAL % GIRLS TOTAL % Kawara Project LGAs 17,696 37,212 47.6 15,716 33,150 47.4 18,893 39,381 48.0 Non project LGAs 21,971 47,675 46.1 22,272 50,318 44.3 24,273 53,012 45.8 Kaduna Project LGAs 22,745 55,349 41.1 24,000 58,853 40.8 19,960 47,687 41.8 Non project LGAs 50,743 120,306 42.2 53,048 120,965 43.9 55,158 125,787 43.8 Kano Project LGAs 8,659 35,840 24.2 11,170 36,211 30.8 15,648 48,092 32.5 Non project LGAs 83,930 228,303 36.8 93,902 235,769 39.8 106,301 253,3767 41.9 Source: Annual School Census Kwara, Kaduna, Kano 2009, 2010, 2011. 4.35 The impact evaluation of the girls CCT pilot showed that attendance for girls increased after the first payment, but due to the disruption in the program impacts diminished (World Bank 2014; World Bank 2011; Work Bank 2012). Attendance for girls in grade six showed the largest gain in comparison to the control group. Beneficiary girls had an average 13 This figure included the number of girls from both categories (JSS and rearticulated JSS) in the Annual School Census. 14 Data were repeatedly checked to ensure there were not errors in transposing the data into spreadsheets. 27 attendance rate of 66 percent (with the impacts concentrated in the Grade 5 cohort), while those without the CCT attended nearly the same amount of time, (63 percent). 4.36 The impact evaluation of the girls CCT pilot found that over the program the transition rate increased from JSS1 to JSS2. After the first payment, the transition rate for girls from primary to junior secondary was slightly higher among grantees (23 percent), than non-grantees (17 percent) (World Bank 2012; Sabarwal & Habyarimana 2014). There was more pronounced impact in the urban area, while the rate for rural girls was similar between grantees and non-grantees but slightly higher for those who did not receive the payment (20 percent than 18 percent). For the second year of the program, there was a statistically higher transition rate from JSS1 to JSS2 for girls receiving the grant (60 percent) than non-grantees (29 percent). The evaluation did not report whether similar results were observed, when results were disaggregated for rural students. It was learned that families may not send their younger daughter to school, despite sending the one getting the grant (Sabarwal & Habyarimana 2014). As well, providing broader coverage with smaller grants may be advisable. This suggests the need for CCT programs with sustained and predictable payments over multiple cohorts to create parental behavior change (Sabarwal & Habyarimana 2014). 5. Efficiency 5.1 Efficiency is rated Substantial. 5.2 The international competitive bidding that was used for infrastructure procurement provided value for money. As Table 11 shows, the cost of project construction activities in nearly all cases were less than comparable government costs. For example, the project had much lower unit costs than in State Government in 11 out of 13 civil works activities (with comparable size and quality). In the case of the construction of laboratories, the project with its competitive bidding was 33 percent of the cost of the Government. Savings were attained because the contractor with the lowest bid was selected by the project implementation unit. In Kano the actual costs were US$7.9 million, rather than the estimated US$9 million. In Kaduna the savings was approximately US$0.5 million. Kano adopted a prototype classroom design to be able to create efficiencies. The savings permitted purchasing additional textbooks to achieve a 1:1 student-to-textbook ratio in core subjects in all targeted LGAs in Kaduna and Kwara. In Kano the savings were spent on the construction of additional bore holes and toilets in the schools. 28 Table 11. Comparison of Project and Government Unit Costs (Naira) Kwara Kano GOV PROJECT GOV PROJECT Classrooms15 3,851,913 2,447,402 4,594,160 2,661,578 Toilets (VIPs) 1,500,000 1,024,405 998,095 2,234,229 Furniture 45,000 14,850 16,000 15,431 Boreholes 16,500,000 7,789,045 6,500,000 612,906 Library 3,800,000 2,309,060 6,205.395 4,895,193 Admin Block 4,101,500 2,859,963 Laboratory 8,300,000 2,730,364 6,038,697 6,592,486 Source: Project Records. 5.3 While construction quality was good, there were deviations from design specification. For example in Kwara the roof structure was changed from steel to wood, ceilings from plaster to synthetic panels, and windows and door frame sizes were reduced. These changes impact the durability of the construction, or in the case of the windows and doors reduce the amount of light. 5.4 The project was completed with no extensions, despite the fact that there was a delay in credit effectiveness. As a result, the project closed in three years and two months, rather than the planned four years. This was a result of the parallel preparation that was done at entry, as well as the solid implementation during the course of the project. 5.5 While the project had no cost overruns, project management expenses were higher than anticipated. The reason for this is not clear, as the implementation time was shorter than anticipated. 6. Ratings Outcome 6.1 Outcome is rated moderately unsatisfactory. This is based on high Relevance of Objectives; modest Relevance of Design; modest achievement for both objectives (i.e. to improve quality and improve girls’ participation). Efficiency was substantial. The share of girls enrolled in primary schools in both project and non-project LGAs in Kaduna and Kwara did not change. There was a slight increase in the percentage of girls enrolled in primary schools in Kano in project LGAs in comparison to non-project LGAs. While the project demonstrated improvements in textbook ratio, school renovations, and training of teachers, these outputs did not culminate in improved quality of basic education, as design did not 15 The project used steel rafters for classroom construction, rather than wood in comparable government classrooms. The project provided 8 toilets, while the government constructed 6. 29 adequately establish the minimum conditions for learning. Training was not adequately focused on the core subjects and its effectiveness was reduced with the subsequent transfer of trained teachers. The two pilot programs were developed and implemented late in the project life to demonstrate results, as well as enable a true learning and evaluative process. Risk to Development Outcome 6.2 There has been some institutionalization of the project's interventions. The Annual School Census has been collected and disseminated with the support of ESSPIN in each of the States annually since the close of the project. The EMIS is operational and utilized by the State Ministry of Education’s EMIS Unit. School management committees continue. Communities have a strong commitment to their schools. Textbooks are provided directly to each State by the Universal Basic Education Commission. SUBEB continues to renovate and build additional classrooms. Inspectors now examine educational quality and in Kwara they work with schools to address the areas to improve (as self-identified by the school). In Kwara School Support Officers go to schools to assist teachers in an effort to institutionalize the professional development provided to teachers. ESSPIN continues to work and support all three of the States. At the time of the IEG Mission, preparation was underway for a new project in Kano and Kaduna funded by the Global Partnership for Education. All of these factors help reduce the risk to the development outcome. 6.3 Sustainability of project activities will depend on several factors. There is a need for sufficient allocation from the State budget for professional development for teachers and further activities to enroll more girls in school, particularly in Kaduna and Kano. As well, school maintenance costs are not included in the State budget and so School Management Committees have a large role in financing the minor repairs and maintenance. Many teachers assessed by ESSPIN demonstrated low levels of understanding of basic concepts, suggesting that many need development beyond the scope of in-service training. As well, reliability of school-level data need to be improved for the States to have accurate information from which to make their decisions. 6.4 While there is political will in support of basic education and girls education, there is a significant risk to the development outcome because of three factors: weak institutional management capacity, teacher posting policies, and changing government priorities. Functions related to monitoring and evaluation continue to need strengthening within each State. Decisions about teacher deployment to rural posts can be easily reversed based on political decision-making, which leave rural schools at a serious disadvantage in creating adequate learning conditions, given the central role teacher play in student learning. Annual School data for 2011-2012 show low primary teacher to student ratios (e.g. Kwara 1:15, Kaduna 1:29, and Kano 1:46) , yet when classrooms were observed in Kwara higher teacher- to-student ratios were evident, suggesting issues in the deployment and distribution of teachers, which are particularly striking in the rural areas. Since the closure of the project, there has been a new Commissioner of Education in Kwara. Some of the reform efforts previously begun in Kwara have not continued. While there was initial support from the State of Kano for the Conditional Cash Transfer program, when the new Governor came to office the program was initially suspended. The CCT program continued with the support of ESSPIN, but over the years the commitment from the government in Kano has waned and its 30 financial support has decreased. While the Bank is financing a follow-up operation with a conditional cash transfer program to poor households, this program is not targeted to girls (World Bank 2013). Bank Performance 6.5 Bank performance is rated Moderately Unsatisfactory. Quality at Entry 6.6 Quality at entry is rated as Moderately Unsatisfactory. 6.7 Project preparation was thorough with the support from CUBE, which laid the foundation for rapid and effective implementation. Simultaneous to the Bank preparation, State teams were engaged in preparatory implementation activities. Preparation included the participation of all levels of State Government, which effectively secured their buy-in. The Bank provided a clear timeline and next steps that each State preparation team had to complete before the subsequent mission. Technical papers were prepared to assist in the design of the school grants and a detailed operational manual was developed. The manual clearly described the process for schools to follow and the forms to complete to make the grants part of an improvement and planning process. However, project preparation did not take account local needs and priorities for school grants. A formula was developed to allocate resources to schools. Schools were selected in advance for civil works, based on an agreed upon criteria. School designs and standards were established during appraisal by qualified firms to avoid problems previously encountered with the standard drawings used by the UBEC which were not well designed. 6.8 The Bank utilized a collaborative process with the States during preparation. The Bank team took the feedback from the State preparation teams into account in finalizing design options. When the Bank suggested expanding the school grants to include purchasing of textbooks and teacher training, the States expressed concerns that school-focused implementation and procurement was risky, given the lack of establishment of School Based Management Committees. Institutional arrangements, including monitoring and evaluation, were clarified. Procurement arrangements reflecting State’s concerns were agreed upon. 6.9 During the delay in project effectiveness, the Bank and CUBE continued to work with State teams to finalize preparatory documents such as bidding documents, training manuals, selection of key consultants and development of Terms of References. When changes in lead personnel were made, the Bank team advised the States that they needed to ensure that few changes were made over the course of the project, and that new staff are fully aware of the project. 6.10 A Quality Enhancement Review (QER) was conducted in November 2006 that concurred with the project's state-based approach, but suggested the need for more clarity on the whole school approach, in relation to: (1) how various inputs would be integrated into packages; and (2) the relationship between demand-driven school grants and the funding by state governments through centralized procurement (World Bank 2012). This feedback was used to make revisions with the design. 31 6.11 There were several shortcomings in preparation. Preparation underestimated the complexity of the task of establishing the information management system and data collection process and the time this would take. It was evident that CUBE would end during the initial stage of implementation, yet its support was a critical part of design that would be needed until the end of the project. For example, CUBE was to support each state with a National Procurement Consultant and International Procurement Consultant during the project implementation, despite the fact that the project would end. It was reasonable to provide this technical support, given that Kano and Kwara did not have experience implementing Bank financed education projects. However, this role would seem more likely for the Bank, since Bank personnel were in a better position to advise about its operational procedures. While the project appraisal document noted that culture and poverty were the main reason why girls did not participate in school, there were no studies to explore the socio-cultural and religious resistance to girls’ education to better inform design. However, the Bank team reported that information from Dfid’s implementation of the Girls Education Program was utilized during preparation. There were weaknesses in the design of the project (See Relevance of Design) and monitoring and evaluation (See Monitoring and Evaluation Design and Relevance of Design). 6.12 While the Federal Ministry of Education was involved in project preparation, it had a very limited role in this project. The limited role related to problems with the previous Universal Basic Education project, but this decision to minimize the Federal role reduced the knowledge sharing and demonstration effects from the project, according to respondents. Subsequent Bank education projects have ensured a Federal role in the education projects to create greater synergy between the project and ongoing national reforms and interventions. Quality of Supervision 6.13 Quality of Supervision is rated as Moderately Unsatisfactory. 6.14 There was a smooth transition between the task team leaders at preparation and supervision. One task team leader (TTL) was dedicated to each State throughout the course of the project. This allowed for each State team to have more contact with a Bank team member, as well as allowed for each TTL to spend more time in each State during supervision missions, given the geography in Nigeria. The Bank team worked closely with the implementation unit through monthly video-conferences where the State teams came to Abuja and were connected with staff in Washington. Implementation was also enhanced, since one of the TTLs was based in Abuja, which provided county knowledge, as well as permitted States closer contact with the Bank team. 6.15 The Bank team continued its policy dialogue with education officials in each State. Opportunities for further advocacy related to girls’ education presented during the Mid-term Review. During the early childhood development pilot, the Bank held workshops that engaged ECD experts, as well as other development partners and each State’s Ministry of Health and Education. 6.16 The Bank and DfID worked separately on their respective activities, but jointly conducted the mid-term review. Better coordination between the work of the Bank and DfID 32 may have enhanced the EMIS, state and local capacity building efforts and teacher professional development. 6.17 The Bank expressed concern when baseline data were delayed, but its supervision ratings such as progress on the development objective and monitoring and evaluation were not used to signal its concerns. While the issue of reliable project data was consistently communicated by the Bank team to the implementation unit, most ratings were in the satisfactory range across the life of the project, even though outcome data were lacking to be able to substantiate progress on the development objective and monitoring and evaluation. 6.18 There were major shortcomings in the activities added at Midterm review, as well as other aspects of supervision. The conditional transfer program was implemented during the final phase of the project. The moral repercussions of beginning the program at the project’s final months were minimized because DfID continued its support to the program. Design was lacking in relation to the ECD pilot, as well as tracking, which did not permit a clear understanding of what was attained nor ability to test the merits of a small-scale intervention. Weaknesses in monitoring evaluation were not addressed during supervision. No indicators were incorporated in relation to the two pilot activities added at Midterm review. The project closed as planned despite the fact that the project had ten fewer months to implement. An extension may have provided time for the three outstanding projects in Kwara to be completed. The completion status of the civil works was reported to the Bank. As a consequence, the three civil works projects were unfinished at the time of the IEG mission. As well, a later closing date may have permitted funding for another round of grants for the CCT pilot, as the second payment did not reach the Implementing Agency’s account before the closing date. Borrower Performance 6.19 Government Performance is rated as Moderately Satisfactory. 6.20 The Federal Government demonstrated commitment to basic education and girls’ education. It adopted a National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (2003), which emphasized reform of education as the means to socioeconomic empowerment. A representative from the Federal Ministry of Finance participated in the IEG Mission in Kwara. 6.21 While the Federal Ministry of Education was involved in project preparation, it had limited involvement in the project, restricted to the National Steering Committee. Representatives from the Federal Ministry of Education participated in some supervision missions with the Bank team. 6.22 Implementing Agency Performance is rated as Moderately Satisfactory. 6.23 State government officials and the State Ministry of Education were committed to the project, even during elections and bureaucratic changes. Commissioners of Education and other State representatives participated in the project launch. 33 6.24 Members of each States preparation team worked under short timelines to deliver the required documents. With the support of CUBE, they developed the Education Sector Plan, operational plans, project manuals, and technical papers, and many other preparatory documents. 6.25 A project implementation unit within each State Ministry of Education oversaw the project management and fiduciary responsibilities. Staff from the State Ministry of Education were on secondment to the project implementation unit from the State Ministry of Education. In this way, capacity built during the project remained with the Ministry. It was also reported to be a way to ensure staff had adequate time to devote to the project. Performance by the implementation teams in the three States steadily improved as a result of the careful selection of personnel and technical assistance. Meetings were held between the States and the participating LGAs to inform them on the activities, implementation arrangements, and their respective roles and responsibilities in the project. The original level of commitment for CCT amongst Government officials in Kano is unclear, and their support appears to have waned. 6.26 Monitoring and evaluation proved to be more difficult than anticipated. There was slow progress on data entry and reporting by the States, as well as longer time to collect Annual School Census data. There were delays in setting up the EMIS, which related to difficulties in harmonizing a Federal EMIS and, complexity of the system’s original design. There was slow attention to analysis of Annual School Census. Monitoring and Evaluation 6.27 The quality of M&E is rated Modest. 6.28 M&E Design: While the appraisal document provided targets for key indicators, baseline data, timetable and responsibility for implementation, there were shortcomings (See Monitoring and Evaluation Design). The key performance indicators were transition and completion rates, and measurement of reading and mathematics learning. Most of the other indicators in the Results Frameworks were outputs: school development plans, teachers trained, schools rehabilitated, textbooks, and quality assurance inspection, relating mainly to the quality objective. No indicators were selected to assess the ECD or CCT pilots. Baselines were revised in 2010, because the data in the appraisal document was unreliable and not disaggregated by LGA. 6.29 An impact evaluation was designed for the pilot conditional cash transfer program. The evaluation was to provide evidence of the results, and monitor the fidelity of the implementation. The evaluation was designed to test whether CCT counteract school supply or distance constraints to secondary education. It also studied the differential effect of different amounts of subsidy (e.g. higher transfer of approximately US$ 130 and lower amount US$ 65). The study was financed by ESSPIN and Bank provided technical assistance. At the time of IEG’s Mission, preliminary results of the program were available, but not the final report. The benefit to the Government in using the results of the evaluation to make informed decisions about continuing the pilot may be reduced with this delay. 34 6.30 M&E Implementation: The Project Support Unit was responsible for monitoring project performance indicators. Given the delay in establishing the State-level EMIS (related to delays in Federal EMIS), as well as the time it took to conduct the Annual School Census, project outcome data was not available until 2010 (nearly two years after project inception). This became the project baseline, since the data available at preparation was state-level, rather than LGA disaggregated. This left the project with no trend data, since the subsequent Annual School Census report was not available by the close of the project. Intermediate indicators were tracked throughout the project. Since the IEG Mission, Annual School Census Reports were available in each State for 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011-2012, but there was delay with the release of the 2012-2013 data and were unavailable at the time of the IEG Mission. 6.31 Reliability of school-level data is a continued concern expressed by respondents. In 2009 a validation of the School Census was done, which found some over reporting, but the report largely confirmed the validity of the results. In the preparation of this report, arithmetical errors were found in the reports from Kaduna and Kano, as well as other data inconsistencies. 6.32 M&E Utilization: Despite the capacity building efforts conducted during the project, the State Ministries of Education exhibited modest utilization of M&E as a tool to inform policy or make decisions. The changes reported mainly related to compiling data. School Report Cards were produced and disseminated in 2010. An Education Sector Analysis Report was produced annually beginning in 2009. 7. Lessons 7.1 Based on the experience of this project, several lessons can be drawn:  Learning and sustainability of pilot activities are limited when there is an absence of clear design, an explicit mechanism for evaluating, and a sufficient implementation time frame. Initiating the girls CCT during the last year of the project provided insufficient time to implement the pilot. As well, it is difficult to determine the benefits and effectiveness of the pilot ECD activities, given the absence of the monitoring and evaluation system and implementation plan. Without strong design and evaluation, there is no way to identify whether the pilot activity is worthy of scaling-up or sustaining. Pilots generate further interest in sustaining or scaling-up when robust data are collected.  Setting up a monitoring and evaluation system takes more time than Governments and TTLs often recognize and provide. An overly complex system was designed and replaced with a simplified one. In environments with low capacity, understanding the critical data needs of the Government is essential, as well as the amount of technical assistance that will be required. During this project, it took considerable time for the States to collect and analyze the Annual School Census. 35  A prior unsuccessful project can result in learning, but it depends upon an accurate understanding of the performance issue. This project avoided some of the shortcomings in the predecessor Bank project, Universal Basic Education Project. DfID’s TA was aligned with the objective of this project. However, each partner worked separately to complete respective responsibilities within the project. Better coordination between the work of the Bank and DfID may have enhanced the EMIS, state and local capacity building efforts and teacher professional development.  Even with a State-focused project, the involvement of the Federal Ministry of Education is critical given its central role in policy. However, the difficulties related to the Federal implementation in the Universal Basic Education project were not fully understood. During preparation, instead of designing approaches to overcome the challenges experienced by the Federal Ministry of Education with the Universal Basic Education Project, the Federal role was minimal. This reduced the buy-in by the Federal Ministry of Education and likelihood of replicating project activities in other states.  Improving inputs into learning (facilities, textbooks, etc.) needs to be accompanied by defining and addressing quality requirements in terms of minimum standards for student learning. While this project improved the inputs and physical conditions for learning, these may not translate into improved student learning, as the key issue of teachers’ capacities was insufficiently addressed by the project. When teachers’ numeracy, literacy, and language skills are low, children’s learning will be compromised. This is particularly true in rural areas as more skill deficiencies were found among rural teachers. There also continue to be issues in how teachers are allocated amongst schools. 37 References Abe, C., 2011. “The Quality of Education in Nigeria: An Outcome Evaluation Study of Teacher Professional Development and Learning Outcomes in Kano, Kaduna, and Kwara States”. State Education Sector Project . Abuja, Nigeria. Adekola, O. 2007. “ Language, Literacy, and Learning in Primary Schools: Implications for Teacher Development Programs in Nigeria”. World Bank Working Paper No. 96 Africa Human Development Series. Report No. 40005. World Bank, Washington, DC. Case, A. & M.,Yogo. 1999. “Does School Quality Matter? Returns to Education and the Characteristics of Schools in South Africa”. National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 7399. Cambridge, MA. Education Sector Support Programme in Nigeria (ESSPIN). 2010. “Teaching and Learning Baseline Survey Summary Report”. Report Number 316. Downloaded from http://www.esspin.org/resources/reports. Federal Ministry of Education. 2007. Federal Ministry of Education 10 Year Strategic Plan. Abuja, Nigeria. Glewwe, P. E., Hanushek, S. Humpage & R. Ravin. 2011. “ School Resources and Educational Outcomes in Developing Countries: A Review of the Literature form 1990-2010.” National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 17554. Cambridge, MA. Garet, M., A. Porter, L. Desimone, B. Birman, and K. Yoon. 2001. “What makes professional development effective? Results from a National Sample of Teachers”. American Educational Research Journal 38(4): 915-945. IEG. 2008. “Project Performance Assessment Report Nigeria Second Primary Education Project and Universal Basic Education Project”. Report No. 44360. Washington, DC: World Bank. Johnson, D., J. Hsieh. F. Oniborn. 2007. “ The Quality of Education in Nigeria. A baseline study into conditions of teaching and learning outcomes in Kano, Kaduna and Kwara. British Council, Cambridge Education and Action aid. Krishnaratne, S., White, H. & Carpenter, E., 2013. “Quality education for all children? What works in education in developing countries”, Working Paper 20. New Delhi: International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie). Omoluabi, E., M. Balarabe, O, Zakariya, and A. Garba. 2011. School Development Grant Assessment in Kano, Kaduna and Kwara States. State Education Sector Project. Kano, Nigeria. Sabarwal, S., J. Habyarimana. (2014) Kano Conditional Cash Transfer Program for Girls’ Education: Draft Impact Evaluation Report. World Bank: Washington DC. White. H. 2004.”Books, Buildings, and Learning Outcomes: An Impact Evaluation of World Bank Support to Basic Education in Ghana.” OED World Bank. World Bank. 2003. “School Education in Nigeria: Preparing for Universal Basic Education.” Human Development Africa Region. Report No. 28412. Washington, DC. _________. 2007. “Language, Literacy, and Learning in Primary Schools Implications for Teacher Development Programs in Nigeria.” Working Paper No 40005. Washington, DC. _________. 2007. “Project Appraisal Document on a Proposed Credit in the Amount of SDR 43.3 Million (US$ 64 Million) to the Federal Republic of Nigeria for a State Education Sector Project”. Report No: 38436-NG. Washington, DC. ________. 2007. “Financing Agreement for State Education Sector Project between Federal Republic of Nigeria and International Development Association”. Credit Number 4295-UNI. Washington, DC. _________. 2008. “Nigeria: Review of the Costs and Financing of Public Education.” Human Development Unit Africa Region. Report No. 42418-NG. Washington, DC. ANNEX A 38 _________. 2009. “International Development Association Country Partnership Strategy for the Federal Republic of Nigeria (2010-2013)”. Report No. 46816-NG. Washington, DC. _________. 2011. “Nigeria Socio Economic Assessment. Poverty Reduction and Economic Management.” Africa Region. Report No. 70606. Washington, DC. ________. 2011 “Kano Conditional Cash Transfer Program: Baseline Report” Africa Education Department Africa Region. Washington, DC. _________. 2012. “Implementation Completion and Results Report.” Africa Education Department Africa Region. Report No. ICR00001959. Washington, DC. _________. 2012 “Kano Conditional Cash Transfer Program: Preliminary Impact Estimates and Program Update” Africa Education Department Africa Region. Washington, DC. _________. Forthcoming. “World Bank Investments in Early Childhood: Findings from Portfolio Review of World Bank Early Childhood Development Operations and Analytical Work from FY01-FY11.” Washington, DC. 39 ANNEX A Annex A. Basic Data Sheet STATE EDUCATION SECTOR PROJECT (P096151) Key Project Data (amounts in US$ million) Appraisal Actual or Actual as % of estimate current estimate appraisal estimate Total project costs 68.51 65.40 95.46 Loan amount 67.55 63.74 94.36 Cofinancing (UK DEPARTMENT FOR 2.87 1.67 58.19 INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ) Cancellation 0.00 3.58 0.00 Cumulative Estimated and Actual Disbursements FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 Appraisal estimate (US$M) 9.80 36.56 56.94 65.00 65.00 Actual (US$M) 3.26 14.51 38.06 62.51 63.74 Actual as % of appraisal 33.26 39.69 66.84 96.16 98.06 Date of final disbursement: 11/10/2011 Project Dates Original Actual Initiating memorandum 08/03/2005 07/31/2006 Negotiations 03/09/2007 03/14/2007 Board approval 04/20/2006 04/26/2007 Signing 10/30/2007 10/30/2007 Effectiveness 04/25/2008 04/25/2008 Closing date 07/01/2011 07/01/2011 ANNEX A 40 Staff Time and Cost Stage of Project Cycle Staff Time and Cost (Bank Budget Only) US$ Thousands (including No. of staff weeks Lending travel and consultants costs) FY06 6 40.79 FY07 63 295.80 Total: 336.59 Supervision/ICR FY8 53 238.92 Total: 53 238.92 Task Team Members Names Title Unit Norosoa Andrianaivo Language Program Assistant AFTED Bayo Awosemusi Lead Procurement Specialist AFTPC Jacob H. Bregman Consultant LCSHE Halil Dundar Lead Education Specialist SASED Nguyan Shaku Feese E T Consultant AFTH3-HIS Ngozi Blessing Malife Program Assistant EASER Gert Johannes Alwyn Van Der Linde Lead Financial Management AFTFM Specialist Tanya Lee Lorraine Zebroff Sr. Education Spec. AFCW2 Sunday Achile Acheneje Procurement Specialist AFTPC Olatunde Adetoyese Adekola Sr. Education Spec. AFTED Adewunmi Cosmas Ameer Financial Management Specialist AFTFM Adekoya Akinrinmola Oyenuga Sr. Financial Management AFTFM Akinyele Specialist Mary Asanato-Adiwu Sr. Procurement Specialist AFTPC Bayo Awosemusi Lead Procurement Specialist AFTPC Marito H. Garcia Lead Human Development AFTSP Economist Josiane M. S. Luchmun Program Assistant AFTSP Janet Omobolanle Adebo Team Assistant AFCW2 Muna Salih Meky Human Development Specialist AFTED Deborah Newitter Mikesell Sr. Operations Officer AFTED Adenike Sherifat Oyeyiola Sr. Financial Management AFTFM Specialist Shwetlena Sabarwal Economist AFTED 41 Annex B. School Conditions in Project LGAs in Kwara, Kaduna, and Kano 2009-2011 KWARA SCHOOL CONDITIONS Table 12. Primary School (2009-2011) Asa Baruten Ilorin West Isin Offa Patigi 2009 Classroom need major repair 25 41 23 22 25 25 Insufficient Seating 72 76 56 68 67 83 No Source of Water 63 77 38 59 69 57 2010 Classroom need major repair 24 29 15 10 21 18 Insufficient Seating 57 42 46 42 58 40 No Source of Water 66 72 16 58 50 84 2011 Classroom need major repair 19 17 11 17 12 12 Insufficient seating 37 74 69 30 55 69 No Source of Water 63 61 25 58 64 81 Source: Kwara Annual School Census 2009-2011. Table 13. Junior Secondary Schools (2009-2011) Asa Baruten Ilorin West Isin Offa Patigi 2009 Classroom need major repair 15 29 45 33 41 34 Insufficient Seating 63 77 62 54 66 95 No Source of Water 43 50 50 19 35 62 2010 Classroom need major repair 5 2 16 4 8 5 Insufficient Seating 36 36 40 70 38 11 No Source of Water 38 22 33 50 35 71 2011 Classroom need major repair 6 4 17 4 8 4 Insufficient Seating 44 60 55 68 25 84 No Source of Water 38 10 41 31 39 67 Source: Kwara Annual School Census 2009-2011. ANNEX B 42 KADUNA SCHOOL CONDITIONS Table 14. Primary School (2009-2011) Chikun Zaria Kagarko Birnin Gwari Sanga Soba 2009 Classroom need major repair 44 12 56 36 40 29 Insufficient Seating 75 70 81 62 82 72 No Source of Water 61 47 74 73 72 73 2010 Classroom need major repair 40 12 52 24 34 23 Insufficient Seating 73 62 78 69 76 69 No Source of Water 66 40 84 73 68 76 2011 Classroom need major repair 34 33 40 29 32 24 Insufficient Seating 69 68 36 67 61 68 No Source of Water 60 28 86 67 62 62 Source: Kaduna Annual School Census 2009-2011. Table 15. Junior Secondary Schools (2009-2011) Chikun Zaria Kagarko Birnin Gwari Sanga Soba 2009 Classroom need major repair 32 15 33 12 31 7 Insufficient Seating 58 44 61 39 64 48 No Source of Water 11 24 33 6 33 23 2010 Classroom need major repair 25 6 22 23 5 0 Insufficient Seating 57 23 60 41 49 20 No Source of Water 21 0 23 7 7 6 2011 Classroom need major repair 16 14 18 3 0 0 Insufficient Seating 57 56 42 56 0 27 No Source of Water 14 20 24 18 33 30 Source: Kaduna Annual School Census 2009-2011. 43 ANNEX B KANO SCHOOL CONDITIONS Table 16. Primary School (2009-2011) Garun Rimin Kiru Kunchi Makoda Minjibir Rogo Ungogo Wudil Mallam Gado 2009 Classroom need 13 31 19 7 22 25 40 26 10 major repair Insufficient Seating 72 64 54 44 78 74 79 77 47 No Source of 57 65 71 53 66 35 38 68 34 Water 2010 Classroom need 15 12 17 6 23 26 25 19 5 major repair Insufficient Seating 61 52 39 44 80 39 75 81 37 No Source of 55 58 80 59 62 75 45 57 26 Water 2011 Classroom need 20 12 21 11 12 17 12 47 6 major repair Insufficient Seating 61 59 44 44 66 66 59 176 40 No Source of 62 67 81 55 65 60 31 62 25 Water Source: Kano Annual School Census 2009-2011. Table 17. Junior Secondary Schools (2009-2011) Garun Rimin Kiru Kunchi Makoda Minjibir Rogo Ungogo Wudil Mallam Gado 2009 Classroom need 4 8 17 4 9 9 12 15 26 major repair Insufficient 67 35 44 49 38 68 61 57 35 Seating No Source of 10 32 55 27 29 33 30 33 23 Water 2010 Classroom need 20 5 5 0 9 13 9 11 4 major repair Insufficient 42 35 10 34 30 45 43 64 34 Seating ANNEX B 44 Garun Rimin Kiru Kunchi Makoda Minjibir Rogo Ungogo Wudil Mallam Gado No Source of 40 54 50 0 36 33 33 29 50 Water 2011 Classroom need 0 2 0 5 7 4 39 30 0 major repair Insufficient 100 19 41 5 34 12 47 45 26 Seating No Source of 0 54 50 0 33 38 0 63 33 Water Source: Kano Annual School Census 2009-2011. 45 ANNEX B Table 18. Public Primary School Enrollment - Kaduna 2009 2010 2011 LGAS TOTAL CLASS 1 CLASS 6 TOTAL CLASS 1 CLASS 6 TOTAL CLASS 1 CLASS 6 GIRLS GIRLS GIRLS ENROLLMENT (GIRLS) (GIRLS) ENROLLMENT (GIRLS) (GIRLS) ENROLLMENT (GIRLS) (GIRLS) Chikun 51,420 25,337 5,335 3,211 52,890 26,261 5,229 2,949 50,501 25,067 4,752 2,805 Zaria 71,955 32,960 6,228 4,743 74,126 34,497 6,240 4,445 74,872 36,561 5,252 4,383 Kagarko 34,679 16,751 3,804 1,985 34,175 16,468 3,487 1,927 33,021 16,117 3,221 2,003 BIRNINGWARI 44,279 16,692 4,021 1,996 49,451 18,962 4,590 1,926 56,846 20,729 4,961 2,049 Sanga 48,871 23,641 4,448 3,294 62,477 30,499 5,521 4,471 48,585 23,673 3,958 3,496 Soba 51,874 20,197 5,677 1,529 50,270 19,745 5,848 1,285 49,647 19,236 5,471 1,296 Total Proj. 303,078 135,578 29,513 16,758 323,389 146,432 30,915 17,003 313,472 141,383 27,615 16,032 LGAs Non project 676,581 305,759 65,204 34,288 751,732 347,255 75,164 39,326 753,803 346,379 72,601 40,086 LGAs Source: Kaduna Annual School Census 2009-2011. ANNEX B 46 Table 19. Public Junior Secondary School Enrollment – Kaduna Source: Kaduna Annual School Census 2009-2011. Table 20. Public Primary School Enrollment - Kwara 2009 2010 2011 CLASS TOTAL CLASS 6 TOTAL CLASS 1 CLASS 6 TOTAL CLASS 1 CLASS 6 LGAS GIRLS 1 GIRLS GIRLS ENROLLMENT (GIRLS) ENROLLMENT (GIRLS) (GIRLS) ENROLLMENT (GIRLS) (GIRLS) (GIRLS) Asa 15,526 7,585 1,511 1,045 15,541 7,680 1,575 1,071 16,012 7,862 1,651 1,092 Baruten 18,461 7,895 1,803 869 18,467 7,984 1,817 967 20,051 8,652 1,995 1,058 IlorinWest 29,654 14,979 1,947 2,516 30,048 15,091 2,053 2,695 29,780 15,056 2,131 2,593 Isin 2,988 1,467 294 203 3,408 1,701 294 226 3,184 1,564 278 180 Offa 9,880 4,704 785 713 10,364 5,128 941 755 11,310 5,749 995 886 47 ANNEX B 2009 2010 2011 Patigi 18,393 7,631 1,659 916 18,734 8,138 1,638 990 19,467 8,503 1,703 1,099 Total Proj. 94,902 44,261 7,999 6,262 96,562 45,722 8,318 6,704 99,804 47,386 8,753 6,908 LGAs Non project 104,702 49,925 9,092 6,970 102,746 48,943 9,317 6,764 111,689 53,426 10,842 7,608 LGAs Source: Kwara Annual School Census 2009-2011. Table 21. Public Junior Secondary School Enrollment - Kwara 2009 2010 2011 LGAS TOTAL GIRLS CLASS 1 CLASS 6 TOTAL GIRLS CLASS 1 CLASS 6 TOTAL GIRLS CLASS 1 CLASS 6 ENROLLMENT (GIRLS) (GIRLS) ENROLLMENT (GIRLS) (GIRLS) ENROLLMENT (GIRLS) (GIRLS) Asa 4,389 1,787 546 650 4,283 1,787 580 609 4,330 1,887 628 536 Baruten 2,938 1,233 371 387 2,699 1,108 378 358 3,428 1,465 505 445 IlorinWest 20,030 10,201 3,129 3,556 15,931 7,977 2,832 2,562 21,856 10,949 3,964 3,164 Isin 1,161 559 184 192 1,371 654 221 214 1,270 567 203 180 Offa 5,623 2,868 1,008 919 6,060 3,206 1,021 1,024 5,881 3,049 980 1,029 Patigi 3,071 1,048 308 364 2,806 984 328 349 2,616 976 344 295 Total Proj. 37,212 17,696 5,546 6,068 33,150 15,716 5,360 5,116 39,381 18,893 6,624 5,649 LGAs Non project 47,675 21,971 7,012 7,410 50,318 22,272 6,924 7,649 53,012 24,273 8,154 7,914 LGAs Source: Kwara Annual School Census 2009-2011. ANNEX B 48 Table 22. Public Primary School Enrollment – Kano 2009 2010 2011 TOTAL CLASS 1 CLASS 6 TOTAL CLASS 1 CLASS 6 TOTAL CLASS 1 CLASS 6 LGAS GIRLS GIRLS GIRLS ENROLLMENT (GIRLS) (GIRLS) ENROLLMENT (GIRLS) (GIRLS) ENROLLMENT (GIRLS) (GIRLS) Garun Mallam 27,679 14,215 3,588 1,046 27,849 13,792 3,551 1,033 28512 15021 3428 1095 Kiru 37,877 16,631 3,537 1,349 49,911 22,853 6,192 2,070 51428 24066 5527 2059 Kunchi 51,267 23,496 5,763 2,183 26,488 12,489 3,075 1,159 28052 13273 3148 1309 Makoda 12,328 4,974 1,429 427 16,342 7,222 1,775 533 19671 9285 2134 663 Minjibir 42,265 19,969 4,841 1,728 48,762 22,517 5,810 1,680 55818 27852 7259 2091 Rimingado 24,913 12,113 2,532 1,332 28,817 14,119 3,195 1,546 30329 15226 3273 1522 Rogo 48,582 21,974 4,615 2,351 57,533 27,030 5,742 3,112 59766 30107 7299 2933 Ugogo 73,481 36,139 7,494 4,963 88,167 43,752 9,080 5,131 91671 45876 9775 5215 Wudil 37,005 18,571 3,996 2,370 43,608 21,605 4,596 2,531 45983 23145 4981 2526 Total Proj. 355,397 168,082 37,795 17,749 387,477 185,379 43,016 18,795 411,230 203,851 46,824 19,413 LGAs Non project 1,723,558 1,528,075 724,334 146,445 83,803 1,576,992 752,286 153,491 84,391 828,348 175,201 93,775 LGAs Source: Kano Annual School Census 2009-2011. 49 ANNEX B Table 23. Public Junior Secondary School Enrollment – Kano Source: Kano Annual School Census 2009-2011. ANNEX B 50 Table 24. Percentage of Schools with no Toilets – Kwara Primary School Junior Secondary School LGAS 2009 2010 2011 2009 2010 2011 Asa 95 75 57 76 35 33 Baruten 87 68 42 50 27 30 Ilorin West 43 19 13 67 30 21 Isin 66 49 49 88 38 31 Offa 60 40 32 88 28 17 Patigi 84 77 71 92 71 67 Source: Kwara Annual School Census 2009-2011. Table 25. Percentage of Schools with no Toilets – Kaduna Primary School Junior Secondary School LGAS 2009 2010 2011 2009 2010 2011 Chikun 187 72 72 6 17 36 Zaria 70 33 37 4 5 0 Kagarko 181 74 75 14 27 24 Birnin Gwari 150 67 69 6 13 9 Sanga 168 57 72 10 19 0 Soba 174 69 76 1 0 0 Source: Kaduna Annual School Census 2009-2011. 51 ANNEX B Table 26. Percentage of Schools with no Toilets – Kano Primary School Junior Secondary School LGAS 2009 2010 2011 2009 2010 2011 Garun Mallam 64 57 50 20 50 0 Kiru 83 63 75 40 75 3 Kunchi 68 58 63 36 63 2 Makoda 71 66 39 36 39 3 Minjibir 74 63 60 13 60 0 Rimin Gado 77 71 61 83 61 5 Rogo 88 66 50 35 50 3 Ungogo 63 41 60 48 60 3 Wudil 58 37 34 29 34 1 Source: Kano Annual School Census 2009-2011. Table 27. States in Reading Comprehension and Mathematics 2007 and 2011 (mean percentage score) Reading Comprehension, 2007 Mathematics, 2007 Reading Comprehension, 2011 Mathematics, 2011 Kano, Grade 4 0.60% 5.60% 19.99% 20.01% Kaduna, Grade 4 1.40% 8.70% 25.81% 42.16% Kwara, Grade 4 6.80% 8.40% 20.06% 20.06% Kano, Grade 6 14.50% 6.40% 19.99% 20.01% Kaduna, Grade 6 19.70% 4.80% 45.64% 37.10% Kwara, Grade 6 18.60% 8.90% 20.06% 19.95% Source: Johnson, Hsief, Oniborn, 2007; Abe 2011. ANNEX B 52 Some caveats should be noted about these studies. These evaluations tested a sample of fourth and sixth grade students in Kwara, Kaduna, and Kano using some items from the Monitoring and Learning Achievement (Johnson, Hsief, Oniborn, 2007; Abe 2011). While the test was the same between the baseline and end study, there was difference in the assessment method to test reading comprehension. The baseline study directly assessed what children were actually able to read by providing a 51 word passage to children, while the end study had enumerators read the passage to students, which tested listening comprehension. As well, each evaluation utilized a different sample of students (baseline sample of grade four students was 1,873 in reading and 1,814 in mathematics; end sample of grade four students was 3,810 in reading and 2,765 in mathematics) and neither controlled for other factors. The process to develop the sample was not described in either report, thus, it is not clear whether the samples are representative of students in project LGAs. Given these limitations, direct comparisons of the 2007 and 2011 results should not be made. 53 Annex C. List of Persons Met World Bank Deborah Newitter Mikesell, Senior Operations Officer Halil Dundar, Lead Education Specialist Irajen Appasamy, Senior Operations Officer Marito Garcia, Lead Human Development Economist Michelle Nueman, ECD Specialist Olatunde Adetoyese Adekola, Senior Education Specialist Peter Matero, Sector Manager Education Africa Region Shwetlana Sabarwal, Economist DfID Barbara Payne, Senior Education Advisor Ian Attfield, Senior Education Advisor Kayode Sanni, Project Coordinator ESSPIN Nick Santcross, Senior Education Advisor Federal Ministry of Finance J.O. Adeniran, Assistant Director National Bureau of Statistics S.J. Ichedi, Economist/Statistician Federal Ministry of Education Bridget Okpa, Director Policy, Planning, Management & Research Fabowale Ghadebo, Assistant Director Research Helen Abdu, Assistant Director Gender Education Branch of Basic and Secondary Education Department Nicini Osisiomo, Assistant Director Multilateral Branch ANNEX C 54 Zubairu Muhammed, Chief Technical Instructor NEMIS and Statistics Branch State of Kwara A.B. Ahmed, M&E State Kwara Ministry of Education A.F. Iman EMIS Kwara State Ministry of Education Alhaji Rasaq Alabere, Director Ministry of Education and Human Capital Development (Former Project Coordinator for Kwara) Awolola Joseph Kayode, Infrastructure Lead for Project in Kwara B.A. Salman, Project Procurement in Kwara David Adebola Oguntunde, Lead of Teacher Professional Development Kwara State Gold Hanidrat Taruno, Early Childhood Development SUBEB Hayia Ayelabegan, School Development Scheme in Kwara Ibrahim Uman, Project Accountant in Kwara Isiaka Jokotade, ECD Desk Officer ECD SUBEB Katherine Adeyemi, Former Project Coordinator Kwara Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi, Honorable Commissioner Education State of Kwara Mallam Raji Mohammed, Honorable Commissioner Education State of Kwara Nuhu A. Sakar, Teacher Professional Development Project Core Team Member O.A. Olanrewayu, Teacher Professional Development Project Core Team Member O.B. Ayorou, Teacher Professional Development Project Core Team Member V.O Abuye, Inspectorate in Kwara Local Government Representatives A.A. Saka, Education Secretary, Ilorin West A.N. Issa, Desk Officer Teacher Professional Development, Patigi Abdmulha Ahmed Iado, Education Secretary Baruten Alao Suleiman, Desk Officer, Ilorin West Almyu Usman, Desk Officer School Development Scheme, Patigi 55 ANNEX C Ibualmy Nallah, Desk Officer School Development Schme, Asa J.O. Adewole, Desk Officer, Asa J.O. Awkunle, Desk Officer, Isin J.O. Ibiloye, Education Secretary for Isin J.O. Oladunmade, Desk Officer Teacher Professional Development, Offa Jimeh Ayeguw Bolati, Desk Officer, Ilorin West Mahmud Aluju, Education Secretary for Patigi Mosurod Paliata, Desk Officer ECD Ilorin West S.A. Bello, Desk Officer ECD, Offa Sakomiya Kilapa, Desk Officer, Asa Salibru Hanmuna, Desk Officer, Baruten Ulere Balogun, Desk Officer Teacher Professional Development, Isin Usman Kote, Education Secretary for Offa W. Kamaldeen, Education Secretary for Asa State of Kaduna Joel Ushman, Project M&E Coordinator for Kaduna Musa Duniyo, Project Internal Auditor for Kaduna Schools in Kwara Abdul-Qwadr Amao Arenu, Chairman School Management Committee Akanbi John Oladele, Headteacher Alhgi Basiru, Principal Alhiya Olateju Bolanle, Headteacher Ansar-ud-deen LGEA School Ilorin, Kwara Baboko LGEA School Ilorin West Babtalkta Are, Member School Management Committee ANNEX C 56 ECWA LGEA Primary and Junior Secondary School Odo-Eku, Isin LGEA, Kwara Hazin Junior Secondary School Ilorin West Joel M. Afolayan, Chairman School Based Management Committee Kafat Salavdsen, Pre-primary Teacher Mrs. Omidiji Alice Bode, Principal Ms. Esther Abjodun Aderinto, Headteacher Ms. Jaiyeda, Teacher Class 6 Ms. S.M. Bello, Headteacher Ms. Shakirat Gbodofu, Teacher Class 5 Ms. V.A. Dada Pre-primary Teacher Murthala Adinimole, Vice Chairman School Management Committee Ogele Primary School Asa LGEA, Kwara Omlara Ajadi, Pre-primary Teacher Saka Kubarat Abeb, Pre-primary Teacher St John’s Primary and Junior Secondary School, Ilorin, Kwara 57 ANNEX D Annex D. Borrower Comments From: "Kaduna State, Ministry of Education" To: "scaceres@worldbank.org" Date: 04/08/2014 07:21 AM Subject: RE: PPAR Sir/Madam Please find below a draft of our response to the PPAR. KADUNA STATE RESPONSE TO THE ESP (P096151) DRAFT BY THE IEG 1. PRINCIPAL RATING pg v All the ratings are in order but we wished that the PPAR's rating on ' outcome' which is 'moderately unsatisfactory' would have been 'moderately satisfactory' since the project design, though might not have been perfect, but was tailored towards the stated objectives. To a larger extend, the efficacy dimension was equally achieved. However this observation is subject to the results sheet presented. 2. LESSONS pg x All lessons drawn from this project are accurate. If there will be another SESP or similar projects, and I hope there will be lessons drawn will be very useful. This lesson will need to be taken up early to succeed. 3. EFFICIENCY pg 28 This project was executed in just 3years 2 months as rightly observed. The execution time was very short against the original plan. We wish we had full time. CONCLUSION We acknowledged and commended the thorough work of the IEG which has opened our eyes to so many potholes from design to implementation. We appreciate all observations and ratings. We appreciate the entire concept of the project which has become a guide to government's roadmap for education. However, SEEP was a pilot project which was done in only 3 States and only 6 LGAs out of the project23 Kaduna has. Also only in some few schools in the project LGAs. We will therefore appreciate it much if the IEG will recommend a scaling up to a full national project because the need for education by the teaming population is enormous and the funding gap is very wide for any state to shoulder. There are quite lot children out there who need education but the resources are limited. There are many girls out there who have no option than to go and marry because their parents would rather sponsor the boy child. Yours sincerely, Director/PRS Kaduna State