ICRR 10947 Report Number : ICRR10947 ICR Review Operations Evaluation Department 1. Project Data: Date Posted : 06/20/2001 PROJ ID : P050638 Appraisal Actual Project Name : Second Uttar Pradesh Project Costs 75.7 74.21 Basic Education Project US$M ) (US$M) Country : India Loan/ US$M ) 59.4 Loan /Credit (US$M) 59.4 Sector (s): Board: ED - Primary Cofinancing education (95%), Tertiary US$M ) (US$M) education (5%) L/C Number : C3013 Board Approval 98 FY ) (FY) Partners involved : Closing Date 09/30/2000 09/30/2000 Prepared by : Reviewed by : Group Manager : Group : Helen Abadzi Timothy A. Johnston Alain A. Barbu OEDST 2. Project Objectives and Components a. Objectives The Second Uttar Pradesh Basic Education Project responded to the government's request to reallocate presently unallocated resources in the Uttar Pradesh Basic Education Project, approved in FY1993 and ending in the year 2000, in order to deal with the surge in primary school enrollments that has resulted in large classes and an acute shortage of classrooms. The project helped the government to a) establish the capacity to enroll all 6-10 year old children; b) establish the capacity to enroll 75 percent of 11-13 year old children; and c) improve student learning achievement and completion rates. b. Components The project had two major components: 1) expanding access by opening about 600 primary and 300 upper primary schools, and constructing about 11,000 additional classrooms in the existing institutions; and 2) improving quality and retention, through appointing about 13,000 additional teachers; providing learning materials, including development of new materials for new schools; in-service training to new teachers; and establishing a school improvement fund. c. Comments on Project Cost, Financing and Dates Implementation started a year before the completion of the successful Uttar Pradesh Basic Education Project, Cr. 2509-IN. Due to the large student demand, a second project was financed in the same Uttar Pradesh districts. Both projects were completed on schedule. 3. Achievement of Relevant Objectives: The objectives were substantially achieved . The second project was to build an additional 600 primary and 307 upper primary schools and an addition 11,000 classrooms in existing primary schools . The target was exceeded; 1259 primary and 601 upper primary classrooms were built, 870 primary and 80 upper primary schools were rehabilitated, and 7,011 additional classrooms were constructed . The facilities were sufficient by all estimates to achieve the enrollment objectives . The project was primarily prepared by the borrower, whose staff showed much commitment and ownership . Along with the first Uttar Pradesh Basic Education Project, it was an innovative product, with community and school involvement in its implementation. 4. Significant Outcomes/Impacts: Enrollments increased dramatically, and gross enrollment ratios rose from 65% to 93-102%, surpassing the target of 71% For girls, the target of 65% was reached (up from 32% in 1993). Overall dropout rates decreased from 40% to about 32%, while repetition rates decreased from about 12% to 3.3%. About 5685 'para teachers' were appointed to help in areas of teacher scarcity . A nonformal program for out-of-school children, though delayed, established 800 centers by mid-term review. About 300,000 school committee members received training . About 1000 early childhood care centers were attached to primary schools . The State Council for Educational Research and Training received training funds . Several other agencies related to teacher training and management were established or strengthened. Considerable educational research has been conducted on school data. 5. Significant Shortcomings (including non-compliance with safeguard policies): Achievement tests showed some gains for grade 1, but minimal gains for later grades. Student-teacher ratios in classes have risen to 60 (baseline not available). The OED Gender Impact Assessment Study (2000) found many school education committees dormant and a number of persons who did not know they were on the committee . The education sector review for the OED Country Assistance Evaluation (2000) found published evidence that enrollments in India may be overestimated by 20%. Primary education in Uttar Pradesh has clearly made much progress through this project, but the magnitude of the outcomes is in question . The government has limited access to many studies and data to a specific cadre of civil servants . The construction quality of some buildings was questionable; An OED study on gender found almost no functioning toilets in Uttar Pradesh schools . 6. Ratings : ICR OED Review Reason for Disagreement /Comments Outcome : Highly Satisfactory Satisfactory Government enrollment and community participation data were overestimated; unless the baseline estimates of enrollment were also overestimated, the increase in enrollments under the project may be exaggerated. Given this, the outcome is considered satisfactory, rather than highly satisfactory. Institutional Dev .: Substantial Substantial Sustainability : Likely Likely Bank Performance : Highly Satisfactory Highly Satisfactory Borrower Perf .: Highly Satisfactory Highly Satisfactory Despite some dubious data and limited access to information for donors, the borrower tried very hard to implement Quality of ICR : Satisfactory NOTE: NOTE ICR rating values flagged with ' * ' don't comply with OP/BP 13.55, but are listed for completeness. 7. Lessons of Broad Applicability: - Borrower ownership of a project is critical to successful implementation, particularly in cases of innovative and difficult projects. Continuity of competent staff is critical to the quality of implementation . - Educational research and monitoring helps schools improve, and projects should finance such activities at the level of local academic institutions . - The startup of complex investments takes time, and as much planning as possible should be done before funds start flowing. Often, projects are finished by the time quality -related inputs start becoming more visible in schools . 8. Assessment Recommended? Yes No Why? OED and region disagree on outcomes . Impact evaluation should really be undertaken . 9. Comments on Quality of ICR: The ICR presents much analytical detail and is satisfactory .