Document of The World Bank

Report No:ICR0000172

IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT (IDA-30120)

ON A CREDIT

IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 111.8 MILLION (US$152 MILLION EQUIVALENT)

TO THE

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

FOR THE

THIRD DISTRICT PRIMARY EDUCATION PROJECT

NOVEMBER 30, 2006

Human Development Unit South Asia Region

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS ( Exchange Rate Effective 03/15/2006 )

Currency Unit = Rupee Rupee 1.00 = US$ 0.0285

US$ 1.00 = Rupee 46

Fiscal Year April 1 - March 31

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS AS Alternative School AWPB Annual Work Plan and Budget BAS Baseline Assessment Study BEP Bihar Education Project BRC Block Resource Center BSTPC Bihar State Textbook Publishing Corporation CAS Country Assistance Strategy CRC Cluster Resource Center CSS Centrally Sponsored Scheme DIET District Institute of Education and Training DISE District Information System of Education DO Development Objective DPEP District Primary Education Project DPO District Project Office ECE Early Childhood Education EFA Education For All EGS Education Guarantee Scheme EMIS Education Management Information System FM Financial Management GER Gross Enrollment Ratio GOB Government of Bihar GOI Government of India GOJ Government of Jharkhand HHS Household Survey ICDS Integrated Child Development Service IED Integrated Education for the Disabled JRM Joint Review Mission MAS Mid-term Assessment Study

MDG Millennium Development Goals MS Mahila Samakhya NCERT National Council of Educational Research and Training NER Net Enrollment Ratio PAD Project Appraisal Document PDO Project Development Objective QSA Quality at Supervision SAS Social Assessment Study SC Scheduled Caste SCERT State Council of Educational Research and Training SIDA Swedish International Development Agency SIEMAT State Institution of Educational Management and Training SPO State Project Office SSA Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan ST Scheduled Tribe TAS Terminal Assessment Study VEC Village Education Committee VSS Vidyalaya Shiksha Samiti

Vice President: Praful C. Patel

Country Director: Fayez S. Omar Sector Manager: Michelle Riboud

Project Team Leader: Prema Clarke

INDIA

DPEP III (BIHAR and Jharkhand)

CONTENTS

1. Basic Information 1 2. Key Dates 1 3. Ratings Summary 1 4. Sector and Theme Codes 2 5. Bank Staff 2 6. Project Context, Development Objectives and Design 3 7. Key Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcomes 6 8. Assessment of Outcomes 10 9. Assessment of Risk to Development Outcome 15 10. Assessment of Bank and Borrower Performance 16 11. Lessons Learned 19 12. Comments on Issues Raised by Borrower/Implementing Agencies/Partners 20 Annex 1. Results Framework Analysis 21 Annex 2. Restructuring 23 Annex 3. Project Costs and Financing 24 Annex 4. Outputs by Component 26 Annex 5. Economic and Financial Analysis 32 Annex 6. Bank Lending and Implementation Support/Supervision Processes 36 Annex 7. Detailed Ratings of Bank and Borrower Performance 39 Annex 8. Beneficiary Survey Result 40 Annex 9. Stakeholder Workshop Report and Results 41 Annex 10. Summary of Borrower's ICR and/or Comments on Draft ICR 42 Annex 11. Comments of Cofinanciers and Other Partners/Stakeholders 50 Annex 12. List of Supporting Documents 51 MAP 53

1

1. Basic Information

Country: India Project Name: DPEP III (BIHAR and Jharkhand)

Project ID: P038021 L/C/TF Number(s): IDA-30120 ICR Date: 11/30/2006 ICR Type: Core ICR Lending Instrument: SIL Borrower: GOI Original Total Commitment:

XDR 111.8M Disbursed Amount: XDR 91.9M

Environmental Category:C Implementing Agencies

Jharkhand Shiksha Pariyojana Parishad Bihar Shiksha Pariyojana Parishad Ministry of Human Resource Development Cofinanciers and Other External Partners

UNICEF 2. Key Dates

Process Date Process Original Date Revised / Actual Date(s)

Concept Review: 12/19/1996 Effectiveness: 03/30/1998 03/30/1998 Appraisal: 07/20/1997 Restructuring(s): Approval: 12/04/1997 Mid-term Review: 11/20/2001 Closing: 09/30/2003 03/31/2006 3. Ratings Summary 3.1 Performance Rating by ICR Outcomes: Satisfactory Risk to Development Outcome: Moderate Bank Performance: Moderately Satisfactory Borrower Performance: Satisfactory

2

3.2 Quality at Entry and Implementation Performance Indicators Implementation Performance Indicators QAG Assessments (if any) Rating:

Potential Problem Project at any time (Yes/No):

Yes Quality at Entry (QEA): None

Problem Project at any time (Yes/No):

Yes Quality of Supervision (QSA): Satisfactory

DO rating before Closing/Inactive status:

Satisfactory 4. Sector and Theme Codes

Original Actual Sector Code (as % of total Bank financing) Sub-national government administration 10 10 Pre-primary education 8 8 Primary education 72 72 Other social services 10 10

Original Priority Actual Priority Theme Code (Primary/Secondary) Improving labor markets Primary Not Applicable Participation and civic engagement Secondary Secondary Gender Secondary Primary Education for all Primary Primary 5. Bank Staff

Positions At ICR At Approval Vice President: Praful C. Patel Mieko Nishimizu Country Director: Fayez S. Omar Edwin R. Lim

Sector Manager: Michelle Riboud Ralph W. Harbison

Project Team Leader: Prema Clarke Juan Prawda ICR Team Leader: Prema Clarke ICR Primary Author: David Harding

3

6. Project Context, Development Objectives and Design

6.1 Context at Appraisal This project in Bihar and Jharkhand was part of the Government of India's (GOI) District Primary Education Program (DPEP) introduced in 1994. Over the course of a decade this program was implemented in 18 Indian states. National recognition and commitment to creating a literate population were critical to the financial and programmatic support received by DPEP. The introduction of DPEP was also influenced by the international discourse on the importance of primary education highlighted at the UN conference in Jomtien in 1991 and represented the call for donor coordination in development support. DPEP was supported by the World Bank, UK's Department for International Development, the European Commission, UNICEF, and the Netherlands. The role of UNICEF was particularly significant to DPEP III as the UNICEF supported the Bihar Education Project (BEP) in the early 1990's, which was an important precursor of the DPEP program. UNICEF continued to be involved in DPEP III as co-financier. The objectives of DPEP III for Bihar and Jharkhand were consistent with India's ongoing education development policies and programs and the World Bank's Country Assistance Strategy (CAS 1997). Low education enrollment, high drop-out rates and unacceptable low levels of education attainments were considered major constraints to the social and economic improvement of the poor and socially disadvantaged groups. The strategy for education presented in the CAS was to focus on medium-term assistance for education, with an exclusive focus on primary education given its underdeveloped status in India, its high social returns, and its importance to alleviating poverty. Within this strategy, targeting IDA's social assistance to Bihar and Jharkhand assumed paramount importance as these states represented two of the poorest states with the lowest literacy rates in India.

6.2 Original Project Development Objectives (PDO) and Key Indicators (as approved) The project assisted the Government of Bihar (GOB) to build and strengthen state, district and sub-district institutional capacity to ensure that more children, especially from socially disadvantaged groups (female, scheduled caste (SC) and scheduled tribe (ST) students, working children, children with mild to moderate learning disabilities and other children from disadvantage communities with limited access to educational opportunities), complete a five-year primary education cycle of appropriate quality in districts with low levels of literacy. The indicators for the Project Development Objectives (PDO) were: (i) Expanding access with about 400,000 additional children in the age group 6-10 especially from disadvantaged groups enrolled from the year 2000 onwards; (ii) Attendance rate would improve by about 50 percent and 660,000 children attending school regularly. The retention rate would improve by 15 percent and about 330,000 children would graduate from a five year cycle. Learning achievement scores would improve; and (iii) Improved state and district capacity to manage primary education evident in functional State Project Office (SPO) and District Project Offices (DPOs).

4

6.3 Revised PDO and Key Indicators (as approved by original approving authority), and reasons/justification No revisions.

6.4 Main Beneficiaries, original and revised The project targeted about 5.5 million children aged 6-10 in the 17 educationally disadvantaged districts of Bihar (undivided Bihar). Special attention was given to the most socially disadvantaged groups: (i) 2.75 million girls; (ii) about 825,000 SC and 500,000 ST children; and (iii) children with mild to moderate learning disabilities, working children (at the time of project design, estimated at 275,000 for each group) and other children who had limited access to educational opportunities.

6.5 Original Components (as approved) The project had three components: (a) Expanding access to primary education, particularly for the disadvantaged groups by: (i) constructing new classrooms and schools, and repairing or rehabilitating existing classrooms; (ii) sanctioning new teaching posts and appointing teachers; (iii) developing and implementing targeted interventions for socially disadvantaged groups; (iv) mobilizing school and community organizations and carrying out awareness campaigns in support of education; and (v) establishing a Village Education Committee (VEC renamed Vidyalaya Shiksha Samitis) for each school in the project districts. (b) Increasing retention and improving learning achievement in the primary school by: (i) selectively establishing new, and strengthening existing, early childhood education centers (ECEs); (ii) supporting interventions for women's education and empowerment programs; (iii) installing toilets and water facilities in the primary schools; (iv) establishing and operating block and cluster resource centers (BRCs and CRCs); (v) providing continuous in-service teacher training; (vi) developing and supplying improved textbooks and supplementary instructional materials; (vii) providing grants to schools, community organizations and individual teachers for the purchase of educational supplies and other quality inputs; and (viii) carrying out periodic learning assessments of primary level students. (c) Improving state and district capacity to manage primary education by: (i) building and strengthening state and district program management structures to review and supervise the implementation of state and district investment plans as well as annual work plans and budgets; (ii) establishing and strengthening state and district resource institutions, such as the State Council for Educational Research and Training (SCERT), the State Institution of Education Management and Training (SIEMAT) and the Bihar State Textbook Publishing Corporation (BSTPC) at the state level, and the District Institutes of Education and Training (DIETs) or equivalent institutions in all project districts, and resource groups at the state and district levels to

5

provide technical support in project implementation; (iii) strengthening state and district capacity for carrying out monitoring, research and evaluation activities; (iv) establishing a facility to support innovative approaches to improve primary education; and (v) developing training modules for micro-planning, VEC training and training of master trainers.

6.6 Revised Components

No revisions.

6.7 Other significant changes The DPEP is a Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) with nationally defined development objectives (DOs) and indicators presented in the DPEP Guidelines and included in the PAD. An additional indicator in Annex 1 of the PAD is the improvement of student attendance rates by 50 percent. For several reasons including lack of baselines, the volume of data required to measure attendance at the state level and its exclusion from the Guidelines, the project task team could not monitor this indicator. On the other hand, the DPEP Guidelines included 25 percent increase in achievement as an indicator, which was used as a target for learning in the project. In 2000, an independent state of Jharkhand was carved out of the existing state of Bihar. After the bifurcation, out of the 17 project districts, 11 districts remained in Bihar and while six were included in Jharkhand under DPEP III. The amendment to legal agreements became effective August 7, 2003. The project was extended by 2.5 years. Several factors justified the extension of the project. Sustained financing was necessary in order to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) upheld by the donor community. This was all the more relevant given that both the states in 2003 were at the threshold of accelerating their pace of implementation, and hence withdrawal of funds at this time would have unnecessarily hampered progress. As a result of ambitious budgeting and factors outside the project causing delays in implementation and project expenditure, US$30 million was reallocated to the Emergency Tsunami Reconstruction Project during the extension.

6

7. Key Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcomes

7.1 Project Preparation, Design and Quality at Entry Factors supporting effective project design: (i) The proposed project incorporated lessons learned from ongoing and completed primary education projects financed by the World Bank and other donors in the state and elsewhere. In particular, DPEP III was an extension of DPEP I & II projects operating in 11 states in India. There was evidence regarding the latter's performance from the different states, especially with regard to increasing enrollment and the role of communities. (ii) An immediate learning context was BEP initiated in 1991 in eight districts. BEP, a partnership between GOI, GOB, and UNICEF was the first Education for All (EFA) project in India. It was based on a holistic perception of basic education and established the district as the basic unit of planning and program implementation, supported by interventions at the state and village level. BEP's community mobilization, teacher motivation and training, the cluster resource approach among others have made a smooth transition to DPEP III. Mahila Samakhya (MS, Women's Empowerment) working as an integral part of BEP and continuing into DPEP III was another powerful resource. (iii) For states like Bihar and Jharkhand with very weak institutional contexts and poor performance in education, DPEP organized as a CSS with extended national involvement both financially and to a lesser extent substantively was important. (iv) The DO indicator for dropout is defined more realistically in DPEP III. In other DPEP projects as in the Guidelines, the target for this indicator was to reduce dropout to 10 percent, which even for better developed states was unrealistic. In DPEP III, the dropout was to decrease by 15 percent. Constraints to project design: (i) Teachers are the basic ingredient of education especially in the light of the expected increases in student enrollment. While the project team was cognizant of the persistence of teacher vacancies and included this issue in the legal agreements, both GOI and the Bank failed to recognize the need for a working institutional framework that would allow the state to recruit the required number of teachers in project districts. The project team could have considered the introduction of appropriate and necessary strategies or policy reforms as part of the financing agreement with the state to make this happen. (ii) Similar to the teacher issue, the preparation team accepted government assurances to hire staff for resource institutions such as DIETs, SIEMAT and SCERT. The team and GOB failed to

7

understand and address the magnitude of the procedural and financial constraints to achieving this task. (iii) The DPEP III project design did not fully analyze the political economy of Bihar described in more detail in the next section that effected implementation and managerial capacity, indicating that the accompanying risks were underestimated.

7.2 Implementation Factors supportive of implementation include the following: (i) The Centrally Sponsored nature of the project allowed the national government to be directly involved with overseeing implementation in the state. The national government's involvement also enabled the states to be exposed to the experiences of other states. (ii) The Joint Review Mechanism (JRM), which involved the Government of India (GOI) as well as the donors promoted ownership as well as collaboration in reviewing progress in implementation and achievement of DOs. (iii) The bifurcation of Bihar introduced a new environment for Jharkhand and the possibility of introducing institutions and structures that would enable rather than constrain implementation. For example, released from the dysfunctional teacher recruitment processes in Bihar, Jharkhand was able to hire regular teachers to address increases in enrollment. (iv) To improve civil works, the task team introduced the following measures: (a) a shorter program and streamlining the transfer of funds to the VECs; (b) giving priority to site selection; and (c) constructing BRCs, CRCs, schools, and additional classrooms not sequentially as first planned, but simultaneously. (v) The hiring of contract or para teachers in Bihar and Jharkhand midway through the project helped address, to some extent, the severe teacher shortage in both the states. Constraints to project implementation: (i) In Bihar, teacher shortage critically effected project implementation. Regular hiring of teachers had not taken place for a decade and the system of teacher recruitment and management in the state was dysfunctional. (ii) In Bihar there were problems with land availability for school construction. This was due to the absence of reform in the policies related to land redistribution, which, since India's independence, had taken place in most of the other states. Individual landowners proved reluctant to offer their land for the building of new schools, causing severe delays in the civil works program and therefore the expenditure on this component. There were cases where the District Magistrate and the DPO had to find legal solutions to the lack of available land by relocating

8

schools under the Municipal Corporation, constructing double-storied buildings, allocating land in existing high schools, and negotiating with individuals, urban authorities and Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) for the provision of land. (iii) Vacancies for staff members in the state and district offices in Bihar were affected by the reservation policies. In order to ensure adequate staff in the SPO and DPOs, at project commencement DPEP was exempted from hiring staff according to the reservation policies of the state. In 2001, however, the expectations changed and DPEP III had to show that they had complied with reservation regulations. The agreement was made that when the contracts expired for those hired in breach of the regulations, the contracts would not be extended. The roster for posts according to the policy took a few years to be cleared by the state's legislature and this resulted in long delays in filling vacant positions in state and district offices. (iv) While Jharkhand benefited from being separated from Bihar, it took time for the state to establish structures and institutions to support project implementation. For example, the division of civil servants between the two states left Jharkhand with a severe shortage of skilled personnel for about a year after the bifurcation. 7.3 Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Design, Implementation and Utilization Design: Indicators for the DOs were identified in detail and included targets to be achieved for enrollment, retention and learning. However, as the Quality Assurance Groups' assessment of supervision (QSA) points out, the targets identified were actual numbers rather than rates, which would have been more appropriate as rates provide proportions of the population that would benefit from the project. To collect data, GOI established the District Information System of Education (DISE), which introduced computerized data collection in project districts. Baseline (BAS), mid-term (MAS) and terminal assessments (TAS) of learning were to be conducted. In addition, the production of annual work plan and budgets (AWPBs) were to be used as evidence of increased capacity building in the project. Implementation: The Project achieved a significant amount in terms of the introduction and capacity building for a viable monitoring and evaluation system in the state and district level offices. Consistent reporting in JRMs and ISRs was made possible by the DISE or Educational Monitoring Information System (EMIS) established at state and district level, and household surveys (HHS). Most importantly, both states have adopted the DISE as their only system of data collection and monitoring. Both Bihar and Jharkhand are in the process of completing a five percent validity check of the DISE data. DISE does not include the increasing number of unrecognized private schools, Alternative Schools (AS) and Education Guarantee Schools (EGS) and therefore, may not be a full reflection of enrollment. The HHS was introduced after mid-term, which provides valuable data on private school attendance as well as out of school children at the district level. It will be important and useful for the HHS to make the distinction between never-enrolled and drop-outs. The states are trying to

9

make connections between the DISE and HHS, though this is turning out to be difficult as the data formats are entirely different. Overall, while all districts maintained their own databases, there is considerable variation in terms of the extent to which districts were able to analyze and use the data to prepare the AWPBs. Some districts have done extensive analysis, for example, one district demonstrated that dropout was actually low when private school enrollment was taken into account. In other districts the use of the data was limited. Both states need further support in collection, validation, analysis and - most importantly - the use of the wealth of data they are now required to handle. In terms of component implementation monitoring, physical targets were consistently monitored. The monitoring of quality such as an improved classroom environment and processes were more of a challenge. The states are in the process of piloting a system of quality monitoring in a few districts.

7.4 Safeguard and Fiduciary Compliance The project utilized the whole IDA credit of US$130.2 million after reallocation of US$30 million. Considering the delays in expenditure during the early years of the project, this efficient utilization is to be noted. Counterpart funds were provided on a timely basis by both governments and these funds have been fully expended over the course of the project period. The project was a Category C with regard to environmental safeguards and no issues were reported. There were no apparent problems related to procurement in the project. Although, in Bihar the use of National Competitive Bidding created delays in the procurement and distribution of textbooks for several reasons. The increases in enrollment meant that textbook production also increased dramatically stretching the capacity of the Bihar State Textbook Production Corporation. The Corporation also took time to understand and adopt Bank procurement procedures and guidelines for the printing of textbooks. In addition, there were difficulties in obtaining the quality of paper mandated for textbooks supported through Bank funds. Jharkhand procured textbooks directly from NCERT and although this simplified the procurement processes, there were still delays in distributing textbooks to schools due to transportation constraints. The capacity and attention given to the production of textbooks in both states have improved over the project period. Annual audit reports have been submitted either on time or within the grace period of three months. Financial management (FM) in the project was monitored during the JRMs. Though, FM supervision would have been further enhanced if JRMs included regular participation of FM experts. As Bank visits were restricted to two persons in the JRMs, this was not possible. A substantial amount of the project funds (almost 40 percent) have been spent by the VSS and VSS office bearers certified this expenditure. Social audit mechanisms were also in place through the PRIs.

10

7.5 Post-completion Operation/Next Phase Fiscal sustainability of the program is ensured to a large extent as the national elementary education program the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) started in 2001 will carry on and expand the DPEP III components across all districts and into upper primary schools. SSA supports the increased teacher requirements in Bihar and Jharkhand (about 70,000 para teachers have been hired in SSA districts in Bihar). The structures and systems, which have proven successful under DPEP such as the State Implementation Society, have been retained in the SSA and at the district level, project offices have merged with district departments. One threat to sustainability can be the extent to which SSA is flexible and has adequately reflected on operational issues that have emerged during DPEP. The wide spectrum of alternative education provision that have come into being under DPEP are being further expanded under SSA and these need to be addressed with cautious optimism, especially with regard to the educational quality component of these interventions. It will be important to understand the comparative performance of children in formal and alternative systems in both the states as well as to develop a systematic mechanism to track children through the bridge courses and alternative systems to ensure their mainstreaming in formal schools for continuing education. Although localized efforts at tracking are not completely absent, they are often ad hoc and conclude when the child enters the formal system.

8. Assessment of Outcomes

8.1 Relevance of Objectives, Design and Implementation The objectives of DPEP III remain highly relevant for the development of India and for the states of Bihar and Jharkhand in particular. GOI's Tenth Plan (2003-2007), focusing on India's poverty reduction strategy endorses the project objectives in terms of the continued need to improve elementary education particularly in the poorer states. In the context of targeting an average eight percent GDP growth per year nationally, the Plan calls for rapid progress on social indicators, proposing more ambitious goals than the MDGs. The Plan also highlights the importance of making schools more accountable to communities and giving local governments greater autonomy to find the best solutions. The project focus on learning outcomes also relates strongly to the Plan's message of re-focusing education on outcomes. Completion rates ensuring that all children complete the primary education cycle are also becoming increasingly important. In addition, apart from the SSA, both Bihar and Jharkhand are in dialogue with the Bank for support to a broad-based state development strategy, which includes addressing policy and institutional constraints to education reform.

8.2 Achievement of Project Development Objectives 1. Expanding access to primary education, particularly for disadvantaged groups: 400,000 additional children in the age group 6-10 years, especially from disadvantaged groups were to be enrolled from 2000 onwards. The total number of additional children enrolled in school from

11

2000 onwards in both Bihar and Jharkhand was approximately 1,650,452 in the formal system and an additional estimated 1,100,000 in EGS and AS schools. This increase is remarkably, almost seven times the targeted increase in school enrollments. In Bihar, the project has enrolled approximately 1,536,669 additional children in the formal school system and an additional estimated 700,000 children in the EGS and AS schools over the project period. GERs for the identified focus groups have witnessed an unprecedented increase: from 61 to 74 percent and from 74 to 86 percent among girls and SCs respectively. With the bifurcation, SCs were predominant in Bihar and STs in Jharkhand. Consequently, the total NER has increased from 72 to 77 percent, for girls from 60 to 70 percent, and for SCs from 70 to 82 percent. In Jharkhand, the project has enrolled approximately 113,783 additional students between 2001 and 2005 in the formal school system and an additional estimated 400,000 children in AS and EGS schools. The focus on AS and EGS was critical in Jharkhand due to the large tribal population living in remote areas with a population less than 200 and thus, falling outside the GOI norm for a regular school. The GER increased from 75 percent in 1998-99 to 98 percent in 2005-06, while for girls it increased from 69 to 90 percent during the same time period. Total NER in Jharkhand has increased from 71 to 81 percent and for girls from 68 to 71 percent. ST increases were similar to the total increase in NER. The effective civil works program in DPEP III, even though delayed has helped improve access in Bihar and Jharkhand. The involvement of the MS, strong community mobilization, ECE and teacher training seem to have addressed the issue of inequity encouraging students from disadvantaged communities to attend school. 2. Increased retention and improved learning achievement in primary schools: Retention: Retention at project commencement according to the PAD was 37.9 percent and this was to increase to 43.6 percent by the end of the project. Taking retention in Grade V at the end of the project, in Bihar in 2001, 1,250,366 students enrolled in Grade I of which 673,567 reached Grade V by 2005, giving a gross retention rate of 54 percent. In Jharkhand, out of 425,815 children enrolled in Grade I in 2000, 170,914 reached Grade V in 2004, giving a retention rate of 45 percent. It is important to note that in the relatively short time since the creation of the state in 2002, Jharkhand concentrated on expanding access to disadvantaged communities (which included its sizable ST populations) through the AS and EGS schools, and so was not able to substantially improve retention in formal schools after the state was formed. The transition from Grade to Grade has improved substantially over the project period. For example, transition from Grade I to II in Bihar, which was 63 percent in 2000 improved to 75 percent in 2005; Grade II to III from 77 percent to 93 percent; Grade III to IV from 75 to 95 percent; and Grade IV to V from 77 to 98 percent. Similar improvements are evident in Jharkhand. Both states now record mainstreaming of students in EGS and AS centers, though retention rates were not provided.

12

Learning Achievement: According to the PAD, learning achievement would improve when compared with the 1997 BAS. The DPEP Guidelines of 25 percent over the baseline added more accuracy to this measurement. The project outcomes in terms of learning achievement are impressive. In the case of Bihar, the difference between the BAS and the TAS represented for Grade II, a 65 percent improvement in the mean test score for mathematics, and 71 percent difference in language. For Grade V the increase was 59 percent and 18 percent respectively in these subjects. Overall, achievements show a marked difference between BAS and MAS scores and lesser gains between the MAS and the TAS. Girls' achievement in the TAS across both the grade levels and subjects are marginally lower than those of boys. The achievement levels of the SC community are lower than other social groups spanning approximately 4-7 percentage points. In the case of Jharkhand, the project outcomes in terms of learning achievement are also significant. The difference between the BAS and TAS for Grade II represented a 50 percent improvement in the mean test score for both mathematics and language, with corresponding 43 percent difference for the mathematics score in Grade V. The equivalent score for language were not available though improvement is evident between the BAS and the MAS. Interestingly, there has been an observed decline from MAS to TAS, which could be partially explained by the introduction of NCERT textbooks and the scheduling of the test to fit the new school calendar. It will be important in the SSA and other programs to systematically assess student learning in the AS and EGS, which was introduced and expanded during the last few years of the project. Given the many constraints regarding the recruitment of teachers and teacher development and support, the high performance on learning outcomes in Bihar is surprising, but the results have also been corroborated by a recent report by PRATHAM, a significant Indian NGO, which found that while overall learning in India was low, the achievements of Bihar was comparable or higher than levels in other more advanced Indian states. Again, these achievements in the national standardized tests are largely due to the impact of quality interventions in the project such as MS, ECE, community mobilization, teacher training and the use of instructional aids with all its limitation in terms of implementation. UNICEF was responsible for financing and implementing the development and provision of continuous in-service teacher training and the supply of instructional materials for this training. A cadre of teacher trainers in the BRCs has been created to facilitate the process of teacher training in a methodical and sustained manner. The innovations in quality such as worksheets and libraries in Jharkhand also explain these achievements. 3. Improved state and district capacity to manage primary education: The indicator specified that by June 30, 1998, the SPOs and 17 DPOs would be fully functional demonstrated by the preparation of sound and implementable AWPBs. In spite of severe constraints because of incomplete staffing, this PDO has been achieved as evidenced in the improved implementation in the second half of the project period and in the full utilization of the Credit. This was largely achieved through staff multi-tasking and taking on dual roles and responsibilities. In addition, the role of resource institutions such as DIETs, SIEMAT and SCERT was assumed by the SPO and in the case of DIETs by the BRCs. In addition, tasks were also outsourced to NGOs or other

13

institutions. In recognition of their continuing need for technical support and also of their proactive planning, both states are also seeking partnerships with well known resource institutions like XLRI (Jamshedpur), XISS (Ranchi), and A.N. Sinha Institute (Patna) to build capacity of their staff. At the sub-district level, the BRCs and VECs were effective, and with insufficient staff CRC provided some support to teachers.

8.3 Efficiency DPEP III has provided important benefits from the standpoint of increasing the number of children enrolled in primary school and allowing many to either complete the normal five-year cycle or finish it with lower repetition and dropout rates given in more detail in Annex 5. In this respect, the project was able to reach its goals. As far as the fiscal sustainability of the project is concerned, the analysis shows that the amount of resources necessary to maintain the reforms initiated under DPEP III will be more than enough under the new SSA program to allow both governments to significantly improve the quality of service delivery in the primary education sector and to build sustainable local capacity to monitor progress in educational outcomes at the state and district levels.

8.4 Justification of Overall Outcome Rating Rating: Satisfactory Solely in terms of outcomes, the project could be rated highly satisfactory as it has improved implementation and achieved its DO of enrolling large numbers of girls and children from disadvantaged communities. The project has also been able to reduce dropout and make a substantial improvement in terms of learning outcomes, which is often a challenge in education projects as identified by the Bank's Independent Evaluation Group. The ICR, however, maintains a satisfactory (S) rating for the following reasons: (i) Slow implementation in the first three years due to shortage of staff in the SPO and DPOs; and the violation of the legal covenant (PAD: Schedule 2, para 4) ensuring that 95 percent of the sanctioned teacher posts were filled in the districts, resulting in the project being under threat of suspension for almost two years and rated unsatisfactory. (ii) The qualitative improvements in teaching and learning that need to take place. While the states did relatively well in the study conducted by PRATHAM, this study also shows the low levels of learning across India (about half the children tested could not read or do simple mathematics). The JRMs and ICR team note that instruction continued in overcrowded classrooms with little change in pedagogy and the superficial impact of training on classroom practice.

14

(iii) The S rating takes into account the significant challenges that remain ahead for both states in terms of introducing a system of hiring the required number of teachers each year and reducing teacher absenteeism.

8.5 Overarching Themes, Other Outcomes and Impacts (a) Poverty Impacts, Gender Aspects, and Social Development Both states have made considerable effort in targeting the identified focus groups under DPEP, mainly girls and children belonging to the SC and ST families. These children constitute a large share of the current enrollment in the EGS and other alternative interventions being implemented by the state. The progress is evident in the decreasing gender and social gaps in key educational indicators. The woman's organization entitled Mahila Samakhya (MS) has played a significant role in directly implementing targeted initiatives as well as mainstreaming gender and social equity concerns in overall project implementation. The Mahila Samakhya initiated Jagjagi centers for 9-14 year old girls, Bal Jagjagi for pre-schoolers, and Mahila Shikshan Kendras for adolescent girls. These centers are operating effectively in remote areas empowering women and girls and creating an exceptional demand for education. A wide spectrum of alternative interventions was introduced in DPEP and will be expanded under SSA. Though, these initiatives need to be addressed with cautious optimism, especially with regard to the "quality." DPEP has also supported interventions under Integrated Education for the Disabled (IED) by identifying incidence of disability, providing aids and appliances and the construction of ramps in schools. Teachers have been trained but the actual practice of inclusive education is limited. (b) Institutional Change/Strengthening At the national level, the GOI's involvement in DPEP has increased the attention and analytical capacity to work in the education sector. GOI's role in terms of developing the state's institutional capacity to plan and manage education has been supportive and encouraged the state to effectively implement the project. At the state level, the project has had a significant impact on institutions to administer education. Additional funding in the project has facilitated the focus on collecting macro data on education indicators and developed capacity to maintain databases and analyze trends in the data. In SSA, this has now been expanded state wide. In addition, the project has highlighted the need for good institutions to train teachers and introduced the state to the processes of improving textbooks. In terms of district level impact, there was considerable variation depending on the background and skill of the director of the DPO. Some districts now have management level capacity similar to the state level, while this is limited in other districts. The education resource institutions, on the other hand, at state and district level are weak. State level institutions in Bihar including the SCERT and the SIEMAT have not become more effective during the project. This was largely due to restrictive state policies on recruitment and therefore,

15

absence of staff to be able to utilize project funds adequately. In Jharkhand, there are no corresponding state resource institutions. Plans are underway for the creation of equivalent institutions to serve the state. DIETs were envisaged in the PAD to play a strategic role in the pedagogic chain providing the link between the state and the block level institutions. However, under the control of a different GOI department than the unit responsible for this project, the capacity of the DIETs could not be developed in the project and there were only two functional DIETs in the state of Bihar. In the SSA, there has been integration of departments at the GOI level, which will facilitate better performance of DIETs.

8.6 Summary of Findings of Beneficiary Survey and/or Stakeholder Workshops

Not applicable

9. Assessment of Risk to Development Outcome Rating: Moderate The moderate risk to DOs is given for three reasons. First, the GOI under its 10th Plan and 11th Plan (in draft) is committed to achieving the MDGs in order to sustain its rapid growth, and there is a strong awareness that unless there is improvement in education service delivery and performance in the states of Bihar and Jharkhand, these goals are unlikely to be met. Second, it is understood that certain national developments including the 86th Constitutional Amendment establishing education as a fundamental right for all children between the ages of 6-14 as well as an articulation of an enabling policy framework to achieve the EFA goals also have the potential to minimize the external constraints faced by DPEP giving reform efforts a fresh impetus in these states. Third, the project has developed capacity in the SPOs and DPOs for education management that, although not as great as it could have been had a full contingent of staff been appointed, will provide direction in the planning, administration, monitoring and evaluation of education projects. Both states have begun the recruitment of program personnel. However, constraints that occurred during DPEP III will continue to pose risks to the appointment of sufficient staff in resource institutions. Both a small qualitative study supported by UNICEF and the Bank study on teacher absenteeism indicate the shrinking instructional time in Bihar. Teacher absenteeism is largely due to issues related to teacher management, which is outside the scope of DPEP as it comes under the purview of state policy. While both states are in the process of reviewing its teacher recruitment and monitoring policies, it is imperative that it does so in a timely and planned manner: addressing both the short-term (rationalization of teacher deployment, training and monitoring performance) and long-term considerations (hiring guidelines and incentive structures) in developing a professional teaching cadre, keeping in mind the pivotal role the teacher plays in ensuring both quality and equity in educational attainment. These issues are receiving closer attention in the SSA. The need to provide support to the para-teachers entering the system will be critical to ensure that quality teaching is provided for all children on an equitable basis.

16

10. Assessment of Bank and Borrower Performance

10.1 Bank (a) Bank Performance in Ensuring Quality at Entry Rating: Moderately Satisfactory Despite a sound logical framework in the project design, the strong desire on the part of the GOI and the Bank to extend DPEP into the state of Bihar, where social indicators, particularly for education access, were the worst in India, resulted in some critical oversights concerning the design of this project: (i) The project had ambitious disbursement projections and unrealistic timelines that did not take into consideration the weak institutional framework and managerial capacity, and the political economy of achieving education reform specifically in Bihar. (ii) The full implications and risks were not fully assessed concerning the filling of vacant teacher positions (although rated "high risk" in the PAD). At the time of project preparation, teacher positions had remained unfilled for about six years and little personnel data was available on existing teachers and projected needs. (iii) Key target indicators for the DOs were presented in raw numbers rather than in rates in the PAD. GER/NER and, more importantly, completion rates should have been specified from the year 2000 (to have allowed time for sound baselines to be developed). (iv) The political economy concerning the availability of land for school construction was not anticipated, nor were issues relating to the reservation policies affecting the appointment of staff in the state and district offices, or the political and legal barriers for the appointment of new teachers (even at project closing Bihar needed 115,000 more teachers to meet its current needs). The project design and disbursement projections should have reflected these constraints, which resulted in considerable difficulties in project implementation, particularly as clear signals were available from BEP, the project's predecessor. This said, however, the project fulfilled an essential role in developing education in the two states and the assurances given by the GOI and GOB during negotiations were both given and received in good faith. (b) Quality of Supervision Rating: Moderately Satisfactory DPEP III was subject to the standard supervision model governing all DPEP projects that restricted supervision to a semi-annual JRMs with the involvement of GOI, donors and the Bank in a one-week field visit of which typically three days is spent at district level. Since mission

17

staff is rotated to different states, the model did not lead to continuity in supervision. Although this model is clearly aimed at achieving harmonization and to simplify the otherwise heavy demand on the Borrower and Bank, the model also restricts direct communication with state offices as the GOI acts as a channel, and this often leads to delays. As described in Sec 7.4, the JRMs prescription of the number, duration and composition of missions resulted in no FM officer participating in the supervision missions. The QSA conducted by the Bank in 2004 identified the strongest aspects of the project were the task team's proactive way of dealing with the critical problem of teacher vacancies. In FY03 there were 24,000 teacher vacancies in project districts. The threat of project suspension at this time, when the GOB was reluctant to hire needed teachers, in violation of the legal covenant, together with the task team's dialogue with the Chief Minister and the State legislature, resulted in the government order that enabled the filling of the teacher vacancies to be passed. Throughout the project the Bank's performance was good in identifying and tackling problems relating to the identification and assessment of possible threats to the project's DOs. (c) Justification of Rating for Overall Bank Performance Rating: Moderately Satisfactory The real value added of the Bank's support in DPEP III was in providing sound knowledge of and advice on sector issues encountered by the project, particularly inputs into the institutional development and technical support aspects of the project. The strengths in the Bank's performance lay in the support and involvement in JRMs which, although restricting the Bank's direct supervision of the states concerned, provided an emphasis on measurable and time-bound outcomes. The participatory nature of project preparation ensured a high degree of ownership of the program by key stakeholders. The task management for the project was largely based in the country office allowing for regular formal and informal contact between Bank staff, GOI officials and implementing agency staff. There was good continuity of task management in the project as a result of having just two task managers for the eight year period. This resulted in consistent and close support for the program. The proactive performance of the Bank in threatening suspension in 2002 when teacher vacancies were not being filled proved an effective and timely strategy although throughout the project closer supervision to FM issues could have been substantially improved.

10.2 Borrower (a) Government Performance Rating: Moderately Satisfactory Government performance is rated moderately satisfactory for this project. GOI provided strategic interventions with the GOB and GOJ at critical stages such as when the project was under threat

18

of suspension related to the filling of teacher vacancies. The Bank's task team worked well with GOI and good working relationships were maintained throughout the project period. During the extension the task team highlighted the need to cancel some of the project funds as the amount was over ambitious and did not match with the ability of GOB and GOJ to spend this money. It would have been more efficient for GOI to cancel some amount of project funds early on during project implementation. The ICR, however, maintains a moderately satisfactory rating due to the limited support received from the state government during the first half of the project. Delays in project implementation required considerable attention both from the Bank and GOI resulting in the project being under threat of suspension for almost two years. Delays were largely due to state restrictions on hiring the required number of teachers, inability to deal creatively with shortages in staff, availability of land and appointment of skilled staff in resource institutions such as SCERT and SIEMAT. (b) Implementing Agency or Agencies Performance Rating: Satisfactory Implementing Agencies Performance: Jharkhand Shiksha Pariyojana Parishad and Bihar Shiksha Pariyojana Parishad The two implementing agencies were able to fulfill their roles and responsibilities in the project in the face of severe political constraints that, at times, put the project at risk. The factors that proved to be critical impediments of project success were due to circumstances beyond the control of the State implementing agencies. The improvements made in implementation during the second half of the project period are commendable. When the impediments were lifted the commitment of the SPOs and DPOs to implementing the project in both states was evident. (c) Justification of Rating for Overall Borrower Performance Rating: Satisfactory An overall ranking of satisfactory is given to Borrower performance taking into account the significant improvement in implementation during the second half of the project period and the substantial achievement made with regards to the DOs. The rating is also based on the delays in implementation during the early years of the project, the difficulties in ensuring adequate number of teachers and staff in project districts and the large amount of project funds that needed to be cancelled.

19

11. Lessons Learned A dedicated project unit responsible for implementation was critical, though the implications of scaling up were not sufficiently understood. There was a significant lack of personnel and focus in the education department when the project was prepared. Therefore, a separate implementation unit was critical to project implementation. Mainstreaming has now begun in SSA, which is timely and appropriate. The need for a more comprehensive and accurate definition and monitoring of project outcomes. The EMIS must include data on private schools, EGS and AS in order to provide an accurate reflection of school education. Alignment and corroboration of the different datasets such as the EMIS and HHS could help ensure reliability and validity of data. There is need to strengthen the culture of analyzing and using such data for monitoring progress, planning and management at all levels. Supervision must have an adequate focus on issues related to procurement and FM. Due to the structure of JRMs, procurement and FM were not sufficiently reviewed in DPEP projects. It will be important to include these aspects in the supervision framework and SSA has begun to do this by the inclusion of persons with the relevant expertise in the JRMs. The involvement of partner institutions was critical for implementation and encouraging participation of disadvantaged communities. UNICEF played an important role at the state level to both dialogue with the state and facilitate implementation. The Mahila Samakhya is a movement/organization with a focus on empowerment. MS programs and the strategies used for empowerment were very important to DPEP. Mobilizing community partnerships and the participation of PRIs will require strong commitment from the state. Commitment to supporting the PRIs as a statutory body lending legitimacy to community involvement in schools is important, whilst ensuring that VSSs are empowered to carry out their roles and responsibilities. There is a need to build capacity of VSSs to go further in monitoring student learning achievement as well as monitoring student and teacher attendance. There is need to understand the connections between teacher training and improving quality of classroom practice. In order to improve education quality extensive and systematic training was provided to teachers in the project. While there was improvement in test scores, the extent to which training influenced change in pedagogy is unclear. Systematic evaluation, analysis, and reflection on the content, length and frequency of training and the supports required to bring about change in classrooms are critical to ensure efficient use of resources. Project design must be inclusive of state structures. In a federal system, policy reforms at the state level and the roles of the state and district resource institutions outside the direct control of the project needs to be clearly defined. Policy reform must focus on teacher and staff recruitment

20

procedures and performance monitoring in all institutions connected with education service delivery. Links between the different institutions and their roles and responsibilities need to be specified and strengthened to support project activities. Each DPEP state has had a distinctive set of factors affecting implementation and outcomes. A careful analysis, especially of risks associated with project implementation, needs to be made in the project design particularly related to the legal and political constraints at the state level that might restrict project implementation. In the case of Bihar, the constraints were severe and included the hiring of new teachers, the allocation of land for new school construction, and the appointment of project staff.

12. Comments on Issues Raised by Borrower/Implementing Agencies/Partners

(a) Borrower/implementing agencies Comments from GOI were received on November 30, 2006 and were incorporated (b) Co-financiers No comments received. (b) Other partners and stakeholders

Not applicable

21

Annex 1. Results Framework Analysis Project Development Objectives (from Project Appraisal Document) The project assisted the Government of Bihar (GOB) to build and strengthen state, district and sub-district institutional capacity to ensure that more children, especially from socially disadvantaged groups (female, scheduled caste (SC) and scheduled tribe (ST) students, working children, children with mild to moderate learning disabilities and other children from disadvantage communities with limited access to educational opportunities), complete a five-year primary education cycle of appropriate quality in districts with low levels of literacy. The indicators for the Project Development Objectives (PDO) were: (i) Expanding access with about 400,000 additional children in the age group 6-10 especially from disadvantaged groups enrolled from the year 2000 onwards; (ii) Attendance rate would improve by about 50 percent and 660,000 children attending school regularly. The retention rate would improve by 15 percent and about 330,000 children would graduate from a five year cycle. Learning achievement scores would improve; and (iii) Improved state and district capacity to manage primary education evident in functional State Project Office (SPO) and District Project Offices (DPOs). Revised Project Development Objectives (as approved by original approving authority) No revisions. (a) PDO Indicator(s)

Indicator Baseline Value

Original Target Values (from

approval documents)

Formally Revised Target

Values

Actual Value Achieved at

Completion or Target Years

Indicator 1 : Increasing access and enrollment. Creating 400,000 new student places. Value (quantitative or Qualitative)

5323773 5723773. Bihar 5469172; Jharkhand 1833340

Date achieved 10/01/1999 03/31/2006 03/31/2006 Comments (incl. % achievement)

Indicator 2 : Retention to increase by 15 percent.

Value (quantitative or Qualitative)

37.9 43.6 (15% improvement)

Bihar 54 percent; Jharkhand 45 percent

Date achieved 10/01/1999 03/31/2006 03/30/2006 Comments (incl. % achievement)

22

Indicator 3 : Improve learning levels in schools

Value (quantitative or Qualitative)

Bihar (All): Grade II - Maths 48.35, Language 46.68. Grade V - Maths 34.41, Language 39.36. Jharkhand (All): Grade II - Maths 47.3, Language 46.8. Grade V - Maths 31.1, Language 37.91.

25 percent over baseline

Bihar (All): Grade II - Maths 79.97, Language 70.02. Grade V - Maths 54.57, Language 46.64. Jharkhand (All): Grade II - Maths 70.8, Language 70.3. Grade V - Maths 45.

Date achieved 03/15/1999 03/31/2006 03/31/2006 Comments (incl. % achievement)

Indicator 4 : Improve state and district capacities to manage education

Value (quantitative or Qualitative)

No sub-district level institutions and skilled staff.

Remaining staff hired and effective implementation continuing in the SSA.

SPOs and DPOs functional and AWPBs produced each year.

Date achieved 03/15/1999 03/31/2006 03/31/2006 Comments (incl. % achievement)

(b) Intermediate Outcome Indicator(s)

Indicator Baseline Value

Original Target Values (from

approval documents)

Formally Revised Target

Values

Actual Value Achieved at Completion or

Target Years Indicator 1 : Not applicable Value (quantitative or Qualitative)

Date achieved Comments (incl. % achievement)

23

Annex 2. Restructuring (if any) Not applicable

24

Annex 3. Project Costs and Financing (a) Project Cost by Component (in USD Million equivalent)

Components Appraisal

Estimate (USD M)

Actual/Latest Estimate (USD M)

Percentage of Appraisal

Expanding access to primary education. 90.50 87.00 96.13 Increasing retention and improving learning achievement in primary school.

65.30 54.00 82.70

Improving state and district capacity to manage primary education.

18.40 14.00 76.09

Total Baseline Cost 174.20 155.00 Physical Contingencies 13.80 Price Contingencies 3.80

Total Project Costs 191.80 Front-end fee PPF 0.00 0.00 0.00 Front-end fee IBRD 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total Financing Required 191.80 155.00

(b) Financing

Source of Funds Type of Cofinancing

Appraisal Estimate (USD

M)

Actual/Latest Estimate (USD M)

Percentage of Appraisal

Borrower 37.70 19.00 50.40 International Development Association

152.00 130.00 85.53

Un children's fund 10.00 6.00 60.00

25

(c) Disbursement Profile

26

Annex 4. Outputs by Component Component 1: Expanding access to primary education (i) Constructing new classrooms and schools and repairing or rehabilitating existing classrooms: The credit was to be used for the construction of 2,350 new schools and 4,400 new classrooms. The civil works program was slow to start and it was only in 2002 that Bihar started introducing creative ways to acquire land. The table below captures the accomplishments made in this area by both states.

Bihar Jharkhand PAD targets New targets Completed New targets CompletedNew schools 2350 1505 1252 1062 1062 New classrooms 4400 2060 1954 2888 2888

As the National Evaluation of Civil Works in DPEP (GOI, 2004) indicates, the community construction of schools and the use of cost effective technologies have been very effective in Bihar and Jharkhand. Creative designs were used such as polygonal classrooms to facilitate activity oriented teaching and learning. The innovation fund was used for building prototypes used for design and technology demonstrations. The report indicates that there could be more attention to location specific resource mapping and adaptation of the school design. JRM reports also mention the impact of the standardization of school design on enrollment. For example, some of the new schools visited during field visits were already over crowded suggesting the school size were not commensurate with the school population. The 33 percent ceiling for civil works did not allow the project to address the total civil works requirements of the school population and there are signs of a gap between the existing capacity of schools and classrooms and what is actually needed to achieve universal elementary education is widening. Although the PAD does not mention it, the AS and EGS strategy addressed the issue of enrollment especially for marginalized communities and for those populations that fell below the norm (200) eligible for the provision of a school. In Bihar 6,631 EGS centers were opened against the target set by the state of 7,679. In Jharkhand in 2002, nearly 8,000 habitations in the project districts did not have access to a school. This was given priority by the new state and by 2005 every habitation in the district as well as the state has a school/EGS within the radius of a kilometer. (ii) Sanctioning new teaching posts and appointing teachers: Teacher vacancies in the state, originally flagged by the PAD as a risk consistently constrained project implementation and performance. The 12th JRM indicates that 8,056 teachers were appointed in 2000. However, the filling up of 95 percent of the vacancies as specified in the legal agreements was an issue as a systematic process of appointing new teachers was not in place in the state. The introduction of para teachers allowed the state to address this issue to some extent. About 42,000 were hired in 2003 and subsequently 70,000 in 2005 across the state. In spite of this, the average teacher-pupil

27

ratio continues to be well over the national norm of 1:40. Given that enrollment is steadily increasing and a large percentage of teachers are nearing their retirement age, it is anticipated that a significant number of additional teachers will be required. Jharkhand provides an interesting contrast to the Bihar experience. After the creation of the new state, the administration committed itself to putting in place the requisite number of teachers required in the system. 9,576 teachers were appointed and 6,629 EGS teachers. The new teacher posts created under DPEP III have been filled through induction of 2,124 para teachers hired under the project. The state has manageable class sizes, and in 2004-05 the ratio was 1:43 for the DPEP districts. (iii) Targeting interventions for socially disadvantaged groups: Both states have made considerable effort to target focus groups identified under DPEP, mainly girls and children belonging to the SC and ST families. These children constitute a large share of the current enrollment in the EGS and other alternative interventions being implemented. The progress is evident in the overall increase in enrollment and the decreasing gender and social gaps in key educational indicators MS played a significant role in directly implementing targeted initiatives as well as mainstreaming gender and social equity concerns in over the project period. The MS initiated Jagjagi centers, Bal Jagjagi centers, and Mahila Shikshan Kendras are functioning in remote areas and are generating an awareness and demand for education that is unprecedented. While MS Bihar recently established itself as an independent society, MS Jharkhand is in the process of doing the same. It will be important to maintain a continuous link between MS and SSA to strengthen each other and capitalize on the gains made by DPEP. DPEP also supported interventions under IED. In Bihar, the identification of children with mild to moderate disabilities was done through the HHSs and VSSs involvement. Aids and appliances are being supplied with the assistance of NGOs. Para teachers appointed for formal schools, the Lok Shikshan Mitra for AS and EGS and CRCs have been trained in IED. The mission observed that some schools were provided with ramps and handrails. A similar process of identification and sensitization was also initiated in Jharkhand and the state is preparing to distribute aids and appliances. The State constituted a core group for inclusive education of children with special needs. Self-learning materials for children with disabilities were developed in collaboration with the Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU) to facilitate home-schooling as an initial step. Overall, in both states, the emphasis was on addressing physical disabilities and the issue of learning disabilities is yet to be addressed. It will also be important to ensure that training makes an impact in the classroom. (iv) Mobilizing communities and establishing VECs: Community partnerships, an enduring legacy of the BEP and further intensified under DPEP, span the whole gamut of activities from the participatory nature of micro-planning and school mapping exercises to enrollment drives and the institutionalization of VECs. Bihar's endeavor to improve primary education may be

28

attributed to many actions initiated by the state government. The Bihar State Panchayati Raj Act entrusted the responsibility to supervise and manage elementary education to the Gram Panchayats. This act instituted the formation of VSS instead of VECs, and as a result 24,276 VSS were reconstituted and made functional. Jharkhand has had no panchayat elections since 1978 and is still continuing with the original VECs, which are yet to be accorded statutory status. Project Component 2: Increasing retention and improving learning (i) Early Childhood Education: The project's programmatic emphasis on ECE was successful in addressing the issue of under-age enrollment in DPEP districts to some extent. To date, 2,162 ECE centers as well as Bal Vargs have been opened under the project in Bihar and these have been successful in enrolling nearly 85,000 children between the ages of 3-6 years. In Jharkhand nearly 1,613 centers have been created and approximately 45,211 children are currently enrolled. Considerable effort was invested in developing these centers to promote school readiness among the younger children and this needs to be further strengthened, especially the role of the Bal Vargs and its linkages to the school. While it is understood that the ICDS program will adopt all the ECE centers once DPEP comes to a close, it is important to ensure that inputs to strengthen the ECE component continue under SSA in a systematic manner to capitalize on the gains made by the DPEP project. (ii) Toilets and water facilities: The credit was to support the installation of 7,600 toilets and 8,100 water facilities. Two thirds of this was to be in Bihar and the rest in Jharkhand. Bihar put in place only 3,246 toilets and 2,227 water facilities. Jharkhand installed 1,330 toilets and 1,209 hand pumps. SSA will continue to implement these interventions. (iii) Establishing BRCs/CRCs: The BRCs and CRCs have been a critical intervention of the project introducing sub-district level focal points for education. Without the DIETs playing a role and the inability of the project to have an impact on this institution, the BRCs have had to assume the role of the DIET. The target for BRCs was 206 in the PAD. Bihar established 216 BRCs and Jharkhand 84 using community construction. The BRCs are large structures with open courtyards used for residential training. It is led by a Block Education Officer and three resource persons. BRCs provided all inservice training in DPEP. CRCs, which were to provide continuous support to schools and teachers, on the other hand, have been less successful due to staffing issues. The project was to establish 2,476 CRCs. Bihar established 1,659 CRCs and Jharkhand 530. Unlike other DPEP states, CRCs did not have full-time coordinators. Instead, due to the shortage of teachers and the fiscal situation in the state, (appointing CRC and BRC coordinators would involve establishing a separate cadre for the state) CRC staff were part-time teachers. Jharkhand recently introduced full-time CRC coordinators and as a response to increasing expectations and demands, Bihar is also intending to do the same. The work of the BRCs and CRCs are discussed in the section on inservice training.

29

(iv) Inservice teacher training: UNICEF supported the development of the ten-day inservice training modules entitled Ujala I and II. Teachers apart from those who had participated in BEP were provided inservice for the first time in their careers. In Bihar, Ujala I covering areas of motivation and child-centered instruction for Grades I and II was provided to 68,642 teachers. Ujala II covering subject content issues was provided to the same teachers. In addition, 56,539 teachers were given specific training in Hindi, English, Sanskrit, mathematics and science. Bihar, provided 30 days of training to the newly recruited para teachers. With the growing need for inservice training exacerbated by poor preservice training and induction of over 100,000 para teachers in the last two years, a "training fatigue" is evident in the state. Partly to address this, PRATHAM is now assisting the state in training para teachers for the SSA. Jharkhand introduced its own training modules. The SPO introduced worksheets in project districts and teachers were provided training in this area. Modules in mathematics and English were introduced. Similarly, training in the use of library and science experiments was provided to some teachers. The state also initiated distance learning for the newly recruited para-teachers through a 2-year Diploma in Primary Education in collaboration with IGNOU. For inservice training, IGNOU is also offering a six-month teaching certificate in different subjects. The latter is mandatory for all teachers and is facilitated with the support of the CRCs as well as BRCs. It is important to acknowledge that distance learning and the six-month training was put in place only in 2004 and, as yet, too new to observe any impact. In 2002, a qualitative study supported by UNICEF and GOB portrays the limited impact of inservice teacher training on the classroom. The preferred mode in the classroom continued to be lecturing, giving class work, writing on the board, and rote learning. Teachers rarely prepared lesson plans or engaged in systematic pupil evaluation. In addition, teachers were not equipped to address multigrade-multilevel classroom situations, an unavoidable reality in both states. This study reflects the weaknesses of the continuous support provided by the CRCs that was to facilitate teachers become confident in the new methodology. Jharkhand's decision to discontinue Ujala was partly due to this study. (v) Development and distribution of textbooks and supplementary instructional material: The textbooks are distributed through the Bihar State Text Book Publishing Corporation. The relative unattractiveness of the textbooks and the delays in delivery indicates that this area will require continued attention in SSA. Jharkhand procures its textbooks directly from NCERT, although the timely distribution is still an issue. Textbooks are attractive and the state made additional efforts to develop bridging primers for teachers in the dominant tribal languages of the state. (vi) Grants to communities and schools: Communities received Rs. 2,000 to purchase items for the school. Communities used these funds to improve the surroundings of the school or to build a gate. Occasionally, the money was used to fund classroom needs such as putting in a blackboard or buying mats etc. The strength of community involvement is emphasized in JRM reports evident in additional community contribution made to schools in the form of money, time and sometimes even providing substitute teachers. In addition, teachers received Rs. 500 each for

30

school supplies. Funds were used to create instructional aids. Due to the limited internalization of the new pedagogy, instructional aids tended to be fairly uniform and standardized. Project Component 3: Improving state and district capacity to manage primary education (i) State and district program management structures and resource institutions: Management capacity in the state and districts has undergone capacity strengthening over the project period and this is demonstrated by functioning state and district offices. Staff vacancies, however, greatly impeded the development of the full capacity of these facilities, particularly in their ability to adequately cope with the scale and pace of monitoring and evaluation, and research demands. An important component of the program was on capacity building in the SCERT, SIEMAT, and DIETs but this was only partially achieved in Bihar as appropriate and sufficient staff was not recruited to these institutions by the state due to fiscal constraints and policies related to staffing. Due to the institutional structure, DIETs were never given a clear role to play in the network of resource institutions and, at project closing, only two DIETs were functioning in Bihar and one in Jharkhand. (ii) Monitoring, research, and evaluation: Of special note, is the functioning EMIS system that was established under DPEP III and the availability of basic disaggregated data for which to monitor and plan for the education sector. The state carried out two HHSs and attempts are being made to find consistency between the EMIS data and HSS statistics, but the difference in formatting makes this a difficult task. It will be useful for HHSs to make the distinction between never-enrolled and drop-outs. There was considerable variation in the extent to which DPOs used the data in planning. For example, a few DPOs have analyzed dropout data and found that it was be much lower when private school attendance was taken into account. To monitor overall project implementation, the SPO had a monthly monitoring system of implementation and attainment of financial targets at the district level. The need to include data on unrecognized private schools, AS and EGS is critical. Both Bihar and Jharkhand are carrying out the five percent validity check of the EMIS data, which will become an annual feature in the SSA. Both states clearly need further support in collection, validation, analysis and - most importantly - the use of the wealth of data they are now required to handle. In order to address the issue of quality, the Bank conducted a workshop on monitoring quality interventions in the project. Based on the workshop, a Quality Monitoring Tool was developed independently by the two states and piloted in some districts. The data was revealing and useful for project officials. Large scale implementation of this tool will require assistance and training. Several studies were done in preparation for the ICR mission by both states. (iii) Innovative approaches to improve primary education: Both states implemented a number of innovative approaches in civil works, pedagogy, and inter-sectoral convergence in ECE to improve primary education discussed throughout this annex. Opportunities to work with civil society organizations, especially to reach out to children in urban areas were explored. In East Singhbhum , the district administration worked with the Kerala Samajam to run a second-shift

31

school for underprivileged children using the infrastructure of the private school (English-medium) and supplementing teachers' salaries. In a short time, this experience was expanded to include other private schools in the city. This is an interesting example of public-private partnership and needs to be further explored to draw lessons. Both states are also seeking partnerships with resource institutions like XLRI (Jamshedpur), XISS (Ranchi), and A.N. Sinha Institute (Patna) to build the capacity of their staff. It is important that these innovations are strengthened and scaled-up under SSA to maximize their impact. (iv) Developing training modules for micro-planning, VEC training and training of master trainers: VSSs seem to be functioning satisfactorily in the state. The training modules are elaborate and include both motivational and technical aspects. In addition, a grading system was developed to evaluate VECs according to established indicators. A GOB study on the VSS indicates a high degree of involvement. More specifically, 30 percent are performing extremely well, the majority is performing satisfactorily. The next challenge will be to facilitate VSS members to actually focus on quality of education inputs and outcomes as well as issues of social exclusion.

32

Annex 5. Economic and Financial Analysis (including assumptions in the analysis) DPEP III, which represents about US$130 million- effective IDA money disbursed during the course of the project- was intended to increase enrollment by about 400,000 children from 2000 onward and 330,000 students were expected to graduate from primary school. At the beginning of the project, 17 educationally disadvantaged districts of Bihar were selected to implement DPEP III. After the bifurcation, Jharkhand implemented DPEP through 6 educational districts. Firstly, the rates of returns to DPEP III will be estimated. Secondly, the analysis will examine the fiscal sustainability of the project in each state. I. Internal rates of return for Bihar and Jharkhand The economic benefits of the project are estimated using the enrollment, repetition and dropout information provided mainly by the DISE. More specifically, the benefits are estimated based on the additional number of children enrolled since the beginning of project as a result of more students entering the system and of a decrease in both dropout and repetition. Furthermore, the estimated costs of the project include the expenditure during the implementation as well as the indirect costs incurred as a result of some students enrolling in school because of the project. The analysis in both states is conducted using the following assumptions:

• The exchange rate was set at Rs.45 per US dollar; • We set alternative assumptions regarding the share of net beneficiaries of the

project (20 and 50 percent of students' enrolled benefit from the project. Net beneficiaries are understood as children being enrolled and the number of dropouts and repetition reduced as a result of the project;

• The mean wage rate of a primary graduate and the opportunity cost of attending primary school are both computed from the National Sample Survey of 2004. The survey shows that the average hourly wage of an illiterate person in Bihar is about Rs.3.6 whereas that of a primary graduate is about Rs.4.6. On the other hand, the average hourly wage of an illiterate person in Jharkhand is about Rs.4.2 whereas that of a primary graduate is about Rs.7.6. In both states, the direct cost of sending children to school is assumed to be zero. The opportunity cost is computed using the average earnings of an illiterate person.

The total enrollment at the end of the project was about 5.5 million and 1.9 million in Bihar and Jharkhand, respectively. If we use a conservative estimate of 20 percent of enrolled children as being the project's net beneficiaries, the rate of return under this assumption is shown to be 12.6 percent and 16.8 percent in Bihar and Jharkhand, respectively (Table 1). When we use a more realistic assumption of 50 percent of enrolled children benefiting from the project, the internal rate of return rises to 19.4 percent and 22.1 percent respectively (Table 1). Table 1 seems to suggest that efforts to improve service delivery in primary education and to effectively provide quality education- especially to children from poor families, hold huge payoffs, particularly since the externalities of investing in children's education are not accounted for in the analysis.

33

Table 1: Internal Rates of Return of the Project in Bihar and Jharkhand

II. Fiscal sustainability in Bihar Due to the deterioration of Bihar state finances, the gross fiscal deficit has risen from 3.1 percent GDP in 1991-92 to 5.1 percent in 2003-04. The recurrent problems of large fiscal deficits, heavy debt burden, institutional weaknesses in expenditure management and budget implementation have been magnified by the separation of Jharkhand from Bihar. In this section, we run two simulations on how the education budget is allocated to cover primary education expenditures in order to achieve the fiscal sustainability of DPEP III. In the first set of simulations, we have assumed that the share of primary education expenditure (excluding the project cost) as a percentage of the overall education expenditure remains the same at 75 percent as in year 2004/2005 whereas in the second set of simulations, we allow for change. Further, the share of education expenditure as a percentage of GDP is kept constant at 6.8 percent whereas the share of government spending as a percentage of GDP is kept at 33 percent, across all simulations. It is worth noting that the high share of the education budget going to primary education would need to be reallocated to higher levels of education as more children are entering secondary school. In the low case scenario, we assume an annual growth rate of 3 percent. The amount of government expenditure devoted to primary education (including the DPEP cost) is expected to rise from US$793.5 million to US$836.2 million. That amount will increase to 891.1 million as the share of primary to total education expenditure goes up from 75 percent to 80 percent. On the other hand, the high case scenario which assumes a 6 percent annual GDP growth rate shows an increase of spending to US$938.1 million and US$999.8 million respectively under the case of constant and varying share of primary education as a percentage of total education spending. As a result, the share of education expenditure (including DPEP cost) as a percentage of government spending ranges from 15.5 percent to 16.5 percent under both types of simulations. Based on our simulations, the share of primary education expenditure as a percentage of total education spending should not increase by more than 6.1 percent. Similarly, the share of primary education expenditure in total government expenditure will not rise by more than 1.2 percent. Given the introduction the SSA program, these expenditures should be sustainable. With the amount of resources mobilized through the SSA, GOB will be able to position itself to significantly improve the quality of service delivery in the primary education sector, to increase

Share of net beneficiaries (%) 20% 50% Bihar 12.6 19.4 Jharkhand 16.8 22.1

34

learning achievement and to ameliorate the capacity to implement and monitor DOs at the state and district levels.

Table 2: Bihar education expenditure during DPEP III (US$ million)

III Fiscal sustainability in Jharkhand

As we did for Bihar, we simulate how the education budget is allocated to finance primary education expenditures in order to meet the new objectives proclaimed under SSA. In the first set of simulations, we have assumed that the share of primary education expenditure (excluding the project cost) as a percentage of the overall education expenditure remains constant at 78.6 percent in year 2004/2005 whereas in the second set of simulations, we allow for a varying share. In addition, the share of education expenditure as a percentage of GDP is kept constant at 4 percent whereas the share of government spending as a percentage of GDP is kept at about 25 percent in both cases of constant and changing shares of primary education as a percentage of total education expenditure. The share of education in GDP is assumed to be 3 percent in 1997/98. Furthermore, the share of primary education as a percentage of total education spending is assumed to be about 79 percent in 1997/98. In the low case scenario, we assume an annual growth rate of 3 percent. The amount of government expenditure devoted to primary education (including the DPEP cost) is expected to rise from US$346.7 million to US$379.7 million. That amount will increase to US$400.5 million as the share of primary to total education expenditure goes up from 80.7 percent to 85.2 percent. On the other hand, the high case scenario which assumes a 6 percent annual GDP growth rate shows an increase of spending to US$441.2 million and US$465.5 million respectively under the case of constant and varying shares of primary education as a percentage of total education spending.

Constant Share Increasing Share

1997/98 2004/05 2006/07 (Low)

2006/07 (High)

2006/07 (Low)

2006/07 (High)

GDP 15344.3 15319.8 16252.8 18261.6 16252.8 18261.6 Tot Gov. Expenditures 2418.5 5083.8 5393.4 6060.0 5393.4 6060.0 Tot. Edu. Spending 630.5 1036.0 1099.1 1234.9 1099.1 1234.9 as % of GDP 4.1% 6.8% 6.8% 6.8% 6.8% 6.8% Primary Education Expenditures 472.9 777.0 824.3 926.2 879.2 987.9 as % Tot. Edu. Exp. 75% 75% 75% 75% 80% 80% as % Tot. Gov. Exp. 19.6% 15.3% 15.3% 15.3% 16.3% 16.3% Total Project Cost 0.6 16.5 11.9 11.9 11.9 11.9 Total Primary Edu. Expend. (including project cost) 473.5 793.5 836.2 938.1 891.1 999.8

as % Tot. Edu 75.1% 76.6% 76.1% 76.0% 81.1% 81.0% as % Tot. Gov. Exp. 19.6% 15.6% 15.5% 15.5% 16.5% 16.5%

35

As a result, the share of primary education expenditure (including DPEP cost) as a percentage of government spending ranges from 15.5 percent to 16.5 percent under both set of simulations. Based on our simulations, the share of primary education expenditure as a percentage of total education spending should not increase by more than 6.6 percent. Similarly, the share of primary education expenditure in total government expenditure will not rise by more than 1 percent. Therefore, the amount of resources necessary to maintain the reforms initiated under DPEP III in Jharkhand will be supported through the SSA.

Table 3: Jharkhand education expenditure during DPEP III (US$ million)

Constant Share Increasing Share

1997/98 2004/05 2006/07 (Low)

2006/07 (High)

2006/07 (Low)

2006/07 (High)

GDP 6928.9 10921.9 11813.1 13778.8 11813.1 13778.8 Tot Gov. Expenditures 1737.5 2738.8 2962.2 3455.2 2962.2 3455.2 Tot. Edu. Spending 207.9 434.8 470.3 548.5 470.3 548.5 as % of GDP 3.0% 3.98% 3.98% 3.98% 3.98% 3.98% Primary Education Expenditures 163.3 341.6 369.5 431.0 390.3 455.3

as % Tot. Edu. Exp. 78.6% 78.6% 78.6% 78.6% 83.0% 83.0% as % Tot. Gov. Exp. 9.4% 12.5% 12.5% 12.5% 13.2% 13.2% Total Project Cost 2.99 5.08 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2 as % Tot. Edu 80.0% 79.7% 80.7% 80.4% 85.2% 84.9% as % Tot. Gov. Exp. 9.6% 12.7% 12.8% 12.8% 13.5% 13.5%

36

Annex 6. Bank Lending and Implementation Support/Supervision Processes (a) Task Team members

Names Title Unit Responsibility/SpecialtyLending Audrey Aarons Consultant SASHD Education sector analysis

Kevin William Casey Lead Procurement Specialist

ECSPS Procurement

Philip M. Cohen Consultant EASHD Education sector analysis Gertrude Cooper Program Assistant SASHD David Harding Sr Education Spec. WBIHD Education sector analysis

James Keith Hinchliffe Lead Education Economist

AFTH3 Economic sector analysis

Susan E. Hirshberg Sr Education Spec. SASHD Education sector analysis N. K. Jangira Consultant SASHD Agustin Litvak Consultant OPCPR Procurement Cecil M. Perera Sr Disbursement Off. LOAG2 FM analysis Margaret Png Sr Counsel LEGEA Legal Sudesh Ponnappa Program Assistant EACNF Administration Juan Prawda Consultant OPCIL Task Leader Vaikalathur J. Ravishankar

Lead Economist SASPR Economic analysis

Salman M. A. Salman Lead Counsel LEGEN Legal Kalpana Seethepalli E T Consultant EASIN Research analyst Samuel Thangaraj Consultant SASPR Adriaan M. Verspoor Consultant WBIHD Supervision/ICR Syed I. Ahmed Lead Counsel LEGMS Legal Shellka Arora Legal Associate SARIM Legal Sunil Batra Consultant SASHD 15th JRM member Philip Beauregard Sr Counsel LEGMS Legal Vincent M. Greaney Consultant MNSHD 14th JRM member Renu Gupta Program Assistant SASHD Edward H. Heneveld Consultant QAG 13th JRM member N. K. Jangira Consultant SASHD 19th JRM member Oza Jayshree Consultant SASHD ICR mission

37

Venita Kaul Sr Education Spec. SASHD Education sector analysis Santhanam Krishnan Consultant SARPS

Tanuj Mathur Sr Financial Management Specia

SARFM FM Specialist

Bertha M. Mburugu Program Assistant SASHD Administration/OperationsJuan Prawda Consultant OPCIL 18th JRM member Michelle Riboud Sector Manager SASHD Sector Manager Deepa Sankar Education Economist SASHD Shashi K. Shrivastava Sr Education Spec. SASHD Operations Advisor (b) Ratings of Project Performance in ISRs

No. Date ISR Archived DO IP Actual Disbursements

(USD M) 1 02/24/1998 Highly Satisfactory Highly Satisfactory 0.00 2 04/09/1998 Satisfactory Satisfactory 4.50 3 12/04/1998 Satisfactory Satisfactory 5.74 4 05/14/1999 Satisfactory Satisfactory 12.39 5 12/30/1999 Satisfactory Satisfactory 17.88 6 06/06/2000 Satisfactory Satisfactory 20.95 7 12/21/2000 Satisfactory Satisfactory 24.71 8 06/14/2001 Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory 28.57 9 12/28/2001 Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory 33.31 10 06/27/2002 Satisfactory Satisfactory 37.75 11 12/23/2002 Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory 38.85 12 05/29/2003 Satisfactory Satisfactory 42.15 13 11/25/2003 Satisfactory Satisfactory 64.16 14 03/30/2004 Satisfactory Satisfactory 74.99 15 08/24/2004 Satisfactory Satisfactory 79.39

16 03/03/2005 Moderately Satisfactory

Moderately Satisfactory

97.11

17 09/01/2005 Moderately Satisfactory

Satisfactory 107.49

18 02/27/2006 Satisfactory Satisfactory 114.08

38

(c) Staff Time and Cost

Staff Time and Cost (Bank Budget Only)

Stage of Project Cycle No. of staff weeks

USD Thousands (including travel and

consultant costs) Lending

FY96 13.62 FY97 242.12 FY98 127.10 FY99 0.00 FY00 0.00 FY01 0.00 FY02 0.00 FY03 0.00 FY04 0.00 FY05 0.00 FY06 0.00 FY07 0.00

Total: 382.84 Supervision/ICR

FY96 0.00 FY97 0.00 FY98 33.83 FY99 39.01 FY00 24 53.64 FY01 15 22.20 FY02 14 35.99 FY03 12 41.65 FY04 12 23.48 FY05 13 31.90 FY06 28 92.84 FY07 5 21.49

Total: 123 396.03

39

Annex 7. Detailed Ratings of Bank and Borrower Performance

Bank Ratings Borrower Ratings Ensuring Quality at Entry:

Moderately Satisfactory Government: Moderately Satisfactory

Quality of Supervision: Moderately Satisfactory Implementing Agency/Agencies:

Satisfactory

Overall Bank Performance:

Moderately Satisfactory Overall Borrower Performance:

Satisfactory

40

Annex 8. Beneficiary Survey Results (if any) Not applicable.

41

Annex 9. Stakeholder Workshop Report and Results (if any) Not applicable.

42

Annex 10. Summary of Borrower's ICR and/or Comments on Draft ICR

BIHAR REFLECTION PAPER

Scenario prior to DPEP: The overall literacy rate in the state was 38.48 percent (All India 52.20 percent). The average literacy rate of identified 17 districts (27 revenue districts) for DPEP was 38.57 percent in the original state of Bihar. Issues related to education in Bihar included (a) Inadequate access and enrolment, (b) low retention of students in the School, (c) low level of quality, (d) inequities in relation to various social groups, and (e) weak management and inadequate institutional support. The GER for the 17 DPEP districts was 64.28 percent. The average retention rate for these districts was only 37.92 percent and especially low for girls, SCs/STs and minorities. The achievement levels were generally low both in language and mathematics. The Primary education system was not streamlined and well managed. There was no reliable record of enrolment, 'out of school' children existed but there was no idea of their location. Although, DISE was introduced in1996-97, very few districts completed DISE data. And this data was deemed unreliable. There were no support institutions for the capacity building of educational managers in the State. Project Design: The design of the project, based on BEP experience, was fairly flexible and allowed us to incorporate strategies and interventions as per the requirements worked out by state and district teams. The Guidelines did not constrain but supported innovation. The appraisal process was also fairly liberal and supportive of new ideas. A BEP district had to work with a non-BEP district for planning as well as implementation. Core teams supported the planning process in all districts. Encouraged by the national level support group and MHRD, the members of the team were trained. The lack of habitation-based data prevented evidence-based targeting of areas/pockets for special focus. The attention of most interventions was focused on all areas uniformly irrespective of the educational disadvantage. Project planning: DPEP chose the project mode of implementation. District level coordinators were appointed. Our considered view is that, at that point of time, the elementary education system was not geared at all for such a fast-paced program of implementation but because of the project mode it brought good results. The infusion of new people from outside the government brought in a different work-culture. The participatory approach to planning and decision making in DPEP was unique. District specific needs were identified and through community sharing appropriate strategies evolved. For transforming vision into reality several "Visioning workshops" were organized at the State, District and Block levels. At state level, planning core team was formed consisting BEP personnel, member of mission task force, representatives from UNICEF, SCERT, Directorate Primary Education, Directorate Mass Education, Textbook Publishing Corporation and A.N. Sinha Institute of Social Science. Similarly, at the district, block, cluster and school level and in this way the AWPB was based on participation and a realistic assessment of grass root level issues. In addition, functional area wise workshops were held at district and state level.

43

Considerable planning skills have been developed at district level, though there is room for improvement. After bifurcation, DPEP was implemented in 11 districts in Bihar with most of the tribal population in Jharkhand. Project Implementation: Community mobilization and participation focused on empowerment, this component was one of the successes of the program. The establishment of VECs and now VSS in every school was process oriented made up of parents, community members and school officials. Several rounds of training and orientation of VEC members have been conducted in all DPEP district. Four modules (five days, two days and two one-day) were developed and implemented. The VECs are very active and have also involved themselves in classroom transaction. The entire construction program under DPEP has been carried out through VECs/VSSs. In the minority dominated areas, religious leaders have also been involved to promote education. A study by the "Skill Development Institute," Lucknow on 1307 VSS members and 1434 community members attests to the widespread provision of training, and the positive impact on the civil works program and on enrollment. While there was variation in the extent to which members attended meetings, 90 percent of the member reported to have received one day training and 71 percent two days. 60 percent of community members reported that VSS members met with them to encourage them to send their children to school. The relationship of VSS to school authorities was noted to be positive and constructive. Civil work using the community transformed the attitudinal status of all concerned by ensuring contract less construction, and involving the stakeholders in the process. It inculcated a sense of ownership and pride in timely completion and innovative design using cost effective technology. With regard to new schools, there were difficulties in acquiring land, which had to be overcome. Alternative schools: There were two models of Alternative Schools. Apna Vidyalaya for 6-11 years children and Angana Vidyalaya for 9-14 years adolescent girls. After inception of DPEP-III, 1354 Apna and 1621 Angana Vidyalaya were opened. Mata Samitees were responsible (Mothers association) for appointing instructors, deciding timing and location of centers. Based on the tremendous response to Apna/Angana Vidyalayas, 6185 additional AS centers were opened in DPEP district. The special feature of the model was to help the learners master the primary level competencies in language, mathematics and Environmental studies. Early Childhood Education: 805 ECE centers were set up and studies in four districts indicate that children from these centers do better than children without this background. Strong community participation is evident and again Mata Samittees select the teacher and oversee the functioning of these centers. "Bal varga" to address the needs of under age children in formal schools was introduced in the project. Mahila Samkhya: MS Bihar has a presence in over 2,133 villages in 34 blocks of nine districts of Bihar. The MS strives to create an environment wherein the women will 'comprehend' the need for, and 'demand', education. "Education for empowerment" is the fundamental belief underlying MS strategies, and this belief is brought to life through various interventions.

44

(i) Jagjagi Kendras: (Jag is world; jagi is awakening). These are day schools for girls in the 9-15 age group and for women with incomplete or no primary education. The aim is to wake girls from their 'enforced slumber' by opening the windows of education and allowing the light of knowledge to reach them. Over 12,000 girls have been mainstreamed from these centers. (ii) Bal Jagjagi Kendras: These centers are preschools designed for three to five year olds established in a village that does not have an ICDS center. Till date over 18,000 children from these centers have entered formal school. (iii) The Mahila Shikshan Kendra (MSK): These are residential Education-cum-Training Centers where semi-literate women and adolescent girls can complete primary education, and where illiterate women can acquire basic skills. The main purpose is to develop women community leaders and these centers have helped delay the age of marriage. Till date 776 girls have been mainstreamed to formal schools and 1038 girls are associated with various self employment schemes. Integrated Education for Disable Children(IED ): All children with disabilities have been identified through the Household Survey and aids and appliances have been supplied with the assistance of NGOs. The CRCs and School teachers have been trained in IED. Community awareness has also been carried out. A training module 'Pahal' on Inclusive Education has been developed and one day training has been imparted to community leaders/VSS members on this module. Schools are also now provided with ramps and handrails. Attention will now need to be given to the inclusion of children with disabilities within the school and classroom. The non-availability of properly qualified and trained personnel and NGOs in the state is an issue. Textbook revision/development and production: A twenty point formula based on workshops with teachers, parents, and educationist has evolved for the guidance of writer and reviewers. For example some of the points made the need for a text-cum-workbook, child centeredness in the text, suitability for multigrade situations and so on. Three workshops were organized in which teachers, VEC member, local writers and educationists prepared draft versions which were analyzed and improved by the SPO. Experts along with SCERT representative revised the drafts and these drafts were reviewed with senior persons/NCERT experts. Pilot testing of the textbooks were done and feedback incorporated. In-service training: As the pre-service training course was not conducted in the state for a long time, a large number of teachers did not have any kind of training prior to DPEP. A total of 68,642 teachers were trained in the Ujala –I module (pedagogical needs, practices and joyful learning) based on Grades I and II and in the consecutive years about 55941 teachers were trained in the 'Ujala-II' module based on subject content issues in Grades III, IV and V. Training was participatory and peers as well as resource persons took part. In 2000-01, subject specific training modules on Hindi, English, Sanskrit, mathematics and science were developed and about 56539 teachers trained. An activity book "Seekhna Aassan hai" was developed and sent to schools/CRCs.

45

One concern has been the limited impact of the training program in the classroom. In some cases the targets for classroom change were too ambitious. The inadequate involvement of educational administrators may have also contributed to the limited gains from training programs. The issue of children with a home language different from the medium of instruction did not receive adequate attention. This is a major problem in Bihar. Research Studie : A total 40 research and evaluation studies were carried out to asses the project impact. The Component Evaluation has been carried out by four external agencies and final reports have been received. SIEMAT is conducting a study on "Dynamics of Grade I Enrolment" and "Grade Repetitions." Financial Management and procurement: DPEP-III followed IDA procurement guidelines. The SIS has adopted the IDA guidelines and the policy of Internal Audit by qualified Chartered Accountants (CA) firms for all DPOs. There is also a system of Internal Supervision Missions consisting of Program, Finance & technical experts that visit DPOs periodically and facilitate discussion of issues and also act as an internal checking authority. Annual statutory audit of the books of accounts of the SPO and the DPOs are done by the CA firms appointed by the SIS Executive Committee as statutory auditors. There is also a provision for a GOI audit. The Accountant General has conducted test audit in 2003 and a Performance audit in 2002. Issues raised by the different auditors have been complied with. The JRM as constituted by GOI and Funding agencies conducted periodical supervision of the program. Sustainability: The sustainability of DPEP is fairly clear with the implementation of SSA. The SIS headed by an officer of the rank of Commissioner and Secretary implements SSA. At the district level, the District Superintendent of Education (DSE) has become the ex-officio District Project Coordinator and the Block Education Extension Officer (BEEO) at the block level is the ex-officio Block Resource Centre Coordinator (BRCC). The ICDS has adopted all the ECE centers and the MS program will now be implemented by an independent society. An effort to sustain State Level Academic and management institutions like the SIEMAT is being made. Presently SIEMAT is sustained from SSA funds. The institution of CRC and BRC will be continued under SSA. The CRC will be reorganized to make it coterminous with the Gram Panchayat. After DPEP, the salary of teachers working in new primary schools will be paid by GOB. Lessons learnt from DPEP: i) Enactment of the VSS Act was a landmark achievement. ii) The planning process in SSA has followed the bottom up approach of DPEP. iii) The use of data for planning of interventions has been made mandatory. iv) The gap of infrastructure is being addressed under SSA. v) Convergence is now been worked out with ICDS. Instead of setting up ECE centers, the focus is on now "Bal-Varga" setting in school premises. vi) The IED program has now been streamlined. NGOs are involved in several districts. vii) A major program has been launched for deprived urban children which was earlier a neglected segment. The approach of 'bridge courses' for out of school children has been adopted in a big way. viii) The approach of forming subject wise resource groups with persons from colleges, universities, high schools and

46

middle schools has been adopted for preparation of upper primary textbooks. ix) Institutional capacity building of SCERT, SIEMAT, DIETs, BRCs and CRCs is to be addressed more emphatically. x) The mechanism for evaluation of learners is to be rationalized in terms of continuous and comprehensive evaluation. World Bank performance: Visits of the JRMs at regular intervals were the biggest strength of the World Bank. Regular contact of the Bank during the implementation of the program was its uniqueness. At no point during the implementation of DPEP was there any pressure on the state for change of priorities or interventions. Organization of the Capacity Building workshops by IDA and the support of their personnel especially of Ms. Prema Clarke were remarkable. The visits to Washington D.C. organized by the Bank proved to be very useful. Bureaus performance: The DPEP/Elementary Education Bureau has been largely supportive to the State DPEP Society and has also helped in arranging for technical assistance whenever requested. In the past four years, due to the initiations of SSA, the monitoring by the Bureau for DPEP has been less frequent and less intensive.

JHARKHAND REFLECTION PAPER

Introduction: Jharkhand is one of the new states in India formed on 15 November 2000, from erstwhile state of Bihar. The mainly tribal population has an overall literacy rate of 54.13percent, which is well below the national average. Accessibility is an issue in Jharkhand, due to its hilly terrain. Multiple dialects and tribal languages add to the complexity of the education situation. In addition, absence of school in inaccessible habitations, poor PTR, high drop out rate, migration into the state, gender disparity were impediments to education providers when DPEP was initiated in the 6 projects districts (Chatra, Hazaribagh, Ranchi, East Singhbhum, West Singhbhum, Dumka). The GER for the 6 DPEP districts was 75 percent in 1998 and dropout was 54.7 percent (girls: 55.9 percent). Project design and the Planning process: The design of the project was fairly flexible and allowed planners and implementers to design district specific strategies. Freedom for trial and error helped the workers to learn, gave them confidence to make decisions and enhanced their level of motivation. Above all, the project appraisal process was very friendly and supportive. A participatory planning and decision making approach was adopted in DPEP. Habitation based plans were developed through micro planning, use of PRA techniques, and local community and NGOs participation. This strategy helped strengthen community mobilization- the key word for DPEP. Facilitated by core teams, tate level "visioning workshops" were held to transform perceptions and provide direction. Assistance of agencies like UNICEF, XLRI, XISS and other national agencies were sought when required. At district level AWP&B were prepared involving personnel of different levels-district, block, cluster, school, village prior to formation of state's AWPB.

47

Project implementation: The District Commissioner acted as the ex-officio and District Program Coordinator. At state level, the State Project Director (SPD) - a full time GOI officer headed DPEP. Implementation in project mode and engagement of some dynamic people in crucial positions both at state and district levels and from outside the government was important. A Mission Task Force met regularly to discuss problems, solve issues and create convergence among the various components. Reflection cum review meetings were organized by the SPD with all DPOs at SPO every month to assess the progress of the program. 17 Executive Committee Meetings and 3 General Council Meetings were held. Pedagogy renewal: The state government adopted the Central Board of Secondary Education curriculum and NCERT text books for Grades I to X. A curriculum coverage plan was developed for better classroom transaction by teachers (made available to each school). Child friendly worksheets were introduced in 10597 schools/EGS centers enabling teachers to assess achievement of learners over a period of time. In addition, 26,831 teachers were provided Mathematics training; 15,751 teachers received English training; and 20,210 teachers were provided science training. Science and Math kits were procured for each school as TLM. In addition, 12,369 para teachers and 7097 EGS teachers were given 10 days induction training. Library hours were introduced in 14190 schools with objectives to improve reading and comprehension skill of learners and to imbibe the habit of self learning. To address issues related to quality learning, district staff attended a workshops organized at Patna and Ranchi by the World Bank. As outcome of the workshop quality indicators and tools for monitoring were identified. A training program was organized for BRCs and CRCs to orient district level teams on quality monitoring tools prior to its introduction in districts in a phased manner. Community mobilization: VECs were formed with 50 percent members from among parents. Mata Samities (mother's group) were formed in areas where alternative schools were established. Training module focused on micro planning, the development of schools, and quality of learning and these modules were updated from time to time. VEC and Mata Samities were involved with micro planning exercises done at the habitation level. Exposure visits for VECs were also organized to exchange views and learn through sharing. Similarly, through state level participatory workshops, brochures, pamphlets, posters, and booklets were developed for IED. Besides this, wall writings, rallies, bal melas, ma-beti melas were organized in DPEP districts for awareness generation. Gender development and alternative schools: The MS program spread from 1136 villages in 2000-01 to 2911 villages during 2005-06. Similar to the programs in Bihar, interventions like Jagjagi Kendras, Bal Jagjagis, MSKs, Kishories Sanghs are in full operation. Alternative schools were provided for two sets of children: (a) children living in habitations without schools; and (b) children living in difficult situations. For the first category of children, 7097 EGS centers were opened and for the second group of children 126 AS centers often with the help of NGOs were opened. Today, there are no habitations without a school or EGS and a total of 4,03,388 children

48

were reached through these interventions. out through EGS & AIE centres in DPEP districts from 2002-2006. IED and Tribal education: The greatest problem faced by the state is the non availability of local resource persons and trainers in adequate numbers to meet the state demand.15772 children (6-11 age-group) were identified in DPEP districts with some form of disability. IED state coordinators provided training to CRCs. 2174 teachers and resource persons were trained at the district level. Sensitization camps were organized for teachers/community members. Ramps were constructed in 260 schools and self learning materials are being prepared. Aids and appliances were given to over 2527 children. 6 NGOs were involved to train parents of children with special needs. DPEP Tribal education: Jharkhand established a core group to address various issues related to the education of tribal children. The Majority of the schools sanctioned under DPEP, were opened in tribal dominated areas. Residential camps were run for children of from very remote tribe. Adolescent tribal girls were motivated to join DPEP programs and care was taken to select a tribal as a VEC president in tribal areas. Tribal songs, folk lore, and reading materials in Mundari, Oraon, Santhali and Kharia were developed in addition to bridge materials to help tribal children switch from their mother tongue to Hindi. Similarly, materials were developed for non tribal teachers to get familiarized with tribal culture, history etc. Distance education: Teleconferencing facilities were provided to all DPEP districts. A radio program "Tarang" relayed weekly from 6 centers supported the work of AS and EGS teachers. Capacity building of CRCs was done through biweekly programs called "PRERANA." "Sune Kahani" and yoga were broadcast daily and "NAYA BIHAN" was relayed weekly for ECE centers. Foundation training to 50 teachers on IED was organized in collaboration with Bhuj University. 4639 teachers were trained through distance education courses. Civil works: A 12 day professional program followed by 5 day hands-on training and recurrent training was provided for engineers. In addition, three-day pre construction training was provided to community members. Training in cost effective construction was given to masons. Use of pedagogically improved designs and cost effective construction through alternative technologies allowed for significant savings even while ensuring high quality construction. Child friendly elements were also included in the construction. Construction work was done by VECs (Bhavan Nirman Samity) except for BRC and site supervision was done by engineers and diploma holder civil supervisors. Early childhood education: 1613 ECE centers reaching out to 45211 children were run in DPEP districts. Mothers' groups played a key role in opening of ECE centers. They selected the sites, the teachers, helped run the center and prepared materials. These groups and teachers were trained. Research & evaluation: A State Resource Group on research and evaluation was formed under the leadership of the SPO. State research and evaluation teams organized orientation workshops

49

for district functionaries to form a district core team and build their capacity. Studies conducted inDPEP districts were: classroom observations in selected districts, study of household data by DPO Hazaribagh, Impact of worksheet on student's attendance and achievement by DPO Ranchi, Dumka, West Singhbhum; and Drop out from Grades I to II with reasons in Dumka. Local research institutions provided support. EMIS:SPO has developed a strong EMIS cell with LAN connectivity and all DPEP districts are equipped with sufficient number of PIV terminals and other peripherals/software. Series of capacity building workshops were organized for district level EMIS personnel on the new version of DISE.

50

Annex 11. Comments of Cofinanciers and Other Partners/Stakeholders The UNICEF participated in the Bank's ICR mission.

51

Annex 12. List of Supporting Documents Joint Supervision Review Mission Reports 1. Eleventh Joint Review Mission (March 30, 2000 - April 17, 2000). 1. Twelfth Joint Review Mission (November 9, 2000 - November 27, 2000). 2. Thirteenth Joint Review Mission (April 19, 2001 - May 5, 2001). 3. Fourteenth Joint Review Mission (November 17, 2001- December 5, 2001). 4. Fifteenth Joint Review Mission (April 18, 2002 - May 5, 2002). 5. Sixteenth Joint Review Mission (November 17, 2002 - November 23, 2002). 6. Seventeenth Joint Review Mission (April 23, 2003-April 28, 2003). 7. Eighteenth Joint Review Mission (November 25, 2003 - November 30, 2003. 8. Nineteenth Joint Review Mission (July 8, 2004 - July 21, 2004). 9. Twentieth Joint Review Mission (November 29, 2004 - December 13, 2004). 10. Twenty-first Joint Review Mission (May 5, 2005 - May 16, 2005).

National and State Studies 1. Evaluation of ECCE Component, ASSERT, Patna, 2005 2. Evaluation of Alternative Schooling Component, Skill Development Institute, Lucknow,

2005 3. Terminal Assessment Survey for DEPEP-III Program, BEP, Patna, 2005 4. Dynamics of Grade 1 Enrolment, SIEMAT, Patna, 2005 5. A Study on Grade Repetition, SEIMAT, Patna, 2005 6. A Study on Teachers Absenteeism, BEP, Patna, 2005 7. A Study on Utilization of Grants, BEP, Patna, 2005 8. Aggarwal, Yash. 2002. District Primary Education Program. Universal Access and

Retention. Where do we stand? Elementary Education Report Cards. New Delhi, National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration.

9. Aggarwal, Yash. 2001. District Primary Education Program. Progress towards Universal Access and Retention. District Report Cards. New Delhi, National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration.

World Bank Reports/Studies 1. Bashir, Sajitha, and V. Ayyar. 2001. District Primary Education Program. Encyclopaedia of

Indian Education. New Delhi, National Council of Educational Research and Training. 2. Bihar, Towards a Development Strategy, The World Bank 3. India, Inclusive growth and service delivery: Building on India’s success, The World Bank 4. Hirshberg, Susan. 2003. DPEP Case Study. Washington DC, World Bank. 5. Hussock, Howard. 2000. Implementing Education Reform in India: The Primary School. 6. Jalan, Jyotsna and Elena Glinskaya. 2002. Improving Primary School Education in India:

An Impact Assessment of DPEP-Phase I (draft). Washington DC, The World Bank.

52

7. Lockheed, Marlaine, John Middleton, Keith Hinchliffe, N.K. Jangira, Philip Cohen, Jane Hannaway, and Adrian Verspoor. 1997. Primary Education in India. Washington, DC, The World Bank.

8. Pandey, R. 2000. Going to Scale with Education Reform: India District Primary Education Reform, 1995-99. Washington DC, World Bank.

9. Sipahimalani-Rao, Vandana and Prema Clarke. A Review of Educational Progress and Reform in The District Primary Education Program (DPEP I and II). 2002. DPEP Evaluation. Report No.1. New Delhi, SASHD, World Bank.

10. Textbook Debate and Resistance to Change in Kerala. Cambridge, MA: Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.

11. Sankar, Deepa. The Education Sector in Jharkhand: Paper prepared for Jharkhand policy note.

53

MAP