SCALING UP READINESS AND RETENTION (SURE) PROJECT … · 2019-06-20 · 0 Kamya K Edmu SCALING UP READINESS AND RETENTION (SURE) PROJECT BASELINE ASSESSMENT REPORT Baseline Assessment

0

SCALING UP READINESS AND RETENTION (SURE)

PROJECT

BASELINE ASSESSMENT REPORT

Baseline Assessment Carried Out in Gulu, Nwoya, Koboko and Moyo Districts

By

Directorate of Education Standards (DES)

&

Kamya K Edmund & Nairuba Joyce

Literacy and Adult Basic Education (LABE)

for

Literacy and Adult Basic Education (LABE)

June 2018

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................................................... 1

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES ..................................................................................................................................... 4

LIST OF ACROYNMS ..................................................................................................................................................... 7

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 8

Overview of SURE Project ....................................................................................................................................... 8

Baseline Study Background ..................................................................................................................................... 8

Objectives ................................................................................................................................................................ 9

Scope of the Study .................................................................................................................................................. 9

Organisation of the Report ................................................................................................................................... 10

Limitations of the study ........................................................................................................................................ 11

CHAPTER TWO: FINDINGS ......................................................................................................................................... 12

ELDS ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................................................................... 14

1.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... 14

1.2 Methodology ................................................................................................................................................... 14

1.3 Key Findings .................................................................................................................................................... 15

1.3.1 Gender of Learners ......................................................................................................................... 15

1.3.2 Status of Children’s Immunization .................................................................................................. 15

1.3.3 Physically Observable Health Problems of Learners ...................................................................... 16

1.3.4 Status of Parents and Persons where Children Stay ....................................................................... 16

1.3.5 Occupation of Parents .................................................................................................................... 16

1.3.6 Structuring of Learning at HLCS ...................................................................................................... 17

Parent Educator Preparedness at the HLCs ............................................................................................. 17

1.3.7.1 Koboko District............................................................................................................................. 18

1.3.7.2 Moyo District ............................................................................................................................... 21

1.3.7.3 Nwoya District .............................................................................................................................. 25

1.3.7.4 Gulu District ............................................................................................................................. 27

1.3.8 Comparison of Children’s Performance .......................................................................................... 31

2

1.3.10 Interviews ................................................................................................................................................... 37

QUALITATIVE INDICATORS ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................................. 38

QUALITATIVE INDICATORS ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................................. 39

2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... 39

2.2 Methodology ................................................................................................................................................... 39

2.3 Outcome Findings ........................................................................................................................................... 40

2.3.1 Outcome 1: Informal Home-based Early Childhood Development (ECD) Model Integrated into National

Systems of ECD ....................................................................................................................................... 40

2.3.2 Outcome 2: Supportive parenting and child-rearing practices to improve school readiness for the most

disadvantaged families in the new sites ................................................................................................ 48

2.3.3 Outcome 3: Community ownership of HLCs enhanced to continue providing expanded scope of ECD

supportive activities ............................................................................................................................... 50

2.3.4 Outcome 4: Improved learning outcomes for pre-school children from HLCs and parents .......... 55

CHAPTER THREE: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................... 59

ELDS ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................... 59

ELDS CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................... 59

QUALITATIVE INDICATOR ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................. 59

REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................................................. 61

APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................................................. 62

Appendix 1: Filled-in Quantitative Indicator Matrix (Indicator 4a) ....................................................................... 62

Appendix 2: Filled-in Qualitative Indicator Matrix ................................................................................................ 63

Appendix 3: ELDS Quantitative Assessment tool .................................................................................................. 66

Appendix 4: Gulu Children sampled for assessment ............................................................................................ 70

Appendix 5: Nwoya Children sampled for assessment ......................................................................................... 71

Appendix 6: Koboko Children sampled for assessment ........................................................................................ 72

Appendix 7: Moyo Children sampled for assessment ........................................................................................... 73

Appendix 8: Regional/District Performance Comparisons ................................................................................... 74

Appendix 9: Qualitative tools Used ....................................................................................................................... 75

A. NATIONAL LEVEL STAKEHOLDERS’ QUESTIONNAIRE .......................................................................... 75

B. PARENT EDUCATOR OBSERVATION GUIDE ......................................................................................... 77

C. DISTRICT OFFICIALS QUESTIONNAIRE .................................................................................................. 79

D. NEW SITES’ PARENT INTERVIEW GUIDE .............................................................................................. 81

E. HLCMC MEMBERS INTERVIEW GUIDE ................................................................................................. 83

3

F. PARENT INTERVIEW GUIDE .................................................................................................................. 85

G. TEACHER QUESTIONNAIRE .................................................................................................................. 87

4

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Table 1: Scope of respondents in the Baseline study ................................................................................................. 9

Table 2: Scope of Institutions for the baseline study ................................................................................................ 10

Table 3: Outcomes and their performance measures .............................................................................................. 10

Table 4: HLCs that participated in the ELDS Assessment .......................................................................................... 14

Table 5: Assessment tool for learner’s performance ................................................................................................ 15

Table 6: Gender of learners ...................................................................................................................................... 15

Table 7: Immunization of learners ............................................................................................................................ 16

Table 8: Physically observable health problems ....................................................................................................... 16

Table 9: Status of parents/persons where children stay .......................................................................................... 16

Table 10: Occupation of parents ............................................................................................................................... 17

Table 11: Performance of children by level of achievement on Cognitive Development domain ........................... 18

Figure 1: Performance of children by level of achievement on Cognitive Development domain ............................ 18

Table 12: Performance of children by level of achievement on Physical Development domain ............................. 18

Figure 2: Performance of children by level of achievement on Physical Development domain .............................. 19

Table 13: Performance of children by level of achievement on Language Communication and Literature

Development domain ............................................................................................................................................... 19

Table 14: Performance of children by level of achievement on Social Emotional Development domain ............... 20

Figure 3: Performance of children by level of achievement on Social Emotional Development domain ................ 20

Table 15: Performance of children by level of achievement on Approaches to Learning Development domain .... 21

Figure 4: Performance of children by level of achievement on Approaches to Learning Development domain..... 21


Figure 5: Performance of children by gender by level of achievement on Cognitive Development domain ........... 22


Figure 6: Performance of children by level of achievement on Physical Development domain .............................. 22


Development domain in Moyo district ..................................................................................................................... 23

Figure 7: Performance of children by level of achievement on Language Communication and Literature



Figure 8: Performance of children by level of achievement on Social Emotional Development domain ................ 24

Table 20: Performance of children by level of achievement on Approaches to learning Development domain .... 24


Figure 9: Performance of children by level of achievement on Cognitive Development domain ............................ 25


Figure 10: Performance of children by level of achievement on Physical Development domain ............................ 25




Development domain in Nwoya ............................................................................................................................... 26


Figure 12: Performance of children by level of achievement on Social Emotional Development domain .............. 27


5


Figure 13: Performance of children by level of achievement on Cognitive Development domain .......................... 28


Figure 14: Performance of children by level of achievement on Cognitive Development domain. ......................... 28




Development domain. .............................................................................................................................................. 29

Table 29: Performance of children by level of achievement on Social Emotional Development domain .............. 29

Figure 16: Performance of children by level of achievement on Social Emotional Development domain .............. 30


Figure 17: Performance of children by level of achievement on Approaches to Learning Development domain .. 30

Table 31: Children’s performance on Cognitive domain across the districts ........................................................... 31

Figure 18: Overall children’s performance is illustrated as follows; ......................................................................... 32

Table 32: Children’s performance on Physical Development domain across the districts ....................................... 32

Figure 19: Overall performance of children on this indicator is as follows; ............................................................. 33

Figure 20: Overall performance of children on this domain is as follows; ............................................................... 34

Table 33: Children’s performance on Social Emotional Development domain across the districts ......................... 34

Figure 21: Overall performance of children on this domain is as follows; ............................................................... 35

Table 34: Children’s performance on Social Emotional Development domain across the districts ......................... 35

Figure 22: Overall performance of children is as follows; ........................................................................................ 36

Table 35: Children’s general performance across all domains ................................................................................. 36

Table 36: Data collection tools and sample numbers ............................................................................................... 39

Table 37: Sample of the National level stakeholders ................................................................................................ 41

Table 38: National Level Stakeholders’ Opinions on the Extent to which Project Informal ECD Approaches have

been Shared .............................................................................................................................................................. 41

Figure 23: National level stakeholders' opinions on the extent to which the project informal ECD approaches

have been adapted in national systems ................................................................................................................... 42

Table 39: Sample of the Parent Educators ................................................................................................................ 43

Table 40: Number of PEs observed demonstrating usage of informal home based ECD resources ........................ 43

Table 41: Sample of District Officials ........................................................................................................................ 45

Table 42: District Officials’ responses on supporting informal home based ECD ..................................................... 45

Table 43: Summary of district officials supportive of informal home based ECD .................................................... 47

Table 44: Sample of Parents ..................................................................................................................................... 48

Table 45: Parents’ responses on interacting with their children in the past month ................................................ 48

Table 46: Parents’ responses on discipline approaches they used in the past month ............................................. 49

Table 47: Sample of the HLCs whose HLCMC members participated ....................................................................... 50

Table 48: HLCMC members’ opinions on attendance and contribution of members in meetings .......................... 51

Figure 24: HLCMCs holding monthly meetings over a three months' period (February, March & April) ............... 52

Table 49: Percentage attendance of members in HLCMC meetings ........................................................................ 52

Table 50: Participating HLCs ...................................................................................................................................... 53

Figure 25: Variety of Initiatives at the HLCs .............................................................................................................. 54

Table 51: Participating Parents ................................................................................................................................. 55

6

Table 52: Parents’ perceptions of the impact of home based ECD on their children ............................................... 55

Table 53: Participating Teachers ............................................................................................................................... 57

Table 54: Teachers’ perceptions of the impact of home based ECD on children learning outcomes ...................... 57

Table 55: Filled in Quantitative Indicator Matrix for Outcome 4 .............................................................................. 62

Table 56: Filled-in Qualitative Indicators Matrix ....................................................................................................... 63

7

LIST OF ACROYNMS

AL Approaches to Learning

BEWG Basic Education Working Group

CCT Centre Coordinating Tutors

CD Cognitive Development

CDO Community Development Officers

DEO District Education Officer

DES Directorate of Education Standards

ECD Early Childhood Development

ELDS Early Learning Development Standards

HLC Home Learning Centre

HLCMC Hone Learning Centre Management Committee

LABE Literacy and Adult Basic Education

LCL Language Communication and Literacy

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

MGLSD Ministry of Gender Labour and Social Development

MoES Ministry of Education and Sports

NCDC National Curriculum Development Centre

NGO Non-Governmental Organisation

NIECD National Integrated Early Childhood Development

OVC Orphaned Vulnerable Children

PD Physical Development

PE Parent Educator

PTC Primary Teacher College

SED Social and Emotional Development

SURE Scaling Up Readiness and Retention Impact

TIET Teacher Instruction, Education and Training

UNEB Uganda National Examinations Board

VHT Village Health Team

8

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

Literacy and Adult Basic Education (LABE) is an indigenous organization established in 1989 as a Non-

Governmental Organisation. One of the purposes of existence of LABE is to promote literacy practices

and increase access to information particularly among women and children in local communities in order

to actively demand and protect their rights. Currently LABE is implementing the Scaling Up Readiness

and Retention Impact (SURE) project as one of the educational projects focusing on children and parents

in Northern Uganda and West Nile.

Overview of SURE Project

The SURE project seeks to contribute towards the realization of Sustainable Development Goal 4 targets

1,2, and 6 in marginalized communities in Uganda by ensuring that scaled up informal home based

education approaches complement formal education to enable school ready children to enroll, stay in

school and achieve better learning outcomes by the end of primary three. SURE Project is being

implemented in four districts of Gulu and Nwoya in Northern Uganda, Koboko and Moyo in West Nile.

These are remote, rural-districts often associated with social conflict, severe environmental disturbances

and dislocation. There inhabitants are among the 90% of the poor in remote rural communities of Uganda

assumed to have no capacity to take responsibility for and participate in ECD despite recognition of

provisions like home-based ECD in the national ECD policies. National policy makers have adopted a

highly centralized education system which favours private-sector led formal ECD provisions. Without

direct government involvement in ECD provision, these rural communities continue to receive very few

or no resources required for successful ECD implementation and hence have no or limited access to

ECD services.

The SURE project home-based ECD intervention will take place in Home Learning Centres hosted by

volunteer families, it will be based around volunteer HLCMCs and Parent Educators selected by the

community members and trained by LABE to mobilise for, manage, provide and support their own ECD

services ensuring community ownership. The ECD intervention will also be supported by community

parenting, family livelihoods through HLC–VSLA and Adult literacy interventions to equip parents with

resources, information and skills to meaningfully play their roles in their children’s education and

development.

With this SURE project, LABE is finding out how best to implement a more inclusive home-based Early

Childhood Development (ECD) model and support government to widely address problems of low

access in marginalised communities. The project approach reflects the following informal ECD scale up

strategies: collaboration and advocacy with Government of Uganda national ECD policy implementers,

increasing community/parental support for informal ECD and strengthening existing HLCMCs to engage

in livelihood activities integrated with parenting and school readiness and retention.

Baseline Study Background

The aim of the project baseline study is to establish the project start-up conditions using a mixed methods

approach i.e. quantitative and qualitative methodologies with the ultimate objectives of; i) Ascertaining

the level of competence of children against Early Learning and Development Standards at the time of

9

joining HLCs, and ii) Establishing the knowledge, skills and practices of beneficiaries and stakeholders on

informal ECD approaches at the start of the project.

It focuses on the four outcomes and their performance measures defined in the project’s indicator matrix:

LABE worked with The Directorate of Education Standards (DES) that is mandated to define and set

education standards followed in pre-school, primary, secondary and tertiary education institutions to

conduct this baseline study.

Objectives

The objectives of the baseline study were categorized into qualitative and quantitative objectives;

The quantitative objective was;

1) To establish the baseline achievement levels of pre-school children at the HLCs regarding their

competences against Early Learning and Development Standards developed by the Directorate of

Education Standards.

The qualitative objectives were to evaluate factors contributing to the use of Informal ECD approaches

as follows;

1) The integration of informal home-based ECD in national systems of ECD, including; sharing

information about the informal ECD approaches, usage of informal home-based resources by

Parent Educators, support of informal home-based ECD by government authorities

2) The uptake of supportive parenting and child-rearing practices to improve school readiness for

the most disadvantaged families in new sites, including; parents’ usage of parenting skills to change

their lives and support their children’s school readiness, PES in new sites using new types of ECD

resources

3) Enhancement of community ownership to continue providing expanded scope of ECD supportive

activities, including; attendance of HLCMC meetings by HLCMC members, community-developed

initiatives at HLCs

4) Improvement of learning outcomes for pre-school children from HLCs and parents, including;

parents’ perception of the impact of home-based ECD on their children, teachers’ perception of

the impact of home-based ECD on children’s learning outcomes

Scope of the Study

The baseline study was conducted in the four project districts of Gulu, Nwoya, Koboko and Moyo

covering project stakeholders and institutions as in tables 1 and 2 below

Table 1: Scope of respondents in the Baseline study

Respondents Target Population Respondents Target Institutions

Parents 600 MoGLSD 10

Parent Educator 80 Schools 20

P1-P2 teachers 40 DIS 4

Deputy/Head Teachers 40 DEOs 4

VHT 120 CCTs 10

MoES Officials 10

10

Table 2: Scope of Institutions for the baseline study

Institutions Population

Districts 4

HLCs 40

HLCMCs 40

Schools 20

HLCMC Members 200

This baseline study is a critical measurement of the project performance indicators (See Table 3). The

baseline study findings set bench mark data against which the SURE project’s subsequent achievements

will be measured. The findings and recommendations are also meant to support the planning and

implementation of LABE’s informal home–based ECD interventions under the SURE project.

Table 3: Outcomes and their performance measures

Outcome Performance measure

Outcome 1:

Informal home-based Early Childhood

Development (ECD) model integrated

into national systems of ECD

1d. Extent to which project informal ECD approaches have been

shared and adapted in national systems.

1e. Parent Educators demonstrating usage of informal home based

ECD resources.

1f. Support of informal home-based ECD by DEOs, CDOs, CCTs

and local government authorities.

Outcome 2:

Supportive parenting and child-rearing

practices to improve school readiness for

the most disadvantaged families in the

new sites

2d. Examples of parents using parenting skills to make positive

changes in their lives and support their children’s school readiness.

2e. New types of ECD resources used by PEs/VHTs in new sites

Outcome 3:

Community ownership of HLCs enhanced

to continue providing expanded scope of

ECD supportive activities

3d. Attendance and contribution of Committee members in the HLC

meetings

3e. Variety of community-developed initiatives happening in HLCs

Outcome 4:

Improved learning outcomes for pre-

school children from HLCs and parents

4a. Pre-school children demonstrate a 35% performance

improvement on their learning outcomes as compared to the DES

Baseline Assessment at the end of the learning cycle

4d. Parents have a positive perception of the impact of Home Based

ECD on their children

4e. Teachers have a positive perception of the impact of Home Based

ECD on children’s learning outcomes

Organisation of the Report

The material presented in this report is organized into 3 chapters.

After this introductory Chapter One that shared the background, overview and context of the baseline

study, Chapter Two, discusses the findings. These presentations are divided into two sections; Section

I: The ELDS assessment and Section II: Findings of the Qualitative Project Indicators. Finally, “From

11

Analysis to Action”, Chapter 3 compiles the different conclusions and recommendations from the two

sections. At the end of the report are the Appendices of; Filled-In Indicator Matrix, ELDS Assessment

tool, list of Assessed pre-school children under ELDS and Qualitative Data tools used

Limitations of the study

Despite the outstanding efforts made by project staff and researchers to make this baseline study a

success, the following limitations were encountered:

• Some of the pre-school children participating in the study found it difficult to articulately express

themselves. Attempts to ensure their maximal participation were made through the efforts of their

parent educators who formed part of the research team. Likewise, some of the preschool children

who came for interviews were very young and had to be replaced by others.

• Although the aims and objectives of this study were well explained to the respondents, some parents

expected financial incentives for the time they spent participating in the study. Therefore, some time was spent by explaining to the expectant communities the ethics and benefits of undertaking the

Baseline Study

12

CHAPTER TWO: FINDINGS

This chapter is divided into two sections that discuss the findings from the Quantitative ELDS

Assessment; Section I Qualitative Indicator Assessment; Section II

13

SECTION 1

Early Learning and Development

Standards Assessment

A teacher assessing a child at Liwa North HLC, Moyo

District

14

ELDS ASSESSMENT

1.0 Introduction

In collaboration with other education institutions, DES developed Early Learning and Development

Standards (ELDS) to guide assessment of learners at pre-school level after they are instructed on the

Learning Framework.

Early Learning and Development Standards are statements of competences expected to be demonstrated

by children before they join formal primary education. These competences are expressed in two

categories- those for three-year-old children and those for the five-year-old children.

1.2 Methodology

The assessment of ELDS of three-year old children focused on the four districts of Nwoya, Gulu,

Koboko and Moyo where LABE is implementing the HLCs as a new approach that facilitates learners

in disadvantaged areas to access pre-school education. Three key methods were used to collect data:

questionnaire, interviews and review of documents. The LABE project officers selected data collectors

who are familiar and literate in the area language of instruction in the different project districts. Data

collectors were professional teachers (teaching in lower primary) capable of working with children

between three and four years of age. They were trained to be friendly, caring, playful, audible and

motivate learners to answer more questions. Data collectors engaged children in short oral interviews

which were followed by observing children as they participated in whole class activities. A team of 20

data collectors administered questionnaires to 201 pre-school children in 40 HLCs within one week

(Appendix 1). The Assessment questionnaire covered personal information, preparedness of the

caregiver and the four domains of ELDS.

The study tool which had been developed in English by DES was translated to area local languages.

Parent Educators assisted data collectors by helping children respond to questions by data collectors.

Documents related to the project and ELDs were reviewed, and interviews held with LABE field staff.

Sample

All the 10 HLCs from each of the four beneficiary districts participated (Table 4). At each HLC, five

learners were randomly selected to participate in the assessment (appendix i). The assessment exercise

was majorly through observation and short interviews of the learners. The learners with assistance of

the parent educator responded to all questions by the data collector. Data collectors had a tool which

they used to collect information.

Table 4: HLCs that participated in the ELDS Assessment

District Home Learning Centres (HLCs)

Gulu Bobayo, Oguru, Otege, Kiteny, Lagotilibi, Adak, Lukali, Gunya, Kwanber, CetDyang

Nwoya Baraminy, Cambedo, Kalanga Guna, Gey, Namawal, Kamcoo, Wiigoro, Poliiro, Gok. A,

Agweng

Moyo Kagera, Ibahwe, Asakwe, Ndirindiri, Legu North, Legu South, Awara, Amatura, Liwa North,

Obogubu

Koboko Cornerstone, Minga, Jiro, Dranya, Pakujo, Diobe, St. Kizito, Yambura, Anika, Alero, Arabule,

Tanyaji, Ropoli

15

Analysis of Data

Data collected during the study was analyzed using Microsoft excel. The

achievement of each learner was evaluated following a four-point scale designed by the DES (Table 5)

Table 5: Assessment tool for learner’s performance

Score Descriptor Explanation Of Child’s Performance

1 Novice level Child has little experience to demonstrate the competence

2 Partial level Child has limited experience to demonstrate the competence.

3 Adequate level Child has remarkable experience to demonstrate a competence.

4 Satisfactory level Child has outstanding experience to demonstrate the competence.

The achievement of each child on every indicator in a domain was used to determine a child’s

achievement against a domain. The achievement of all children in a district against each domain were

arranged to enable the data analyst to calculate the percentage of children who achieved on each level

of performance. The percentages of children achieving at each level were compared by gender as per

variable factor such as occupation of parents, domain and district. The comparison was represented on

a simple bar graphs for ease of making conclusions.

1.3 Key Findings

1.3.1 Gender of Learners

The number of male and female learners that participated in the study was almost equal in the four

districts (Table 6). A total of 201 learners participated in the study.

Table 6: Gender of learners

District Male Female Total

Gulu 26 (51%) 25 (49%) 51 (100%)

Koboko 30 (60%) 20(40%) 50 (100%)

Moyo 28 (56%) 22 (44 %) 50 (100%)

Nwoya 25 (50%) 25 (50%) 50 (100%)

Total 109 (54%) 92(46%) 201(100%)

1.3.2 Status of Children’s Immunization

Government policy on immunization is to have all children below the age of five immunized. Status of

children’s immunization was checked by looking for the scar from the immunization scratch on the

child’s shoulder. The PEs indicated that children were immunized when the parents took them to the

health centers. The majority of learners (over 90%) which indicated that they were immunized (Table

7). However, presence of immunization scratch scar was not informative enough to ascertain the type

of illness prevented.

16

Table 7: Immunization of learners

1.3.3 Physically Observable Health Problems of Learners

The physically observable health problems included learners with physical, visual and hearing

impairments. These include the lame, dumb, blind amongst others. The majority of the learners sampled

(over 90%) were considered normal (no known disabilities by their parents) (Table 8). The few leaner’s

(less than 10%) with observable health problems were found in Gulu, Moyo and Nwoya, such as physical

impairment and malnutrition.

Table 8: Physically observable health problems

District Yes No Total

Gulu 5 (10%) 46 (90%) 51 (100%)

Koboko 0 (0%) 50 (100%) 50 (100%)

Moyo 1 (2%) 49 (98%) 50 (100%)

Nwoya 3 (6%) 47 (94%) 50 (100%)

1.3.4 Status of Parents and Persons where Children Stay

The majority of learners indicated that their parents/guardians are alive (Table 9). In Moyo district

almost (90%) all children sampled stay with both parents. Yet in Gulu and Nwoya 80% of the children

sampled stay with both parents. It’s only in Koboko where 13% of learners stay with guardians.

Table 9: Status of parents/persons where children stay

District Both parents Mother Father Guardian Total

Gulu 43 (84%) 5 (10%) 0 3 (6%) 51 (100%)

Koboko 40 (80 %) 5 (10%) 1 (2%) 4 (8%) 50 (100%)

Moyo 49 (98%) 0 1(2%) 50 (100%)

Nwoya 43 (86%) 3 (6%) 0 4 (8%) 50 (100%)

When majority of children stay with their parents it ensures that children are reared in an environment

which enables them to develop and master the mother language which is a vital factor to promote

learning at the age of 3 years. In addition, parents supplement the ability of learners to attend HLCs

regularly and provide basic necessities.

1.3.5 Occupation of Parents

The Parent Educators (PE) helped children to respond to questions by the data collectors regarding

parents’ occupation. Their responses revealed that, whereas in Gulu and Koboko only 92% and 80% of

parents respectively sampled are subsistence farmers, in Moyo and Nwoya all the parents are

subsistence farmers. The few parents (4% and 12% for Gulu and Koboko respectively) described as

District Yes No Total

Gulu 51 (100%) 0 51 (100%)

Koboko 49 (98%) 1 (2%) 50 (100%)

Moyo 50 (100 %) 0 50 (100%)

Nwoya 50(100%) 0 50 (100%)

17

people engaged in petty business; are actually involved in operating kiosks, buying and selling goats,

cows, chicken and food stuffs so as to make some profit and sustain their families. Parents categorized

as laborers’ are employed to offer manual labour to earn a living. Parents who are self-employed are

mainly those engaged in transport business with boda boda or taxis (Table 10).

Table 10: Occupation of parents District Subsistence

Farmer

Petty

Business

Labourers Self

employed

Other

s

Total

Gulu 47 (92%) 2 (4%) 0 2 (4%) 0 51 (100%)

Koboko 40 (80%) 6 (12%) 0 4 (8%) 50 (100%)

Moyo 50 (100%) 0 0 0 50 (100%)

Nwoya 50 (100%) 0 0 0 0 50 (100%)

1.3.6 Structuring of Learning at HLCS

Parent Educator Preparedness at the HLCs

The study on the HLC was intended to ascertain whether they have a daily routine or program to

follow, an outline of a curriculum to follow or learning framework, copies of Early Learning

Development Standards, play materials, records of assessment and progress charts together with

feedback report cards.

Data collectors discovered that HLCs operated three days a week so there was no need for a daily

routine. There were scanty records of programs followed on the days the HLC were in operation,

progress charts and feedback report cards. HLCs operate throughout the year.

All HLCs visited had play materials of some kind especially swing, slides, and tyres. Some children were

seen skipping ropes and others were playing hide and seek. Yet, some boys were seen chasing and

caning each other. This is typical of boys who play rough wanting to show supremacy and dominance

over other children.

A majority of HLCs visited had copies of learning framework designed by LABE for use in non-formal

learning centers. However, none of the HLC visited had a copy of Early Learning Development

Standards (ELDS). Since these HLCs had just started, it is anticipated that the situation will gradually

change with time. The PEs seemed to lack desired competences to be able to prepare relevant

assessment records and progress charts which would be used to provide appropriate feedback reports

to individual parents and other community members. PEs need guidance on how to use assessment

records to address individual child learning needs.

1.3.7 Specific Findings about Children’s Achievement by Districts by Domains

Learners’ achievements were computed and summarized by gender per district to assess the average

performance of learners on the five domains. The five domains are: Cognitive Development (CD);

Physical Development (PD); Language Communication and Literacy (LCL); Social and Emotional

Development (SED); and Approaches to Learning (AL).

18

1.3.7.1 Koboko District

All children sampled in Koboko project district were immunized except one. Children’s level of

performance by gender on each domain is depicted in the Table 11 and Figure 1 below:

a. Cognitive Development

Table 11: Performance of children by level of achievement on Cognitive Development domain

Figure 1: Performance of children by level of achievement on Cognitive Development domain

The assessment on cognitive domain indicates that in Koboko district:

• No girl was able to achieve adequate level 3.

• A majority of girls 14(70%) achieved partial level 2, compared to 15(50%) of boys achieving at the

same level.

• 6(30%) of girls achieved novice level, compared to 14(47%) of boys achieving at the same level.

• Only 1(3%) of boys achieved adequate level 3, hence boys performed better than girls on this

domain.

• Overall 20(40%) of children sampled achieved novice level 1; 29(58%) of children achieved partial

level 2 and 1(2%) of children achieved adequate level 3.

b. Physical Development

Table 12: Performance of children by level of achievement on Physical Development domain

Gender Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Total

Boys 9 (30%) 21(70%) 0 0 30


Boys 14 (47%) 15 (50%) 1(3%) 0 30

Girls 6 (30%) 14 (70%) 0 0 20

Total 20 (40%) 29 (58%) 1(2%) 0 50

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Boys Girls

level 1

level 2

level 3

level 4

19

Girls 15 (75%) 5 (25%) 0 0 20

Total 24 (48%) 26 (52%) 0 0 50

The assessment on physical development domain indicates that in Koboko district:

• No child attained beyond partial level 2 on this domain.

• 24(48%) of all children achieved novice level 1 as compared to 26(52%) children who achieved

partial level 2.

• 9(30%) of boys achieved novice level 1 as compared to 15(75%) of girls achieving at the same level.

• 21(70%) of boys achieved partial level 2 as compared to 5(25%) of girls achieving at the same level.

Boys performed better than girls on this domain.

c. Language Communication and Literature

Table 13: Performance of children by level of achievement on Language Communication and

Literature Development domain


Boys 18 (60%) 12 (40%) 0 0 30

Girls 9 (45%) 11(55%) 0 0 20

Total 27 (54%) 23 (46%) 0 0 50

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Boys Girls

level 1

level 2

level 3

level 4

Figure 2: Performance of children by level of achievement on Physical Development domain

20

The assessment on language communication and literature domain indicates that in Koboko district:

• No child achieved beyond partial level 2 on this domain.

• 27(54%) boys achieved novice level 1 as compared to 23(46%) girls who achieve partial level 2.

• 18(60%) of boys achieved novice level 1 as compared to 9(45%) of girls achieving at the same level.


The girls performed better than boys on this domain.

d. Social and Emotional Development

Table 14: Performance of children by level of achievement on Social Emotional Development

domain


Boys 19(63%) 11(37%) 0 0 30

Girls 11(55%) 9(45%) 0 0 20

Total 30(60%) 20(40%) 0 0 50

Figure 3: Performance of children by level of achievement on Social Emotional Development

domain

The assessment on social emotional development domain indicates that in Koboko district:

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Boys Girls

level 1

level 2

level 3

level 4

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Boys Girls

level 1

level 2

level 3

level 4

21


• 30(60%) of children achieved novice level 1 as compared to 20(40%) of children who achieved

partial level 2.

• 19(63%) of boys achieved novice level 1 as compared to 11(55%) of girls achieving at the same

level.

• 11(37%) of boys achieved partial level as compared to 9(45%) of girls achieving at the same level.

Girls performed better than boys on this domain.

e. Approaches to Learning

Table 15: Performance of children by level of achievement on Approaches to Learning

Development domain


Boys 23(77%) 7(23%) 0 0 30

Girls 16(80%) 4(20%) 0 0 20

Total 39(78%) 11(22%) 0 0 50

Figure 4: Performance of children by level of achievement on Approaches to Learning

Development domain

The assessment on approaches to learning development domain indicates that in Koboko district;


• 39(78%) of children achieved novice level 1 as compared to 11(22%) of children achieving at the

same level.

• 23(77%) of boys achieved novice level as compared to 16(80%) of girls achieving at the same level.


Boys performed better than girls on this domain.

1.3.7.2 Moyo District

The overall average performance of children against the five domains is presented tables 16 to 20.


0

20

40

60

80

100

Boys Girls

level 1

level 2

level 3

level 4

22



Boys 22 (79%) 6 (21%) 0 0 28

Girls 14 (64%) 8 (36%) 0 0 22

Total 36 (72%) 14 (28%) 0 0 50

Figure 5: Performance of children by gender by level of achievement on Cognitive Development

domain

The assessment on cognitive development domain indicates that in Moyo district:

• None of the children achieved beyond partial level 2 on this domain.

• 22(79%) of boys achieved novice level 1, compared to 14(64%) of girls achieving at the same level.

• 6(21%) of boys achieved at partial level 2, compared to 8(38%) of girls achieving at the same level.


• Overall 36(72%) of children achieved at novice level as compared to 14(28%) of those achieving at

partial level 2.




Boys 22 (79%) 6 (21%) 0 0 28

Girls 16 (73%) 6 (27%) 0 0 22

Total 38 (76%) 12(24%) 0 0 50


0

20

40

60

80

100

Boys Girls

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 4

23

The assessment on physical development domain indicates that in Moyo district:


• 22(79%) of boys achieved at novice level 1 compared to 16 (73%) of girls achieving at the same

level.

• 6(21%) of boys achieved at partial level 2 compared to 6(27%) of girls achieving at the same level.


• Overall 38(76%) of children achieved at novice level compared to 12(24%) of children achieving

at partial level.



Literature Development domain in Moyo district


Boys 27 (96%) 1(4%) 0 0 28

Girls 22 (100%) 0 0 0 22

Total 49 (98%) 1(2%) 0 0 50

Figure 7: Performance of children by level of achievement on Language Communication and


The assessment on language communication and literature domain indicates that in Moyo district:

• No child (boys and girls) achieved beyond partial level 2 on this domain.

0

20

40

60

80

100

Boys Girls

level 1

level 2

level 3

level 4

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Boys Girls

level 1

level 2

level 3

level 4

24

• Only 1(6%) boy achieved partial level 2.

• 24(94%) of boys and 22(100%) girls achieved at novice level on this domain.

d. Social Emotional Development


domain


Boys 26 (93%) 2 (7%) 0 0 28

Girls 20 (91%) 2 (9%) 0 0 22

Total 46 (92%) 4 (8%) 0 0 50


domain

The assessment on social emotional development domain indicates that in Moyo district:

• No child performed beyond partial level 2.

• 26(93%) of boys achieved at novice level compared to 20(91%) of girls achieving at the same level.

Children performed very poorly on this indicator.

• 2(7%) of boys achieved at partial level 2 compared to 2(9%) of girls achieving at the same level.


Table 20 indicates that all sampled children in Moyo project district performed at novice level 1 which

was poor performance.

Table 20: Performance of children by level of achievement on Approaches to learning

Development domain


Boys 28 (100%) 0 0 0 28

Girls 22 (100%) 0 0 0 22

Total 50 (100%) 0 0 0 50

0

20

40

60

80

100

Boys Girls

level 1

level 2

level 3

level 4

25

1.3.7.3 Nwoya District

All children sampled in Nwoya district were immunized. The overall average performance of children

against the five domains is presented in tables 21 to 26:




Boys 25 (100%) 0 0 0 25

Girls 25 (100%) 0 0 0 25

Total 50 (100%) 0 0 0 50


The assessment indicates that in Nwoya district children performed at novice level 1 against the

cognitive development domain.




Boys 24 (96%) 1(4%) 0 0 25

Girls 24 (96%) 1(4%) 0 0 25

Total 48 (96%) 2 (4%) 0 0 50


0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Boys Girls

level 1

level 2

level 3

level 4

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Boys Girls

level 1

level 2

level 3

level 4

26

The assessment on physical development domain indicates that in Nwoya district:

• None of the children performed beyond partial level 2. 2(4%) of children performed at partial

level 2.

• A majority of children 48(96%) performed at novice level 1.





Boys 24 (96%) 1(4%) 0 0 25

Girls 23 (92%) 2 (8%) 0 0 25

Total 47 (94%) 3 (6%) 0 0 50


Literature Development domain in Nwoya

The assessment on language communication and literature domain indicates that in Nwoya district:

• Overall 47(94%) of children performed at novice level 1.

• 24(96%) of boys performed at novice level 1 compared to 23(92%) of girls performing at the same

level. Boys and girls performed at the same level.

• 1(4%) of boys performed at partial level 2 compared to 2(8%) of girls performing at the same

level.




domain


Boys 24 (96%) 0 1(4%) 0 25

Girls 25 (100%) 0 0 0 25

Total 49 (98%) 0 1(2%) 0 50

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Boys Girls

level 1

level 2

level 3

level 4

27


domain

The assessment on social emotional development indicates that in Nwoya district:

• Only 1(4%) boy achieved at adequate level 3 against this domain.

• 24(96%) of boys achieved at novice level compared to 25(100%) of girls achieving at the same level.

• The performance of boys was relatively better than that of girls.


Overall 48 (96%) of children performed at novice level compared to 2(4%) of children performing at

partial level 2 (Table 25).


Development domain


Boys 23 (92%) 2 (8%) 0 0 25

Girls 25 (100%) 0 0 0 25

Total 48 (96%) 2(4%) 0 0 50

1.3.7.4 Gulu District

All children sampled in Gulu project district were immunized. The overall average performance of

children against the five domains is summarized in Tables 26 to 34.




Boys 16 (62%) 10 (38%) 0 0 26

Girls 14 (56%) 11(44%) 0 0 25

Total 30 (59%) 21(41%) 0 0 51

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Boys Girls

level 1

level 2

level 3

level 4

28


The assessment on the cognitive domain indicates that in Gulu district:


• 16(62%) of boys performed at novice level 1 compared to 14(56%) performing at the same love.

• 10(38%) of boys performed at partial level 2 compared to 11(44%) of girls performing at the same

level.




Boys 14 (54%) 12 (46%) 0 0 26

Girls 15 (60%) 10 (40%) 0 0 25

Total 29 (57%) 22 (43%) 0 0 51

Figure 14: Performance of children by level of achievement on Cognitive Development domain.

The assessment on cognitive development domain indicates that in Gulu district:

• No child performed beyond Partial level 2.

• 14(54%) of the boys performed at Novice level 1, compared to 15(60%) of girls performing at the

same level.

• 12(46%) of the boys performed at Partial level 2, compared to 10(40%) of the girls performing at

the same level.

• Boys performed a little better than girls.

0

20

40

60

80

Boys Girls

level 1

level 2

level 3

level 4

0

20

40

60

80

Boys Girls

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

level 4

29





Boys 24 (92%) 2 (8%) 0 0 26

Girls 18 (72%) 7 (28%) 0 0 25

Total 42 (82%) 9 (18%) 0 0 51


Literature Development domain.

The assessment on language communication and literature domain in Gulu district:

• No child performed beyond performance level 2.

• 24(92%) of boys performed at novice level 1, compared to 18(72%) of girls performing at the

same level.

• 2(8%) of boys performed at Partial level 2, compared to 7(28%) of girls performing at the same

level.



domain


Boys 25(96%) 1(4%) 0 0 26

Girls 22(88%) 3(12%) 0 0 25

Total 47(94%) 4(6%) 0 0 50

0

20

40

60

80

100

Boys Girls

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 4

30


domain

The assessment on social emotional development domain in Gulu district:

• No child performed beyond Partial level 2 on this domain.

• 25(96%) boys performed at novice level 1, compared 22(88%) of girls performing at the same

level.

• 1(4%) boy performed at Partial level, compared to 3(12%) girls performing at the same level.

e. Approaches to Learning Development


Development domain


Boys 25(96%) 1(4%) 0 0 26

Girls 24 (96%) 1(4%) 0 0 25

Total 49 (96%) 2 (4%) 0 0 51

Figure 17: Performance of children by level of achievement on Approaches to Learning

Development domain

The assessment on approaches to learning development domain indicates that in Gulu district:


• 25(96%) of boys achieved at novice level as compared to 24(96%) of girls achieving at the same

level.

• 1(4%) boys achieved at partial level 2 as compared to 1(4%) girls who achieved at the same level.

Boys and girls performed at the same level on this domain.

0

50

100

150

Boys Girls

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 4

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Boys Girls

level 1

level 2

level 3

level 4

31

• Overall 49(96%) of children achieved at novice level 1 compared to 2(4%) children who achieved

at partial level 2.

1.3.8 Comparison of Children’s Performance

Comparison of children’s performance across the districts for each domain was calculated to find out

the percentage of children achieving at each of the five levels. Overall, children’s performance on each

of the domains at the different levels is also included in the illustration within the tabulation.

a. Cognitive Domain

Table 31: Children’s performance on Cognitive domain across the districts

District Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4

Koboko 20(40%) 29(58%) 1(2%) 0(0%)

Moyo 36(72%) 14(28%) 0(0%) 0(0%)

Nwoya 50(100%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 0(0%)

Gulu 30(59%) 21(41%) 0(0%) 0(0%)

Overall 136(68%) 64(31%) 1(0.01%) 0(0%)

Interpretation:

• Against the cognitive domain, all the sampled children in Nwoya district 50(100%)

performed at Novice level.

• Children in Koboko district performed best with 20(40%) at Novice level, 29(58%) at

Partial level and 1(2%) at adequate level, they didn’t have any child at level 4.

• A majority of children in Moyo and Gulu districts performed at Novice level

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Koboko Moyo Nwoya Gulu

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 4

32

Figure 18: Overall children’s performance is illustrated as follows;

b. Physical Domain

Table 32: Children’s performance on Physical Development domain across the districts


Koboko 24(48%) 26(52%) 0(0%) 0(0%)

Moyo 38(76%) 12(24%) 0(0%) 0(0%)

Nwoya 48(96%) 2(4%) 0(0%) 0(0%)

Gulu 29(57%) 22(43%) 0(0%) 0(0%)

Overall 139(69%) 62(31%) 0(0%) 0(0%)

Interpretation:

Against the Physical development domain;

• Over 50% of children in Koboko achieved beyond Novice level. This is the district where

children performed best followed by Gulu.

• Children in Nwoya performed worst with 48(96%) of the children from the district

performed at Novice level.

Novice level

68%

partial level

31%

Adequate level

1%

Satisfactory level

0%

Performance

0

20

40

60

80

100

120


level 1

level 2

level 3

level 4

33

Figure 19: Overall performance of children on this indicator is as follows;

c. Language Domain

Table 33: Children’s performance on Language Development domain across the districts


Koboko 27 (54%) 23 (46%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Moyo 49 (98%) 1(2%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Nwoya 47(94%) 3 (6%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Gulu 42 (82.4%) 9 (17.6%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Overall 165 (82.1%) 36 (17.9%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Interpretation:

Against the language development domain;

• Children sampled from Koboko performed best as compared to those from other

districts.

• A majority of children from the rest of the districts other than Koboko performed to the

Novice level.

Novice level

69%

Partial Level

31%

Adequate level

0%

Satisfactory

level

0%

Performance

0

20

40

60

80

100

120


level 1

level 2

level 3

level 4

34

Figure 20: Overall performance of children on this domain is as follows;

d. Social Emotional Domain

Table 33: Children’s performance on Social Emotional Development domain across the districts


Koboko 30 (60%) 20 (40%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Moyo 46 (92%) 4 (8%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Nwoya 49 (98%) 0 (0%) 1(2%) 0 (0%)

Gulu 47 (92 %) 4 (8%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Overall 172 (86%) 28 (14%) 1(0%) 0 (0%)

Interpretation:

Against the domain of language development:

• Children sampled from Koboko district performed better than their counterparts in the

other 3 districts

• A majority of children from Moyo, Nwoya and Gulu districts performed at partial level.

Novice level

82%

Partial level

18%

Adequate level

0%Satisfactory level

0%

Performance

0

20

40

60

80

100

120


level 1

level 2

level 3

level 4

35

Figure 21: Overall performance of children on this domain is as follows;

e. Learning Approaches Domain

Table 34: Children’s performance on Social Emotional Development domain across the districts


Koboko 39(78%) 11(22%) 0(0%) 0(0%)

Moyo 50(100%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 0(0%)

Nwoya 48(96%) 2(4%) 0(0%) 0(0%)

Gulu 49(96%) 2 (4%) 0(0%) 0(0%)

Overall 186(93%) 15(7%) 0(0%) 0(0%)

Interpretation:

Against the domain for learning approaches:

• All districts performed poorly except for Koboko where 39(78%) of the children sampled

performed at novice level and 11(22%) of the children performed at Partial level

Novice

85%

Partial level

14%

Adequate level

1%

Satisfactory level

0%

Performance

0

20

40

60

80

100

120


level 1

level 2

level 3

level 4

36

Figure 22: Overall performance of children is as follows;

1.3.9 General Performance of children

Table 35: Children’s general performance across all domains

Domain Novice Partial Adequate Satisfactory Total

Cognitive development 136

(67.7%)

64

(31.8%)

01

(0.5%)

00

(0%)

201

Physical development 139

(69.2%)

62

(30.8%)

00

(0%)

00

(0%)

201

Language and communication

development

165

(82.1%)

36

(17.9%)

00

(0%)

00

(0%)

201

Social and emotional development 172

(85.6%)

28

(13.9%)

01

(0.5%)

00

(0%)

201

Approaches to learning 186

(92.5%)

15

(7.5%)

00

(0%)

00

(0%)

201

Interpretation:

• A majority of children performed to novice level.

• Only one child in the four districts performed to adequate level in the Cognitive domain.

• A few other children performed at partial level.

0

50

100

150

200

Cognitive

Development

Physical

Development

Language

Development

Social

Development

Approaches to

Learning

Novice

Partial

Adequate

Satisfactory

Novice level

92%

Partial level

8%

Adequate level

0%Satisfactory

level

0%

Performance

37

• Following the fact that the higher the number of learners achieving at novice level, the

poorer the performance; the general performance of children was poorest in the Approaches to

Learning domain186 (92.5%) followed by the social development172 (85.6%) domain, language

development domain165 (82.1%), physical development139 (69.2%) domain and Cognitive domain

136(68%)

1.3.10 Interviews

Interviews were conducted with parents at the HLC to share their experiences about HLCs.

Parents’ views were positive regarding the importance of HLCs in ensuring that their children

access pre-school education.

Parent 1: The HLCs have given parents hope of educating their children at minimal cost within their

environment.

Parent 2: Since LABE started this program, many parents brought their children and the number of

learners enrolling at HLC has increased. We are supportive by providing free shelters, materials and

physically bringing our children to the centre. However, parent’s contribution towards PE is still poor

because parents are poor they do not have money. What we do is to offer physical labor to supplement

efforts by the parent teachers.

Parent 3: The HLCs that started in northern Uganda help to keep our children safe without loitering.

They can now share happiness with other children.

Parent 4: Our children feel happy while playing with other kids using materials provided by the HLC.

38

SECTION II

QUALITATIVE INDICATORS

ASSESSMENT

Parents’ Focus Group Discussion at Otege HLC, Gulu District

39

QUALITATIVE INDICATORS ASSESSMENT

2.1 Introduction

To establish the knowledge, skills and practices of beneficiaries and stakeholders on informal ECD

approaches, provide data that could assist with project implementation and allow determination of

benchmarks and targets to measure success, together with the Early Learning Development Standards

Assessment, the baseline study also assessed the qualitative indicators.

2.2 Methodology

The qualitative indicators’ assessment focused on the 9 Project Qualitative Indicators. A representative

sample from all the four districts of Nwoya, Gulu, Koboko and Moyo was identified which included

project beneficiaries, partners and other stakeholders. The following tools were used to collect detailed

information; Observation Check Lists, Self-administered Questionnaires, Interview and Focus Group

Discussion Guides

Data Collection and Sampling

Data collection tools were developed in English and responses written in English for easy data entry,

however, the data collectors were area language speakers. Four supervisors – from DES (1 per district)

and 20 research assistants (5 per district), 14 of who were teachers and 6 LABE interns, were trained

as data collectors and divided into four teams (one per district). Each district team had at least one

LABE staff. Data collection took 21 days in May 2018.

The total number of HLCs sampled and people who participated are shown in Table 36 below.

Table 36: Data collection tools and sample numbers

OUTCOME INDICATOR TOOLS SAMPLE SIZE

Outcome 1:

Community

ownership of

HLCs enhanced to

continue providing

expanded scope of

ECD supportive

activities

Extent to which project

informal ECD approaches

have been shared and

adapted in national systems

Self-administered

Questionnaire

12 National Level

Stakeholders ( Baylor,

MGLSD, Agha Khan,

NCDC and MOES

officials)

PEs demonstrating usage of

informal home based ECD

resources

Observation

Checklist

20 PEs (5 per district)

using the Observation

Checklist

Support of informal home-

based ECD by DEOs, CDOs,

CCTs and local government

authorities

Self-administered

Questionnaire

20 District Officials:

(DEOs, CDOs and

CCTs)

Outcome 2:

Supportive

parenting and

child-rearing

practices to

improve school

readiness for the

most

disadvantaged

Examples of parents using

parenting skills to make

positive changes in their lives

and support their children’s

school readiness

Interview Guide 80 Parents in new sites

New types of ECD resources

used by PEs/VHTs in new

sites

Observation

Checklist

3 Baylor Officials and

resident district officials

(VHTs, Baylor POs)

40

OUTCOME INDICATOR TOOLS SAMPLE SIZE

families in the new

sites

Outcome 3:

Community

ownership of

HLCs enhanced to

continue providing

expanded scope of

ECD supportive

activities

Attendance and contribution

of Committee members in

the HLC meetings

Focus Group

Discussion Guide

20 HLCMCs (5 per

district)

Variety of community-

developed initiatives

happening in HLCs

Focus Group

Discussion Guide and

Observation Check

List

40 HLCMCs

Outcome 4:

Improved learning

outcomes for pre-

school children

from HLCs and

parents

Parents’ perception of the

impact of Home Based ECD

on their children

Interview Guide 120 parents (47

parents X 4 HLCs X 4

districts)

Teachers’ perceptions of

social, cognitive, language and

motor skills’ development of

children in the project, as

compared to other children

Self-administered

Questionnaire

36 Teachers (3

teachers X 3 schools X

4 districts)

Analysis of Data

Analysis of data involved understanding complexities, detail and context. We adopted an interpretive

and reflexive approach. To analyze qualitative data, we organized statements and responses to generate

useful conclusions and interpretations based on the research objectives (Sekranan, 2003). Qualitative

data analyses for the study objectives involved analysis of themes of interview data. Interview response

was reviewed, sorted and classified into related themes. Once the themes were established, data was

entered into Microsoft Access and exported to both Microsoft Excel and the Statistical Package for

Social Scientists for cleaning, validation, evaluation and analyzed to determine consistency, credibility and

usefulness of the information to support the qualitative data requirements for the study. Analysing the

data involved labeling and coding all in order to recognize their similarities and differences. Content

analysis was used to categorize verbal or behavioral data, for purposes of classification, summarization

and tabulation to make sense of the data collected and to highlight the important messages, features or

findings.

2.3 Outcome Findings

2.3.1 Outcome 1: Informal Home-based Early Childhood Development (ECD) Model

Integrated into National Systems of ECD

2.3.1.1d Project Informal ECD Approaches Shared and Adapted in National Systems

A total of 14 National level stakeholders responded to the self-administered questionnaire as seen in

Table 37 below.

41

Table 37: Sample of the National level stakeholders

Institution Number Percentage

MoES 5 35.8%

NCDC 3 21.4%

DES 2 14.3%

MGLSD 2 14.3%

Baylor 1 7.1%

Aga Khan 1 7.1%

TOTAL 14 100.0%

Overall, all national level stakeholders acknowledged that LABE’s home-based ECD is contributing to

increased children’s access to ECD in marginalised communities (Table 38). For them to have

acknowledged this means that they had got information about the model in one way or another.

Table 38: National Level Stakeholders’ Opinions on the Extent to which Project Informal ECD

Approaches have been Shared OPINION STATEMENT STRONGLY

DISAGREE

DISAGREE UNCERTAI

N

AGREE STRONGLY

AGREE

LABE's Home Based ECD is

contributing to increased children's

access to ECD in marginalised

communities

0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 21.4% 78.6%

LABE's Home Based ECD Model is

being shared widely through national

level platforms

0.0% 0.0% 21.4% 57.1% 21.4%

LABE's Home Based ECD support

materials are being shared widely

0.0% 0.0% 35.7% 57.1% 7.1%

• 78.5% of the respondents agreed (57.1%) and strongly agreed (21.4%) that LABE’s home-based

ECD model is being shared widely through national level platforms and 64.2% agreed (57.1%) and

strongly agreed (7.1%) that LABE’s home-based ECD support materials are being shared widely. These

respondents noted that they had got information about the model by reading national newspapers,

through attending Ministry working group meetings where a presentation about the model was made

and 8 respondents (2 from MoES, 3 from NCDC, 2 from DES & 1 from MGLSD) had physically been on

monitoring visits to LABE HLCs in Northern Uganda and West Nile. However, 21.4% and 35.7% were

uncertain about LABE's Home Based ECD Model being shared widely through national level platforms and

LABE's Home Based ECD support materials being shared widely respectively (Table 38). The main reasons

given for this uncertainty were that; sharing through national high-level platforms like newspapers,

working group meetings reached a few predetermined members and left out other potential

stakeholders like parents, community-based organisations especially in marginalised communities.

Majority (78.6%) of the respondents agreed (64.3%) and strongly agreed (14.3%) that government is

supportive of LABE’s home-based ECD model (Figure 23). This was attributed to the fact that home-

based ECD is recognised as one of the ECD provisions in the 2007 ECD policy. However, it was noted

that there have been no direct government efforts to get it implemented yet.

42

Figure 23: National level stakeholders' opinions on the extent to which the project informal

ECD approaches have been adapted in national systems

• Results in Figure 23 show that 64.3% of the respondents disagreed (14.3%) or were uncertain

(50.0%) of the opinion statement that LABE’s home-based ECD model has been adapted in national

systems. However, 57.1% agreed that LABE’s parenting approach and practices are being adapted in

national systems, although this is in its infancy stage. Even then, 35.7% respondents disagreed (7.1%) or

were uncertain (28.6%) about this as they did not have documented evidence.

What does this mean for Project Implementation?

i) What the findings suggest is that LABE needs to diversify platforms of sharing lessons, best

practices and materials to reach a wider audience. Taking into account the current trends,

social media and updating the LABE website are some of the new platforms to consider.

However, to cater for all stakeholders including those in marginalised communities, LABE

needs to balance these with the traditional ones for example local radio stations and local-

celebration events.

ii) Although the model has not yet been adapted in national systems, LABE needs to capitalize on

the fact that government is supportive of it to build a concrete relationship and work with

relevant government ministries and bodies/departments to develop systems and supportive

materials which can be used to ease adaption of the model in national systems. LABE needs to

continue participating in relevant working group meetings like BEWG, ECD, M & E and make

presentations about the model, take technical staff out for project site visits and get their

technical guidance to fit national standards and use evidence-based lobbying to get

Government to adapt the model and its approaches.

0.0%

7.1% 7.1%

0.0% 0.0% 0.0%0.0%

14.3%

7.1%

21.4%

50.0%

28.6%

64.3%

14.3%

57.1%

14.3% 14.3%

0.0%0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

Government is supportive of the adaption of

LABE's Home Based ECD Model

LABE's Home Based ECD model has been

adapted in national systems

LABE's parenting approach and practices are

being adapted in national systems

NO RESPONSE STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREE UNCERTAIN AGREE STRONGLY AGREE

43

2.3.1.1e Parent Educators demonstrating proper usage of Informal Home Based ECD

Resources

A total of 20 Parent educators, 5 per district were observed. 55% of the observed parent educators

were female as seen in Table 39 below.

Table 39: Sample of the Parent Educators

SEX NUMBER PERCENTAGE

FEMALE 11 55%

MALE 9 45%

TOTAL 20 100.0%

Research assistants were asked to observe and comment on available Informal Home Based ECD

resources (Learning Framework, Caregiver’s Companion and Continuous Assessment Guide) and

Parent Educators’ Usage of these resources.

In all the 20 HLCs visited, there were no Informal Home Based ECD resources available. Therefore, all

the 20 parent educators observed were not using any of these resources. However, the parent

educators were found with resources like Parent Educator Resource Books, Picture Charts and locally

made teaching and learning materials. Further probing revealed that these were handed-down from the

concluded RARE project.

Table 40 below presents the details of the observations.

Table 40: Number of PEs observed demonstrating usage of informal home based ECD resources

44

Parent Educators’ Knowledge on and Skills of Using Home-based ECD Resources

• Discussions with the 20 Parent Educators revealed that all PEs (100%) did not know what the

home-based ECD resources were and therefore did not know how to use them. 60% of the observed

parent educators did not have either lesson plan books or developed session plans. Although 40% of

the parent educators had lesson plan books (handed-down from the concluded RARE project), all their

session plans were not aligned to the Informal Home Based ECD resources (as they had not yet got

them). Only 10% of the observed PEs satisfactorily used a variety of appropriate learning materials

during sessions. All PEs were not able to use age/level appropriate activities and use a variety of

activities to conduct continuous assessment. They only used whole group activities and only a

‘question-answer’ approach for assessment.

Parent Educators’ Facilitation of Sessions at the HLCs

• The 20 PEs observed facilitating sessions mainly engaged the children in singing, reciting the alphabet

letters and numbers in local language, picture identification, storytelling, riddling, modeling using

mud/clay, fitting jig-saw puzzles and sorting trays. Further probing revealed that they were relying on

past experiences from the RARE project to engage the children in these activities. All PEs were using

local language while interacting with the children. However, 60% of them were having challenges with

using soft tones when the children were being difficult to manage.

2.3.1.1f Support of informal home-based ECD by DEOs, CDOs, CCTs and local

government authorities

A total of 17 District officials from all the 4 project target districts (Gulu, Nwoya, Koboko and Moyo)

responded to the Questionnaire. 41.2% of the respondents were CCTs, 41.2% were CDOs and 17.6%

were DEOs as in Table 41 below


i) What these findings suggest is that LABE needs to look at; first availing the Informal home-

based ECD resources to the PEs in languages they understand and then they should be

trained on how to use these resources. Since sessions planning was a challenge for most of

the PEs, one of the resources should be a step – by – step guide on how to handle the ECD

sessions to ease their work.

ii) The training approach needs to make use of visual materials such as videos and

performance approaches like role-plays in order to simplify abstract/difficult concepts for

example, age-appropriate activities and continuous assessment.

iii) The PEs should be praised for the local songs, games, rhymes and activities which they are

currently using, but they should be trained on how they can integrate them into the ECD

sessions appropriately.

iv) Parent educators also need to be trained in children management and positive disciplining.

Specific sessions on children characteristics and how children learn will be useful in helping

them manage the children better.

45

Table 41: Sample of District Officials DISTRICT GULU KOBOKO MOYO NWOYA TOTAL

Centre Coordinating Tutors (CCTs) 2 2 1 2 7

Community Development Officers (CDOs) 1 2 2 2 7

District Education Officers (DEOs) 1 1 0 1 3

TOTAL 4 5 3 5 17

Table 42 below presents responses by district officials on their support of Informal Home Based ECD.

Table 42: District Officials’ responses on supporting informal home based ECD No. Opinion Statement Strongly

Disagree

Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly

Agree

Average

KNOWLEDGE

1 I know about all the different

types of ECD provisions in my

district

0.0% 0.0% 5.9% 41.2% 52.9%

2 I know about LABE’s Home Based

ECD at the HLCs

0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 35.3% 64.7%

3 I have performed all the tasks

required of me to support Home

Based ECD

0.0% 23.5% 70.6% 5.9% 0.0%

RESOURCE MOBILISATION

4 I have used resources from my

office/institution to support Home

Based ECD activities and

implementation

11.8% 47.1% 5.9% 35.3% 0.0%

5 I have personally campaigned and

lobbied for the devotion of more

funds to support Home Based

ECCE in my district

23.5% 35.3% 17.6% 11.8% 11.8%

6 I have personally raised or

contributed resources to support

Home Based ECCE

0.0% 47.1% 29.4% 17.6% 5.9%

AVERAGE RESPONSES 11.8% 43.1% 17.6% 21.6% 5.9% 27.5%

DIRECT ACTIVITY IMPLEMENTATION

7 I have attended a HLC

Management Committee meeting

before at the HLC

23.5% 35.3% 5.9% 17.6% 17.6%

8 I have monitored and/or

supervised activities at a HLC

before

0.0% 41.2% 17.6% 41.2% 0.0%

9 I have created awareness about

Home Based ECD to the

communities in my district

0.0% 35.3% 17.6% 35.3% 11.8%


SUPPORTIVE ADVOCACY

10 I have done advocacy for Home

Based ECD in my local

5.9% 35.3% 11.8% 35.3% 11.8%

46

No. Opinion Statement Strongly

Disagree

Disagree Uncertain Agree Strongly

Agree

Average

government/ institution/district

meetings

11 I participate and contribute to the

registering the HLC at Sub county

level

11.8% 35.3% 23.5% 29.4% 0.0%

12 I have promoted the Home Based

ECCE model for scale up with in

and out of my district

11.8% 41.2% 11.8% 29.4% 5.9%


District Officials’ Knowledge on ECD

• Table 42 reveals that 94.1% of the respondents Agree (41.2%) and Strongly Agree (52.9%) that they are

knowledgeable about all the different types of ECD provisions in their respective districts and only 5.9%

were uncertain.

• Although all the respondents Agree (35.3%) and Strongly Agree (64.7%) that they were aware of

LABE’s Home Based ECD at the HLCs, only 5.9% agreed to having performed all the tasks required of

them to support Home Based ECD while 70.6% were uncertain. Further analysis revealed that with

specific statements defining support of Informal Home Based ECD, 23.5% of the 70.6% respondents

who were uncertain moved to being sure that they were supportive of Informal Home Based ECD.

District Officials’ Support of Informal Home-based ECD

• Table 42 reveals that district officials mostly get actively involved in DIRECT ACTIVITY

IMPLEMENTATION (41.2%) while getting involved in RESOURCE MOBILISATION is the most challenging

for them (27.5%). This is partly explained by LABE’s strategic projects’ implementation designs that

directly engage partners in activity implementation.

Using a combination of questions under three critical support areas of; RESOURCE MOBILISATION,

DIRECT ACTIVITY IMPLEMENTATION and SUPPORT ADVOCACY, a respondent had to either ‘Agree’ or

‘Strongly Agree’ to at least one of the questions in each support area for them to qualify as having been

supportive of Informal Home Based ECD. Table 43 below summarises the different responses given by

the district officials in relation to their support of Informal home-based ECD

47

Table 43: Summary of district officials supportive of informal home based ECD

TRUE* represents the respondent who satisfies the criteria for being supportive to Informal Home Based

ECD

• According to the results in Table 42, much as the district officials are aware of ECD provisions in their

districts including LABE’s home –based ECD approach and have even performed tasks to support

home-based ECD (as seen Table 43) only 5 (29%) of the 17 district officials were supportive of

Informal home-based ECD. This is so, because they have concentrated on only one aspect of direct

activity implementation neglecting the other equally important aspects of resource mobilisation and

supportive advocacy.


i) LABE should put focus on helping the district officials understand why home-based ECD is

important enough to be made one of the priorities during the budgeting and planning

exercise. This will be one step to facilitating the process of raising local resources and

reflecting home-based ECD in parish, sub-county and district plans.

ii) Recognise and award efforts made by the district officials to fulfill the various aspects of

supporting home-based ECD. This can be done in a competitive way at different levels

throughout the year.

48

2.3.2 Outcome 2: Supportive parenting and child-rearing practices to improve school

readiness for the most disadvantaged families in the new sites

A total of 80 parents, 20 per district were interviewed from Baylor’s OVC project in Kyenjojo district,

Western Uganda. 53.8% of the observed parents were female as seen in Table 44 below.

Table 44: Sample of Parents


FEMALE 43 53.8%

MALE 37 46.2%

TOTAL 80 100.0%

2.3.2.2d: Examples of parents using parenting skills to make positive changes in their lives

and support their children’s school readiness

To collect information on parenting practices, the parents were asked about their interaction with their

children in the past month. Interaction activities used were related to children’s school readiness like;

storytelling, playing with the children, availing play materials, escorting children to the HLC, sharing a

meal, following up on children’ learning progress and making contributions towards the requirements of

the HLC.

Table 45: Parents’ responses on interacting with their children in the past month No INTERACTION ACTIVITY NEVER ONCE TWICE THRICE MORE THAN

THREE

TIMES

1 In the last month, I have engaged my

children in story telling

68% 23% 8% 1% 1%

2 In the last month, I have played with my

children for more than 20 minutes

65% 26% 5% 4% 0%

3 In the last month, I have made/bought

play materials for my children

56% 25% 15% 4% 0%

4 In the last month, I have shared at least

'one meal' everyday with my children

48% 19% 13% 11% 10%

5 In the last month, I have escorted my

children to the HLC

64% 24% 9% 4% 0%

6 In the last month, I have visited the HLC

to check on my children’s progress

84% 13% 1% 1% 1%

7 In the last month, I have made a

contribution towards the HLC

Requirements (Children's feeding,

Supporting PE, Play Material Maintenance)

81% 18% 1% 0% 0%

AVERAGE RESPONSE 66% 21% 7% 4% 2%

49

Parents responses (Table 45) above showed that;

• 68% of the parents had not engaged their children in storytelling, 65% had not played with their

children for more than 20 minutes and 48% had not shared a meal even once on a daily basis with their

children. Most parents blamed this on the lack of time as they had to focus on making ends meet, while

some said they were not aware that they had to do these activities with their children. 56% of the

parents had not made or bought play materials and said that the children were able to make their own

with support of their older siblings. 64% of the parents had not escorted their children to the HLC and

84% had not followed their children’s progress at the HLC. Further investigations revealed that this was

a precedent set from the existing relationship between parents and schools. A culture has been

developed that school matters are to be left to the teachers. Lastly, 81% of the parents had not made

any contribution towards the HLC requirements, most likely because the Baylor OVC project design

catered for HLC requirements’ provision.

• According to the project design, a parent interacting with their child more than three times a

month would be the ideal situation. Looking across all interaction activities in Table 45, on average

only 2% of the parents had interacted with their children more than three times in the past month.

To learn more about parenting practices parents were also asked about the discipline approaches used

in their households in the past month.

Table 46: Parents’ responses on discipline approaches they used in the past month NO DISCIPLINE APPROACH NEVER ONCE TWICE THRICE MORE

THAN

THREE

TIMES

NON VIOLENT DISCIPLINE APPROACHES

1 Taking away something the child likes or

privileges

16% 44% 28% 10% 3%

2 Explaining why something (the behaviour) was

wrong

81% 14% 5% 0% 0%

3 Giving the child something else to do 69% 24% 4% 4% 0%

AVERAGE 55% 27% 12% 5% 1%

VIOLENT DISCIPLINE APPROACHES

4 Beating the child with bare hands on the bottom 15% 21% 25% 35% 4%

5 Beating the child with a hard object 9% 20% 49% 13% 10%

6 Slapping on the face 6% 26% 46% 16% 5%

7 Shaking, pushing or pulling the child 10% 30% 29% 25% 6%

8 Shouting/Screaming/Yelling at the child 4% 34% 25% 31% 6%

9 Calling the child derogatory names 1% 31% 33% 30% 5%

AVERAGE 8% 27% 34% 25% 6%

• Majority (92%) of the parents (the total of those who used the approaches once, twice, thrice

and more than three times) were using violent approaches to discipline their children as illustrated

by Table 46. The two most commonly used violent approaches were ‘Calling children derogatory

50

names (99%)’ and ‘Shouting, Screaming and Yelling at the children (96%)’. Out of the 8% of the parents

who did not use violent approaches, 4 parents further commented that they did not do so because

the children were lucky to have kept in line that month.

• Only 45% (the total of those who used the approaches once, twice, thrice and more than three

times) of the parents used non-violent approaches especially ‘Taking away something the child likes or

privileges’ to discipline their children. However, on many occasions this comes after one or other

violent approach. For example, slapping the child and then stopping them from going to play. When

asked why they do not use non-violent approaches for example explaining why something (the

behavior) was wrong, 5 parents responded that the children are not yet mature enough to

understand words, they only understand actions.

• From the above findings (Table 46), 66% (53 of the sampled parents) were still using old

parenting practices for rearing children.

2.3.2.2e: New types of ECD resources used by PEs/VHTs in new sites

In contrast with the PEs in the four project districts, no data about this indicator on PEs and VHTs in

the new sites was collected. This was because the ECD resources had not yet been developed and

unlike some PEs in the four project districts, those in new sites had not had any prior training in

materials production. Consequently, they were not expected to have developed any new types of

materials using the ECD resources.

2.3.3 Outcome 3: Community ownership of HLCs enhanced to continue providing expanded

scope of ECD supportive activities

79 members of 20 HLCMCs, 5 committees from each of the project targeted districts were

interviewed as seen in Table 47 below.

Table 47: Sample of the HLCs whose HLCMC members participated NO DISTRICT HOME LEARNING CENTRES Respondents

1 GULU ADAK GUNYA LAGOT LIBI OTEGE WIPOLO 18

2 NWOYA GEYI GUNA KAMCOO POLIRO WIIGORO 21

3 KOBOKO DIOBE JIRO MINGA PAKUJO YAMBURA 23

4 MOYO ASAKWE IBAHWE KAGERA LEGU NORTH NDIRINDIRI 17

TOTAL 79


i) Parents should be supported to understand why purposeful interaction with their children

for example, sharing a meal, storytelling, following up children’s learning progress is

important for child development. They should also be showed how to integrate interaction

activities within their day to day schedules without interfering with their work.

ii) Support parents to understand positive parenting practices including disciplining.

iii) Parents who are ‘positive deviants’ should be used as role models for others.

51

2.3.2.3d: Attendance and contribution of Committee members in the HLC meetings

A team of informed members were selected to represent their HLCMC. This team had to agree on a

common response to the different opinion statements which represented the views of their entire

management committee. Table 48 presents the responses of the 20 Home Learning Centre

Management Committees.

Table 48: HLCMC members’ opinions on attendance and contribution of members in meetings

OPINION STATEMENTS STRONGLY

DISAGREE

DISAGREE UNCERTAIN AGREE STRONGLY

AGREE

1 We have been adequately trained

in our roles as HLCMC

0% 0% 10% 55% 35%

2 At least HALF of the HLCMC members understand their roles

0% 20% 20% 45% 15%

3 All HLCMC members are capable

of performing their roles

5% 20% 10% 40% 25%

4 A HLCMC should hold a meeting

at least once a month

0% 0% 15% 30% 55%

5 There is need to keep records of

our HLCMC meetings

0% 5% 15% 55% 25%

6± At least HALF of the members

attend the HLCMC meetings

regularly

15% 40% 5% 25%± 15%±

6± represents the Key attendance triangulation question

Basing on the assumption that adequate training is one of the factors leading to attendance and

contribution by HLCMC members in meetings, the 79 selected respondents were first asked to give

their opinion on whether their committee members were adequately trained. Members of 90% of the

HLCMCs agreed (55%) and strongly agreed (35%) that they have been adequately trained in their roles

(Table 48). This was attributed to the fact that most of the HLCMC members served and had been

trained under the RARE project. However, they all noted that they will need refresher trainings since

some of their members are new and specific trainings for all of them on new tasks that they are

expected to do in the new project.

• While members of only 60% of the HLCMCs agreed (45%) and strongly agreed (15%) that at

least half of their members understood their roles. members of 65% of the HLCMCs agreed (40%) and

strongly agreed (25%) that all their members were capable of performing their roles. Some of the

reasons given for this situation included; their willingness to volunteer, they are trainable, they are

members of the community and many have experience serving on the HLCMCs.

• When they were asked for their opinions on how regular a committee should hold meetings

and the need to keep records, members of 85% of the HLCMCs agreed (30%) and strongly agreed

(55%) that they should at least hold monthly meetings while members of 80% of the HLCMCs agreed

(55%) and strongly agreed (25%) that there is need to keep records of their HLCMC meetings (Table

48). However, a document review of the 20 HLCMC meeting minutes to find out how regularly they

had held meetings in the last 3 months revealed that; 7 (35%) had held meetings irregularly and only 5

(25%) had regularly held monthly meetings while 8 (40%) had no records for verification (Figure 24).

52

For the HLCMC to qualify as having held meetings regularly, they must have held at least one meeting

every month. The finding indicates that there is a big gap between the knowledge and the practice of

the HLCMC members that needs to be bridged.

Figure 24: HLCMCs holding monthly meetings over a three months' period (February, March &

April)

To collect information on HLCs with members regularly attending HLCMC meetings, a further

document review of the meeting minutes was done and an average of the Individual Percentage

Attendance (IPA) of members was computed to represent their HLC Average Percentage Attendance (APA).

A HLC had to have an Average Percentage Attendance (APA) of at least 50% to qualify as having had its

HLCMC members attending meetings regularly.

Individual Percentage Attendance = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑚𝑒𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟𝑠’ 𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑎𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒

𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝐻𝐿𝐶𝑀𝐶 𝑚𝑒𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑠 ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑎𝑠𝑡 3 𝑚𝑜𝑛𝑡ℎ𝑠

APA of a HLC = ∑ 𝐼𝑃𝐴 (𝑛

1 𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑑𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝐴𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒)

𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟(𝑛) 𝑜𝑓 𝐻𝐿𝐶𝑀𝐶 𝑚𝑒𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟𝑠 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑎𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒

Table 49: Percentage attendance of members in HLCMC meetings AVERAGE PERCENTAGE

ATTENDANCE NUMBER OF HLCs PERCENTAGE

GROUPED

CUMULATIVE %s

HLCs with no records 8 40% 40%

00% - 24% 2 10%

25% - 49% 2 10% 20%

50% - 74% 7 35%

75% - 100% 1 5% 40%

TOTAL 20 100%

Key

• Although there wasn’t a uniform frequency/pattern of holding meetings across the 20 HLCs,

results showed that; only 40% (8) HLCMCs had members with an average percentage attendance of

HLCs with no Records

HLCs with Members averaging less than 50% attendance

HLCs with Members averaging 50% attendance or more

40%35%

25%

NO RECORDS IRREGULAR REGULAR

53

50% and more recorded (Table 49). This document review finding was validated by the responses on

Opinion statement six (6±) in Table 48 which showed that 40% of the respondents Strongly Agreed

(15%) and Agreed (25%) that at least Half of the HLCMC members attended meetings regularly.

2.3.2.3e: Variety of community-developed initiatives happening in HLCs

All 40 HLCs participated in responding to this indicator as seen in Table 50

Table 50: Participating HLCs

District HLCs

Gulu Bobayo, Oguru, Otege, Kiteny, Lagotilibi, Adak, Lukali, Gunya, Kwanber, CetDyang

Nwoya Baraminy, Cambedo, Kalanga Guna, Geyi, Namawal, Kamcoo, Wiigoro, Poliiro, Gok. A,

Agweng

Moyo Kagera, Ibahwe, Asakwe, Ndirindiri, Legu North, Legu South, Awara, Amatura, Liwa North,

Obogubu

Koboko Cornerstone, Minga, Jiro, Dranya, Pakujo, Diobe, St. Kizito, Yambura, Anika, Alero, Arabule,

Tanyaji, Ropoli

The community-developed initiatives were categorized into three; Economic (including VSLAs, HLC

gardens, HLC granaries, Crafts), Health (Immunisation camps, counseling) and Social (community

meetings like LCs, clan, cultural, religious, Drama).


The findings suggest that;

i) LABE should consider giving HLCMC members refresher trainings on their roles to cater for

the new members as well as organise specific trainings to equip the HLCMCs for their new

tasks.

ii) HLCMCs need to be supported to schedule their meetings to take place alongside regular

project activities.

iii) Specific training on holding meetings and writing minutes will be helpful for the HLCMCs to

guide them on records keeping. However, given the findings on the gap between the knowledge

and practice of the HLCMC members, this alone will not be enough. There will be need to

think about regular hands-on support supervision and role modeling by the programme officers

on how to do some of the tasks expected of the HLCMC members to ensure they not only do

these tasks regularly but also correctly.

54

Figure 25: Variety of Initiatives at the HLCs

• Figure 25 shows that most of the HLCs (22 HLCs) had social community-developed initiatives.

This indicated that these were easier to start and manage compared to the other categories. 10 HLCs

had health community-developed initiatives especially immunisation camps and VHT services.

• Although the study found all the three categories of community-developed initiatives at the

HLCs, this indicator focused on the economic community-developed initiative to assess the ability of

the community to support and sustain learning activities at the HLCs. Results show that only 7 HLCs

had started economic community-developed initiatives like VSLAs and HLC gardens. 4 of the 7 HLCs

with economic community-developed initiatives were VSLAs however, these were general and not

focused on supporting education activities at these HLCs as the project intends them to do.


The findings indicate that it is easier to start and manage social community-developed initiatives.

i) LABE needs to consider selling this idea to HLCs which have not yet started, and at the

same time capitalize on these social community-developed initiatives for community

mobilisation.

ii) Community members need to be helped to understand why VSLAs are important and

central in sustaining activities at the HLCs.

iii) HLCs will need hands-on support to start and run education focused VSLAs. In order to

maximize resources, LABE needs to consider how often support staff visit the HLCs

especially during VSLA meetings. Experiences from implementation of other VSLA models

have shown that it is a necessity for support staff to attend all the VSLA meetings during

the first cycle.

iv) Given how supporting the HLCs will require investment of a lot of time, it will be best for

LABE to consider a progressive phase – based approach in bringing on board the HLCs

starting with the early adopters to ensure quick uptake and availability of role models for

the late adopters.

55

2.3.4 Outcome 4: Improved learning outcomes for pre-school children from HLCs and

parents

2.3.2.4d: Parents have a positive perception of the impact of Home Based ECD on their

children

173 Parents (53.2% Female) were interviewed in 20 HLCs across all the 4 districts

Table 51: Participating Parents


FEMALE 92 53.2%

MALE 81 46.8%

TOTAL 173 100.0%

Focus Group Discussions with at least 5 parents at HLCs were conducted to explore their perceptions

of home-based ECD. The results indicate that all parents perceived home – based ECD as having a big

impact in terms of solving the ECD access challenge while more than half of them believed that children

who go to HLCS generally had a better performance than those who didn’t. (Table 52).

Table 52: Parents’ perceptions of the impact of home based ECD on their children NO OPINION STATEMENT STRONGLY

DISAGREE DISAGREE UNCERTAIN AGREE STRONGLY

AGREE

1 The home learning centre is easily

accessible by all children including those

with special learning needs (physical,

mental, visual and hearing impairments)

0% 0% 0% 54% 46%

2 The contact time between PEs and

children in a week is sufficient

0% 1% 55% 36% 8%

3 Home learning centres are preparing our

children to join primary one

0% 0% 58% 36% 6%

4 Children going to HLCs have a better

performance1 than those who don’t

0% 0% 43% 48% 9%

5 Home based learning has positively

changed my attitude towards the

importance of ECD and education as a

whole

0% 16% 31% 45% 8%


changed my community members’ attitude

towards the importance of ECD and

education as a whole

4% 18% 36% 37% 5%

7 I would recommend a

neighbour/friend/relative/another

community to enroll their children for

Home Based ECD at HLCs

0% 9% 46% 32% 13%

AVERAGE RESPONSES 1% 6% 38% 41% 13%

1 Performance in this case refers to the general way in which the child conducts themselves in relating with others

56

• All of the parents agreed (54%) and strongly agreed (46%) that HLCs are easily accessible by all

children. One notable argument they gave in favour of HLCs was that, even lame children who cannot

take themselves to schools (as they are far away) are able to access the HLCs given that they are

stationed very close to them in homesteads. Many commented that, unlike schools, HLCs accept and

take care of all kinds of children.

• 55% of the parents were uncertain whether the contact time between PEs and children in a

week is sufficient. Their justification for this was that the experience they have had is with children

going to school for 5 days a week. However, they noted that the good thing about HLCs is that they

are open all the time and children can go there to play and learn any time any day unlike schools.

• 58% of the parents were uncertain whether HLCs prepare their children to join primary one.

The main reason given for this was that although they have heard stories from other parents about this,

they are yet to have their own experience with their own children as they had just joined HLCs.

• 57% of the parents agreed (48%) and strongly agreed (9%) that children going to HLCs have a

better performance than those who don’t. Sharing their experience, parents said children who go to

the HLCs are able to sing, tell riddles, count numbers and even say the alphabet letters within a short

period of joining. Apart from the cognitive aspects, it was also noted that these children do not fear

people, are not shy and interact openly with their peers.

• The parents believed that home-based learning had not only positively changed their personal

attitude towards the importance of ECD and education as a whole (53% of the parents agreed (45%)

and strongly agreed (8%)), but also that of their community members (52% of parents agreed (37%) and

strongly agreed (5%).

• Findings also showed that while 45% would recommend others to enroll their children for

home-based ECD at HLCs, 46% were uncertain. This implies that parents view home-based ECD as an

approach that is worthy trying.

• Overall 54% of the parents (the sum of the percentage agreed and strongly agreed)

acknowledged the contribution of home-based ECD to their children’s education.


The findings indicate that home – based ECD is generally appreciated by the parents. To capitalize on

these gains and improve the situation further, LABE should;

i) Help the parents understand how the learning under home – based ECD is structured and

then leave them to take the decision on contact hours between the PEs and the children as

long as they don’t go below the stipulated minimum contact hours.

ii) Organise community events to share the success stories and invite stakeholders like parents,

government authorities and teachers to share their experiences with children who join P1

from HLCs and those who are not to clarify the role home-based ECD plays in preparing the

children to smoothly transit to primary school.

iii) Capitalise on the positive attitude of the parents towards home-based ECD to document

best practices and success stories and share them widely.

57

2.3.2.4e Teachers have a positive perception of the impact of Home Based ECD on

children’s learning outcomes

Table 53: Participating Teachers


FEMALE 20 55.6%

MALE 16 44.4%

TOTAL 36 100.0%

36 teachers (55.6% Female) in 12 schools in all the 4 districts responded to a self-administered

questionnaire. 26 (72.2%) of these teachers were newly transferred to the schools or had just been

allocated the P1 class and had not had experience with the project before. Table 54 shows the findings

on teachers’ perceptions of home-based ECD on children learning outcomes categorised into social,

cognitive and motor skills development.

Table 54: Teachers’ perceptions of the impact of home based ECD on children learning

outcomes NO OPINION STATEMENTS STRONGLY

DISAGREE

DISAGREE UNCERTAIN AGREE STRONGLY

AGREE

1 The Home Based ECD has a positive impact

on the learning and performance2 of children

0% 3% 58% 28% 11%

2 Children from HLCs have developed social

skills (participate in group activities, take

turns and responsibility and relate with adults

more easily) as compared to other children

that have never had any ECD intervention before joining primary one

0% 17% 33% 42% 8%

3 Children from HLCs have developed

cognitive skills (learn new concepts easily,

don’t forget easily and have a rich vocabulary) as compared to other children that have

never had any ECD intervention before

joining primary one

0% 11% 44% 33% 11%

4 Children from HLCs have developed gross

motor skills as compared to other children

that have never had any ECD intervention

before joining primary one

0% 8% 36% 44% 11%

AVERAGE 0% 10% 43% 37% 10%

• 58% of the teachers were uncertain whether home based ECD has a positive impact on the

learning and performance of children. This is probably because as stated above most of the teachers

were new to the project experience.

• SOCIAL SKILLS: 56% of the teachers agreed (42%) and strongly agreed (8%) that HLC

graduates have developed social skills compared to other children joining P1 without any prior ECD

2 Performance in this case refers to the academic performance assessed using tests and examinations

58

intervention. Teachers commented that in comparison with children who did not go to HLCs, HLC

graduates were easier to manage and work with. They could easily take turns when playing with their

peers; they shared comfortably, wanted to take responsibilities in class for example carrying the

teachers’ books and did not seem to fear talking with the teachers.

• COGNITIVE SKILLS: While 44% of the teachers were uncertain 44% of them agreed (33%)

and strongly agreed (11%) that children from HLCs have developed cognitive skills as compared to

other children that have never had any ECD intervention before joining primary one. Teachers noted

that HLC graduates learn new things faster and do not easily forget them. These children also have a

better word vocabulary in the local language and it becomes very easy for them to understand what the

teacher is talking about.

• MOTOR SKILLS: 55% of the teachers agreed (44%) and strongly agreed (11%) that children

from HLCs have developed motor skills as compared to other children that have never had any ECD

intervention before joining primary one. It was noted that these children handle the physical education

activities like running, frog jumping, rope skipping, bottle filling races with more precision than their

counter parts.

• Overall 47% of the teachers (the sum of the percentage agreed and strongly agreed) believed

home based ECD had a positive impact on the children’s education.


The findings indicate that some teachers are still uncertain about the impact of home-based ECD on

the children’ learning outcomes. There is need to clear this uncertainty and this could be done by;

i) Carrying out specific studies to determine with concrete evidence the impact of home-

based ECD on the different categories of learning outcomes.

ii) Supporting PEs to conduct continuous assessment whose results will be compared with

the ELDS bench mark results to assess the improvement the children are making.

iii) Sharing the results of these studies with a wider audience

59

CHAPTER THREE: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

ELDS ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

1. There is need to mobilize the community to enroll more learners and retain them in HLCs

2. Regular training of PEs to equip them with more relevant knowledge, skills and attitude to effectively

handle young children for example, LABE may consider encouraging PE to enroll for training of caregivers

under the in-service program supported by GPE and managed by TIET Department at Kitgum and Gulu

Core PTCs so that they can acquire a certificate that is nationally recognized.

3. LABE should continue talking to members of Village Health Teams (VHT) to advise/sensitize parents

to take their children for immunization to guarantee good health

4. LABE should procure and distribute copies of ELDS to all HLCs; and organize a training of PEs in

ELDS

5. The learners’ quest and eagerness to learn and participate in every learning activity needs to be

exploited by PEs to motivate learners to learn and keep in them in HLCs.

6. LABE should consider increasing the number and variety of game facilities at each center in order to

cater for children with different abilities. For example, puzzles, stacking boxes of various shapes and sizes,

containers of different sizes to be filled with water or sand or dust for the worst.

7. Preferably, provide separate play facilities for relatively grown up children to allow the younger ones

have opportunity to access other play facilities.

8. Strengthen the practice of supervised play by encouraging more parent teachers to supervise children

while playing this helps children to understand the reasons why they play as a social activity done

peacefully.

9. LABE should liaise with National Curriculum Development Center (NCDC) to adapt the existing

national learning Framework based on formal education system to suit non formal system.

ELDS CONCLUSION

The performance of the learners in ELDS was rated Novice. Efforts being implemented by LABE will

definitely help to improve the learning situation at the Home Learning Centers.

QUALITATIVE INDICATOR ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

1. In computing the attendance of HLCMC members in the future, we recommend management to use

60% as the benchmark for regular attendance of HLCMC members in all the meetings.

2. In most of the Indicators for the project, Moyo seemed to be lagging behind in implementation. We

therefore recommend management to look into strategies to bring Moyo’s implementation

performance closer or beyond the rest of the other districts.

3. We further recommend the M&E and management to as much as possible keep using/employing the

same research assistants as used in this Baseline assessments. This will tap into the expertise,

knowledge about the project and the specific research areas that they have been trained in.

4. LABE management should also consider developing a database for storing this data from the

baseline in electronic form and for any forthcoming data

5. We also request management to keep modifying the existing tools while developing others

depending on the needs and changes to the project.

60

6. Management should devote resources into research and generation of concrete facts about the

project especially through conducting Randomised Control Tests/Experimental especially for the

children in order to generate more empirical facts about the impacts of Home Based ECD. This

could be used to create awareness about Home Based ECD and policy changes. Furthermore, there

are other aspects of the project that need to be explored through research for example the

feasibility of the project in other contexts.

61

REFERENCES

Government of Uganda (2008) The Education Act. Entebbe: UPPC

LABE (2016) 2016- 2020 Strategic Plan. Kampala: LABE

MoESTS (2015) Early Learning and Development Standards for 3 and 5 yearolds. Kampala MoESTS.

NCDC (2005) The Early Learning Framework Kampala: NCDC

UNEB (2015) The Achievement of Primary School Pupils and Teachers in Uganda in Numeracy and Literacy

in English: A summary of 2015 NAPE Report. Kampala: UNEB

Sekaran, U. (2002). Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach, 4th Edition. John Wiley &

Sons, Inc.

62

APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Filled-in Quantitative Indicator Matrix (Indicator 4a)

Table 55: Filled in Quantitative Indicator Matrix for Outcome 4 Outcome 4

Improved learning outcomes for pre-school children from HLCs and parents

Number-based (quantitative) indicators

Indicator Baselin

e

Overall

project

target

Numbers benefitting

this year

Numbers benefitting since

the start of the project

Total Male Female Total Male Female

4a Pre-schoolers demonstrate a 35%

performance improvement on their

learning outcomes as compared to the

DES Baseline Assessment at the end of

the learning cycle

0.2 35.2 201 109 92 201 109 92

63

Appendix 2: Filled-in Qualitative Indicator Matrix

Table 56: Filled-in Qualitative Indicators Matrix

OUTCOME 1

Informal home-based Early Childhood Development (ECD) model integrated into national systems of ECD

Indicator

number

Indicator description Baseline – description of

the situation at start of the

project (if appropriate)

Target – description of

situation you want to

see at end of the

project (if appropriate)

Data collection

methods (including

frequency of

collection for each

method)

1d Extent to which

project informal ECD

approaches have been

shared and adapted in

national systems

The informal Home Based

ECD policy has been

reflected in the 2007 ECD

policy with no government

efforts to get it

implemented

Home Based ECD

framework and

supportive materials

being used nationwide

with the support of

government structures

Interviews with key

stakeholders e.g.

MoES, NCDC,

MoGLSD; produced

guidelines/resources,

final evaluation

1e Parent Educators

demonstrating usage of

informal home based

ECD resources

The observed Parent

Educators had no

knowledge on how to use

the informal Home Based

ECD materials

Most of the trained

parent educators

(80%) demonstrate

usage of government

approved resources to

develop learning

materials, conduct

multi-age sessions and

carry out continuous

assessments

Observation

checklist

Interviews

1f Support of informal

home-based ECD by

DEOs, CDOs, CCTs

and local government

authorities

29% (5 of the sampled 17)

district officials had

supported informal Home

Based ECD in different

ways

Monitoring of LABE’s

activities especially at

the HLCs integrated

into the official district

activities

Focus groups and

interviews with

district technical

staff and local

authorities

Case studies

Action research and

Final evaluation

64

OUTCOME 2

Supportive parenting and child-rearing practices to improve school readiness for the most disadvantaged families

in the new sites

Qualitative indicators:

2d Examples of parents

using parenting skills

to make positive

changes in their lives

and support their

children’s school

readiness

66% (53 of the sampled

80) of the parents were

still using old parenting

practices for rearing

children

Majority (80%) of the

targeted parents in new

sites adopt new

parenting skills and

practices (like preparing

nutritious foods for

children, making play

materials and toys, telling

and reading stories and allowing children time to

play.)

Focus groups and

interviews with

parents, PEs and

teachers

Case studies

Action research and

final evaluation

2e New types of ECD

resources used by

PEs/VHTs in new sites

0%; No PEs nor VHTs

had had access to new

ECD resources

Majority of PEs/VHTs

(80%) in new sites using

the approved Home Based ECD resources

(like the framework,

guides and continuous

assessments) to support

teaching of pre-school

children at the HLCs

Feedback from PEs

and local ECD

providers (e.g. VHTs) on usefulness

of resources

OUTCOME 3

Community ownership of HLCs enhanced to continue providing expanded scope of ECD supportive activities


3d Attendance and

contribution of

Committee members

in the HLC meetings

40% (8 of the sampled

20 HLCMCs) had

members regularly

attending HLCMC

meetings

Majority of the HLCMC

members (85%) attending

meetings regularly and

participating in discussions

Meeting minutes,

follow up on

action points

3e Variety of

community-

developed initiatives

happening in HLCs

35% (7 of all the 40

HLCs) had started

initiatives like VSLAs,

HLC gardens that

support children’s

learning

All HLCs (100%) to have

started at least a HLC

development initiative (like a

VSLA, HLC garden, granary

for the children’s feeding

program)at the end of the

project

Observations of

activities in

HLCs, HLC

work plans,

interviews with

local leaders

65

OUTCOME 4

Improved learning outcomes for pre-school children from HLCs and parents


Indicator

number

Indicator

description

Baseline –

description of

the situation at

start of the

project (if

appropriate)

Target –

description of

situation you

want to see at

end of the project

(if appropriate)

Data collection methods

(including frequency of

collection for each method)

4d Parents have a

positive perception

of the impact of

Home Based ECD

on their children

54% of the

parents

acknowledged

the contribution

of Home Based

ECS to their

children’s

education

85% of project

targeted parents

fully appreciate

the benefits and

contribution of

Home Based

ECD to their

children’s

education

Interviews

Interviews

Focus Group Discussions

4e Teachers have a

positive perception

of the impact of

Home Based ECD

on children’s learning outcomes

47% of the

targets

perceived Home

Based ECD as

impactful to the children’s

education

95% of the

targeted teachers

appreciate the

contribution of

Home Based ECD to children’s

learning

outcomes

Interviews

Focus Group Discussions

66

Appendix 3: ELDS Quantitative Assessment tool

ASSESSMENT OF PRE-SCHOOL CHILDREN (THREE-YEAR OLD) LEARNING

ACHIEVEMENT LEVELS IN EARLY LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

(ELDS).

A: Information about HLC.

District …………………………………… County/Municipality …………………….

Sub-County/Town Council/Division …………………………………………………..

Parish/Cell/Ward ………………………………………………………………………

Name of HLC Centre ……………………………………..Contact ………………….

Licensed No/Yes ………………Registered No/Yes …………………………………

B: Personal data

1. Surname…………………………Religious Name…………………………………………

2. Date of birth .........................................................................................................

3. Place of Birth

District County Sub-county Parish Village (LC1)

4. Permanent Address

District County Sub-county Parish Village (LC1)

Telephone Contact(s) ……………………………………………………………

5. Was the child immunized? (Tick one)

1.Ye

s

2.

NO

6.Does the child have any health problems (If yes, write the details below)

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………...

7(a)Fathers / Guardian’s Name

……………………………………………..………………………………………………………

(b) Mother/Guardian Name

…………………………..…………………………………………………………………

8.All my parents are alive? (Tick one)

1.Yes 2. NO

67

9. I stay with

Both parents Mother Father Guardian

10. What do your parents do to earn a living?

Farmer Business Civil servant Self employed Other (specify)

C: CAREGIVER PREPAREDNESS AT THE CENTRE (Use a tick (√) to indicate available and an

X for not available).

Materials Available (√) Not Available

(x)

Daily routine

Learning Framework

Early Learning Standards

Outdoor Play Materials

Assessment Records

Progress Charts

Feedback Report Cards

Instructions: Please use a four-point scale (Level 1 to Level 4) to judge the level of performance of each child

against each competence under four domains in section D.

Criteria for Assessment

Level 1 Novice level : Child has little experience to demonstrate the competence.

Level 2 Partial level : Child has limited experience to demonstrate the competence

Level 3 Adequate level: Child has remarkable experience to demonstrate a competence

Level 4 Satisfactory level: Child has outstanding experience to demonstrate the competence

D: LEARNER ACHIEVEMENTS IN THE FIVE DOMAINS OF ELDS:

Domain 1: Cognitive Development Achievement Level

Indicators 1 2 3 4

● Identifies living thing and none living thing in the environment

● Names familiar plants and animals in their environment

● Mentions important places in his/her environment

● Cares for his/her environment

● Identify and purposely use materials in the environment

● Classify objects based on their physical appearance

● Count numbers 1 – 5 orally from memory

● Use appropriate measuring instruments for units

68

● Identity picture/ symbols of a given object

Domain 2: Physical Development Achievement Level

Indicators 1 2 3 4

▪ A child coordinates and balances his/her body parts

▪ Picks an object and transfers it from one hand to another

▪ Differentiates food and non-food items

▪ Can was hands before the meal or after visiting a toilet

▪ Follows safety rules at home and Centre

▪ Asks for help when in pain or frightened

Domain 3: Language Communication and Literacy Achievement Level

Indicators 1 2 3 4

● Responds correctly to simple instructions

● Demonstrates gestures and words in a simple conversation

● Talk about familiar object people, events and actions using

simple and short phrases

● Give simple discussion about a topic with friends

● Interprets simple pictures common in his/her environment

● Holds writing tools correctly

● Copy and print letters or other familiar symbols

Domain 4: Social and Emotional Development Achievement

Level

Indicators 1 2 3 4

● Child knows the names of family members and classroom

● Demonstrates cooperative and socially responsible behaviors

● Demonstrates personal responsibility

● Uses polite and actions with modeling assistance

● Demonstrates leadership and group dynamic skills

● Cares for the safety of others

● Shows concern for someone who is sad or upset

● Encourages appropriate behaviors

● Shows care for personal safety

● Identifies him/herself by name and sex

● Considers the views of peers and adults when succeeds

● Lives by positive example

● Participates in cultural events and routines

● Identifies man-made and God-made creation

Domain 5: Approaches to Learning: Achievement Level

Indicators 1 2 3 4

▪ Demonstrates interest to learn new things and gain experience

▪ Asks simple but logical questions about new and un familiar things

69

▪ Persists to complete challenging tasks

▪ Demonstrates independence in making choices to perform activity

▪ Demonstrates a skill of problem solving in performing day-to-day

activities

▪ Demonstrates movement according to a played rhythm.

Assessor’s Signature …………………………………. ……………………………………..

Assessors Name and phone contact ……………………………………………………….

Date…………………………………………………

70

Appendix 4: Gulu Children sampled for assessment

NO HLC NAME SEX NO HLC NAME SEX 1 Bobayo Lamaro F 27 Oguru Odoch M 2 Boobayo Aloyo F 28 Oguru Adokorac F 3 Bobayo Rubangakere M 29 Oguru Laker F 4 Bobayo Ayella M 30 Oguru Oketayot M 5 Bobayo Ajalorwot F 31 Oguru Ocwee F 6 Otege Okello M 32 Lagotlibi Alimocan M 7 Otege Ocan M 33 Lagotlibi Rubangakene M 8 Otege Adoch F 34 Lagotlibi Laker M 9 Otege Lanyero F 35 Lagotlibi Agenorwot F 10 Otege Apiyo F 36 Lagotlibi Ayero F 11 Kiteny Opiyo M 37 Adak Ajok M 12 Kiteny Aloyo M 38 Adak Opiro M 13 Kiteny Ayeerwot M 39 Adak Rwotomiya M 14 Kiteny Rubangakene M 40 Adak Apwoyocan F 15 Kiteny Auma F 41 Adak Aber F 16 Lukali Atimango F 42 Gunya Lamaro F 17 Lukali Anena F 43 Gunya Aber F 18 Kukali Opiro M 44 Gunya Ocira M 19 Lukali Auma F 45 Gunya Okema M 20 Lukali Komakech M 46 Gunya Ogenrwot M 21 Kwan Ber Aromo M 47 CetDyang Lagum F 22 Kwan Ber AyooLamara F 48 CetDyang Okello M 23 Kwan Ber Abalo F 49 CetDyang Aber F 24 Kwan Ber Oloya M 50 CetDyang Rubangakene M 25 Kwan Ber Rubangakene M 51 CetDyang Anena F 26 Oguru Apwonyrwot F

71

Appendix 5: Nwoya Children sampled for assessment

NO HLC Name Sex NO HLC Name Sex

1 Agweng Ocaya Junior M 26 Cambedo Akello Lisa F

2 Agweng Agenorwot Sunday M 27 Cambedo Acora Blessing F

3 Agweng OromaSibra M 28 Cambedo Akello Barbara F

4 Agweng LamaroSyntia F 29 Cambedo OnencanOsker M

5 Baraminy Akello Innocent F 30 Cambedo Aol Monica F

6 Geyi AloyoDeisy F 31 Cambedo Akello Juliet F

7 Geyi AmarorwotEfsy F 32 Cambedo LakareberGifty F

8 Geyi OgenrwotDerick M 33 Guna AcayoProssy F

9 Geyi Laker Patience F 34 Guna Opiyo Erick M

10 Geyi AgenrwotPrisca F 35 Guna OcenEdimond M

11 Gok A Akwero Harriet F 36 Guna Akello Blessing F

12 Gok A ApioPrisca F 37 Guna Ocira Brian M

13 Gok A Lakareber Eunice F 38 Kamcoo OgenrwotCeaser M

14 Gok A Apiyo Patricia F 39 Namawal Otyang Samuel M

15 Gok A Ojaro Reymond M 40 Namawal AlemaVicent M

16 Gok A Agweng Elvis M 41 Wii Goro AgenrwotPheobe F

17 Gok A OgenMaxwel M 42 Wii Goro Nok Peterson M

18 Poliro Rubangakene Eric M 43 Wii Goro Lubangakene S M

19 Poliro Laker Lidia F 44 Wii Goro Opiyo Erick M

20 Poliro KicaBerSobick M 45 Wii Goro Agenorwot Mica M

21 Poliro DidaDragba M 46 Wii Goro Okema Gerald M

22 Poliro Amito Sandra F 47

Wii Goro AtimangoRacheal

F

23 Poliro Oola Christopher M 48 Wii Goro Ajok Rebecca F

24 Poliro Lukwiya Sunday M 49 Wii Goro AryemoGifty F

25 Wii Goro ApwoyoRwot P F 50 Wii Goro Ogenrwot Joel M

72

Appendix 6: Koboko Children sampled for assessment


1 Alero Media Christine F 26 Arabule SofiAnnet F

2 Alero Atiki Samuel M 27 Arabule Mukilia M

3 Alero MisilaKabadu M 28 Arabule Loki Sadam M

4 Alero Patience Hellen M 29 Arabule ZubedaSiasa F

5 Alero MunakiJackline F 30 Arabule ArikeYanani M

6 Diobe AyikoruKaifa F 31 Jiro MawilaHidaya F

7 Diobe Sorry Yasida M 32 Jiro Simple Hellen F

8 Diobe AsinduJafari M 33 Jiro Maliamungu Moses M

9 Diobe ZawadiHaira F 34 Jiro Kadija Knight F

10 Diobe Juma M 35 Jiro Mandela Benson M

11 Minga MosekaSadad M 36 Pakujo IkimaAlio M

12 Minga Sida Beatrice F 37 Pakujo AnyoleKarim M

13 Minga TindiSafiki M 38 Pakujo Ibrahim Swadick M

14 Minga Munguleni Iren F 39 Pakujo Fatima Easi F

15 Minga Isaac M 40 Pakujo Sivali Ismail M

16 Ropoli SabiriJuma M 41 St.Kizito Mugisha Lucky M

17 Ropoli DorukasMasi F 42 St.Kizito Tayisa Florence F

18 Ropoli Kideni X-tian F 43 St.Kizito Safa Victor M

19 Ropoli Brian Oloah M 44 St.Kizito Ayikoru Beatrice F

20 Ropoli Wayiwayi Emmanuel M 45 St.Kizito Lemeriga James M

21 Tanyaji Koko Brian M 46 Yambura Akangi Anna F

22 Tanyaji Happy Rasma M 47 Yambura Media Chrstine F

23 Tanyaji AateEmmanula M 48 Yambura Tayire Condition M

24 Tanyaji Nadia Hayat F 49 Yambura Kato Hussein M

25 Tanyaji AriyeDaifa M 50 Yambura BelaniNakato F

73

Appendix 7: Moyo Children sampled for assessment


1 Amatura Aganja Adam M 26 Asakwe Drichiru Naira F

2 Amatura Aliga Patrick M 27 Asakwe AbiriaFaiza F

3 Amatura Nasira Jamal M 28 Asakwe AlafiSukra M

4 Amatura TohaKalid M 29 Asakwe TopikiSaida F

5 Amatura Friday Rahman M 30 Asakwe Subura Night F

6 Awara WuyaNasir M 31 Ibahwe Mazapke Bridget F

7 Awara AchedriGadrifu M 32 Ibahwe Bungusolomon M

8 Awara FaidaRamulati F 33 Ibahwe Vunzua Irene F

9 Awara ChandituHayati F 34 Ibahwe Tani Paul M

10 Awara RadriaUdata M 35 Ibahwe MesidruYunice F

11 Kagera Anzo Emmanuel M 36 Legu North KojoRobina F

12 Kagera Muraruku Desire F 37 Legu North Medina Christine F

13 Kagera Amara Edison M 38 Legu North Fortune Acia F

14 Kagera MesikuEvaline F 39 Legu North Modi Joel M

15 Kagera Fungaroo Nixon M 40 Legu North OpiniSaviour M

16 Legu South Poni Viola F 41 Liwa North SifaZubeda F

17 Legu South Kiden Catherine F 42 Liwa North ChandiruMauzu F

18 Legu South ModoronAtiasis M 43 Liwa North Basa Musa M

19 Legu South Ibu Stephen M 44 Liwa North YukuneSubura M

20 Legu South DumbaSolfa M 45 Obogubu MafikiRashida F

21 Ndirindiri Lucky Benard M 46 Obogubu RasirYeye M

22 Ndirindiri Mundua Harriet F 47 Obogubu Edema Geofrey M

23 Ndirindiri Ambayo Nicholas M 48 Obogubu OndoaSammu M

24 Ndirindiri Amidru Innocent F 49 Obogubu Azamaku Ismail M

25 Ndirindiri KojokiJackline F

74

Appendix 8: Regional/District Performance Comparisons

REGION DISTRICT DOMAIN Novice Partial Adequate Satisfactory Total

West Nile Koboko Cognitive development 20 29 01 0 0 50

Physical development 24 26 00 0 0 50

Language and communication 27 23 0 0 0 0 50

Social and emotion

development 30 20 0 0 0 0 50

Approaches to learning 33 11 00 00 50

Koboko total 134 109 01 00 250

Moyo Cognitive development 36 14 00 00 50

Physical development 38 12 00 00 50

Language and communication 49 01 00 00 50

Social and emotion

development 46 04 00 00 50


Moyo Total 219 31 00 00 250

Northern

Uganda

Gulu Cognitive development 30 21 00 00 51



Social and emotion



Gulu Total 197 58 00 00 255

Nwoya Cognitive development 50 00 00 00 50



Social and emotion



Nwoya Total 242 05 00 00 250

75

Appendix 9: Qualitative tools Used

A. NATIONAL LEVEL STAKEHOLDERS’ QUESTIONNAIRE

LITERACY AND ADULT BASIC EDUCATION

NATIONAL LEVEL STAKEHOLDERS’ QUESTIONNAIRE

Name of the institution you work with: ………………………………………………………………..…………………..………………. Date: ………….……

Please indicate your level of agreement with each of the statements below by ticking () in one of the

columns 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 that best describes your opinion and give a reason for your choice in the extreme right column of the table

# QUESTION 1 2 3 4 5 What is your reason for this response?

1 LABE’s Home Based ECD model is contributing to increased children’s access to ECD in marginalised communities

2 Government is supporting the adoption of LABE’s Home Based ECD Model

3 LABE’s Home Based ECD model is being shared widely at national level platforms

4 Home Based ECD support materials including the complementary learning framework, caregivers’ companion, continuous assessment guides are being shared widely

5 LABE’s Home Based ECD model has been adopted in national systems

This self-administered questionnaire is meant to collect data for the SURE baseline study on LABE’s Home Based ECD. The information from key national level stakeholders will be used for better implementation and scale up of the Home Based ECD model. The information you give will only be used for learning, documentation and communication to the wider community and will remain confidential so DO NOT indicate your NAME anywhere on this questionnaire. Contact LABE on these numbers +256-773-208194 or +256-701-1121881 Email: [email protected] in case of any queries. Thank you so much

mailto:[email protected]

76


6 LABE’s parenting approach and practices are being adopted in national systems

1. How did you learn about LABE’s Home Based ECCE Approach? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

2. Suggest any recommendations to improve LABE’S Home Based ECCE approach for

implementation and scale up country-wide ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………………………………………………………………………….………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………………………………….………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………………………………………………………………………………..……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………………………………………………………………………………………….……………………………………………………………………………..…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………

THANK YOU SO MUCH

77

B. PARENT EDUCATOR OBSERVATION GUIDE

LITERACY AND ADULT BASIC EDUCATION

PARENT EDUCATOR OBSERVATION GUIDE

Name of the Parent Educator: ………………………………………………………………………………………………… Name of the HLC: ………………………………………………..…………………..………………. Date: ………….……

Please indicate your observation to each of the statements below by ticking () in one of the columns 0=No Observation, 1=Not Satisfactory, 2=Satisfactory, 3=Very Effective to rate Parent Educator performance

and give a reason for your choice in the extreme right column of the table

# OBSERVATION AREAS 0 1 2 3 What is your reason for this rating 1 Availability of Informal Home Based ECD

materials (Learning Framework, Caregiver’s Companion, Continuous Assessment Guide )

2 Availability of a planning book with developed session plans aligned to Informal Home Based ECD materials

3 Following a developed session plan to facilitate a session

4 Availability and organisation of a variety of Teaching/Learning resources aligned to Informal Home Based ECD materials

5 Appropriate usage of a variety of learning materials during a session

6 Ability to identify learner competences and abilities

7 Usage of age/level-appropriate activities during an ECD learning session

8 Ability to use appropriate continuous assessment activities

This Observation Guide is meant to collect data for the SURE baseline study on LABE’s Home Based ECD. The information will be used for better implementation and scale up of the Home Based ECD model. The information will only be used for learning, documentation and communication to the wider community and will remain confidential. Contact LABE on these numbers +256-773-208194 or +256-701-1121881 Email: [email protected] in case of any queries. Thank you so much


78

# OBSERVATION AREAS 0 1 2 3 What is your reason for this rating 9 Ability to support learners with Special

learning Needs

10

Ability to use age/level appropriate language when interacting with children

11

Evidence of self-assessment and reflection as seen in the session plan comments’ columns

Overall comments/recommendations on the performance of the Parent Educator

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………

………………………………………………………………………….……………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

THANK YOU SO MUCH

79

C. DISTRICT OFFICIALS QUESTIONNAIRE

LITERACY AND ADULT BASIC EDUCATION (LABE) SURE PROJECT BASE LINE ASSESSMENT

DISTRICT OFFICIALS QUESTIONNAIRE

District: …………………………………………… Position: …………..…………………………… (DEO, CDO, CCTs)

Date:………………..

Please indicate your level of agreement with each of the statements below by ticking () in one of the 5

columns that best describes your opinion and give a reason for your choice in the extreme right column of the table. Use the key below 1.Strongly Disagree 2. Disagree 3. Not Certain 4. Agree 5. Strongly Agree


1 I know about all the different types of ECD

provisions in my district

2 I know about LABE’s Home Based ECD at the HLCs

3 I have performed all the tasks required of me to

support Home Based ECD

4 I have used resources from my office/institution to

support Home Based ECD activities and

implementation

5 I have personally campaigned and lobbied for the

devotion of more funds to support Home Based

ECCE in my district

6 I have personally raised or contributed resources to

support Home Based ECCE

I have attended a HLC Management Committee

meeting before at the HLC

I have monitored and/or supervised activities at a

HLC before

I have created awareness about Home Based ECD to

the communities in my district

This self-administered questionnaire is meant to collect data for the SURE baseline study on LABE’s Home Based ECD. The information from key district officials will be used for better implementation and scale up of the Home Based ECD model. The information you give will only be used for learning, documentation and communication to the wider community and will remain confidential so DO NOT indicate your NAME anywhere on this questionnaire. Contact LABE on these numbers +256-773-208194 or +256-701-1121881 Email: [email protected] in case of any queries. Thank you so much


80


I have done advocacy for Home Based ECD in my

local government/ institution/district meetings

I participate and contribute to the registering the

HLC at Sub county level

I have promoted the Home Based ECCE model for

scale up with in and out of my district

Propose other ways in which the Home Based ECCE needs to be supported in the

district

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

THANK YOU SO MUCH

81

D. NEW SITES’ PARENT INTERVIEW GUIDE


NEW SITES’ PARENT INTERVIEW GUIDE

Name: ……………………………..………………………………………………….. Sex: …………………………………………………………….…………………….. Name of the HLC: ………………………………………………………………..………………………. Date: ………….……


columns 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 that best represent the most appropriate practice and give a reason for your choice in the extreme right column of the table

1. NEVER 2. ONCE 3. TWICE 4. THRICE 5. MORE THAN THREE

TIMES

# QUESTION 1 2 3 4 5 What is your reason for this response? 1 In the last month, I have engaged my

children in story telling

2 In the last month, I have played with

my children for more than 20 minutes

3 In the last month, I have made/bought

play materials for my children

4 In the last month, I have shared at

least 'one meal' everyday with my

children

5 In the last month, I have escorted my

children to the HLC

6 In the last month, I have visited the

HLC to check on my children’s

progress

7 In the last month, I have made a

contribution towards the HLC

Requirements (Children's feeding,

This Interview Guide is meant to collect data for the SURE baseline study on LABE’s Home Based ECD. The information will be used for better implementation and scale up of the Home Based ECD model. The information you give will only be used for learning, documentation and communication to the wider community and will remain confidential. Contact LABE on these numbers +256-773-208194 or +256-701-1121881 Email: [email protected] in case of any queries. Thank you so much


82

# QUESTION 1 2 3 4 5 What is your reason for this response? Supporting PE, Play Material

Maintenance)

Parents’ responses on discipline approaches they used in the past month

# DISCIPLINING APPROACH 1 2 3 4 5 What is your reason for this response? NON VIOLENT DISCIPLINE APPROACHES 1 Taking away something the child likes

or privileges

2 Explaining why something (the

behaviour) was wrong

3 Giving the child something else to do

VIOLENT DISCIPLINE APPROACHES 4 Beating the child with bare hands on

the bottom

5 Beating the child with a hard object

6 Slapping on the face

7 Shaking, pushing or pulling the child

8 Shouting/Screaming/Yelling at the child

9 Calling the child derogatory names

THANK YOU SO MUCH

83

E. HLCMC MEMBERS INTERVIEW GUIDE


HLCMC MEMBERS INTERVIEW GUIDE

Name: …………………………….………….…………..……………………………………….. Sex: ………………….. Name of the HLC: …………………………………………………………..………………………. Date: ………….……


columns 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 that best represent the most appropriate practice and give a reason for your choice in the extreme right column of the table 1.Strongly Disagree 2. Disagree 3. Not Certain 4. Agree 5. Strongly Agree

# OPINION STATEMENTS 1 2 3 4 5 What is your reason for this response? 1 We have been adequately trained in

our roles as HLCMC

2 At least HALF of the HLCMC

members understand their roles

3 All HLCMC members are capable of

performing their roles

4 A HLCMC should hold a meeting at

least once a month

5 There is need to keep records of our

HLCMC meetings

Initiatives at the HLCs

This Interview Guide is meant to collect data for the SURE baseline study on LABE’s Home Based ECD. The information will be used for better implementation and scale up of the Home Based ECD model. The information you give will only be used for learning, documentation and communication to the wider community and will remain confidential. Contact LABE on these numbers +256-773-208194 or +256-701-1121881 Email: [email protected] in case of any queries. Thank you so much


84

The Initiative at the HLC Tick Yes if available

Name the initiatives available

Economic community-developed initiatives Health community-developed initiatives Social community-developed initiatives

THANK YOU SO MUCH

85

F. PARENT INTERVIEW GUIDE


PARENT INTERVIEW GUIDE

Name: ……………………………..…………………………………………………..

Sex: …………………………………………………………….……………………..

Name of the HLC: ……………………………………………..……………………….

Date: ………….……

Please indicate your level of agreement with each of the statements below by ticking () in one

of the columns 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 that best represent the most appropriate practice and give a

reason for your choice in the extreme right column of the table. Below is an explanation of the

opinions that each number (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) represents. 1.Strongly Disagree 2. Disagree 3. Not Certain 4. Agree 5. Strongly Agree

# OPINION STATEMENT 1 2 3 4 5 What is your reason for this response? 1 The home learning centre is easily

accessible by all children including those

with special learning needs (physical,

mental, visual and hearing impairments)

2 The contact time between PEs and

children in a week is sufficient

3 Home learning centres are preparing our

children to join primary one

4 Children going to HLCs have a better

performance3 than those who don’t


changed my attitude towards the

3 Performance in this case refers to the general way in which the child conducts themselves in relating with others

This interview guide is meant to collect data for the SURE baseline study on LABE’s Home Based ECD.

The information will be used for better implementation and scale up of the Home Based ECD model. The information you give will only be used for learning, documentation and communication to the

wider community and will remain confidential. Contact LABE on these numbers +256-773-208194

or +256-701-1121881 Email: [email protected] in case of any queries.

Thank you so much


86

# OPINION STATEMENT 1 2 3 4 5 What is your reason for this response?

importance of ECD and education as a

whole 6 Home based learning has positively

changed my community members’

attitude towards the importance of ECD

and education as a whole

7 I would recommend a

neighbour/friend/relative/another

community to enroll their children for

Home Based ECD at HLCs

THANK YOU SO MUCH

87

G. TEACHER QUESTIONNAIRE


TEACHER QUESTIONNAIRE

Name: ……………………………..…………………………………………………..

Sex: …………………………………………………………….……………………..

Name of the School: ………………………………………………………………..

Date of filling in the questionnaire: ………….……………………………………


columns 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 that best represent the most appropriate practice and give a reason for your

choice in the extreme right column of the table. Below is an explanation of the opinions that each

number (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) represents.

1.Strongly Disagree 2. Disagree 3. Not Certain 4. Agree 5. Strongly Agree


1 The Home Based ECD has a

positive impact on the learning

and performance4 of children

2 Children from HLCs have

developed social skills

(participate in group activities,

take turns and responsibility

and relate with adults more

easily) as compared to other

children that have never had any

ECD intervention before joining

primary one

4 Performance in this case refers to the academic performance assessed using tests and examinations

This self-administered questionnaire is meant to collect data for the SURE baseline study on LABE’s Home Based ECD. The information will be used for better implementation and scale up of the Home Based ECD model. The information you give will only be used for learning, documentation and communication to the wider community and will remain confidential. Contact LABE on these numbers +256-773-208194 or +256-701-1121881 Email: [email protected] in case of any queries.

Thank you so much


88



developed cognitive skills (learn

new concepts easily, don’t

forget easily and have a rich

vocabulary) as compared to

other children that have never

had any ECD intervention before

joining primary one


developed gross motor skills as

compared to other children that

have never had any ECD

intervention before joining

primary one

THANK YOU SO MUCH