Results based M&E: Experiences of school level education in Nepal
Teertha DhakalJoint Secretary
Government of Nepal
Presentation outline
• Context- National M&E system (PMAS)
• Educational planning
• Results-based M&E in education
• M&E design of School Sector Reform Plan (SSRP)
• Lessons learnt and Issues
Nepal
Area (Sq. Km)Area (Sq. Km) 147,181.147,181.
Population (million)Population (million) 28.528.5
Growth rate (%)Growth rate (%) 2.132.13
GDP (CP) (billion)GDP (CP) (billion) US$ 170US$ 170
Growth rate (%) Growth rate (%) 3.53.5
Per Capita GDPPer Capita GDP US$ 562US$ 562
Poverty (%)Poverty (%) 25.425.4
Literacy Literacy ((%)%) 6363(Economic survey, 2009/10)(Economic survey, 2009/10)
Context
• Despite difficult political situation Nepal has been institutionalizing MfDR in planning, budgeting and M&E with– Broad-based interventions – Piloting in key agencies
• The country is in the process of – restructuring the state building new constitution,
and – expedite development efforts focusing on results
• This presentation includes efforts to institutionalize results based M&E in education sector in Nepal
MfDR Practices in NepalLevel Planning Budgeting Monitoring
National MTP/ TYIPLog frame,Result matrixes
MTEF PMASPRSP progress reportsNDAC
Sectoral SWApBusiness plan as a sectoral strategy
MTEF sectoral papersRBB
Performance indicatorsMDAC
Project Log frames mandatory
Performance based budgetRBB
Performance M&E
Local DPPs Log frame based
D-MTEFFormula based grants
DPMASSocial audits
MfDR- piloting in some agencies
• Piloted in some ministries under ADB TA- Education, Local Development, Roads, Drinking Water)
– Readiness assessment done and Business Plan refined– Results matrix prepared– Internal capacities enhanced– Piloted in 4 districts- awareness and capacity enhanced
• ADB TA 7158- NEP: Strengthening capacity for MfDR under implementation (RBB, capacity building)
• Other initiatives e.g. performance contracts
ContextContext
• Education budget as share of public budget: 17%
• Primary edu budget as share of edu budget- 60%; as share of GDP- 2.22%
• Primary education free by law
• Primary NER: 89.1% (GPI: 0.98)
• Home to school distance (half an hour walk): 91% hhs
• High repetition & dropout rates– 29% repetition; 15% drop out in grade1
• Survival rate in Grade 5- 81.1 %
ReformsReforms
• Efforts made to improve educational governance
• Community mgmt of schools
• Increased public investment in education
• Per capita funding to schools
• Moving towards universal completion of basic education (grade 1-8)
• Capacity devt at different levels
• Shift from project approach to SWAp
• Focus on results7
Primary Education in Nepal
Level Plans Responsible Edu. plan Responsible
National MTPP(PRSP)
NPC Edu plan
SSRP
MOE
District Dist. Devt. Plan
DDCs Dist Edu. Plan
DEOs
Village/ Municipality
V/M Devt. Plan
VDCs, Muni. V/M Edu Plan
V/M Edu. Com.
Institutional SIPs SMCs
Education Planning
Poverty Monitoring and Analysis System (PMAS)
(A national level Results-based M&E system)
Why Poverty Monitoring and Analysis System (PMAS)?
• PMAS aims to-– support the implementation of the national plan– coordinate monitoring the national plan and
tracking the MDGs – communicate results as feedback into policy
making process– make central M&E system results-based
PMAS- Major Components
Outcome Monitoring
Implementation Monitoring
Impact AnalysisImpacts
Processes
Outputs
Outcomes
Inputs
Communication/Advocacy
PMIS
Components of the PMAS
Performance-based budget release
PRSP progress report
Education indicators in PMAS
Outcome Intermediate/outcome Indicators
Access •Number of primary schools•NER (primary)•Proportion of primary students receiving scholarship •Proportion of population more than half an hour's walk to school
Quality •Pupil completing primary level (%)•Primary/secondary teachers trained (%)•Proportion of vacant teacher's positions•No. of schools transferred to communities•Absenteeism of teachers
Equity •Share of female teachers in primary schools (%)•Girls students receiving scholarships (primary/secondary)•Schools having separate latrines for girls•Enrolment/ cycle completion etc (social groups/ gender)
Literacy •Adult literacy rate (Male/ female)
Sources of information for M&E
PRSP Sectoral Targets
MTEF/Budget allocation
Release/Disbursement of allocated budget
Outputs
OutcomesImpact
EMIS, Flash reports, PETS, Social audit, client
satisfaction survey
HH Surveys (NLSS, NDHS), Impact Analysis
Results based education M&E
• Logic models in educational planning, programming and design of projects
• Business plan and MTEF in the education sector
• Linkages between national and sectoral monitoring
• Education M&E in National Poverty Monitoring & Analysis System (PMAS)
• SWAp in primary level has contributed to harmonize M&E system
• Streamlined and strengthened survey systems- Separate education modules in;
– Nepal Living Standards Survey (5 yrs)– Nepal Demographic and Health Survey (5 yrs)– Nepal Labour Force Survey (5 yrs)
• Periodic reviews inviting multiple actors/ stakeholders
• Formative research institutionalized in school education
• Learning achievement tests introduced
• Focused on capacity building
Results based education M&E …
EMIS and Flash Report System
• The EMIS gathers school level educational performance data from all schools twice a year– Flash I- snapshot of data at the beginning of the school year – Flash II- focuses on end of school year data
• The national flash report is prepared based on district flash reports
• The reports cover enrolment, pass rates, repetition & survival rates, training status of teachers, supply of textbooks and learning materials
• Te reports also show participation of SMCs/ PTAs in various activities of schools
M&E of School Sector Reform Plan (SSRP)
M&E in SSRP
• The SSRP is the school sector SWAp in Nepal which is funded by more than 10 devt partners in addition to government funding
• The M&E aims to improve education services through informed decisions tracking achievements at each level of service delivery
• M&E functions based on performance indicators include;– Assessing compliance with acts and regulations– Measuring progress against milestones and targets– Evaluating the impact of policies/strategies
• Utilizes a decentralized monitoring system, use flash reports data, social audit, and provisions an external evaluation of outcomes
• Education Review Office conducts external audits of agencies based on norms and standards and submits annual reports to the Education Policy Committee
Key education indicators in SWAp1 Share of education budget in GNP, GDP
2 Share in education budget in primary, secondary
3 Teachers with required qualification and training
4 Teachers with required certification
5 Pupil/ teacher ratio
6 Enrolment in Grade 1 (ECD experience, GIR, NIR)
7 GER (Primary, Basic & Secondary)
8 NER (Primary, Basic & Secondary)
9 Repetition rate (Grade 1 & 8)
10 Survival rate by cohort method (Grade 5 & 8)
11 Coefficient of efficiency (Basic & Secondary)
12 Learning achievements (Average score of students in core subjects in Grade 5 & 8)
13 Pass rate (Percentage of students pass in SLC)
14 Literacy rate (15-24, 6+ & 15+)
15 Literacy GPI (15+)
Summary of key results of M&E activities
Key results Log-frame level
Frequency Data source Responsible
Client satisfaction baseline survey
Baseline Once (2009) Service recipient MOE, ERO
Combined status report
Key results Annual Schools, DEOs DOE
District level status report
Key results Annual Schools DEOs
Flash I Key results/ obj Annual Schools DOE
Flash II Key results/ obj Annual Schools DOE
Agency Review Reports
Key results, agency performance
Annual Concerned agency
ERO
SSR progress review reports
Strategic interventions, Key results/inputs
Annual Schools, DEOs Agency
ERO
Summary of school-level fin audit reports
Strategic interventions, Key results/inputs
Annual Auditors’ school audit report
DEO/DOE
Summary of key results of M&E activities
Key results Log-frame level
Frequency Data source Responsible
Social audit summary report
All Annual Schools/ DEOs DEO/ERO
Client satisfaction survey
Key results/ inputs
Annual Service recipient DEOs
Trimester progress report
Key results/ obj Trimester DEOs record DEOs
FMR Key results/Inputs Trimester DEOs DOE/ DEOs
Commissioned research studies
Key results/ obj As required As per the TOR MOE/DOE
National studies on learning assessment
Objectives Twice (in plan period)
As per the TOR MOE/ ERO
Evaluation of model building exercises
Key results/ obj As required As per the TOR MOE/ DOE
Mid-term evaluation Theme/ LF level Once (midterm) As per the TOR MOE
End-of-programme evaluation
Theme/ LF level Once (after completion)
As per the TOR MOE
Lessons learnt
• SWAp contributory to institutionalize MfDR
• Participatory design of M&E system crucial
• Commitment and capacity key to success- focus lower levels and retain talents in the M&E function
• Link incentives with credible M&E/ MIS data
• Triangulation of methods/tools for data reliability
• Strengthen the system rather re-inventing it
• Make multi-party review meetings results- based
• Produce data what is needed and usable
Challenges/ Issues
• Make the system functional and effective
• Cascading results approaches to lower levels- – capacity issues, – cost incurred
• Data issues– frequency and reliability (survey vs. MIS)– disaggregated data- diverse social groups
• Harmonize TA funding for capacity development
• Frequent changes in leadership and key staff
• Use of M&E data in managerial decision making
Discussion
• Promote country level capacities monitoring education MDGs and EFA agenda through regional capacity building initiatives
• Use of VLN of COP- MfDR to further build capacities through exchanging ideas
Thank you