Malawi - First Education Sector Credit Project

 First education sector credit Report No: ; Type: Report/Evaluation Memorandum ; Country: Malawi; Region: Africa; Sector: Education Adjustment; Major Sector: Education; ProjectID: P001633 Malawi: First Education Sector Credit (Credit 1767-MAI) The Malawi First Education Sector Credit project (Credit 1767-MAI for US$27.0 million equivalent) was approved in FY87. The credit was almost fully disbursed and was closed in December 1993, with the exception of the civil works and consultancies categories which were extended to December 1994. The Implementation Completion Report (ICR) was prepared by the Africa Regional Office. An appendix includes comments by the Borrower. The project was the sixth education project in Malawi assisted by IDA but the first sector investment and maintenance credit as defined in OP1.00 in the country's education sector. It financed a slice, 1985-1991, of an agreed sector policy action program planned to run till 1995. The objectives were primary school expansion and quality improvement, expansion of secondary schools, and policy/institutional development (ID), including seeking Government's agreement to increase education's share of the budget from 13 percent to 15.5 percent by the end of the project. Outcomes were mixed, in large part because the original objectives and some policy reforms were over-ambitious, including raising student fees and introducing student loans and a shift system in secondary schools. By 1993 the budgetary target was met and was later exceeded, in response to rapid enrollment expansion and certification of untrained teachers. But this success was diminished by the unsustainable, high-cost expansion at primary level when the Government abolished all fees after project completion. Under the ID component, a modest start was made on other selected policy changes, including raising fees in secondary and higher education, the introduction of student loans and a shift system in secondary schools. Some ID activities were accomplished, including better management of correspondence education, the establishment of a maintenance unit and modest strengthening of the Project Implementation Unit. But technical assistance and the fellowship program were both reduced and ineffective, two of three important studies were not done, a monitoring and evaluation committee was unproductive and there was heavy turnover of trained ministry staff. The ICR suggests that such reforms need more time and IDA is supporting them under two subsequent sector credits. The investment program, in contrast, made major gains, providing places for a total of 70,000 primary and secondary pupils, 1,074 new classrooms and 520 teachers' houses. However, there were significant shortfalls in primary school construction (29 percent) and in quality improvement (two million textbooks not provided and 1,800 teachers not upgraded). The ICR rates project outcome as satisfactory, institutional development as modest, sustainability as uncertain and IDA performance as satisfactory. The Operations Evaluation Department (OED) agrees with all the ICR ratings except that it rates outcome as marginally satisfactory because the project achieved too few of its policy, institutional reform and investments aims to warrant the higher rating. Overall, the ICR is satisfactory. A lesson not brought out in the ICR is that, if challenging policy reforms are to be achieved, detailed implementation plans need to be in place at project launch, and incentives for action must be integral to the project design. In this instance, the instrument, combining traditional investments with a statement of policy intent from the Borrower, proved inadequate to sustain the Borrower's full commitment to sector policy reform. An audit is planned.