Nepal - Basic and Primary Education Project

Document of The World Bank Report No: 19002 NEP PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT ON A PROPOSED CREDIT IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 9.0 MILLION TO THE KINGDOM OF NEPAL FOR THE BASIC AND PRIMARY EDUCATION PROJECT IN SUPPORT OF THE FIRST PHASE OF THE BASIC AND PRIMARY EDUCATION PROGRAM March 3, 1999 Education Sector South Asia Regional Office  CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (Exchange Rate Effective September 15, 1998) Currency Unit = Nepalese Rupees (NRs.) NRs. I =US$ 0.015 US$ 1 = 67.51 FISCAL YEAR July 16 - July 15 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS APL Adaptable Program Lending AWPB Annual Work Programs and Budgets BPEDU Basic and Primary Education Development Unit BPEP Basic and Primary Education Program CAS Country Assistance Strategy CBO Community-based Organization CDC Curriculum Development Center CIP Core Investment Program for BPEP CMG Change Management Group Danida Danish International Development Agency DEO District Education Officer DOE Department of Education ECDC Early Childhood Development Center EMIS Educational Management Information System ESRP Earthquake Schools Rehabilitation Project EU European Union JICA Japanese International Cooperation Agency LACI Loan Administration Change Initiative MOE Ministry of Education NCED National Center for Education Development NFEC Non-Formal Education Center NGO Non Governmental Organizations NORAD Norwegian Agency for Development PIP Project Implementation Plan PMIS Project Management Information System SMC School Management Committee TSAG Technical Support Advisory Group VDC Village Development Committee VEC Village Education Committee Vice President: Mieko Nishimizu Country Director: Hans M. Rothenbuhler Sector Manager: Ralph W. Harbison Team Leader/Task Team Leader: Grant G. Sinclair  NEPAL BASIC AND PRIMARY EDUCATION PROJECT CONTENTS A. Project Development Objective Page 1. Program purpose and program phasing 3 2. Project development objective 3 3. Key performance indicators 3 B. Strategic Context 1. Sector-related Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) goal supported by the project 4 2. Main sector issues and Government strategy 4 3. Sector issues to be addressed by the project and strategic choices 6 4. Program description and performance triggers for subsequent loans 7 C. Project Description Summary 1. Project components 8 2. Key policy and institutional reforms supported by the project 9 3. Benefits and target population 11 4. Institutional and implementation arrangements 11 D. Project Rationale 1. Project alternatives considered and reasons for rejection 14 2. Major related projects financed by the Bank and other development agencies 16 3. Lessons learned and reflected in proposed project design 17 4. Indications of borrower commitment and ownership 17 5. Value added of Bank support in this project 17 E. Summary Project Analyses 1. Economic 18 2. Financial 19 3. Technical 20 4. Institutional 20 5. Social 21 6. Environmental assessment 22 7. Participatory approach 22 F. Sustainability and Risks jI  1. Sustainability 23 2. Critical risks 24 3. Possible controversial aspects 25 G. Main Loan condition 1. Effectiveness conditions 25 2. Other 25 H. Readiness for Implementation 25 I. Compliance with Bank Policies 26 Annexes Annex 1: Project Design Summary 27 Annex 2: Detailed Project Description 31 Annex 3: Estimated Project Costs 34 Annex 4: Cost Benefit Analysis Summary, or Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Summary 36 Annex 5: Financial Summary for Revenue-Earning Project Entities, or Financial Summary 41 Annex 6: Procurement and Disbursement Arrangements 42 Annex 7: Project Processing Schedule 49 Annex 8: Documents in Project File 50 Annex 9: Statement of Loans and Credits 51 Annex 10: Country at a Glance 53 Annex 11: Development Policy Statement and Basic and Primary Education Policy Framework 55 Annex 12: Common Procedures for Donors 73 MAP(S) N/A -jj  NEPAL Basic and Primary Education Project Phase I of an APL Credit to support the Basic and Primary Education Program Project Appraisal Document South Asia Regional Office Education Sector Unit Date: March 3, 1999 Team Leader: Grant G. Sinclair Country Manager/Director: Hans M. Rothenbuhler Sector Manager/Director: Ralph W. Harbison ProjectID: 40612 Sector(s): EE - Education Lending Instrument: Adaptable Program Loan (APL) Theme(s): Education Poverty Targeted Intervention: Yes ... .. ..;-" .' - ' e' w ..... t t IDA Others Total Commitment Closing US$ m % US$ m US$ m Date Date APL 1 12.5 22.4 43.2 55.7 07/16/99 07/15/2002 His Majesty's Government of Loan/ Nepal Credit APL 2 15.0 29.5 35.9 50.9 07/16/2002 07/15/2005 His Majesty's Government of Loan/ Nepal Credit _ _ __ _ _ _ APL 3 22.5 18.8 97.5 120.0 07/16/2005 07/15/2009 His Majesty's Govermment of Loan/ Nepal Credit _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ APL 4 Loan/ Credit Total 50.0 176.6 226.6 Project Financing Data II Loan 1 Credit O Grant O Guarantee L] Other (Specify) For Loans/Credits/Others: Amount (US$m) 12.5 Proposed Terrns: O To be defined OI Multicurrency El Single currency - Standard Variable Cl Fixed L] LIBOR-based Grace period (years): 10 Years to maturity: 40 Commitment fee: 0.5% Service charge 0.75% iDTo bed --- Government 1.7 0.5 2.2  IBRD 0.0 0.0 0.0 IDA 9.7 2.8 12.5 OTHER BILATERAL FINANCING INSTITUTIONS 31.6 9.3 40.9 Total: 43.0 12.6 55.6 Borrower: His Majesty's Government of Nepal Guarantor: Responsible agency: Ministry of Education Implementing agency(ies): Ministry of Education Address: Keshar Mahal, Kantipath, Kathmandu, Nepal Contact Person: Mr. Sharad Kumar Bhattarai, Secretary Tel: 411599 Fax: 414887 Email: Estimated disbursements ( Bank FYIUS$M): Annual 3.3 4.2 5.0 Cumulative 3.3 7.5 12.5 Project implementation period: 36 months Expected effectiveness date: 07/16/99 Expected closing date: 07/15/2002 OCS APL PAD Form: October 9, 1998 -2-  A: Program Purpose and Project Development Objective 1. Program purpose and program phasing: By 2009, the Government of Nepal expects that at least two thirds of school-age children will attain grade 8 in schools that are effectively supported by institutions at the community, district and national level. To achieve this goal the Government will: (a) give greater control to communities to manage schools for quality improvement and to districts to distribute resources based on school needs and targeted underserved groups; (b) develop the quality of teaching and educational content; and (c) increase access to an eight-year basic cycle of education. IDA proposes to support this program with a Credit of approximately US$50 million in three phases over ten years following an Adaptable Program Lending (APL) approach. Phase I (US$12.5 million over three years, starting July 1999) will develop institutional capacity for qualitative and quantitative improvement in the five-year primary education system. This includes: (a) strengthening the Ministry of Education (MOE) and establishing a Department of Education (DOE) to become its technical wing to deliver primary and secondary education programs; (b) introducing performance-based district planning and budget processes; and (c) piloting school improvement planning. Phase II (tentatively US$15.0 million over three years, starting July 2002) will consolidate institutional capacity building at national, district and school levels to raise primary school quality. It will assess human and physical requirements to universalize eight years of basic education, and ensure that teacher development policies and strategies are in place to support an extended cycle of basic education from five years to eight years. Phase III (tentatively US$22.5 million over four years, starting July 2005) will continue to support institutional capacity building, development of the teaching service, and will expand access to eight years of education. Project details will be based on outcomes of Phase II and corresponding changes in the structure of secondary education. 2. Project development objective: (see Annex 1) The objective of the project is to strengthen institutional capacities at national, district and school levels to plan and deliver more efficient and better quality education services. In turn, this is expected to lead to increased levels of learning resulting from improved student retention (especially for girls and socially disadvantaged groups), more effective teacher performance and efficient teacher deployment practices. 3. Key performance indicators: (see Annex 1) Progress towards the development objectives will be measured by: (a) preparation of appropriate annual operational and expenditure plans at national and district levels based on school improvement plans; (b) numbers of months of staff development and training for school managers (by gender and location); (c) physically adequate schools in underserved areas; (d) gross enrollment ratios (by gender and location, sampled from the poorest 15% of subdistricts); (e) primary school completion rates (by gender and location, sampled from the poorest 15% of subdistricts); (f) cycle costs; (g) teachers performance as measured by changes in classroom practice; (h) teacher quality based on the percentage of total primary teachers with the Certificate of Primary School Teaching (by gender and location); and (i) learning achievement based on a national assessment of Nepali and Mathematics in grades 3 and 5 carried out bi-annually. -3-  B: Strategic Context 1. Sector-related Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) goal supported by the project: (see Annex 1) Document number: 18578-NEP Date of latest CAS discussion: 12/15/98 Reducing poverty and strengthening a weak human capital base through effective investments in the provision of basic services are priorities in the Nepal CAS, reviewed by the Board on December 15, 1998. The CAS identifies two key strategies to poverty alleviation: (i) bringing resources closer to the beneficiaries, where they are most likely to be productively used; and (ii) collective donor action to foster the stronger governance needed to reduce waste and mismanagement of resources. The project strongly supports these strategies in the following ways: (a) Reducing poverty through effective investments in basic services. The project objective is to strengthen capacities at school, district and at the central level to manage human, physical and financial resources more efficiently and equitably. Within the longer-term strategy for basic and primary education, a detailed five-year subsector investment plan has been developed by the MOE. The plan outlines policies and strategies to improve efficiency, quality and equitable access, and Government will put in place performance-based annual planning and budget processes based on these three criteria. (b) Bringing resources closer to the beneficiaries. The project will introduce a School Improvement Planning process that will be the responsibility of School Management Committees (SMCs) and they, together with Village Development Committees (VDCs), will participate in monitoring schools' performance. The project targets interventions to reduce educational inequity between gender, regions, and disadvantaged groups through a district planning process. Funds to carry out activities will be allocated to schools, districts and NGOs based on efficiency and equity criteria, implementation plans and performance. The project will improve institutional capacity at the national level to manage a community- and district-based basic education system by setting criteria for targeting interventions to the most disadvantaged schools and communities, and reviewing implementation plans against the policies set out in the Basic and Primary Education Policy Framework (Annex 11). (c) Coordinating donor action to foster stronger governance and increase efficiency in resource use. Government's policy framework for basic and primary education is agreed with donors supporting its program and benchmarks for implementation of efficiency, quality and equity policies have been established. Five major donors will jointly cofinance the core investment activities of the Government's basic and primary education program and will jointly review with the Government the annual work plans and budgets against performance benchmarks and needs. The MOE will be responsible for donor coordination for which a set of common procedures has been prepared (Annex 12). Financial management capacity building will be an important component of the project. 2. Main sector issues and Government strategy: Sector Issues: Government recognizes that education is key to poverty alleviation and in recent years has given a high priority to provision of education services. Much has been achieved in a very difficult environment to make schooling more accessible, to increase quality inputs and to provide alternative programs to address the low literacy levels. However, student learning outcomes of both primary and secondary education are low, and the poorest communities remain the most educationally disadvantaged. These low outcomes relate to issues of equitable access to quality schooling, system efficiency and use of resources. 4-  (a) Access and Quality. Substantial progress has been made in increasing enrollment in primary education since the early 1990s. In this period, the Govermnent has supported a range of programs to include more women, out-of-school girls and children with special needs in basic education. Gross enrollment rates in primary education are high and access to schools is impressive given the remoteness of much of the population. Access to secondary education is unevenly distributed, and has high direct and opportunity costs. Primary and secondary school completion rates are low and those completing schooling have only minimal levels of skills for community needs. Teacher absenteeism is high, reflecting the poorly regulated teacher recruitment process, incentive structures, and weak school supervision. (b) Efficiency and Resource Use. The school system is characterized by low student retention and completion rates, inefficient teacher deployment practices and poor fund utilization. Sector management is highly centralized and not well situated to handle the rapidly expanding school system. Many professional functions in the sector such as curriculum renewal, teacher training and design of non-formal education programs have been carried out under donor-funded project units. Currently about half of education expenditures are channeled to the basic and primary education subsector, but resource use is poor at all levels of the system. The large number of donors supporting the sector within a weak institutional and regulatory framework has exacerbated the low absorptive capacity and lack of policy coherence. Government Strategy: The Government recognizes these issues and has articulated strategies in the Ninth (1997-2002) Five-Year Development Plan to raise the national literacy level by expanding equitable access to basic education and increasing the quality of primary education; and at the secondary and higher levels, by emphasizing the upgrading of secondary and higher education and raising the quality of output. Other key strategies are to increase the allocation of public resources for the education sector from 13% to 15% in the interests of sustainability and system stability; to strengthen the MOE in order to improve policy planning and system monitoring; and to devolve education management to promote the active involvement of communities and local bodies in managing education institutions. Major ongoing efforts to improve access and quality at the basic and primary levels are being expanded with greater emphasis on community participation at all levels. The Basic and Primary Education Master Plan, 1997-2002 outlines national priorities for the subsector as follows: (a) to ensure universal coverage of primary education and raise literacy; (b) to improve quality and efficiency of primary education; (c) to improve planning, policy making, coordination, research and evaluation capacity within the MOE; and (d) to decentralize educational management. It builds on strategies and experience from two previous IDA-supported primary education projects, supports curriculum and textbook reform, a school cluster-based teacher training model, and targeted strategies to increase participation of girls and disadvantaged groups. Based on the Master Plan, and in collaboration with donors supporting the subsector, Government developed a Second Basic and Primary Education Program, 1997-2002 (BPEP II) which covers the entire subsector, builds on past experience and introduces a more decentralized approach to management of primary education. BPEP II supports implementation of Government's compulsory education policies and strategies to ensure that all children can enter and complete five years of primary education. Government's longer term vision is to raise the basic cycle from five years to eight years as recommended in the National Education Commission Report (1998). -5-  3. Sector issues to be addressed by the project and strategic choices: The project will focus on addressing the key institutional issues that affect the efficiency, quality and equitable provision of basic and primary education services. It will support the Govermment's medium-term objectives as set out in the agreed policy framework for BPEP II (see Annex 1 1). Issues to be addressed in the project are based on past experience in the basic and primary education subsector in Nepal and strategic decisions made during appraisal of the core investment plan for BPEP II. * More efficient use of resources. A decision taken early in project preparation by the donors supporting basic and primary education was to build on their cooperation in BPEP I and to support jointly with the government a subsector wide investment program. From that flowed the decision to focus support on strengthening the capacity of the MOE to manage a sectoral program, to make districts more accountable for planning and performance monitoring and to increase community participation in school management. Five of the major donors agreed to finance jointly an agreed core investment plan for BPEP II. It was decided that the funding mechanisms for this should enable a single monitoring and reporting system and an associated process to provide for joint annual reviews of work plans and budget proposals to release funds against performance benchmarks and needs. This is expected to provide greater coherence in policy implementation and monitoring and more efficient use of resources. In addition, policy measures on three major expenditure items were also agreed: (a) teachers will be deployed according to the target teacher:student ratio of 1:45 nationally with special consideration for small isolated and rural schools; (b) construction of schools/classrooms will be on needs-based criteria and school mapping requirements; and (c) the long-term residential teacher upgrading.program will be replaced by distance education programs linked to classroom teaching performance. * Strengthening Institutional Capacity. It became clear during appraisal of the BPEP II that the first three years of implementation would require a new institutional framework and developing capacities to meet the demands of a more technically equipped MOE and a decentralized system. A decision was made to absorb various project units already established under previous projects; to support the establishment of a technical department at MOE; and to support a long-term human resource development plan for strengthening capacities to deliver quality education services. Another decision was to introduce district planning as a funding prerequisite. Greater accountability would be encouraged at the school level to improve teacher and student attendance and increased authority at district level to set priorities for equity and quality. As it will take some time to bring about the desired institutional changes, Government and IDA agreed that an Adaptable Program Lending approach would better suit the change process being initiated and offer flexibility in adjusting to the pace of implementation as it becomes evident. * Addressing access and quality. The strategic choices made are to focus on increasing primary school completion rates and improving learning achievements as measured by periodic national assessments. A high level of quality inputs was provided under BPEP I (curriculum and textbook reform, cluster-based in service training and in-school professional support) to 40 of the 75 districts in Nepal. The project will extend access and quality initiatives begun under BPEP I to the remaining districts. Analysis and feedback from the national basic skills assessment at grade 3 will be used to identify key areas for teacher training and professional support, materials and school development planning. C ommunity provision of early childhood programs would cater for the special needs of young children and ensure that under-age children are not enrolled in school. The project will use the financing mechanisms to target school construction, teacher deployment and local language materials to underserved areas. It will support alternative school schedules to retain children, especially girls, from disadvantaged groups. Female teachers will be deployed to schools with low enrollment of girls and be given preference in recruitment. -6-  4. Program description and performance triggers for subsequent loans : The Government's program over the next ten years is to upgrade the quality of the primary school system and to extend the basic cycle of education from five to eight years, to build the MOE's technical capacity, and to introduce decentralized school-based planning and management. An APL approach would best suit the longer term strategic approach. It would confirm IDA support for the Government's overall strategies in the sector and provide program support to: (a) expand to all districts successful quality improvement strategies begun under previous projects; (b) introduce new education management structures and approaches that would allow communities to participate more directly in decisions on the use of resources to improve their schools; and (c) develop appropriate strategies to support a universal basic education cycle of eight years within a twelve-year formal school system. The APL financing approach would allow sufficient time and flexibility in which to develop appropriate strategies for extending the basic cycle of schooling to eight years and to put in place a teaching service structure that would meet the quality demands of a changing school system. Phase I (US$12.5 million over three years, starting July 1999) will focus on putting in place the institutional framework to bring about the desired changes in the primary education system. Institutional capacity will be developed at: (a) the MOE/DOE for primary education policy, planning and monitoring; (b) national institutions to provide quality support services and promote learning; (c) district level to plan, implement and monitor school quality; and (d) community level to participate in school improvement planning. The ongoing school-cluster system for teacher support and curriculum implementation will be expanded to the remaining 35 districts. School quality improvement activities will focus on increasing learning in grades 1 to 3. Phase I to Phase II triggers will be: - Donor coordination is effective. - Teacher recruitment is contained within the total number of positions at 1998 levels. - National assessment of basic skills at grades 3 and 5 has been carried out. - The DOE is fully established and functioning. - Basic district planning is implemented in all districts. - Pilot for preservice primary teacher training has been carried out. - Nonformal Education and Early Childhood Development programs have been piloted. - A policy to include NGOs as providers of eligible community and district level activities is being implemented. Phase 1I (tentatively US$15 million over three years, starting July 2002) will consolidate institutional capacity building at national, district and school levels to bring about qualitative change in schools. Based on experience of Phase I, Phase II will expand the annual planning and budgeting processes to all districts and, as appropriate, will expand school improvement planning for direct allocations to schools through the district planning process. Phase II will begin to put in place the mechanisms for increasing the basic education cycle from five years to eight years for all school-age children. Policy and strategic issues related to development of a professional teaching service for an eight-year cycle of basic education will be a focus of this phase. Phase II to Phase III triggers will be: - Appropriate human resource development programs are being implemented throughout MOE and line agencies. - National assessments of basic skills at grades 3 and 5 are repeated. -7-  - A primary school teacher career development (education, training, incentives and career paths) and strategic framework approved by government. - District planning strategies target disadvantaged groups. Phase III (tentatively US$22.5 million over four years, starting July 2005) will continue to support institutional capacity building and the development of the teaching service, and will expand access to eight years of basic education. Detailed plans for Phase III will be developed midway during the proposed Phase II. These will be based on progress in institutional development, sector policy development and studies undertaken during Phase II to map schools and staffing requirements to shift from a five-year to an eight-year basic education cycle. C. Program and Project Description Summary 1. Project components (see Annex 2 for a detailed description and Annex 3 for a detailed cost breakdown): The objective of the Project is to strengthen institutional capacity at national, district and school levels to deliver more efficient and better quality basic and primary education services thereby raising learning achievement and increasing equitable access, especially for girls and under-served communities. The Project supports the first three years of the BPEP II core investment program (CIP) which is being financed jointly by five major donors (Danida, European Union, Finland, IDA and NORAD) and by the Government of Nepal. A joint Government-donor annual planning process will comprise plans, budgets, monitoring indicators and performance benchmarks for release of funds. Plans at national and district level will be developed within the policies and strategies set down in the Government's Basic and Primary Education Policy Framework. A process by which School Improvement Plans (SIPs) will be eligible for direct funding will be put in place and over the project period these will progressively become part of the district planning process. Eligible expenditures for national, district and school plans are described in the BPEP II investment plan. The project supports the following three components of the CIP. (a) Strengthening institutional capacity: At national level, the project will: (i) provide programs of staff development and training to strengthen the technical support functions of the MOE including its newly established DOE; and Curriculum Development Center (CDC), Non-Formal Education Center (NFEC), Distance Education Center (DEC), and National Center for Education Development (NCED); (ii) develop information systems and the professional skills to manage and supervise a decentralized school system; (iii) prepare manuals and formats for development of policy-based implementation plans and budget proposals by national institutions and district primary education teams; (iv) conduct policy research, evaluation and monitoring including periodic national assessments in basic skills at grades 3 and 5; (v) initiate and provide technical support for a district planning process starting in 12 districts and expanding up to 30 districts during the project; and (vi) establish criteria and mechanisms for school improvement planning, providing technical support to districts for their implementation and gradually incorporating these into the district planning process. At district level, the project will: (i) provide programs of training in support of the district plamning process to staff in eligible districts; (ii) strengthen their technical and management capacities to implement teacher inservice-training based on clusters and whole school development approaches, to monitor school performance; (iii) increase participation of village education committees (VECs) and school management -8-  committees (SMCs) in actions to raise schools' performance; and (iv) develop district plans and budgets targeting quality improvement at grades 1 to 3 and increased retention of students to grade 5. At community level, the project will: (i) provide technical support and training to headteachers, SMCs and VECs in school improvement planning; (ii) provide essential books and materials to schools and additional facilities based on school improvement plans; and (iii) provide inservice training for teachers in methods appropriate to increasing learning in grades 1 to 3 and in multigrade teaching in small schools. (b) Raising learning achievement: The project will: (i) improve teaching and learning processes through: curriculum review in the context of small, multigrade schools as well as single classes grades 1 to 3; a more efficient textbook distribution system; development of methods and materials for local languages, multigrade teaching, and continuous assessment techniques; and (ii) expand and improve teacher education through regular school-based training; by strengthening the resource center professional support system; and by piloting a preservice teacher training certificate program. (c) Increasing equitable access: The project will: (i) expand early childhood development (ECD) centers as part of school and village planning in areas where there are large numbers of underage children in grade 1; (ii) provide textbooks free to all children in grades 1 to 3, and to girls and children in the poorest districts at grades 4 and 5, scholarships to needy girls and inclusive schooling programs for children with special needs; and (iii) improve the stock of classrooms based on approved district education plans and community mobilization programs. Table 1. Project Components and Costs oDmponent - tor ;s % of fin.ig ;- Strengthening Institutional Capacity EE - Education 18.8 33.8 4.2 33.6 Raising Learning Achievement EE - Education 14.0 25.1 3.1 24.8 Increasing Equitable Access EE - Education 22.9 41.1 5.2 41.6 Total Project Costs 55.7 100.0 12.5 100.0 Total Financing Required 55.7 100.0 12.5 100.0 2. Key policy and institutional reforms supported by the project: A description of Government's ten-year vision and its strategies for basic and primary education over the program period has been provided in a Letter of Development Policy (Annex 11). The Basic and Primary Education Policy Framework for BPEP II sets out the policies, strategies and monitoring indicators for the Project (Annex 11). This will provide the policy criteria for appraising annual work plans and budget proposals. In summary, the key institutional reforms supported by the project relate to: -9-  * delegating responsibilities for planning, budgeting and implementation to districts; * progressively incorporating whole school improvement plans in district plans to promote access and quality targeting and community involvement; * preparing annual operational and expenditure plans, linking each line agencies' (CDC, NFEC, DEC, NCED, DOE) key activities at national and district levels; * strengthening the MOE to create a separate DOE and merging previous project units into functional units of the DOE; * maintaining teacher positions at 1998 levels; and * transferring recurrent costs of operating the system to the revenue budget on a gradual basis as agreed after project closing. The criteria for appraising school improvement plans, annual district work plans and budget proposals and implementation plans of national institutions supporting the subsector will be based on policies and indicators set out in the Basic and Primary Education Policy Framework. These include the following policies: (a) to improve quality and efficiency by: * ensuring that all teachers are properly trained and are allocated to schools on the basis of school enrollment criteria; and that, class size does exceed 50 students;