Senegal - Quality Education for All Project

Report No. PID8013 Project Name Senegal-Quality Education for All Region Africa Regional Office Sector EP - Primary Education Project SNPA47319 Borrower(s) Government of the Republic of Senegal Implementing Agency Ministry of Education Environment Category C Date PID Prepared July 31, 1999 Projected Appraisal Date August 30, 1999 Projected Board Date September 29, 1999 1. Country and Sector Background The accelerating national effort in education since independence has demonstrated strong public and private commitment to education. Senegal has begun moving beyond the period of massive disruption in regular school activities, when programs and institutions deteriorated or simply halted their operations. The Government aims to energize communities by helping them to organize and coordinate their efforts in establishing schools and improving education services. In this changing environment, the Government will need to address the following major issues of the sector. (a) Low quality of schooling. The Government, donors and civil society at large are optimistic that schools will gradually build on recent gains. But low quality continues to constrain the efficiency of the system and limit the number of well-qualified students graduating from each level. Only 30.6% and 52.6% of students pass the grade 6 and grade 9 examinations, respectively. Although improving, internal efficiency remains apparent in high repetition and dropout rates and low completion rates. Even those students who manage to stay in school are not learning enough because inadequate, bare facilities do not create a classroom environment conducive to learning, and multiple shifts reduce learning time. The number of learning hours per pupil per year has decreased by about 12 9 (from 980 to 872 hours) in many primary schools in recent years because of the way double and multigrade shifts are implemented. Simply put, the main sector issue is that too many children don't have access to schooling, and for those who do have access, quality is generally low. The reasons for this are as follows: (i) expenditures are heavily skewed to higher levels of the system, leaving primary education receiving only 36% of public education resources; (ii) the unit cost of teachers is unsustainably high, thereby crowding out expenditures for other quality engendering inputs such as books, learning materials, teacher supervision and in-service training;  (iii) a lack of effective management and accountability systems which does not empower sector managers to undertake action to improve the high cost and poor quality of service delivery; (iv) backtracking on stated higher education sector reforms has resulted in continued instability in the system and reduced the government's credibility and confidence in reforming the education system. (b) Limited and inequitable access to primary and secondary education. The trend and momentum in school enrollment are positive. The gross enrollment rate (GER) for primary increased from 54.3% to 61.7% over the past several years; and for middle school from 14.8% to 20.6%. Despite these gains, the school population distribution is wide at the bottom with about 1,033,933 million children in primary education (grades 1-6), and narrow in the middle and top, with only 174,114 in secondary education (grade 10-12), and only about 23,418 students enrolled in tertiary education institutions. Access to education is particularly restricted for certain groups. For example, the gross primary education enrollment rate in Dakar is about 91.5% as compared to the average for the other provinces which 55.4%. The following issues are related to equitable access: (i) There is an inadequate number of school places, thus either preventing children from entering into the school system or for about 35.6% of the children, enrolling them into "incomplete schools" with less than five grades. The Government's priority is to rebuild the system and increase the number of school places. (ii) In addition to expanding the school system, the Government will also have to increase the size of the teaching force, particularly qualified teachers, as enrollment expands. Average pupil-teacher ratios are already high--49:1 in primary school. (iii) Girls are less likely to attend and finish school than boys. In 1997, girls accounted for about 44.0% of the 1,208,047 million pupils enrolled in primary and middle schools. In secondary, girls represented about % of the students. The problem is particularly acute in the rural areas and among the poorest families. (iv) Only 10% of poor rural populations can read and write. (v) Students with special needs and learning disabilities are largely left out of the system, a problem the Government is now proposing to address. Gifted children may also require special attention. (vi) Private provision of schooling is underdeveloped, with no consistent government strategy for financial and pedagogic support. (c) Low institutional capacity for decentralized management. The historically centralized management of education is no longer capable of efficiently delivering education to the whole country. The Government is therefore decentralizing functions and has made capacity building in strategic planning and management at all levels of a national priority. There are four main issues related to the Ministry's institutional capacity: (i) MEN's organizational structure and management system is weak. - 2-  The central Ministry of Education units, regional and decentralized authorities, schools and communities are not yet ready to assume new responsibilities. Roles and responsibilities are not clearly defined, management skills are weak, although the MEN is now developing a systematic human resources development program. The MEN program is addressing these problems through upgrading staff levels at the center and in the regions and decentralized collectivities, as well as introducing a new system of human resource management. (ii) Capacity for policy and planning is still centralized little expertise has been developed in the regions and collectivities. Decentralized collectivities and individual schools need the capacity to efficiently collect, analyze and use data and better integrate into MEN's planning process a system for the exchange of information. This is likely to be facilitated by increasing computerization of planning functions which will also be reinforced under the program. (iii) The system of financial management needs to be computerized and staff skills need to be upgraded to support crucial functions, especially those that are to be decentralized. MEN staff at all levels, particularly those at the regional, local and school levels need training in program budgeting, accounting, computerized information systems, and procurement. A training program must be prepared for staff who will be deployed to carry out administrative and financial functions in the regions. (iv) The monitoring and evaluation system. MEN does not have an adequate system of monitoring and evaluation to track the progress of its massive effort to improve education. The proposed implementation structure for the QEFA, including the requirements for consultations and reporting, will provide an effective framework for getting feedback on implementation. This will help steer the course of policies and programs. Results from this process will be further enhanced by upgrading and training of staff. Government Strategy Government's objectives and strategies for dealing with these issues are set out in four source documents: (a) the 10-Year Education and Training Policy Document 1999-2009; (b) the 1999-2009 Master Plan for Investments; (c) the 1997 Review of Public Expenditures; and (d) a Summary Document of Regional and Departmental Master Plans. A bibliography of documents is provided in Annex 4. Essentially, these documents set the objective of universal primary enrollment by 2007 and progressive increases in access to middle and secondary schooling, significant improvements in quality at all levels of the system including higher education, increased adult literacy, and development of a more market-relevant vocational training program. The strategies proposed for achieving these objectives include: (a) greatly reducing unit costs of teachers by introducing a number of measures including: (i) moving to a contract-based hiring system at all levels; (ii) increasing the number of hours of teaching at the middle school and secondary levels; -3-  (iii) promoting polyvalent teachers at the middle-school level; (iv) reducing the numbers of supplementary teachers; (v) re-deploying non-teaching staff to the classroom. (b) shifting public financing to primary education, while increasing cost recovery at higher levels of the system and providing incentives for the expansion of private sector involvement, (c) creation of a nine-year basic education cycle, (d) strengthening partnerships with NGOs and communities, and (e) improving management and pedagogic support. 2. Objectives The objective of the Senegal Quality Education For All Project is to establish the framework for universal primary education. It deals with all levels of the education system, from pre-school to university, as well as adult literacy, and seeks to put in place sustainable approaches to improving quality and ensuring sufficient numbers of teachers and classrooms. The Government will finalize a revised strategic framework for the development of the entire program. After the strategy is prepared, the Government and donors will discuss specific plans for the development and integration of various sub-sectors into the program. 3. Rationale for Bank's Involvement During program preparation, the Bank has been instrumental in three main areas: (a) technical advice in education, financing and management issues, (b) strategic advice for mobilizing donor support and facilitating consensus, and (c) providing a predictable and flexible source of funds to ensure that the core program will be financed while other donors firm up their contribution to QEFA. The Bank has also supported the government in programming the strategy and has produced background documents to support the MEN's analysis of constraints and alternative solutions (including cost- benefit and effectiveness analyses, and an education sector expenditure review). The Bank has also developed extensive experience in the region working with many of the issues Senegal faces in extending its education system: teacher financing, textbook rental and use, school improvement initiatives, low-cost primary school construction, equity, school health, etc. The team working for the Bank on Senegal education issues represents a range of technical and disciplinary backgrounds and has been associated with successful implementation of education reform in the region. During program implementation, the Bank would fund key elements of the QEFA's core program. Bank experience is expected to play a key role in providing technical advice in program implementation and in helping to establish a decentralized system of management in the sector. The Bank would also make major contributions in harmonizing arrangements and procedures for program implementation. 4. Description 1. Improving the quality of schooling - 4-  2. Increasing access to basic education 3. Strengthening capacity for decentralized management 5. Financing Total ( US$m) Government 45 IBRD 0 IDA 50 OTHERS 75 Total Project Cost 170 6. Implementation The PDEF program would run through the period from 1999-2009 in 3 phases using an APL credit. The Ministry (MEN) would be responsible for implementation of the first phase, as well as overall coordination: disbursement of public funds for education not delegated to the territorial collectivities, credits made available to the government for the Ten-Year Education and Training Program by external partners including IDA, procurement and contracts with implementing agencies, monitoring and evaluation, and progress and audit reports. The DAGE would be responsible, within this framework, for financial implementation and procurement, and would ensure coordinated monitoring of all sector expenditures regardless of the provenance of the funds. It is expected that the existing project unit would be absorbed into a reconfigured DAGE, which would be strengthened through additional recruitment and training. An institutional analysis of the DAGE has been begun under project preparation. The territorial collectivities would be responsible for budget execution of the funds delegated to them for education purposes by the state, as well as for use of matching funds provided by the MEN for maintenance purposes. Given the increasing level of responsibility delegated to the territorial collectivities, the MEN would need to develop new bottom-up approaches to planning. These approaches would include criterion-based financing, a form of contracting by which the MEN would establish performance criteria linked to block grants to decentralized entities. Many services would also be contracted out to private sector service providers including NGOs. Classroom construction, for instance, would be delegated to a specialized agency such as AGETIP. The DCES would then be free to concentrate on quality control-- establishment of norms and standards, etc. Similarly, the preparation and distribution of textbooks and reading materials would be privatized, leaving INEADE free to concentrate on its primary mission of ensuring teaching and learning quality. The school projects component, at the primary, middle-school, and secondary levels, would help set the stage for increasing financial autonomy at the school level and would strengthen capacity for financial, administrative and pedagogic management at that level. These projects are seen as part of the process for moving toward bottom-up approaches to financing and design of in- service training, program evaluation, and other sectoral functions. Multidonor Coordination and Aid Management. The National Superior Education Council (NSEC) will oversee the implementation of the Ten-Year Education and Training Program (TETP) and its first phase the Quality Education For All Program (QEFA). The NSEC would be chaired by the Minister of Education and - 5 -  comprise all MEN's managers at the central and deconcentrated levels, heads of all interested institutions such as INEADE, Universities, representatives of the public sector of education, representatives of other Ministries such as Finance, Modernization, etc., representatives of employer professional organizations, Local Governments (Regional Councils, Municipalities and Rural Communities), NGOs acting in the education area, and other representatives of the civil society such as trade-unions etc. The NSEC would meet twice a year to monitor the progress of the QEFA and would invite all donors during the second yearly review during which the progress of QEFA for the present year would be jointly reviewed and the annual operation plan for the following year approved. Overall responsibility for coordination and management of the QEFA program implementation would lie with the MOE technical divisions and DAGE, which would work in close cooperation and interaction with the Management & Coordination Committee (MCC) to oversee the management of resources provided under the QEFA. This MCC would be composed of 5 sub-sector directors (DAEB, DEEPE, DEMSG, DFP, DET, DES), 3 cross-sectoral directors (DAGE, DPRE, DCES), two specialized Institutions (INEADE, CREA), 3 Regional and 3 Departmental Inspectors (IAs and IDENs) on a rotative basis, and maintained in its agreed upon configuration for the duration of the QEFA). The DPRE would play the role of MCC's secretary and provide all documentation to and from the SMC. The MCC would have an important role to play throughout the implementation process to identify and solve issues relating to donor coordination and aid management, policy reform measures, coordination with Local Governments, budget and planning. The main functions of the MCC would be to: (a) liaise between the borrower, technical management, Local Governments, other Ministries including Ministry of Finances and Plan, Ministry of State Modernization, beneficiary entities, and donors, and keep them apprised of all important QEFA matters; (b) provide full support and assist program beneficiary entities in resolving problems related to QEFA execution and deal with unexpected situations as well as errors and omissions and commission arising from lack of familiarity with IDA and other donors procedures; (c) coordinate the preparation of the annual operation plans and associated budget of the program by each implementation entity, aggregate them into an annual operation plan for the QEFA and monitor its execution. The activity encompasses the monitoring of allocation of QEFA co-financing institutions and central and Local Governments funding and, where applicable, contribution from other sources to various implementation entities; (d) coordinate and monitor the execution of the said annual operation plan, commitments and disbursement of credit proceeds by each implementation entity, and consolidate no-objection requests and procurement matters with DAGE; supervise compliance with agreed covenants and fulfillment of the objectives and performance indicators; (e) prepare exhaustive progress report and transmit them to the decision- making bodies and donors in a timely manner; and coordinate with DAGE the preparation of the annual audit of accounts, and, with DPRE, the preparation of the National Education Counsel (NSEC) bi-annual meetings, and secure the approval of the annual operation plan by the NSEC during its second yearly session conducted jointly with donors. Decentralization, Partnership and Outsourcing. The 1996 Decentralization Law - 6 -  devolved from central to Local Governments several responsibilities including inter alia several educational services among which classroom construction and maintenance with parallel delegation of corresponding funds for the latter. In this context, the allocation of resources for the development of education would be governed by Education Departmental Plans (PPDE) to be jointly prepared and signed at the Department level by the local MOE manager (IDEN), the Mayor(s) of the Commune and the Presidents of the Communes Rurales within the territory of the Department. The 40 PDDE are to be aggregated into 10 Education Regional Plans (PRDE) to be jointly prepared and signed by the regional manager of DoSE (Academic Inspector) and the President of the Regional Council, with inclusion of activities and investments henceforth under the responsibility of the Regional Council, and after implementation of appropriate procedures to prioritize PDDE activities in order to fit each PRDEs into the regional financial framework pre-determined by the PDEF-QEFA. The 10 PRDE are aggregated together to form, with the addition of the central directorates' development plans, the PDEF-QEFA. The PDDE and PDRE include inter alia the detailed local school building programs and would serve as guides by Local Government for budget preparation. The DPRE would be responsible of the overall implementation of the above mentioned planning process of the QEFA by the various involved partners. Under DPRE coordination, the financial planning and the construction planning will be managed by the DAGE and the DCES respectively. Implementation and supervision of the school construction program defined in the various PDDE would be delegated to Contract Management Agencies (CMA). The Government has extensive experience of such delegations to AGETIP and, at more limited scales, to several NGOs specialized in school construction, such as Aide et Action, Paul Gerin Lajoie, AFVP, ENDA, Plan International, etc. Once a PPDE has been negotiated and signed, the CMA will proceed with the implementation of the construction program including bidding procedures and execution of works, with monitoring and supervision of the progress of the program by the DCES which has adequate technical expertise to do so, including experienced regional coordinators (CTRs). The Government proposes AGETIP to be the primary CMA. The implementation of the QEFA planning cycle will be made to coincide with the Government's annual planning and budgeting cycle. The preparation of the yearly departmental and regional Operation Plans would be conducted during the 2nd (3rd ?) quarter of each calendar year, based on the medium term framework provided by the approved PDDE and PRDE and the joint review by local managers of MEN and elected bodies of the progress made during the current year against performance indicators fixed in the PDDE and the PRDE. Consolidated preliminary Annual Operation Plan and Budget (AOPB) will be completed XX months before the beginning of the next Government fiscal year and assessed by the Ministry of Finances, IDA and other donors during the (September/October ?) joint annual review meeting of NEC. Outcome of the annual review meeting will include: (a) monitoring of the progress made against annual performance indicators and the program of reforms, (b) the level of recurrent and investment for the forthcoming year, and a detailed financing plan. The Operation Plan and Budget will then be finalized and approved by the administration before January lrst. Then, information would be channeled to all Local Governments for their respective budgeting exercises held in following March. As part of the planning process, le DPRE will communicate regularly with IDA/donors to ensure QEFA - 7 -  activities'eligibility for IDA/Donors support. Donor coordination. The DPRE will be responsible for donor coordination. The French Ministry of Cooperation will take the lead among the donors for ensuring regular consultation and information-sharing. Joint missions will be held to the extent possible; the annual and mid-term reviews of the Quality Education For All Project will be organized jointly by the MEN, IDA and the other key donors, including the African Development Bank, CIDA, the French Ministry of Cooperation, the French Development Agency, the Nordic Development Fund and KfW. Donor procurement procedures will be complementary, but not identical. Table : Donors partnership to QEFA Co-Financing by components Note Figures for other partners than IDA are estimations subject to confirmation. Accounting, financial management, and auditing functions. MEN's directorate of administration and finance (DAGE) will be responsible for overall management and reporting of the principal financial resources for the QEFA: (a) Government funds, and (b) funds from external partners. The financial management system will be computerized and integrated, and it will support the phased decentralization of financial management, beginning with some pilot regions. Every quarter, the financial management committee, reporting to the technical committee, will review DAGE's program management report. Independent auditors acceptable to IDA will audit program accounts annually and provide a management letter that recommends improvements to the financial management system. The introduction of a financial management system will be recommended as part of the overall civil service reform program. The Government will keep the funds from IDA and each other donor in separate accounts; it will move toward common financial management and auditing procedures acceptable to all partners. Financial statements will show QEFA expenditures as well as the source of the funds. Donor agencies will support the gradual transfer of funds to MEN through budget support as its financial management capacities improve. In line with good accounting practice, the accounting records for each bank account will be reconciled monthly by DAGE with the bank statements for each of them upon their receipt. Technical assistance, including a financial controller and a deputy controller, will support DAGE. The program will strengthen DAGE to provide general financial management of the central Ministry directorates and units, the regional and local directorates, and schools. Following the decentralization approach of the 10-Year Program for Education and Training (TYPET), financial management structure will be gradually decentralized as well through the APL phased approach. During QEFA which supports the first phase of TYPET, the objective will be limited to build capacity for decentralization of the financial management system to the IA level (decentralization at this level will be effective at the second phase during which capacity will be built to decentralize at the IDEN level). During QEFA, a sound financial management system will be installed in all IAs to record and report on all project expenditures disbursed at the IA level. Procedures will be developed in the Manual of procedures to define mechanisms for the flow of financial information between the IAs and the lower levels - 8 -  (IDEN, schools, etc.). All IAs accounts will be consolidated in the QEFA overall financial management system which will be under the responsibility of the DAGE. The IAs will: (i) coordinate budget preparation at the regional level; (ii) monitor budget implementation; (iii) keep the QEFA accounts for all expenditures disbursed at the regional level; (iv) report to the DAGE all financial information necessary to consolidate QEFA financial statements and to establish the quarterly PMR; (v) assist the auditors in the annual financial audits of the project. Disbursements for local expenditures will be channeled through impress accounts opened at commercial banks acceptable to IDA at the regional level. The use of impress accounts is already widespread within the DAGE and other MOE's decentralized services, including IA, IDEN and schools. The DAGE, in close coordination and with input from the MCC, would be responsible of the overall financial management and reporting. It will: (i) coordinate in relation with DPRE the preparation of the Annual Operation Plans and Budgets for all project components regardless origin of funds, including Government resources for recurrent expenditures managed by the MEN's line agencies and resources delegated to autonomous institutions such as Universities, Local Governments, etc.; (ii) manage all investment resources including IDA and other donors' special accounts, and the project account for annual deposit of the Government' share of project expenditures for investment; (iii) monitor all expenditures incurred for education, regardless origin of funds - including in particular Local Government proper resources, direct cooperation to decentralized levels --, and disbursement agency; (iv) maintain and consolidate all project accounts including IDA's Special Account for all components except Literacy sub-projects, and other donors' special accounts; (v) ensure that all reports and audits are provided to the MEN's Cabinets, Ministry of Finance and Planning, IDA and other donors as required, (vi) monitors AGETIP's management of the second IDA Special Account for Literacy sub-projects; and (vi) produce the quaterly Project Management Reports (PMR). During program preparation, the Ministry of Finances (DDI) agreed to develop its partnership with the DAGE in view to insure success to: (a) autonomous management of the special account by the DAGE and (b) shift of DDI's management from prior control to post control of MoE's expenditures, with IDA financial support to build consistent capacity in DAGE and DDI. Accounting. The DAGE will keep the QEFA accounts in accordance with international accounting standards. The project accounting system will be defined in the Manual of Accounting and Financial Procedures. The process of budget management will compare appropriations with actual commitments (by donor, component, and expenditure category). Aggregates will refer both to financial years as a whole, and to the cumulative period since the launching of the project. In order to prepare the DAGE for further use of the LACI, the DAGE will set up a reporting system able to generate quarterly financial and management reports and permit the monitoring and reporting of procurement and contract implementation in line with the principles and specifications detailed in the World Bank document entitled "The Loan Administration Change Initiative - Implementation Handbook" (September 1998). Capacity of DAGE will be built during the first phase of the APL (3 years) for the use of LACI during the second phase. Benchmark to measure effective DAGE's capacity to manage under LACI principle will constitute one of the triggers for second phase of the APL. 9  Audits. The DAGE would maintain consolidated project accounts. All project accounts would be audited annually by an independent auditor acceptable to IDA. Audit reports of reasonable scope and detail would be submitted to IDA within four months of the end of the auditing period. In addition to annual financial audits, technical audit reports on the implementation of subprojects including quality of execution and adequacy of procurement, in form and substance acceptable to IDA, would be furnished three months before each annual review. As a condition of credit effectiveness, a financial auditor would be recruited under a multi-year contract acceptable to IDA. Terms of reference for the selection of the auditors will be prepared and approved by the Bank. Staffing. The head of the finance and accounting division will be appointed and will be a certified accountant. He/she will have full authority to act as the accountant ("comptable") on behalf of the MFP, streamlining commitments, payments and the preparation of IDA disbursement requests. Capacity of the rest of the DAGE and IAs staff involved in financial management will be reinforced through training. Monitoring and evaluation. MEN will monitor and evaluate the program within the structure set up for implementation and using detailed terms of reference for key units within this structure. Monitoring and outcome indicators will allow MEN to measure progress and will form the basis for joint supervision with other donors. Each unit involved with implementation will develop instruments for monitoring its respective components, while the planning unit and the DAGE will consolidate and analyze statistical, financial, and physical data on the rate of implementation. The new PMR system will provide information on output indicators such as expenditures, units built and number of teachers trained. Capacity will be built in the regions for collecting monitoring data. The donor group will coordinate and manage donor-related matters, such as the preparation of statements of donor contributions, to minimize MEN's time-consuming task of dealing with individual donors. The MOE budget is comprised of over 200 decentralized "articles". Each with its own timetable and a DAGE agreed format. Monitoring of budget implementation is under the responsibility of the designated credit manager who can be in the DAGE or located in a decentralized unit. The DAGE monitors around 30 of these "articles. In addition, the main purpose of budget monitoring is to follow the balance available out the amount allocated to each article. This is done under 4 headings representing the nature of expenses (personnel, goods and services, maintenance, transfers of funds). The DAGE uses EXCEL spreadsheet both to prepare and to monitor the budget. In most of the other units, particularly the IAs, preparation and monitoring of the budget is done manually. DAGE and IA capacity would be built during QEFA to ensure that their performance meets LACI criteria before the end of this first phase for full LACI implementation during the second phase of the APL. The DAGE will be reinforced by (a) the transfer of individual currently within the existing PCUs which will not be maintained after PDRH2 and PAES and from other line agencies such as DCES whose role shifts from execution of construction to management, and (b) specific recruitment/appointment of necessary skills to conduct its activities according to the capacity building plan issued form the institutional capacity assessment. In addition DAGE will receive technical support from a qualified accounting firm to: (i) propose adequate - 10 -  changes in the organization of the DAGE (ii) provide appropriate computer software for financial and accounting management, including production of reports on a quarterly basis; (iii) develop an accounting manual; and (iv) train the DAGE staff. Terms of reference, which are under preparation, have to be approved by IDA prior to negotiation. They specify that the accounting software should be compatible with IDA's requirements, in particular, be LACI-compatible, the manual should reflect those procedures and that staff will be trained to implement LACI as per the time-bound action plan, with full implementation before end of irts phase QEFA. The financial management specialist in the Dakar RM will review the selected proposal and provide operational support during start-up. He will be responsible for determining whether the new systems and procedures meet the eligibility criteria established under the LACI. Adoption of an accounting manual satisfactory to IDA is a condition of effectiveness. Activities eligible for financing under the QEFA would be planned yearly in Annual Operation Plans and Budgets (AOPB) prepared under the responsibility of the DPRE, with identification of specific donor for each individual activity. The AOPB would be reviewed and approved by the MEN and donors during joint annual review. The Operation Manual of the program - under preparation through DoE/DoF partnership -- details the process for preparation, approval and execution of the AOPB. Formalized supervision will take place twice a year to review progress in implementation. Government and donors will jointly prepare the terms of reference and participate in the mission. The Government and each of the regions will prepare annual progress reports that not only assess overall progress but also highlight components or regions with bottlenecks and weak performance. MEN's information-gathering activities will be the basis of the reporting requirements for the joint annual review meetings with donors. This review will be carried out immediately following MEN's annual meeting with regional and local directors. An implementation completion report (ICR) will be prepared within six months after the closing of the IDA credit. MEN will contribute to the ICR with its own evaluation of the program. MEN will commission special studies on difficult issues or problems specific to certain areas, including education costs and financing, detailed capacity building strategies, a vocational and technical education strategy, and improvements of quality and efficiency in secondary and higher education. The various departments will carry out these studies, with consultant help where appropriate. Independent consultants will also carry out technical audits of the program starting in the second year to assess the quality of implementation and to make recommendations on how strategies for dealing with technical issues may be improved. 7. Sustainability The proposed program will require public expenditures for education, excluding higher education, to rise by about 8% annually in nominal terms, mainly to cover the increased salary costs of the greater number of teachers. Education's share of total recurrent expenditures will increase from . A in 1998 to % by year 2003. Measured against GDP the share will remain constant at 9 including higher education. These ratios are consistent with the targets set out in the HIPC Decision Paper. In view of projected increases in public resources, and the Government's pledge to gradually raise education's share of public expenditures up to % by year 2003, the program - 11 -  is fiscally feasible. Although the projected flows of foreign aid imply that the program will continue to rely on donors' assistance, long-term sustainability of the program seems ensured even if donor assistance were to stabilize at current levels. The country's prospects for economic growth are good and the Government is committed to increasing the share of education in the budget. 8. Lessons learned from past operations in the country/sector (a) Textbooks: unless there is local capacity for developing textbooks and other reading and learning materials, these are unlikely to be available on a reliable, timely, sustainable basis. Further, unless teachers have confidence that all children will have access to needed books on an ongoing basis, they will not change their teaching style. This component is designed to ensure that all children receive books, that schools have the power of choice to ensure that the books chosen fit their overall learning objectives, that teachers receive sufficient training to be able to develop new ways of individualizing instruction, and that there be sustainable local capacity for developing textbooks and other learning materials. (b) Construction: The effectiveness of a contracting approach, by which Government would delegate responsibility for managing construction to private sector entities such as AGETIP, has been well demonstrated. Government would then be able to establish norms and standards and to ensure quality control. This project would give support to the construction unit in the Ministry of Education (the DCES) in developing such a role. (c) School improvement: If teaching and learning are to improve, the school must be the locus of change, and the system as a whole must be organized in ways that support that change. Under the previous project, the School Development Fund (FDS) initiative correctly recognized the importance of empowering teachers and school directors, but this was treated as a marginal activity. The current project design builds on the FDS experience, and seeks to redefine the roles of the inspectorate and the in-service training centers in order to enable them to respond to teacher-driven initiatives. (d) National languages: The research demonstrates clearly that children acquire literacy more easily and more "authentically" when classes are taught in their own language. This also facilitates second-language acquisition. The project would include a pilot experiment with national language teaching that is designed to be taken to scale in the second phase of the Ten-Year-Program. (e) Decentralization: Considerable experience has been gained in recent years from other projects. Key elements incorporated in this project are the need for developing a strong information system and for a functional monitoring capacity at all levels of the system. (f) Sectoral approach: Here the lessons learned have come largely from the Health Sector SIP and deal in particular with the importance of strengthening existing structures and developing early and genuine donor coordination (including government as the primary donor) on approaches to construction, support for decentralization, agreement on policy issues and priorities. (g) Adult literacy: The effectiveness of the policy to involve the private - 12 -  sector and NGOs in provision of adult literacy courses has been seen in the increasing number and quality of these providers and in the sharply increasing public demand for courses. Phase I of the PDEF will build on the successful strategy of the PAPA (CIDA program) and the PAPF (1995-99) -- which provided more than the originally expected outputs -- and support the second phase of the National Literacy Program with some management changes aiming at: (i) adjusting the program speed to the increase in both demand and supply; (ii) integrating post-literacy and functional literacy; (iii) decentralizing program management; (iv) completing the ongoing process of harmonizing all donor support through a program approach. Successive phases of the PDEF will pilot the shift from providing literacy programs on a project basis to providing (continuous) adult education in poor areas (rural and sub-urban) through similar management arrangements including outsourced service delivery from the private sector. The current project seeks to articulate the policies and priorities for the adult literacy program in relation to the universal primary education goals of the PDEF. 9. Program of Targeted Intervention (PTI) No 10. Environment Aspects (including any public consultation) Issues No environmental problems are anticipated. Sanitation facilities will be built at a number of schools, and these will be sited to avoid contaminating water supplies. The program will provide water to schools where possible to improve health conditions. The program will also promote environmental awareness through the curriculum and education materials. 11. Contact Points: Task Manager Robert S. Prouty The World Bank 1818 H Street, NW Washington D.C. 20433 The InfoShop The World Bank 1818 H Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20433 Telephone No. (202)458 5454 Fax No. (202) 522 1500 Note: This is information on an evolving project. Certain activities and/or components may not be included in the final project. Processed by the InfoShop week ending August 6, 1999. - 13 -