Nepal - Basic and Primary Education Project

Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No: 19726 IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT (CR-23570) ONA CREDIT IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 21.8 MILLION (US$30.6 MILLION EQUIVALENT) TO THE KINGDOM OF NEPAL FOR THE BASIC AND PRIMARY EDUCATION PROJECT May 10, 2000 This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.  CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (Exchange Rate Effective June 1999) Currency Unit = Nepalese Rupees (NRs.) NRs. 68.00 = US$ 1.00 US$ 0.0147 = NRs. 1.00 FISCAL YEAR July 16 - July IS ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS APA Annual Plan of Action APL Adaptable Program Loan CDC Curriculum Development Center DANIDA Danish International Developmnent Agency DEO District Education Office(r) DOE Department of Education GER Gross Enrollment Ratio HMG His Majesty's Government IDA International Development Association MHPP Ministry of Housing and Physical Planning MOE(C) Ministry of Education (and Culture) MTR Mid-term Review NFE Non-formal Education NFEU Non-formal Education UnitiBPEP NGO Non-Governmental Organization OSP Out-of-School Program PCTDU Primary Curriculun and Textbooks Development Unit PEP Primary Education Project PIU Project Implementation Unit PTTU Primary Teacher Training Unit RCs Resource Centers RCDU Resource Centre Development Unit REDs Regional Education Directorates RME Research, Monitoring and Evaluation RP Resource Person SLC School Leaving Certificate SMC School Management Comrnittee UNICEF United Nations Children's Fund UPE Universal Primary Education WEP Women's Education Program Vice President: Mieko Nishimizu Country Director: Hans M. Rothenbuhler Sector Director: Emmanuel Y. Jimenez Team Leader/Task Team Leader: Grant Sinclair/Ana Maria Jeria  FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY CONTENTS Page No. 1. Project Data 1 2. Principal Performance Ratings 1 3. Assessment of Development Objective and Design, and of Quality at Entry 1 4. Achievement of Objective and Outputs 3 5. Major Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcome 7 6. Sustainability 9 7. Bank and Borrower Performance 10 8. Lessons Learned 12 9. Partner Comments 12 10. Additional Information 13 Annex 1. Key Performance Indicators/Log Frame Matrix 14 Annex 2. Project Costs and Financing 17 Annex 3. Economic Costs and Benefits 20 Annex 4. Bank Inputs 21 Annex 5. Ratings for Achievement of Objectives/Outputs of Components 23 Annex 6. Ratings of Bank and Borrower Performance 24 Annex 7. List of Supporting Documents 25 Annex 8. HMG - Ministry of Education-Basic and Primary Education Project (1992-1998) 26 Project Evaluation Report This docment has a restricted distnbution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.   Project ID: P010395 Project Name: Basic and Primary Education Project Team Leader: Grant G. Sinclair TL Unit: SASED ICR Type: Core ICR Report Date: May 10, 2000 1. Project Data Name: Basic and Primary Education Project L/C/TF Number: CR-23570 Country/Department: NEPAL Region: South Asia Regional Office Sector/subsector: EP - Primary Education KEY DATES Original Revised/Actual PCD: 03/31/89 Effective: 07/01/92 07/08/92 Appraisal. 09/11/91 MTR: 12/31/94 01/15/96 Approval: 04/21/92 Closing: 12/31/99 12/31/99 Borrower/lImplementing Agency: GOVT OF NEPAL/MIN. OF EDUCATION & CULTURE Other Partners: STAFF Current At Appraisal Vice President: Mieko Nishimizu D. Joseph Wood Country Manager: Hans M. Rothenbuhler Jochen Kraske Sector Manager: Emmanuel Y. Jimenez Martin Karcher Team Leader at ICR: Grant Sinclair Thomas Schmidt ICR Primary Author: Ana Maria Jeria 2. Principal Performance Ratings (HS=Highly Satisfactory, S=Satisfactory, U=Unsatisfactory, HL=Highly Likely, L=Likely, UN=Unlikely, HUN=Highly Unlikely, HU-=Highly Unsatisfactory, H=High, SU=Substantial, M=Modest, N=Negligible) Outcome: S Sustainability: L Institutional Development Impact: M Bank Performance: S Borrower Performance: S QAG (if available) ICR Quality at Entry: S S Project at Risk at Any Time: No 3. Assessment of Development Objective and Design, and of Quality at Entry 3.1 Original Objective: Nepal is one of the poorest countries in South Asia. During the 1980s, the extremely low levels of most human resources indicators hindered the economic and social development of the Kingdom. Literacy was estimated at only 35% (18% for females). The primary and non-formal education system suffered from low enrollment, high drop-out rates, poor quality and lack of adequate school facilities. Management  problems were pervasive, with the system suffering from lack of planning, poor data and little monitoring. Chronic underfunding of the sector hampered both the growth and the quality of basic and primary education. The Ministry of Education and Culture (MOEC) was well aware of these problems and had been conducting a series of pilot projects designed to address issues of quality and access in basic and primary education. Projects such as the earlier Primary Education Project (PEP) supported by IDA and the Education for Rural Development (SETI) UNESCO Project were experimental in nature, focusing on innovations designed to test methods to improve the curriculum, teaching materials, teacher training and supervision. Although geographically scattered throughout a few districts in the country, data showed that access, education quality and students' performance levels could be increased. In 1990, MOEC developed a Master Plan for the subsector which emphasized the need for investments in quality improvement, access and management. In preparing its Eighth Five-Year Plan (FY1993-97), the Government developed an integrated nationwide program which would be financed by IDA, UNDP, UNICEF, DANIDA and JICA. The IDA Basic and Primary Education Project (BPEP) was designed to support this program. The major thrust of the BPEP project was to improve quality and access in the basic and primary education sector. The Staff Appraisal Report (SAR) recognized that the BPEP project would not allow Nepal to achieve Universal Primary Education (UPE) by the year 2000, but that it would provide a strong foundation for later expansion. Specifically, the project had three objectives: (a) to improve the quality of primary education; (b) to increase equitable access to primary schooling; and (c) to strengthen the management of the formal and non-formal primary education delivery system. 3.2 Revised Objective: n.a. 3.3 Original Components: The project was organized into three components: 3 A quality component, which sought to: (a) simplify and make more relevant the curriculum of the primary schools; (b) provide improved teacher instructional materials, textbooks and supplementary materials; and (c) institutionalize a teacher supervision, support and training system. * An access component, which financed the strengthening of the non-formal primary education and literacy programs. The project supported a number of initiatives to increase participation of girls, the very poor and those living in remote areas; and renovate and construct additional classroom facilities for primary schools. * An institutional development component, which supported: (a) the strengthening of MOEC's capacity to plan, manage and monitor its formal and non-formal primary education programs; (b) assistance to the development of MOEC's capacity to coordinate and manage donor-aided projects; and (c) improvements in the capacity to plan and monitor physical facilities development and maintenance. 3.4 Revised Components: n.a. 3.5 Quality at Entry: -2-  The quality at entry is rated as satistactory in this ICR. The project was well designed and directed towards addressing the key educational issues of the time. The objectives were relevant, clearly defined and had a direct link to the Government's medium-term plans in the sector. The project benefited from lessons learned from earlier projects in the sector. 4. Achievement of Objective and Outputs 4.1 Outcome/achievement of objective: The project satisfactorily achieved its stated objectives, exceeded its physical targets and almost fully disbursed the IDA Credit. As was typical of the design of projects of the time, no performance indicators were described. Therefore, assessment of achievements in this ICR is based on the quantity and quality of the project's educational inputs, the processes which were followed to accomplish the wide range of tasks, and the outcomes as illustrated from analysis of statistical data and from qualitative reports. The BPEP project was designed to support the Government's Basic and Primary Education Program which recommended national objectives and strategies that were based on past project experience. The project's SAR noted that in building the primary education system from such a low base, changes in quality and efficiency of the primary education system would require a long-term perspective. The BPEP was seen as the initial building block to increase the quantity and the quality of inputs required to effectively support a national primary education system --books and educational materials, teaching skills and competencies, classrooms and furniture, management capacity for planning and monitoring. Simultaneously, a major goal was to make schools more accessible to a wide diversity of social groups in very different environments, and to try out a range of strategies to raise the national literacy levels, especially among women. The BPEP project has laid the foundation for an efficient delivery system for better quality primary education. There were improvements in the physical leaming environment resulting from the new and renovated classrooms, the curriculum and textbook reform, the recurrent training of teachers and other education officials and the increased number of female primary school teachers. These contributed to an increase in children enrolling in primary schools, especially girls and students in remote areas, and a moderate increase in the proportion of children completing the five-year primary school program, as well as some improvement in their learning. 4.2 Outputs by components: A. Improving the Quality of Primary Education Component (a) Curriculum development. National curriculum goals and the objectives and expected leaming outcomes were identified; and the content, methods and subject organization of the curriculum were determined. The result was a revised and simplified integrated primary school curriculum for grades 1 to 5 that was gender-sensitive and increased the emphasis on health and environmental issues. There was key stakeholder involvement in setting national goals for primary education, identifying primary education leaming outcomes and contributing to discussions of curriculum relevance and subject organization. Skills and expertise were developed amongst curriculum teams on how children leam and teachers teach in the different contexts in Nepal through a three-year rolling plan. Materials were tried and tested in increasing numbers of schools before they were finalized and distributed nationwide. (b) Textbook development and distribution. Textbooks, teachers guides and supplementary materials - 3 -  were prepared based on the new curriculum. Textbooks for three subjects in grades 1 to 3, and for five subjects in grades 4 and 5 were distributed free annually to all children in grades 1 to 3, to all girls in grades I to 5, and to all students in the 18 remote districts of the country. The new curriculum, textbooks and teacher guides were disseminated nationally through inservice teacher training programs. These activities were coordinated to introduce the curriculum and textbooks for one new grade level each year over a five-year period. The process of textbook and materials development increased participation of teachers and students in the design and development phases; and coordinated the technical expertise of illustrators, designers, practitioners and curriculum experts to produce improved instructional text design. Book distribution, despite the communication difficulties throughout the country, is mostly effective. (c) Inservice teacher training and professional support. A cascade system of teacher training provided rapid dissemination of the new curriculum to all teachers of all schools through the country as each grade level was introduced. Although this provided a short introduction to the subject content and recommended methods of the new curriculum and textbooks, there was little follow-up in the 35 districts not included in the project. Based on the experience under the previous IDA-supported PEP project, the school cluster model, with some adaptations, was extended from six to 40 districts in the country. Teachers received professional support for the effective implementation of the new curriculum through Resource Persons (RPs). However, given the low base from which BPEP started, the impact of the training varied considerably. The RP's role is key to bringing about change in classrooms, but as the system expanded, the selection criteria and training of RPs were diluted. Their effectiveness was therefore reduced. The politicization of teachers, and the very frequent transfers of RPs, District Education Officers (DEOs) and Program Coordinators (PCs) over recent years, has also decreased their effectiveness in implementing the programs. National assessment in the three core primary curriculum subjects started in 1997. Results showed that mean scores in the Nepali language were 46%, in mathematics 44%, and in social studies 51%. Results were different across the three major geographical regions with students in the Hills having slightly higher correct responses compared with students in the Terai and the Mountains. The national assessment of grade 3 will be carried out periodically to assess changes in national standards over the long term. In 1999, a national assessment of the three core subjects at grade 5 level was conducted and will be repeated periodically. B. Increasing Equitable Access to Educational Resources Component (a) Strengthening Non-formal Primarv Education. Literacy programs and materials were provided for adults, especially women. Literacy facilitators were trained and a network of local supervisors for support to literacy centers provided professional support to about 20 centers each. Programs for out-of-school children, especially girls, were provided for those who have difficulty in attending regular primary schools. Early childhood centers were conducted near schools that had large numbers of under-age children in grade 1, so that the young children could benefit from appropriate educational programs and their older siblings could be retained in primary school. Equivalence has been established between out-of-school programs and the grade 2 curriculum. About 152,000 children have benefited from these programs. But tracer studies indicate that about 75% of the children, especially those belonging to the disadvantaged communities (so called "hard core" groups) and those living in the most remote areas, did not transfer to the formal system. Local support for non-formal education (NFE) programs was mobilized which resulted in wider participation. The project's NFE unit prepared annual plans and programs, trained facilitators and supervisors, produced and distributed materials, coordinated with NGOs (national and intemational) engaged in NFE, and monitored program implementation. - 4 -  (b) Initiatives to increase participation of girls in schooling. More female teachers were recruited, and trained, to encourage more girls to attend primary school. Scholarships were awarded to girls from disadvantaged groups and the MOE established a Women's Education Unit (WEU). Other initiatives to increase female participation included provision of sanitation facilities at schools, conducting alternative programs for out-of-school children and literacy programs for women and providing early childhood programs to allow older siblings in grades 1 and 2 (usually girls) to be able to attend regularly and without having to 'mind' younger children brought to class with them. Females as a percentage of primary school teachers increased from 14% in 1991 to 23% in 1997; 61% of the additional primary school teachers appointed between 1991 and 1997 were female. Females as a percentage of primary school teachers in the 18 remote districts increased from 7% in 1991 to 16% in 1997; 64% of the newly recruited teachers were female. There was also a significant increase of about 32% in girls' gross enrollment ratio (GER) in the 18 remote districts. The GER increased nationally from 106% (females 83%) in 1991 to 122% (females 104%) in 1997. (c) Renovation and construction of additional classrooms. An improved physical environment was provided to about 800,000 children through the classroom construction and renovation program. New and replacement classrooms were built through a community cost-sharing agreement with the School Management Committees (SMCs) to increase acconmmodation capacity. Community construction increased SMC ownership of schools, and is cost-effective. Instead of the standard space allocation for 35 students in each classroom, larger rooms built for classes with high enrollment and smaller rooms for classes with low enrollment were introduced in the last year of the project in the Terai (Chitwan district). The quality of construction could have been better with more engineers in the districts, trained supervisors in clusters and a system of inspection and certification. Community perception of quality achieved, however, has been generally satisfactory when compared to other local construction. Maintenance of schools by the comnmunities remains an issue. The project has been able to construct 14,232 new classrooms, rehabilitate 8,462 classrooms and supply furniture allowing group activities to 13,412 classrooms. Communities constructed classrooms and shared the cost as per agreements signed between the DEOs and the SMCs. Communities contributed from 15% to about 48% of the cost, as against 40% envisaged. In general, it took longer to complete the construction work because of delayed contribution by the communities. However, community construction has made possible a high degree of ownership of the school by teachers and communities and is cost- effective as well. In spite of this, links between school, parents and communities are still weak. The communities have to go a long way in developing their capacities. Constitution and selection of SMC members require changes to give adequate representation to parents. C. Improving the Management of the Subsector Component (a) Strengthening MOE's capacity. In terms of implementation achievements, organizational structures and operating procedures of the BPEP project have on the whole been effective. A foundation has been laid to strengthen the Ministry's capacity to plan, manage and monitor education programs through the establishment of a Policy Formulation and Coordination Committee (PFCC), a Project Implementation Unit (PIU) and several other units at central and district levels. However, the cancellation of UNDP technical assistance to this activity bogged down progress towards capacity building at MOE (see section 9(b)). Towards the end of the project, a cadre of trained personnel was created by sending 204 key persons abroad on study tours and training courses. In addition, training was provided to 4,189 Head Teachers, 639 RPs/School Supervisors, 40 Program Coordinators, and the functioning SMCs. Localized training facilities have been created for the teachers by establishing 670 Resource Centers (RCs); 314 RC buildings -5 -  were constructed. A better working environment has been created for the DEOs by constructing 20 office buildings. Adequate planning freedom, financial and administrative powers were given to the PIU. (b) Monitoring and evaluation. Formats for planning, monitoring, evaluation of all units, and district offices have been developed and used. Though established, the Education Management Information System (EMIS) has been mostly working as a data collection unit. Thirty-one research and evaluation studies have been conducted and several of them disseminated through workshops. Several major studies to prepare the second phase (BPEP II) were finalized. A better system, capable of collecting, analyzing and disseminating education data, as well as clearly formulated performance indicators, needs to be developed. (c) Donor Coordination. Donor coordination was effectively managed by the PIU, which facilitated the integration of project funds. Joint Annual Plans of Action (APA) have been prepared and needs for BPEP II have been identified. The collaboration among donors begun under BPEP has been extended further in support of BPEP II preparation. When IDA fumds were not available for some activities, other donors supported the activities of the project, e.g., during the last year of the project. (d) Construction Management. Agreement between the Ministry of Housing and Physical Planning (MHPP) and MOE collapsed early during the implementation of the project. Therefore, a Physical Planning and School Mapping Unit (PPSMU) was added to the PIU. Standard construction designs were developed to suit local materials and skill availability but structural details were not provided. The school teachers have been trained to carry out routine maintenance using the maintenance manuals and the tool kits provided for this purpose. But very few schools are doing any maintenance. Even simple cleaning of the school compound is not done thoroughly. Although several missions recommended that the maintenance trainers be absorbed into the system through hiring them permanently as master technicians, these recommendations were not followed. 4.3 Net Present Value/Economic rate of r eturn: n.a. 4.4 Financial rate of return: n.a. 4.5 Institutional development impact: The institutional development impact has been rated as modest. Organizational structures and operating procedures within the PIU have on the whole been effective. However, progress towards the project's institutional development objectives remained limited. A permanent Program Management Division, replacing the PIU and designed to coordinate the activities of all the donors in the sub-sector, was never established. BPEP activities have been running parallel to the regular system. This was partly due to a planned UNDP technical assistance program which did not materialize (see Section 9(b)). MOE has established a Department of Education (DOE) to institutionalize structures and activities that will provide sustainability. In addition, frequent transfers of DEOs, PCs and some Unit heads have been a problem. Project directors (PDs) were not transferred so frequently. Stability in staffing is a prerequisite for effective institutional, technical capacity building ensuring accountability of key professionals and administrative staff. In spite of all this environment, a coherent policy, institutional framework and primary education sector strategy with a clear long-term vision have been developed, which form the basis for the future -6 -  investment program. Three major planning exercises, namely the Master Plan for Basic and Primary Education, the Development Program, and the Project Implementation Plan, were recently conducted by MOE staff and local consultants, using limited inputs from expatriates. Also on the positive side, better awareness has been created among the Head Teachers and SMCs about school management and efficient use of resources. 5. Major Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcome 5.1 Factors outside the control of government or implementing agency: The project was designed in the period immediately prior to the introduction of democratically elected governments in Nepal. The first national parliamentary elections were conducted in 1992, the year the project became effective. During the last year of project implementation, the third national elections were conducted (May 1999). In the interim, there were nine different governments due to lack of a majority party in Parliament and frequent reforming of coalitions. An outcome of these changes was the appointment of eight different Ministers of Education over the project period, frequent changes of civil service personnel reflecting swings in changes in political power and the politicization of teachers as agents of political change at the community level. The primary education base from which the project began was very low-a large percentage of primary school teachers had no preservice certificate of teaching, and many had educational levels of SLC (grade 10) only. There were a series of subject syllabuses for grades 1-10, which made leaming difficult, especially in the lower grades. Only a few textbooks were available to students. In addition, the pool of national expertise in education areas relating to primary education was extremely limited; there was little national expertise in child psychology, pedagogical theories and teaching practice appropriate to primary education. This was reflected in the content of subject syllabuses and design of textbooks in use at the time. The cancellation of UNDP technical assistance created a gap in technical support, which hindered the capacity building at the MOE and delayed the merger of project units into the MOE (see Section 9(b)). 5.2 Factors generally subject to government control: The project was based on the Government's Master Plan for the primary education sector. Policies have been consistently applied relating to curriculum, textbook distribution, recruitment of female teachers, community cost-sharing of school construction and strategies targeted at inclusiveness of all children in primary education. Late in the project period a Local Self-Govemance Act was passed (1999) to enhance community participation in decision-making and service delivery, which should strengthen school management in the future. A Teaching Service Commission Act was also passed to provide a regulatory framework and a transparent teacher recruitment process. In addition, a five-year subsector program for the BPEP II was developed, providing the basis for continued donors' support. The political impact of the factors referred to under Section 5.1 above was greatest at the district, resource center and school levels where very frequent changes occurred among DEOs, PCs and RPs. For example, in one district there were nine different DEOs in one year and several PCs were transferred at least once. In many cases, RPs were appointed without regard to the selection criteria and were also frequently transferred. Moreover, the impact of the political instability during the latter years of the project affected the stability of the civil service, weakening implementation capacity and accountability of district administration and resulting in overly frequent transfer of field staff and inappropriate recruitments of RPs. -7 -  In this context, it is remarkable that within the seven years of the project, so much was achieved in terms of project implementation. It is a reflection of the commitment of all political parties to the priority of development of the primary education sector and the dedication and innovations of project staff. Two decisions taken midway during the project had a negative impact on the results of program activities at school and district level, namely the change in RP status and their heavy involvement in upgrading certificate training. The Government is aware of these and, in preparing for the second phase of BPEP, it is reviewing the role and function of the RPs and has taken policy decisions about primary teacher education that will lead to a coherent teacher education, training and reward system over the next few years. 5.3 Factors generally subject to implementing agency control. Project management has been effective at the PIU and its units responsible for curriculum, textbook and the teacher professional support system. Management of the project at district and cluster levels has been mainly affected by frequent transfers of field staff. A large amount of donor-supported long-term intemational technical assistance has been provided to the project for support to the special education programs and engineering supervisors. Extensive financial and physical monitoring has been carried out and a number of qualititive studies conducted. There have been no problems with release of counterpart funds, and administration by the project unit has been satisfactory. The dissemination and use of information has not always been used effectively in decision-making. The Borrower contribution to the ICR has been prepared and the Ministry is carrying out an independent evaluation of the project. Lessons learned from the project have fed into the preparation of the second phase of the Basic and Primary Education Program and the Program Implementation Plan for BPEP II which will be supported by joint funding from IDA, Danida, EC, NORAD and Finland; and additionally, with support from Unicef and JICA, and from ADB in the near future. 5.4 Costs and financing: At appraisal, the project was envisaged as a combined effort of Government and all donors in improving primary and basic education. Thus, the project cost appraisal estimates of US$136.5 million also incorporated donor estimates of their contribution to this effort. However, because of issues of timing or donor preference for other modes of participation and financing, actual costs do not include about US$50 million from other donors (JICA - US$15 million, UNDP - US$7 million, UNICEF's under-funding - US$7.68 million, ADB's separate project - US$20.2 million). Likewise, US$18 million was estimated at appraisal as community contribution. Although communities contributed from 15 percent to about 48 percent of classroom construction, the final aggregate figure cannot be calculated with accuracy due to the wide range of activities and degree of participation. The remaining difference of US$14.82 million between the appraisal estimate and final costs can be explained by: (a) lower construction costs resulting mainly from not using another line agency in construction management; and (b) reduced activities under a few sub-components, such as teacher recruitment and training, and curriculum and textbook development. The total actual project financing of $53.8 million covered the original scope of the project (excluding the activities of donors who subsequently did not participate jointly), broken down as follows: IDA - US$30.58 million (US$30.6 million equivalent at appraisal); Danida - US$11.09 million (US$10 million at appraisal), UNICEF - US$3.12 million (US$10.8 at appraisal); NORAD - US$0.46 million; and HMG - US$8.55 million. -8 -  Finally, there were no significant implementation and/or disbursement delays. Moreover, the project closed as originally scheduled (December 31, 1999). 5.5 Procurement and Financial Management: Despite frequent key staff changes, PIU staff carried out procurement activities smoothly under the project. For physical activities, they were able to obtain the support of the Physical Planning and School Mapping Unit (PPSMU). PIU staff participated in Bank procurement seminars held in Kathmandu, where they discussed general project procurement issues in different sectors. In general, BPEP's accounting and internal control systems were satisfactory, as they were all standardized by HMG. PIU staff kept good physical progress and financial records on project activities, which resulted in good accountability and financial management practice. Audit reports were generally submitted on time. 6. Sustainability 6.1 Rationale for sustainability rating: The project Sustainability has been rated "Likely". The Government is implementing the second phase of the basic and primary education program, which is expected to continue and consolidate the BPEP components, as well as expand and introduce new approaches. This will unquestionably ensure sustainability. The BPEP II program is much larger in terms of size of investment and scope of implementation. Some policy decisions which are being introduced, such as school and district planning, the introduction of automatic promotion or liberal promotion in primary grades, the inclusion of parents, women and disadvantaged community members on the SMCs, and the introduction of compulsory primary education through a decentralized framework, enhance the prospects of sustainability of the BPEP project. These decisions would not have taken place had BPEP not initiated them or had it not demonstrated the positive outcome of such initiatives. Very importantly, a number of policy documents indicate government's priority to education and, in particular, to the basic and primary education subsector. The policy framework for BPEP II indicates that 15% of the total budget would be allocated to the education sector with 55% made available for basic and primary education, which would be partly supplemented by alternative sources of funding mobilized by the communities. In the MOE restructuring, the government has already made a meaningful effort to institutionalize the functions of the BPEP units and their programs. The establishment of the DOE is an important step towards institutional sustainability. The BPEP units and components have been fully integrated within the main framework of MOE and the academic and management capability of curriculum developers, teacher trainers, supervisors, DEOs, Resource Persons, and headmasters will ensure the continuing improvement of the subsector and enhance technical sustainability. Finally, the Government has also indicated that it will increase delegation of decision-making and planning for primary education to the district, the school and the community, while helping communities and local bodies to assume greater responsibility for basic and primary education. The recently enacted Local Self-Governance Act (1999) provides a legal basis for devolution of authority and responsibility from central to local levels. Increased planning, management and monitoring functions to be carried out at -9-  districts and school levels will promote ownership of the program by the stakeholders and prepare them to sustain local level activities. 6.2 Transition arrangement to regular operations: Educational change and school environment are long-term processes which typically produce their impact as a result of well-designed interventions sustained over a long period. A foundation has been laid for future interventions through the good implementation progress of this project. BPEP II has been developed and will be funded by a consortium of donors. The project has created the demand for new institutions to provide organizational infrastructure, and to promote and sustain educational development. MOE has recently decided to create such new institutions. DOE and the Non-formal Education Council (NFEC) at the central level will take charge of formal and non-formal primary education respectively. This in itself represents an important outcome of the BPEP program. These two institutions are to absorb the relevant components of BPEP. The project has trained a cadre of MOE personnel who can take responsible positions in DOE and other MOE departrnents. The challenge for the Ministry is how to upgrade the capacity of these new as well as existing institutions. This is the task for BPEP II. Development activities carried out under BPEP will be consolidated (in the case of curriculum implementation and professional support for teachers through school and cluster based activities) and will be expanded to the remaining districts. Communities and districts with the lowest participation rates and the lowest girls GER will be given priority in resource allocation and planning. In addition, lessons learnt from BPEP led to decisions to increase school and community planning, management and monitoring of primary schools to improve school quality and to allocate resources. The integration of the RC/school cluster system into the regular system still remains an outstanding issue. Despite the policy statement on promotion of RCs in the country, it has not yet been translated into operational terms and national strategies are not yet in place. The multi-donor supported core investment plan for the BPEP II will release funds on an annual basis based on need, past performance in the subsector against agreed benchmarks and within an agreed policy framework. Key performance indicators will assess system progress over a ten-year period and annual benchmarks for more efficient planning purposes. The indicators will address access, equity, efficiency, leaming achievement, teacher performance and institutional capacity progress. The Policy Framework for Basic and Primary Education sets out policies, strategies and monitoring indicators for the subsector program and will provide the standard against which annual work plans and budgets will be prepared, implemented and monitored. District planning and school improvement planning and monitoring would be in compliance with the policy framework and any major change in the policy framework would be agreed with the large donor consortium supporting the second phase. Donor coordination will be the function of the MOE and common procedures for monitoring and reporting have been agreed. IDA has prepared an Adaptable Program Loan (APL) for a proposed ten-year support to Nepal's Basic and Primary Education Program. The APL received Board approval on March 29, 1999 and the three-year first phase of the APL was declared effective on October 19, 1999. 7. Bank and Borrower Performance Bank 7. 1 Lending: With the possible exception of the management component and its proposed financing arrangement, the project was well designed and directed towards addressing the key educational issues of the time. The objectives were therefore relevant, clearly defined and had a direct link to the Govemrnment's medium-term - 10 -  plans in the sector. The project was informed by lessons from earlier projects in the sector. 7.2 Supervision: A total of eight full IDA missions assessed the progress at various stages in project implementation and provided assistance in identified areas of need. The BPEP PIU prepared documentation to facilitate the work of the missions. The missions consisted of national and international experts, with relevant backgrounds in project management and primary education development. Due to the Bank's ongoing reorganization during the life of the project, there were changes of Bank task team leaders (five times) and mission members and this hampered systematic follow-up and caused some discontinuity. 7.3 Overall Bankperformance: A very good working relationship was established and maintained among donors and the education authorities. Supervision missions played a supportive role in policy development and the implementation of the project, and the advice and assistance provided contributed significantly to expediting project implementation. Borrower 7.4 Preparation: In 1990, MOEC developed a Master Plan for the subsector which emphasized the need for investments in quality improvement, access and management. In preparing its plan for the Eighth Five-Year Plan period, the Government developed a US$136.5 million seven-year integrated nationwide program to be financed by HMG, IDA, UNDP, UNICEF, DANIDA and JICA. IDA agreed to support the Government's program through a US$30.6 million Credit, which became effective on July 8, 1992. 7.5 Governzment inmplementation perjbrmance: Government implementation was characterized by a high number of Ministers of Education over the project period, frequent changes of civil service personnel (reflecting swings in changes in political power) and the politicization of teachers as agents of political change at the community level. The impact on the project was greatest at the district, resource center and school levels where very frequent changes occurred in DEOs, PCs and RPs. Coordination among ministries was difficult. 7.6 ImplementingAgency: The BPEP PIU was in charge of overall planning, programming, implementing, coordination, supervision and monitoring of the project activities. The project unit was headed by a Project Director. Over the life of the project, there have been three Directors, two of whom were on secondment from Tribhuvan University; the other was a regular employee of the MOE. The leadership of the project remained relatively stable because the last two Directors were recruited from among project staff. Many other educational projects operating in Nepal during the same period saw more frequent changes in leadership positions. 7.7 Overall Borrower performance: Project components were largely implemented and IDA funds were almost fully disbursed. The BPEP project was effective in managing donors inputs. In general, MOE made every effort to fulfill its designated responsibilities, even at times of frequent changes in the Government. Over the years, however, - 11 -  the Government failed to accomplish some of its responsibilities. In particular, MOE was unable to integrate fully the BPEP components and activities within the mainstream of the Ministry during BPEP implementation, and to regularize some of the personnel hired under the project. 8. Lessons Learned Most key BPEP project lessons have already been incorporated in the design of the recent BPEP II project. These are: Quality: Although BPEP has laid the foundation for an efficient delivery to improve the quality of education, it did not accomplish substantial improvements in the learning and achievement of students. Improvement in quality can be achieved where attention is focused on acquisition of basic learning skills and by introducing an integrated approach at the school level to promote student learning, teacher performance and school development. BPEP II is designed to adapt and expand the school cluster model for professional support in order to improve teaching and learning in primary schools, and it will focus on strengthening curriculum implementation especially in grades 1-3 and support grade teaching and multi-grade teaching in small schools. Government and donors have agreed on a policy framework supporting this next phase (BPEP II) which will provide the basis to improve efficiency and quality of primary education in Nepal. Access. Strategies targeting the neediest can increase their participation in education. Interventions to increase girls and out-of-school children enrollment and retention through the appointment of female teachers, provision of textbooks and scholarships, sanitary facilities in schools, literacy programs for women, early childhood programs for siblings and the strengthening of the professional support for teachers in their schools, result in increased access and participation of primary students. Parents and local communities must be closely involved in delivery of educational services if the needs of diverse groups are to be met. Institutional development: The integration of project management structures into the regular education system is not possibie unless there are clear reinforcing policies and a change in bureaucratic culture. A lean, field-based project management structure with flexibility to acquire technical expertise when needed is the most appropriate management approach, provided frequent changes in staff do not occur. Stability in staffing is a prerequisite for effective institutions, technical capacity building and accountability among key professional and administrative staff. In addition, good monitoring and evaluation, and sound financial management contribute substantially to project success. Ensuring communities' ownership in school construction and involvement in school management and teacher monitoring are essential for increasing accountability. BPEP II will increase community management capacity through a district planning process that will increasingly be built on school quality improvement plans prepared by communities. Project development emphasized a strong donor willingness to support a core basic education program. Donor cooperation can be effective provided firm funding commitments and agreements on funding arrangements and supervision are reached before implementation begins. Execution of BPEP II by the Department of Education in the Ministry is expected to lead to stronger ownership by the MOE as a whole. 9. Partner Comments (a) Borrower/implementing agency: The Borrower's independent Project Evaluation Report is attached as Annex 8. MOE and the - 12 -  National Planning Commission have communicated in writing to IDA that this ICR is acceptable to them. (b) Cofinanciers: Whilst DANIDA reported that this ICR is thorough and provides a good account of implementation of the project (Letter of March 17, 2000), UNDP commented (Letter of May 8, 2000) that slow progress towards capacity building and the absence of a clear-cut decision on the part of Government, led to the cancellation of their technical assistance in late 1996. Further, UNDP stated that since MOE did not have a structure and merger plan, and MOE did not accept their September/October 1996 missions recomrnendation for redesigning the technical assistance, UNDP had to cancel its assistance. (c) Other partners (NGOs/private sector): 10. Additional Information -13-  Annex 1. Key Performance Indicators/Log Frame Matrix Outcome /m act Indicators: NOTE: At the time of the design of the Component 1: (a) Proportion of teachers The following improvements in the primary project, it was not usual practice to include applying improved teaching practices; and school system have been achieved: (a) the outcome and performance indicators in the (b) Increased leaming achievement. gross enrollment ratio increased nationally SAR. Nevertheless, around the mid-term from 106% (females 83%) in 1991 to 122% review some broad indicators (listed in the Component 2: Percentage increase in (females 104%) in 1997; (b) the learning adjacent column) were introduced. enrollment and aKtendance in primary environment has improved through enhanced Mechanisms for monitoring these indicators schools (boys and girls) and NFE Centers. physical facilities, with 14,232 additional new systematically are not yet in place. Since the classrooms built, and 8,462 classrooms building-up of the primary education system Component 3: (a) Effectiveness of work rehabilitated; (c) curriculum and textbook started from a low base, the BPEP was planning, progress reporting and M&E reform has led to the introduction of an envisaged as the initial building block to systems; (b) Output of resource institutions; integrated curriculum for primary education improve primary education quality as well as and (c) Achievement and disbursement data which facilitates leaming; (d) a to increase access to primary educabon. by district. criterion-based national assessment of three core subjects was carried out in 1997; results indicated that mean scores in Nepali language were 46%, in Mathematics 44% and in Social Studies 46%; (e) teachers have been retrained, and female primary school teachers increased from 14% in 1991 to 23% in 1997; in addition, 61% of the addibonal primary school teachers appointed between 1991 and 1997 were female; (f) the rate of complebon of the five-year primary school program has moderately increased; (g) community construction increased SMC ownership of schools and is cost effectve; (h) MOE's capacity to plan, manage and monitor education programs has been strengthened; and (i) the project made inroads in early childhood education and non-formal education. Output Indicators: Curriculum Development Cumiculum (Grades I - V) = 1 Curiculum Handbook Development (Grades - V)= 1 Content Elaboration (Grades I - V) Textbook Development Textbooks (Core Subjects: Nepali, Math & Social Studies in Grades I - V and English and Science in Grades IV & V) = 19 Text Materials for Grade I and 11 on Mother Tongue = 2 Teachers' Guide (Core Subjects + Physical Education and Creative Arts in all five grades) = 29 Teachers' Resource Materials = 11 Supplementary Matenals Grade IlIl Math and Nepali (Copies) 6000 + 6000= 12000 Children Materals and Supplementary Materials = 17 - 14 -  In-service Teacher Training (No. of Teachers Curriculum Dissemination (Teachers) = Trained) Program 107271 Master Training Program = 564 Recurrent Training (Whole School Approach) = 37651 Teacher Training on Grade I - V Curriculum = 90607 2.5 Months Teacher Training = 8511 150 Hrs. Teacher Training = 3986 180 Hrs. Teacher Training = 8125 12 Day Teacher Improvement Training (Grade Teaching) = 994 12 Day Teacher Improvement Training (Multi-grade Teaching) = 3843 12 Day Teacher Improvement Training (Extra Curricular) = 1448 Resource Center Development Program Establish 500 resource centers (RCs) Continuous Assessment Program Minimum Leaming Achievement Minimum Learning Achievement Identification for Grade I - lil (Nepali, Math & Identification for Grade I - IlIl (Nepali, Math & Social Science) = 3 Social Science) = 3 School Facilities Construction Management Maintenance Training = 7152 Program: (a) expansion and replacement of Distribution of Manuals for School Building 19,000 classrooms; Maintenance = 7690 (b) essential repairs to about 6,000 Distribution of Tool Box = 7640 classrooms Refurbishment of MOE Building = 1 DEO Building = 20 Pit Latrine = 330 Water Supply = 191 New Classroom Construction = 14232 Classroom Rehabilitation = 8462 Furniture for Classroom = 13412 RC Building Construction and Furnishing 314 Non-Formal Education Program District Level Training for Facilitators and Supervisors = 38626 Out of School Program (Participants) = 151853 Women's Education Program (Participants) = 265362 Adult Education Program (Participants) = 45659 Neo-Literacy Program (Participants) = 6625 Chelibeti Program (Participants) = 19818 Special Education Program District Level Disability Survey (District) 15 Awareness Training (Peoples Trained) = 225 Hostel Management (RC Classes) = 179 Special Education Training to the Primary Teachers = 203 Scholarships for Physical Disabled Children = 2700 Refresher Training to the Resource Teachers = 281 Inclusive Training (Teachers) = 84 Vocational Skill Training for Teachers = 40 Women Education Program Recruitment of Female Teacher = 4151 Training for Women Teachers = 3588 Awareness Program = 500 Training to the Resource Persons = 176 Training to the Community Motivators = 600 Early Childhood Development Program Establishment of Classes - 1200 Training to Teachers = 2232 Training of Trainers = 221 - 15-  Compulsory Primary Education Program Compulsory Primary Education Implementabon (Districts) = 5 Scholarship Distribufion = 27650 Program Management Monioring Package Orientation ( DEO, PC, RP, Overseer, NFE Facilitators and Supervisor) = 480 District, RC and School Register (Copies) = 13384 District, RC and School Register Package Orientation (DEO, PC and RP ) = 418 Physical facilities surveys of primary schools School Physical Facilities Survey (Districts) in about half of the districts in Nepal (37) = 40 School Mapping (Districts) = 75 Development of Design of Primary Schools (Mt., Hill and Terai) = 3 Management training program Headmaster Training = 4189 End of project -16-  Annex 2. Project Costs and Financing Anpraisal estimate Actual /a Local Foreign Local Foreign Source Costs Costs Total Costs Costs Total IDA Civil Works 9.12 6.08 15.20 16.35 16.35 Professional Fees 0.10 - 0.10 Furniture 1.57 0.03 1.60 0.29 0.29 Equipment 0.10 0.70 0.80 0.07 0.08 0.15 Vehicles 0.04 1.06 1.10 0.05 0.46 0.51 Books & Journal - - 0.00 0.01 0.01 Technical Assistance International Consultants - - 0.00 - - 0.00 Local Consultants 0.10 - 0.10 - - 0.00 Sub-total 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 Local Training 4.90 - 4.90 6.57 - 6.57 Salaries of Add'l Staff & Operating Costs 6.60 - 6.60 4.91 - 4.91 Operation & Maintenance 0.00 Buildings 0.51 - 0.51 Vehicles 1.22 - 1.22 Sub-total 6.60 0.00 6.60 6.64 0.00 6.64 Consumable Materials 0.16 0.04 0.20 0.06 0.06 Subtotal IDA 22.70 7.90 30.60 30,04 0.55 30.58 DANIDA Civil works and Professional Fees n.a n.a n.a 4.11 - 4.11 Equipment n.a n.a n.a 0.002 - 0.0 Other (parallel) n.a n.a 10.00 6.98 6.98 Subtotal DANIDA 0.00 0.00 10.00 1 1.09 0o00 1 109 Other Donors UNICEF 0.00 0.00 10.80 3.12 0.00 3.12 ADB (separate financing) n.a n.a 20.20 n.a n.a n.a UNDP (did not materialize) - - 7.00 - - 0.0 Japan/JICA Ic - - 15.00 - - 0.0 NORAD (Local Trg/incr. Oper Cost.) - - 0.00 0.46 - 0.46 HMG Nepal Civil Works & Professional Fees 0.17 0.17 Furniture 0.01 0.01 Equipment & Vehicles 0.01 0.01 Incremental Salaries, Consumable Mats. & Operations and Maintenance 8.35 8.35 Subtotal HMGN 42,90 0.00 42790 /d 8.55 0.00 8.55 Total project financing 65.60 7.90 136.50 53.25 0.55 53.80 Source: BPEP Staff Appraisal Report (March 27, 1992); MOE (BPEP). a/ Includes actual data up to FY1997/98 and estimated expenditures for FY1998/99. Breakdown into local and foreign actual costs has been given to the extent possible. b/ USS amount fluctuated due to US$/SDR exchange rate; US$I=NRs 55 (1993/98); NRs 67.35 (1999). c/ Japan's original financing did not materialize; however, JICA provided construction materials for school construction (actual figures not available). d/ Includes US$18 million estimated as community contribution; actual data are not available. - 17 -  Project Costs b Procurement Arran ements (A raisal Estimate) (US$ million equivalent) 1. Works 1.50 4.70 15.90 36.00 58.10 (1.50) (4.20) (9.60) (0.00) (15.30) 2. Goods 1.50 0.70 1.60 18.20 22.00 1.50) (0.50) (1.40) (0.00) (3.40) 3. Services 0.00 0.00 0.10 13.10 13.20 (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (i0.10) 4. Local Training 0.00 0.00 17.00 0.20 17.20 and Studies (0.00) (0.00) (4.90) (0.00) (4.90) 5. Salaries 0.00 0.00 21.00 0.00 21.00 (0.00) (0.00) (6.70) (0.00) (6.70) 6. Operational Costs 0.00 0.00 0.20 4.80 5.00 (0.00) (0.00) (0.20) (0.00) (0.20) Total 3.00 5.40 55.80 72.30 136.50 (300) (4.70) (22.90) (0.00) (30.60) a/ Includes cornmunity construction, international and local shopping and consultant selection according to IDA Guidelines. b/ NRB.F. means non-Bank financed. cl Books and Journals under Goods (NBF category) include UNICEF procurement. Project Costs b Procurement Arran ements (Actual/Latest Estimate) (US$ million e uivalent) 1. Works 1.60 5.02 11.13 2.88 20.63 _______________________ =(1.60) (4.49) (10.26) (0.00) (16.35) 2. Goods 0.42 0.15 0.41 0.00 0.98 (0.42) (0.14) (0.40) (0.00 (0.96) 3. Services 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.46 4.46 (0.00) 0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) 4. Local Training 0.00 0.00 6.57 6.10 12.67 and Studies (0.00) (0.00) (6.57) (0.00) (6.57) 5. Salaries 0.00 0.00 11.21 0.00 11.21 (0.00) (0.00) (4.91) (0.00) (4.91) 6. Operational Costs 0.00 0.00 3.85 0.00 3.85 (0.00) (0.00) A1.79) (0.00) (.79) Total 2.02 5.17 33.17 13.44 53.80 (2.02) (4.63) (23.93) (0.00) (30.58) Note: (a) Discrepancy between actual and appraisal estimate reflects changes in donor programs (see above financing table and section 5.4 on Costs and Financing); (b) Breakdown based on SAR estimates (ICR guidelines with this new format were issued after the ICR mission). " Figures in parenthesis are the amounts to be financed by the Bank Loan. All costs include contingencies. 2/ Includes civil works and goods to be procured through national shopping, consulting services, services of contracted staff of the project management office, training, technical assistance services, and incremental operating costs related to (i) managing the project, and (ii) re-lending project funds to local govemment units. - 18-  Project Financing by Component (in US$ million equivalent) Anuraisal estimate (US$M) Actual (US$M) /a /b Components Local Foreign Total Local Foreign Total A. IMPROVING QUALITY OF BASIC & PRIMARY EDUCATION 1. Curriculum Development 1.2 3.0 4.2 0.2 0.5 0.6 2. Textbook Development 4.4 7.5 11.9 0.7 1.2 1.8 3. Inservice Teacher Training 12.7 4.1 16.8 6.5 2.0 8.5 4. Additional Teacher Recruitment 13.2 - 13.2 8.0 - 8.0 5. Initial Training 6.4 2.3 8.7 0.6 0.3 0.9 Sub-total 37.9 16.9 548. 16.0 3.9 19.9 B. ACCESS TO BASIC & PRIMARY EDUCATION 1. Non-Formal Education 7.4 0.1 7.5 4.6 0.05 4.7 2. Primary School Construction 27.9 15.4 43.3 14.7 8.3 23.0 Sub-total 35.3 15.5 50.8 19.3 8.3 27.7 C. INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT 1. Facilities Management 1.1 1.1 2.2 1.1 1.0 2.1 2. Education Management Training 3.5 0.6 4.1 - - - 3. MOEC Strengthening 2.0 2.9 4.9 0.1 0.2 0.3 4. Primary School Design & Maintenance 0.3 1.2 1.5 0.6 3.3 3.9 Sub-total 6.9 5.8 12.8 1.8 4.5 6.3 Baseline cost 80.1 38.2 118.4 37.1 16.7 53.8 Contingencies: Physical 3.5 2.7 6.2 - - - Price increase 7.9 4.0 11.9 - - - Sub-total 11.4 6.7 18.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS 91.5 44.9 136.5 37.1 16.7 53.8 Source: BPEP Staff Appraisal Report (March 27, 1992); MOE (BPEP). a/ The huge difference between appraisal estimate and the actual can be explained as follows: The total SAR estimated project costs of US$136.5 million included estimated financing from: (i) ADB - US$20 million, Japan - US$15 million; and UNDP - US$7 million. However, actual figures do not include these financiers since (a) UNDP funding did not materialize, (b) ADB's data are not available, and (c) Japan decided to participate only starting during FY1995 and contributing construction materials for schools only. Also included in the SAR estimate was the amount of US$18 million as community contribution for which actual figures are not available. b/ These costs comprised of actual costs up to FY1997/98 and estimated expenditures for FY 1998/99. Breakdown for local and foreign costs has been estimated in some cases. - 19 -  Annex 3: Economic Costs and Benefits Economic rates of return were not calculated at appraisal. - 20 -  Annex 4. Bank Inputs (a) Missions: Stage oft 'roject Cycle No. of Persos and Specialty Performnance ing (eg 2 Economists, I FMS, edc.) mplemertation Development Month/Year Count sPecialty Pregs Objective Identification/Preparation 10 General Educator, 2 Education Specialists, Architect, Economist, Curriculum Development Specialist, 2 Textbook Specialists, Operations Analyst, Non-Formal Education Specialist Appraisal/Negotiation 9/91 10 General Educator, 2 2/92 Education Specialists, Architect, Economist, Curriculum Development Specialist, 2 Textbook Specialists, Operations Analyst, Non-Formal Education Specialist Supervision 6/92 2 General Educator, Architect S S 3/93 4 Education Specialist, Economist, S S Architect, Soc. Sectors Coord. 6/93 7 3 Education Specialist, HS HS Economist, Soc. Sectors Coord., Architect, Program Officer 2/94 6 2 Education Specialist, S S Economist, Soc. Sectors Coord. 11/94 4 3 Education Specialist, Architect S S 1/96 2 2 Education Specialist S S 11/96 2 2 Education Specialist S S 6/97 4 4 Education Specialist S S 3/98 2 Economist/Human Res., S S Architect 2/99 4 Economist/Human Res., S S Education Specialist, Architect, Accountant ICR 6/99 3 Economist, 2 Education S S Specialists, Operations Analyst -21 -  (b) Staff: Stage of Project Cycle Actual/atsstimt| No. Statffweeks US$ (000t ) Identification/Preparation 20.2 45.9 Appraisal/Negotiation 135.9 285.6 Supervision 124.2 240.8 ICR 12 40 Total 292.3 612.3 - 22 -  Annex 5. Ratings for Achievement of Objectives/Outputs of Components (H=High, SU=Substantial, M=Modest, N=Negligible, NA=Not Applicable) Rating FMacro policies O H OSUOM O N * NA I Sector Policies O H * SU OM O N O NA X Physical * H OSUOM O N O NA Z Financial OH OSUOM ON *NA 2 Institutional Development 0 H O SU *M 0 N 0 NA ?Environmental O H OSUOM O N * NA Social D? Poverty Reduction O H *SUOM O N O NA O Gender O H * SU O M O N O NA O Other (Please specify) ? Private sector development 0 H O SU O M 0 N 0 NA O Public sector management 0 H 0 SU * M 0 N 0 NA O Other (Please specify) - 23 -  Annex 6. Ratings of Bank and Borrower Performance (HS=Highly Satisfactory, S=Satisfactory, U=Unsatisfactory, HU=Highly Unsatisfactory) 6.1 Bank performance Rating E Lending OHS*S Ou OHU 2 Supervision OHS OS OU OHU Z Overall OHS OS O U O HU 6.2 Borrowerperformance Rating L Preparation OHS OS O U O HU F Government implementation performance O HS O S 0 U 0 HU Z Implementation agency performance O HS O S 0 U 0 HU t Overall O ffS S 3 U O HU - 24 -  Annex 7. List of Supporting Documents Bista, Min Bahadur. Basic and Primary Education Project (Management Component). June 1999. Pant, Yagya R., Shiva R. Lohani. BPEP: Improving the Quality and Access of Primary Education. June 27, 1999. Tiwari, Sudarshan Raj. Assessment ofperformance: Access: Civil Works. June 1999. A report on quantitative performance of BPEP, 1993 - 1994. A Study on the Physical Teaching/Learning Conditions of the BPEP Schools, Valley Research Group, September, 1995. A study on the impact of Grade 1 new materials on learning and teaching. CERES. 1995. Aide Memoire, Implementation Completion Mission, June 19-30, 1999. The World Bank. Kathmandu. June 30, 1999 Development Credit Agreement, The World Bank. Education Statistics of Nepal (various years). Ministry of Education, Kathmandu. Monitoring: a summary report. 1995. National achievement study of Grade 3 children, 1997 (EDSC). Project Implementation Plan, BPEP II. Ministry of Education, Kathmandu. 1999. Quantitative Performance of BPEP. 1995 - 1998. Rapid Independent Assessment of Basic and Primary Education Project. Institute for Integrated Development Studies (IIDS), February 22, 1998. Report of the National Education Commission. National Education Commission. Ministry of Education & Culture, Kathmandu. 1992. Report of the Mid-term Review Mission for BPEP. Mid-term Review Mission. 1996. Reports of various Supervision Missions for BPEP. 1992-1999. Staff Appraisal Report (SAR), BPEP. World Bank. 1992. The Basic and Primary Agreement Master Plan, 1991-2001. The Master Plan Team, Ministry of Education and Culture, His Majesty's Government. July 31, 1991. The Basic and Primary Education Master Plan for 1997-2002. Ministry of Education. 1997. The effect of new curriculum on the achievement of grade IV students, 1997. The effect of new curriculurn on the achievement of grade V students, 1998. The Ninth Plan (1997-2002). NPC. His Majesty's Government of Nepal. Kathmandu. 1997. Workshop on 'primary school construction and design'. BPEP, Physical Planning and School Mapping Unit, MOECSW. Kathmandu. June 1994. - 25 -  - 26 -