Ghana - Basic Education Sector Improvement Project

Document of The World Bank Report No: 26095 IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT (IDA-28850) ON A CREDIT IN THE AMOUNT OF US$50.0 MILLION TO THE REPUBLIC OF GHANA FOR A BASIC EDUCATION SECTOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT June 30, 2003 Human Development II Africa Regional Office  CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (Exchange Rate Effective as April 1996) Currency Unit = Cedis 1 Cedis = US$ 0.000645 US$ 1.00 = 1550 Cedis FISCAL YEAR January 1 December 31 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS BAS Beneficiary Assessment Survey BESIP Basic Education Sector Improvement Project CAS Country Assistance Strategy CRDD Curriculum Research Development Division CRT Criterion Referenced Test DA District Assembly DCA Development Credit Agreement DEO District Education Offices DO Development Objectives DP Development partner ECD Early Childhood Development EdSDP Education Development Project EdSeP Education Sector Project EFA Education for All EMIS Education Management Information System ESP Education Sector Plan ESR Education Sector Review FCUBE Free, Compulsory, Universal Basic Education FPMU Funds and Procurement Management Unit FTI Fast-track Initiative GER Gross Enrollment Ratio GES Ghana Education Service GETFund Ghana Education Trust Fund GLSS Ghana Living Standard Survey GOG Government of Ghana GPRS Ghana Poverty Reduction Strategy IDA International Development Association IEC Information, Education, and Communication IP Implementation Progress IRR Internal Rate of Return IT Information Technology JSS Junior Secondary School MDGs Millennium Development Goals MOE Ministry of Education MTEF Medium-term Expenditure Framework PMT Performance Monitoring Test PRSC Poverty Reduction Strategy Credit PSR Project Status Reports PTA Parent and Teacher Association PTR Pupil-Teacher Ratio QAG Quality Assessment Group  SWAP Sectorwide Approach S&L Supply and Logistics SAR Staff Appraisal Report SIF School Improvement Fund SLU Supplies and Logistics Unit SMC School Management Committee SRIMPR Statistics, Research, Information Management and Public Relations STD Survey of Textbook Distribution to Basic Schools TA Technical Assistance TIMSS Trend of International Mathematics and Science Study TTL Task Team Leader VAT Value Added Tax WAEC West African Examinations Council Vice President: Callisto E. Madavo Country Manager/Director: Mats Karlsson Sector Manager/Director: Alexandre V. Abrantes Task Team Leader/Task Manager: Eunice Yaa Brimfah Dapaah  GHANA BASIC EDUCATION SECTOR IMPROVEMENT CONTENTS Page No. 1. Project Data 1 2. Principal Performance Ratings 1 3. Assessment of Development Objective and Design, and of Quality at Entry 2 4. Achievement of Objective and Outputs 5 5. Major Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcome 12 6. Sustainability 14 7. Bank and Borrower Performance 15 8. Lessons Learned 18 9. Partner Comments 21 10. Additional Information 22 Annex 1. Key Performance Indicators/Log Frame Matrix 23 Annex 2. Project Costs and Financing 26 Annex 3. Economic Costs and Benefits 28 Annex 4. Bank Inputs 32 Annex 5. Ratings for Achievement of Objectives/Outputs of Components 35 Annex 6. Ratings of Bank and Borrower Performance 36 Annex 7. List of Supporting Documents 37 Annex 8. Borrower's ICR Contribution 38 MAP IBRD 28045  Project ID: P000975 Project Name: BASIC EDUCATION SECTOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Team Leader: Eunice Yaa Brimfah Dapaah TL Unit: AFTH2 ICR Type: Core ICR Report Date: June 30, 2003 1. Project Data Name: BASIC EDUCATION SECTOR L/C/TF Number: IDA-28850 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Country/Department: GHANA Region: Africa Regional Office Sector/subsector: Primary education (88%); Tertiary education (9%); Central government administration (3%) Theme: Education for all (P); Gender (P); Rural services and infrastructure (P); Access to urban services for the poor (P); Decentralization (S) KEY DATES Original Revised/Actual PCD: 06/14/1995 Effective: 10/11/1996 10/11/1996 Appraisal: 02/20/1996 MTR: 07/31/1998 04/01/1999 Approval: 06/18/1996 Closing: 06/30/2001 12/31/2002 Borrower/Implementing Agency: GOVERNMENT/MINISTRY OF EDUCATION Other Partners: STAFF Current At Appraisal Vice President: Callisto E. Madavo Jean-Louis Sarbib Country Director: Mats Karlsson Olivier Lafourcade Sector Manager: Alexandre V. Abrantes Ian Porter Team Leader at ICR: Eunice Yaa Brimfah Dapaah Josephine Woo ICR Primary Author: Lianqin Wang 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: U Project at Risk at Any Time: Yes  3. Assessment of Development Objective and Design, and of Quality at Entry 3.1 Original Objective: The Basic Education Sector Improvement Program (BESIP) was designed to support the Government of Ghana (GOG) in implementing its policy to achieve free, compulsory, and universal basic education (FCUBE), a priority development policy deriving from the country's constitutional requirement. FCUBE had three broad objectives: (a) improve the teaching process and learning outcomes; (b) strengthen management of the basic education system; and (c) improve access to basic education, especially of girls and the poor and other disadvantaged segments of the population. Because it was designed to support FCUBE, the BESIP had these same objectives. There was a fourth element of the objective in the Staff Appraisal Report (SAR) which was stated as follows: "ensure financial sustainability of the government program for basic education over the longer term." However, this fourth objective was not mentioned in any of the other project documents such as the Development Credit Agreement (DCA) and the Project Status Reports (PSRs), and there were not corresponding project components addressing this objective in the SAR. Because it was not in the DCA and therefore was not legalized, the fourth objective will be by-passed in the discussion of this ICR. The three objectives were clear, relevant, and important because: (a) they reflected the Ministry of Education's (MOE) policy priorities in basic education and responded to a constitutionally mandated requirement that universal basic schooling be available to all young Ghanaians by the middle of the next decade; and (b) they were consistent with the Bank's Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) which placed priority on strengthening human resources and on improving effectiveness of primary and secondary education, as well as regional and gender equality. These objectives were achievable if the program was implemented well and if sufficient time was given for impacts to occur. FCUBE was proposed to be a 10-year program (1996-2005) and the BESIP was to support its first phase (1996-2000). 3.2 Revised Objective: The project objectives were not revised throughout the project cycle. 3.3 Original Components: BESIP was designed to support FCUBE (1996-2000). By design, it was a sub-sector program rather than a stand-alone project. For this reason, all BESIP components are identical with those in FCUBE. They are as follows: Component 1: Enhanced quality of teaching and learning, through (a) in-service training of education personnel; (b) pre-service teachers' training; (c) assessment and evaluation of student performance; (d) provision of instructional materials; and (e) curriculum review and development. Component 2: Management for efficiency, through (a) building capacity for institutional/organizational analysis and change; (b) staffing and personnel management; (c) performance management; (d) budget and financing management; and (e) district capacity-building. Component 3: Improving access and participation, through (a) infrastructure development; (b) school facilities planning and maintenance; (c) increasing girls' participation; (d) fostering community - 2 -  involvement; (e) implementing School Improvement Fund (SIF); and (f) promoting Information, Education, and Communication (IEC). The design of the three components was clearly related to achieving the objectives. These components were developed to address the key issues in the basic education sector: (a) poor teaching and learning outcomes; (b) inadequate access to basic education services; (c) weak management capacity at all levels of the system; and (d) unsatisfactory financial management. The components and subcomponents covered almost the entire basic education sector. Such a comprehensive approach could have been appropriate if the sector had the capacity to implement it. However, given the weak administrative and financial management capacity of the implementation agencies of the GOG (i.e., MOE and Ghana Education Service-GES) at that time, such a design might be too complex and too far-reaching. According to the SAR, the IDA credit of US$50.0 million would focus on supporting in-service training of education personnel, provision of instructional materials to schools, training and workshops for MOE/GES, District Education Offices (DEOs) and School Management Committees (SMCs) to improve efficiency in management, rehabilitation, and construction of school facilities to improve access and the teaching/learning environment, and initiatives to encourage girls' participation and community involvement in education and school activities. However, the breakdown of US$50 million (equivalent to SDR 34.7 million) for the three components was not available in any of the documents. Below are the project costs for 1996-2000 in the SAR. Table 1: Original Components: Appraisal estimate total cost* (US$ million) Component Total Foreign Local Ratings 1. Enhanced Quality of Teaching and Learning 125.4 65.0 60.3 S** 2. Management for Efficiency 28.8 9.3 19.6 S** 3. Improving Access and Participation 58.8 25.2 33.7 S Contingencies 28.6 13.3 15.2 Total 241.6 112.8 128.8 * Including the IDA US$50 million. ** The "satisfactory" rating is only marginal. 3.4 Revised Components: The original project design was very ambitious: it covered 14 areas and had 93 distinctive operations; and the sub-sector program design required highly effective coordination among development partners. This overly ambitious design in a context of weak administrative and financial management capacity led to difficulties in implementation. By April 1999 at the mid-term review, the disbursement was 80 percent behind the original plan, and the "unsatisfactory" ratings on both the Implementation Progress (IP) and Development Objective (DO) had lasted for a year. To respond to these problems, the project was restructured at the mid-term review to limit the scope of the project and to support a smaller number of sub-components that were relatively well implemented. Below are the main areas supported by BESIP after the mid-term review: (a) Civil Works (Construction/rehabilitation of schools) (b) Textbook supply (c) Education Management Information System (EMIS) - 3 -  In addition, other areas proposed for support by the BESIP are: (d) Strengthened policy analysis; (e) SIF; (f) Studies and program development in girls' education; (g) IEC; (h) Expenditure analysis in support of the Medium-term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) process; and (i) Definitions of mechanisms for procurement and financing arrangements. The restructuring at the mid-term review transformed the BESIP from a too-challenging sub-sector program to a more manageable stand-alone project, but it did not change the overall development objectives as the Aide-m