Public Disclosure Authorized Document of The World Bank Report No: ICR00002842 Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT (IDA-43810) ON A CREDIT 4381-HO IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 9.8 MILLION (US$15.37 MILLION EQUIVALENT) TO THE REPUBLIC OF HONDURAS FOR AN EDUCATION QUALITY, GOVERNANCE AND INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTHENING PROJECT Public Disclosure Authorized Human Development Network Central America Country Management Unit Latin America and the Caribbean Region December 20, 2013
CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (Exchange Rate Effective December 20, 2013) Currency Unit = Lempiras (L) 20.350 Lempiras = US$1 US$0.65159315 = SDR 1 FISCAL YEAR January 1 December 31 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS AECO Asociaciones Educativas Comunitarias (Community-Based Educational Associations) CCEPREB Centro Comunitario de Educación Prebásica (Community-Based Pre- Primary School) COMDE Consejo Municipal de Desarrollo Educativo (Municipal Council for Educational Development) CPS Country Partnership Strategy DIGECE Dirección General de Evaluación de la Calidad Educativa (Department of Educational Quality Assessment) DPL Development Policy Loan ECU EFA Coordination Unit EFA Education for All EFA-FTI Education for All / Fast-Track Initiative EGRA Early-Grade Reading Abilities EMIS Education Management Information System FM Financial Management GIZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (German Society for International Cooperation) GoH Government of Honduras HRM Human Resources Management IADB Inter-American Development Bank IAPP Indigenous and Afro-Honduran People s Plan IBE Intercultural and Bilingual Education IDA International Development Association INPREMA Instituto Nacional de Previsión del Magisterio (National Teachers Pension Fund Institute) IOI Intermediate Outcome Indicator IRI Intermediate Results Indicator KfW Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau (German Development Bank) KPI Key Performance Indicator LSMS Living Standards Measurement Survey MERECE Mesa Redonda de Cooperantes Externos en Educación (International Donors' Education Round Table) NES National Educational Strategy ii
PAD Project Appraisal Document PDO Project Development Objective PEC Proyecto Educativo de Centro (School s Educational Development Plan) PER Proyecto Educativo de Red (School Network s Educational Development Plan) PIRLS Progress in International Reading Literacy Survey POA Plan Operativo Anual (Annual Operational Plan) PROHECO Programa Hondureño de Educación Comunitaria (Honduran Community-Based Education Program) PROMEESE Programa de Mejoramiento de la Estadística Educativa de la Secretaría de Educación (Ministry of Education s Program for the Strengthening of Educational Statistics) PRONEEAAH Programa Nacional de Educación para las Etnias Autóctonas y Afroantillanas de Honduras (National Education Program for Ethnic Groups in Honduras) PRS Poverty Reduction Strategy RFM Results Framework and Monitoring RSN Rural School Network SACE Sistema de Administración de Centros Educativos (Integrated System for the Administration of the Education System) SEDUC Secretaría de Educación (Ministry of Education) SIAFI Sistema Integrado de Administración Financiera (Integrated System for the Financial Management of the Public Sector) SIARHD Sistema Integrado para la Administración de los Recursos Humanos Docentes (Integrated System for the Administration of Teachers Payroll) SIL Specific Investment Lending SINECE Sistema Nacional de Evaluación de la Calidad Educativa (National System for Educational Quality Assessment) SINIEH Sistema Nacional de Información Educativa de Honduras (Honduras National System for Information on the Education Sector) TBB Transparency Bulletin Board TERCE Tercer Estudio Regional Comparativo y Explicativo (Third Regional Comparative and Explicatory Study) THRU Transparency and Human Rights Unit TIMSS Trends in Mathematics and Science Study UPEG Unidad de Planeación y Evaluación de la Gestión (Planning and Management Evaluation Unit) Vice President: Hasan A. Tuluy Country Director: Felipe Jaramillo Sector Manager: Reema Nayar Project Team Leader: Juan Diego Alonso ICR Primary Author: Claudia Zambra Taibo iii
REPUBLIC OF HONDURAS EDUCATION QUALITY, GOVERNANCE AND INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTHENING PROJECT CONTENTS Data Sheet A. Basic Information B. Key Dates C. Ratings Summary D. Sector and Theme Codes E. Bank Staff F. Results Framework Analysis G. Ratings of Project Performance in ISRs H. Restructuring I. Disbursement Graph 1. Project Context, Development Objectives and Design... 1 2. Key Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcomes... 6 3. Assessment of Outcomes... 11 4. Assessment of Risk to Development Outcome... 19 5. Assessment of Bank and Borrower Performance... 19 6. Lessons Learned... 21 7. Comments on Issues Raised by Borrower/Implementing Agencies/Partners... 21 Annex 1. Project Costs and Financing... 22 Annex 2. Outputs by Component... 24 Annex 3. Economic and Financial Analysis... 32 Annex 4. Bank Lending and Implementation Support/Supervision Processes... 36 Annex 5. Beneficiary Survey Results... 38 Annex 6. Stakeholder Workshop Report and Results... 40 Annex 7. Summary of Borrower's ICR and/or Comments on Draft ICR... 45 Annex 8. Comments of Cofinanciers and Other Partners/Stakeholders... 56 Annex 9. List of Supporting Documents... 57 MAP iv
A. Basic Information Country: Honduras Project Name: Honduras Education Quality, Governance, & Institutional Strengthening Project ID: P101218 L/C/TF Number(s): IDA-43810 ICR Date: 12/20/2013 ICR Type: Core ICR Lending Instrument: SIL Borrower: GOVERNMENT OF HONDURAS Original Total Commitment: XDR 9.80M Disbursed Amount: XDR 9.80M Revised Amount: XDR 9.80M Environmental Category: C Implementing Agencies: Ministry of Education of Honduras Cofinanciers and Other External Partners: German Cooperation (GIZ, KfW) was a significant external partner B. Key Dates Process Date Process Original Date Revised / Actual Date(s) Concept Review: 01/16/2007 Effectiveness: 11/14/2008 11/14/2008 Appraisal: 10/01/2007 Restructuring(s): 03/22/2011 06/29/2012 Approval: 01/24/2008 Mid-term Review: 11/30/2011 11/24/2011 Closing: 06/30/2013 06/30/2013 C. Ratings Summary C.1 Performance Rating by ICR Outcomes: Risk to Development Outcome: Bank Performance: Borrower Performance: Moderately Satisfactory Significant Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory C.2 Detailed Ratings of Bank and Borrower Performance (by ICR) Bank Ratings Borrower Ratings Moderately Moderately Quality at Entry: Government: Unsatisfactory Satisfactory v
Quality of Supervision: Overall Bank Performance: Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory Implementing Agency/Agencies: Overall Borrower Performance: Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory C.3 Quality at Entry and Implementation Performance Indicators Implementation QAG Assessments Indicators Performance (if any) Potential Problem Project at any time (Yes/No): Problem Project at any time (Yes/No): DO rating before Closing/Inactive status: Yes Yes Moderately Satisfactory Quality at Entry (QEA): Quality of Supervision (QSA): Rating None None D. Sector and Theme Codes Original Actual Sector Code (as % of total Bank financing) Central government administration 26 26 Pre-primary education 25 25 Primary education 24 24 Sub-national government administration 16 16 Tertiary education 9 9 Theme Code (as % of total Bank financing) Education for all 67 67 Rural services and infrastructure 33 33 E. Bank Staff Positions At ICR At Approval Vice President: Hasan A. Tuluy Pamela Cox Country Director: Felipe Jaramillo Jane Armitage Sector Manager: Reema Nayar Eduardo Velez Bustillo Project Team Leader: Juan Diego Alonso Cristian Aedo ICR Team Leader: Juan Diego Alonso ICR Primary Author: Claudia Zambra Taibo vi
F. Results Framework Analysis Project Development Objectives (from Project Appraisal Document) The objective of the Project was to support the Government of Honduras (GoH) to increase the coverage, quality, accountability and governance of its basic education system. The Project Development Objective (PDO) was defined more specifically in the Project Appraisal Document (PAD) as follows: 1. Expand pre-school coverage in disadvantaged communities; 2. Improve completion rates in PROHECO schools; 3. Improve teacher accountability; and 4. Improve accountability of schools to citizens. Revised Project Development Objectives (as approved by original approving authority) N/A (a) PDO Indicator(s) Indicator PDO Indicator 1 Value (quantitative or qualitative) Date achieved Comments PDO Indicator 2 Value (quantitative or qualitative) Baseline Value Original Target Values (from approval documents) Formally Revised Target Values Increased preschool enrollment in targeted areas Actual Value Achieved at Completion or Target Years 45% 53% 65% 67% 12-18-2007 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 Target surpassed. Target was revised upward in the 2012 restructuring due to improved data on population projections, which are used in the denominator of enrollment rates. However, all values reflect: (i) data at the national level, not targeted areas specifically, and (ii) data for the kindergarten year (year prior to starting primary education), not for the whole pre-primary education level (3- to 5-year-olds). Increased 6 th Grade Gross Completion Rates in PROHECO schools 37% 45% 98% 98% vii
Date Achieved Comments PDO Indicator 3 Value (quantitative or qualitative) Date achieved Comments 12-18-2007 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 Target achieved. Target and baseline were revised upward in the 2012 restructuring due to improved data generated under the Project specifically for the Honduran Community-Based Education Program (Programa Hondureño de Educación Comunitaria or PROHECO) schools, whereas the original target was set on the basis of national averages. Gross completion rates were also redefined at restructuring as equivalent to graduation rates, or the number of students graduating from 6 th grade, divided by the number of students that enrolled in 6 th grade at the beginning of the year. The revised baseline (82.3% for the year 2010) was based on the earliest data generated by the Project. Percentage of PROHECO schools that report through the PROHECO module of SEDUC s web portal information about enrollment, teacher absenteeism and number of school days 0% 50% 60% 06-29-2012 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 Target surpassed. This indicator was revised in the 2012 restructuring to absorb two previous indicators: Compliance with the official school calendar in targeted regions and Reduction in teacher absenteeism in targeted regions. Through the PROHECO module of the Integrated System for the Administration of the Education System (Sistema de Administración de Centros Educativos or SACE), the Ministry of Education (Secretaría de Educación or SEDUC) s web-based school management information system, schools were to report the number of school days and the rate of teacher absenteeism. In 2013, SEDUC collected information on enrollment, number of school days, and student absenteeism through a one-time manual survey from 2,311 out of a total of 3,880 PROHECO schools (about 60%), which was uploaded into the SACE. By September 2013, only 243 PROHECO schools had not reported data through SACE (less than 7% of all PROHECO schools). However, a specific PROHECO module was not created because the same information, i.e. enrollment and number of school days, is being collected systematically for all schools, including PROHECO schools. Although teacher absenteeism data is not being collected through SACE, in the case of PROHECO schools, teacher absenteeism is collected by the Associations for Community-Based Education (Asociaciones Educativas Comunitarias or AECOs), which pay teacher salaries. For every day a PROHECO teacher is absent, a proportion of the monthly payment is deducted. For the rest of schools, viii
number of school days is used as a proxy for teacher absenteeism, and absenteeism is also being monitored by the Minister s Front Office. PDO Indicator 4 Value (quantitative or qualitative) Date Achieved Comments Increased proportion of complaints submitted to SEDUC s Transparency Unit made through the Transparency School Boards 0 40% 21% 06-29-2012 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 Target partially achieved (58%). There were two original PDO indicators to measure governance/improved accountability of schools to citizens: Increased proportion of schools who involve parents in social audits of the schools using the 60 words per minute fluency test in second grade in targeted areas, and Development of a balance score card for the national, departmental and the school level and its distribution to all departments and schools. The first indicator was dropped in the 2012 restructuring: it had been conceived as a measure of social accountability of school quality through parents testing of their children s reading abilities through the Early Grade Reading Abilities (EGRA) test, but the test was not meant to be administered by parents who were illiterate or had limited education. The second indicator was revised and replaced balance score cards with Transparency School Boards (TSBs), also known as Transparency Bulletin Boards (TBBs), which were considered a stronger mechanism for improving governance of the system and its grievance redress mechanism. (b) Intermediate Outcome Indicator(s) Indicator Baseline Value Original Target Values (from approval documents) Formally Revised Target Values Actual Value Achieved at Completion or Target Years Component 1 Enhancing and Scaling Up Interventions that Address the Needs of the Poor Indicator 1 Value (quantitative or qualitative) Number of new CCEPREBs opened and functioning with adequate school supplies 0 800 781 (300 of (316 of which which are are IBE) IBE) Date 06-29-2012 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 ix
Achieved Comments Target partially achieved (98% of the total, surpassed for IBE). This Indicator was revised in the 2012 restructuring and merged two original Intermediate Outcome Indicators (IOIs): Number of new Community- Based Pre-Primary Schools (Centros Comunitarios de Educación Pre- Básica or CCEPREBs) opened and Number of CCEPREBs equipped with fungible materials per year. More CCEPREBs were opened than the target throughout the lifetime of the Project (946, of which 344 were IBE), but roughly 20% were closed due to different reasons (insufficient enrollment, reduction in payments to volunteer teachers, political crisis of 2009, etc.). Furniture, pedagogical packages and related equipment, and school supplies were distributed between May and August 2013 to all 781 CCEPREBs that remain open, including all IBE CCEPREBs. An additional 1,130 pre-primary PROHECO teachers (in pre-existing PROHECO preschools) also received pedagogical packages and equipment. Indicator 2 Value (quantitative or qualitative) Date Achieved Comments Number of new CCEPREB volunteers trained 0 1200 1200 of which at least of which at 300 IBE least 450 IBE 1179 of which 417 are IBE 12-18-2007 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 Target partially achieved (98% for the total, 93% for IBE). This indicator was meant to ensure that each CCEPREB had its volunteer teacher trained in the use of the pedagogical package for pre-primary education. The target was based on 50% expected turnover for volunteers; as such, 1,200 volunteers would need to be trained (one for each of the 800 CCEPREBs that were expected to be opened, plus another 400 assuming 50% turnover). Assuming equal turnover for Intercultural and Bilingual Education (IBE) volunteers, the target was revised upward in the 2012 restructuring to 450 (so that each of the 300 IBE CCEPREBs would have 1 trained volunteer if 50% of them quit). At Project closing, 82% of CCEPREBs opened with Project funds had a trained volunteer teacher (645 teachers in 781 CCEPREBs). Of those, 292 IBE teachers were also trained in IBE methods as well as use of the pedagogical package. Indicator 3 Number of PROHECO schools receiving the packages of didactic material adapted to the National Curriculum, including textbooks and teacher workbooks, in Natural and Social Sciences x
Value (quantitative or qualitative) Date Achieved Comments Indicator 4 Value (quantitative or qualitative) Date Achieved Comments 0 2,099 (including all PROHECO- IBE schools) 2,748 (including 317 PROHECO- IBE schools) 06-29-2012 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 Target surpassed. This indicator was revised in the 2012 restructuring and merged three original IOIs: Number of PROHECO schools receiving the packages of didactic material ; Package of didactic materials adapted to the National Curriculum for the first two cycles of basic education in the areas of Math, Spanish, Social Sciences and Natural Sciences ; and Teacher manual/toolkit for the usage of the package of didactic materials designed. Didactic materials for Spanish and Math, however, were eliminated from the Project, as these were prepared and distributed separately with financing from the Common Fund of Education Donors, a pooled-fund investment from 5 donors (Spain, Canada, France, Germany, and European Union). Number of PROHECO teachers trained in the usage of multi-grade didactic materials 0 4,152 4,152 3,711 12-18-2007 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 Target partially achieved (89%). This indicator was revised in the 2012 restructuring from the original Number of PROHECO teachers trained in active-participatory methodologies and in the usage of multigrade didactic materials. Training in active-participatory methodologies was eliminated since it was no longer considered a relevant methodology by SEDUC. The goal of this indicator was to train every multi-grade PROHECO teacher in multi-grade teaching techniques. As of 2013, the number of multigrade PROHECO teachers is 4,298, so the target was underestimated. Based on the Project target, 89% of teachers were trained; based on the actual number of multigrade PROHECO teachers, 86% were trained. Indicator 5 Number of beneficiaries (#), of which female (%) Value (quantitative or qualitative) 0 137,312 (of which) 50% female 138,395 (of which) 50% female xi
Date 06-29-2012 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 Achieved Comments Target surpassed. This core sector indicator was added in the 2012 restructuring. The number of beneficiaries was estimated as the sum of: (i) CCEPREB volunteer teachers receiving training; (ii) PROHECO teachers receiving training and teacher workbooks; and (iii) PROHECO students receiving textbooks. The final numbers were: (i) 1,179 CCEPREB volunteer teachers trained in the pedagogical package, 292 of which were also trained in IBE methods; (ii) 5,376 PROHECO teachers that received teacher workbooks for Natural and Social Sciences, 3,711 of which were also trained in multi-grade techniques; and (iii) 131,840 PROHECO students, grades 1 through 6, that received their Natural and Social Sciences textbooks. Component 2 Community Participation in School Management Indicator 6 Value (quantitative or qualitative) Date Achieved Comments Indicator 7 Value (quantitative or qualitative) Date Achieved Comments Indicator 8 Number of workshops organized to disseminate information related to the PROHECO teachers' pension benefits and rights 0 54 89 06-29-2012 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 Target surpassed. This indicator was added in the 2012 restructuring, consistent with revised activities for Component 2. The target aimed for at least 3 workshops per department (18 departments total in the country). A total of 53 workshops were organized in 2012, and 36 additional workshops were organized in 2013. Promoters and coordinators of PROHECO program trained in financial management and recording capabilities at the AECO level 0 388 220 465 12-18-2007 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 Target surpassed. The target was revised during the 2012 restructuring to correct a mistake in the RFM of the PAD. By 2009, 220 promoters and coordinators had already been trained by the Project. After the political crisis of 2009 (before restructuring), the new administration replaced all promoters and coordinators, so the restructuring included training for the new set (an additional 220 people). In the end, the Project trained 465 PROHECO promoters and coordinators. Number of operational manuals on the preparation and monitoring of xii
Value (quantitative or qualitative) Date Achieved Comments PECs and PERs distributed to school networks in the 12 targeted departments 0 1,500 2,018 PER manuals; 3027 PEC manuals 06-29-2012 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 Target surpassed. This indicator was revised in the 2012 restructuring and merges two original IOIs: Operational Manual on communitybased school management revised and distributed to all AECOs ; and PEC templates consolidated into a single official template applicable to all schools. By restructuring, GIZ had funded the preparation of operational manuals on the development and monitoring of School s Educational Development Plans (Proyectos Educativos de Centro or PECs) and School Network s Educational Development Plans (Proyectos Educativos de Red or PERs), drawing on principles of community-based school management, and distributed them to all school networks, including Community Based Educational Associations (AECOs), in their 6 targeted provinces. The indicator was revised to complement these efforts by focusing on distribution to networks in the remaining 12 departments. Indicator 9 Value (quantitative or qualitative) Date Achieved Comments Indicator 10 Number of school networks with PERs (that draw on school PECs) developed in the 12 departments targeted 0 150 117 (33 in progress) 06-29-2012 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 Target partially achieved (78%). This indicator, which was originally worded AECO members trained in the preparation of PEC and PER, was revised in the 2012 restructuring. Since at that time PERs had already been developed in all school networks in 6 Western departments GIZ s targeted departments the indicator focused instead on Honduras remaining 12 departments. In addition, the reference to AECOs was removed since school networks in all 12 departments would be targeted, regardless of whether a PROHECO school was part of the school network or not. Integrated system for community-based school management developed and implemented in all school networks in the 12 departments targeted and linked to the central level web-based EMIS xiii
Value 0 2 1 0 (quantitative or qualitative) Date Achieved 12-18-2007 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 Comments Target not achieved. This indicator was revised in the 2012 restructuring and merges two original IOIs: Managerial information systems developed and implemented in targeted schools and networks ; and Participatory school management monitoring and evaluation system to monitor school, teacher and student performance developed and implemented in targeted schools and networks. The goal was twofold: (i) to have a single, integrated system, thus necessitating a single indicator, and (ii) to refocus efforts on the 12 non-giz financed departments. The system is being finalized and is expected to go live by mid- January 2014. Meanwhile, surveys have been distributed to all school networks, information from which will be used to populate the web portal. Component 3 Governance and Institutional Strengthening of the Ministry of Education Indicator 11 Development and Implementation of a web-based Education Management and Information System (EMIS) Value 0 (quantitative (no system in place) or qualitative) System fully operative and with actualized information from 100% of departments. System fully operational with updated information from 100% of departments. An EMIS (the SACE) has been developed and collects information on schools, teachers, enrollment, etc., to be crossreferenced with other information systems, including payroll (SIARHD), etc. It has updated information for 100% of departments. Date Achieved 12-18-2007 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 Comments Target achieved. This indicator is a revised version from the 2012 restructuring of the original indicator Availability of information in a web-based technological platform for monitoring performance. The xiv
revision clarifies that it refers to an integrated EMIS being financed by the Project. The EMIS (which is known as the SACE) integrates all school management systems within SEDUC into a single platform. All departments have fully updated information on enrollment, teachers, and other indicators. Continuous additions are being incorporated into the SACE, expecting to have a fully integrated system by end-january 2014. Indicator 12 Number of schools with Transparency School Boards deployed in the 12 targeted departments Value 0 6,194 6,308 (quantitative or qualitative) Date Achieved 06-29-2012 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 Comments Target surpassed. This indicator was added in the 2012 restructuring in line with the creation of the Transparency and Human Rights Unit (THRU) after Project approval and the deployment of Transparency Bulletin Boards (TBBs) that was launched with financing from GIZ in 6 targeted departments. The new indicator focused on installing TBBs in all schools in at least 3 municipalities within Honduras 12 remaining departments. In 2013, the THRU decided to expand deployment to 4 municipalities in each department. The number of TBBs deployed, 6,308, is an estimate based on a representative sample of centers with TBBs verified by consultants hired by the Project in 10 out of 12 departments (centers are currently being verified in the other 2 departments). Indicator 13 Value (quantitative or qualitative) Date Achieved HRM system strengthened and SIARHD fully migrated to the SIAFI and fully decentralized to all 18 departments of the country Undifferentiated lines Valid system of Valid HRM fully of authority, payroll system of strengthened; responsibility, integrity, payroll revamped information and SIARHD fully integrity, SIARHD fully execution across the migrated to SIARHD compatible to central level and SIAFI fully SIAFI, in terms between central and migrated to of integrity and departmental levels. SIAFI validity controls; and SIARHD fully decentralized to 5 departments. 12-18-2007 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 xv
Comments Target partially achieved. This indicator was revised in the 2012 restructuring from its original version HRM system strengthened and SIARHD decentralized to departments Indicator 14 Value (quantitative or qualitative) Date The Human Resources Management (HRM) system within SEDUC was significantly strengthened through a series of systematic measures to improve accountability and governance. The Integrated System for the Administration of Teachers Payroll (Sistema Integrado de Administración de los Recursos Humanos Docentes or SIARHD) did not need to be migrated to the Integrated System for the Financial Management of the Public Sector (Sistema Integrado de Administración Financiera or SIAFI) because the validity and integrity controls in the revamped system are compatible with SIAFI requirements. The target, however, was only partially achieved because the HRM system has yet to be decentralized to all 18 departments. It has only been implemented in 5 thus far. By December, the HRM system is expected to be decentralized to another 2 departments. Staff from DIGECE and other relevant technical units of SEDUC trained in using information from learning assessment to monitor performance, feedback into policy making and results dissemination 0 SINECE 50 450 actualized and fully functional 12-18-2007 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 06-30-2013 Achieved Comments Target surpassed. This indicator was modified in the 2012 restructuring from its original version SINECE personnel trained in using information from learning assessment to monitor performance, feedback into policy making and results dissemination, to reflect the number of staff trained within the Department of Education Quality Assessment (Dirección General de Evaluación de la Calidad Educativa or DIGECE), which is the Department in charge of the National System for Educational Quality Assessment (Sistema Nacional de Evaluación de la Calidad Educativa or SINECE), along with other relevant technical staff from SEDUC. xvi
G. Ratings of Project Performance in ISRs No. Date ISR Archived DO IP Actual Disbursements (USD millions) 1 06/05/2008 Satisfactory Satisfactory 0.00 2 11/11/2008 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 0.00 3 06/08/2009 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 1.00 4 07/26/2009 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 1.00 5 12/04/2009 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 1.00 6 06/18/2010 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 2.25 7 02/09/2011 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Unsatisfactory 4.38 8 07/05/2011 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Unsatisfactory 5.25 9 03/25/2012 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Unsatisfactory 7.97 10 11/15/2012 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 10.97 11 04/24/2013 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 13.25 12 08/24/2013 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 14.63 H. Restructuring (if any) Restructurin g Date(s) Board Approved PDO Change ISR Ratings at Restructurin g DO IP Amount Disbursed at Restructuring in USD millions 03-22-2011 N MS MU 4.77 06-29-2012 N MS MU 8.98 Reasons for Restructuring & Key Changes Made The Project was restructured to provide a partial waiver for the withdrawal condition affecting Sub-component 3.1, which supported improvements to the SIARHD. The major changes and rationale for the restructuring were as follows: a waiver of the withdrawal condition affecting Component 2 (Community Participation in School Management for Better Performance) insofar as the xvii
xviii spirit behind the withdrawal condition - the reinstatement of pension benefits to teachers from the Honduran Program for Communitybased Education (Programa Hondureño de Educación Comunitaria or PROHECO) - was met; a revision of all the remaining dated legal covenants (Other Undertakings) in light of the set of administrative acts undertaken by the Government to regularize the social security situation of PROHECO teachers; a revision to Project activities to adjust them to: i) a shortened implementation period due to the 2009 pause and delay in satisfying the Project s withdrawal conditions; ii) funding from other sources outside of the Project, and iii) the Government s strategy; a revision to the indicators in the Results Framework and Monitoring to reflect the changes in Project activities; a revision in Project costs consistent with the revised Project activities and scope; and a reallocation of Credit proceeds across all 5 categories that reflected the changes in Project activities and costs.
I. Disbursement Profile xix
1. Project Context, Development Objectives and Design 1.1 Context at Appraisal 1. In 2007, Honduras education sector was mired in challenges including limited coverage, especially at the pre-primary and secondary education levels, low quality and weak student performance, inequitable access by geographic and socioeconomic status, and low transition and graduation rates at all levels. Challenges were more prevalent in rural areas and among poorer segments of the population. These issues featured prominently in spite of increased expenditures (from 5% of GDP in 1990 to 6.8% in 2007 1 ) for education, mostly biased towards the wage bill 2. Low administrative and management capacity within the Ministry of Education (SEDUC), coupled with a dearth of information and reliable data that could feed into an institutionalized monitoring, evaluation, and strategic planning function, were affecting educational outcomes. Accountability at all levels was minimal and weak governance, especially in human resources management (HRM), was seen through the lack of compliance with the school calendar, due to the high number of teacher strikes and high teacher absenteeism. 2. The Bank s rationale for involvement stemmed from a long-standing commitment to fulfilling unmet needs in the education sector, helping the Government of Honduras (GoH) overcome governance and capacity challenges, and continued support for prior education coverage and quality interventions to ensure their sustainability. Since 1999, the Bank (and other donors) had supported the Honduran Community-Based Education Program (Programa Hondureño de Educación Comunitaria or PROHECO), to enhance access to education in rural areas and foster community participation in schools. PROHECO was relatively successful in addressing some of the afore-mentioned challenges, specifically coverage and accountability, as PROHECO teachers were only paid for days worked. PROHECO schools came the closest to achieving the nationally mandated goal of 200 days of school (at 175 days), compared to regular schools (72 days) 3. The program also appeared to have increased quality, especially in rural areas 4. 3. The Project was also aligned to: (i) the GoH s long-term vision to improve the quality of education in order to achieve social equity, under the 2007-2030 National Strategic Plan (Plan de Nación 2007-30); (ii) Honduras Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS) goals, namely improving the quality and efficiency of education at all levels, supporting decentralization and community participation in education management, improving teachers performance and supporting programs to improve their qualifications, and promoting PROHECO and Intercultural and Bilingual Education (IBE); (iii) Honduras 1 WB (forthcoming); Social Expenditure and Institutional Review: Honduras. 2 Teacher salaries had increased 18 percent in real terms between 2002 and 2006. WB (2007); Honduras: Public Expenditure Review. 3 See Project Appraisal Document (PAD), p.4. 4 Di Gropello, E. and Marshall, J. (2011); Decentralization and Educational Performance: Evidence from the PROHECO Community School Program in Rural Honduras, Education Economics, Vol 19, Issue 2, pp. 161-180. 1
Education for All Fast Track Initiative (EFA-FTI) goals 2003-2015; and (iv) Honduras Strategic Sectoral Education Plan 2005-15. 1.2 Original Project Development Objectives (PDO) and Key Indicators 4. The objective of the Project was to support the GoH to increase the coverage, quality, accountability, and governance of its basic education system, as reflected in the Financing Agreement. The Project Appraisal Document (PAD) was more specific, listing the four parts of the PDO with their corresponding Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) consistent with Project design, as follows: Coverage: Expand pre-school coverage in disadvantaged communities. KPI 1. Increased preschool enrollment in targeted areas. Quality: Improve completion rates in PROHECO schools. KPI 2. Increased 6 th grade gross completion rates in PROHECO schools. Accountability: Improve teacher accountability. KPI 3. Improved compliance with the official school calendar in targeted regions; KPI 4. Reduction in teacher absenteeism in targeted regions. Governance: Improve accountability of schools to citizens. KPI 5. Increased proportion of schools who involve parents in social audits of the schools using the 60-words-per-minute fluency test in second grade; KPI 6. Development of a balance score card for the national, departmental and school level and its adoption by departments and schools (national and in targeted regions). 1.3 Revised PDO (as approved by original approving authority) and Key Indicators, and reasons/justification 5. The PDO was not revised. Some KPIs were changed in the 2012 restructuring: Table 1. Original and Revised KPIs PDO Indicator Original KPIs Revised KPIs Increased preschool enrollment in targeted areas 1. Increased preschool enrollment in targeted areas 1. No change Improve completion rates in PROHECO schools Improve teacher accountability Improve accountability of schools to citizens 2. Increased 6 th grade gross completion rates in PROHECO schools 3. Improved compliance with the official school calendar in targeted regions 4. Reduction in teacher absenteeism in targeted regions 5. Increased proportion of schools who involve parents in social audits of the schools using the 60-words-per-minute fluency test in second grade 6. Development of a balance score card for the national, departmental and school level and its adoption by departments and schools (national and in targeted regions) 2. No change 3. Percentage of PROHECO schools that report through the PROHECO module of SEDUC s web portal information about enrollment, teacher absenteeism, and number of school days. 4. Increased proportion of complaints submitted to SEDUC s Transparency Unit made through the Transparency School Boards 2
6. Improve teacher accountability: The KPI was revised to absorb the two previously existing KPIs, and to reflect that absenteeism (former KPI 3) and number of school days (former KPI 4) would now be reported through the portal. 7. Improve accountability of schools to citizens: KPI 5 was eliminated because parents needed training in order to perform social audits through fluency tests and many parents were either illiterate or had limited schooling. KPI 6 was revised to reflect a new modality, Transparency Bulletin Boards (TBBs, referred to as Transparency School Boards in the restructuring) 5, which were already being implemented with funding from German GIZ in 6 departments, and were considered a stronger system for improving governance with a better grievance redress mechanism than the balance score cards. 1.4 Main Beneficiaries 8. The Project s main beneficiaries belong in four main categories. 1) Students: preprimary students in underserved areas attending new CCEPREBs; PROHECO students at all levels receiving new materials and benefitting from newly trained teachers, including IBE students; low income students from the National University of Agriculture (UNA) receiving shoes in order to undertake the Infrastructure School Census, plus all Census student participants trained. 2) Teachers: PROHECO teachers trained in multi-grade and IBE pedagogy and affiliated with the National Teachers Pension Fund Institute (Instituto Nacional de Previsión del Magisterio or INPREMA), and new CCEPREB volunteers trained. 3) SEDUC staff: 18 line units involved in Project activities trained in financial management, administrative support for activities, information systems upgrades and other essential functions; several units equipped with computers and furniture; decentralized staff trained for SACE and SIAHRD decentralization and other essential functions; all staff from increased governance and accountability through the SACE, the School Infrastructure Census and cleanup of SIARHD. 4) Community participants and stakeholders: members of the school networks administration trained in implementing PECs and PERs; members of the Municipal Councils for Educational Development (Consejos Municipales de Desarrollo Educativo or COMDEs) trained in the new legal framework for community-based participation; stakeholders with access to TBBs. 1.5 Original Components 9. Project components are the same in the PAD and Financing Agreement, but Subcomponents are worded differently. The ICR is based on the language of the PAD, which is more detailed and comprehensive. 10. Component 1: Enhancing and Scaling-Up Interventions that Address the Needs of the Poor. This component would support pre-primary and primary school 5 The term Transparency Bulletin Board (TBB) will be used throughout the ICR as it better explains the tool. TBBs are bulletin boards that must be placed visibly on school grounds with information about enrollment, teacher lists, school budget, etc. 3
interventions focused on the poorest segments of the population. It had two subcomponents: (1.1) Expanding coverage for preschool education in rural areas; and (1.2) Quality improvement in PROHECO multi-grade schools through teacher training and provision of materials. 11. Component 2: Community Participation in School Management. This component would foster community participation within an Integrated School Management System. It had three subcomponents: (2.1) Consolidation and Institutionalization of the School Management System: This sub-component would finance analysis of existing school management modalities among traditional, PROHECO, and PROHECO-IBE educational networks to develop consolidated policies for community participation, social management, school planning, school systems for information, monitoring and evaluation, and financial administration. (2.2) School Planning and Resources for Quality Education: This sub-component would finance the review and development of instruments to support school and network planning and resource management through cooperative school networks. (2.3) School Management and Education Performance Monitoring and Evaluation: This sub-component would finance the development and implementation of a participatory monitoring and evaluation system for school management. 12. Component 3: Governance and Institutional Strengthening of the Ministry of Education. The component would finance efforts to strengthen SEDUC, including improving governance and management capacity. The component was divided into three sub-components: (3.1) Information for improved performance and greater accountability: This sub-component would finance: a web-based technological platform to allow for improved decision-making and monitoring of performance; improved statistics about sector performance at all levels available to the general public, including capacity building of the statistics unit; expanding, strengthening, updating and maintaining the SIARHD at central and sub-national levels to provide reliable information on teachers at all levels, and integrating SIARHD into SIAFI; and strengthening the capacity for educational planning and the use of information for decision-making at the central and departmental levels. (3.2) National System of Assessment of Learning Outcomes: This sub-component would finance the country s participation in international standardized assessments of student learning and strengthen the institutional capacities of SEDUC to use the information for monitoring of learning outcomes and decision-making, and to increase overall transparency through dissemination of the results. (3.3) Human Resource Management and Evaluation: This sub-component would finance the improvement and implementation of critical human resource management processes and procedures for a more effective personnel system for teachers. 13. Component 4. Project Administration: This component would finance the cost of technical personnel (local consultants) and operating costs. The proposed administration arrangements foresaw the EFA-FTI Project Implementation Unit within SEDUC to be the main implementing agency, supported by five dedicated consultants. 1.6 Revised Components 4
14. All components were revised during the June 2012 Level II restructuring. 15. Component 1: Enhancing and Scaling-Up Interventions that Address the Needs of the Poor. Sub-component 1.2 was reduced in scope to focus only on didactic materials for PROHECO schools in the social and natural sciences, since packages in Math and Spanish for PROHECO schools were being provided by the Common Fund of Education Donors (Fondo Común). 16. Component 2: Community Participation in School Management. This component was decreased in scope and budget to account for a shorter implementation period postrestructuring. The remaining activities under Sub-component 2.1 were geared toward specific support to strengthen the PROHECO program and capacity of its teachers, including training on their newly acquired pension rights, and to train AECOs to strengthen financial management capabilities. The remaining activities in Sub-component 2.2 focused on distributing operational manuals to prepare and monitor outcomes of PECs and PERs and training management entities within rural school networks to prepare and monitor PECs and PERs. Sub-component 2.3 was unchanged. 17. Component 3. Governance and Institutional Strengthening of the Ministry of Education. Activities under Component 3 were revised to account for a shorter implementation period, since a separate withdrawal condition affecting Sub-component 3.1 had been waived in the March 2011 restructuring; Component 3 increased in scope. The scope of Sub-component 3.1 was increased to finance the deployment of TBBs in 12 departments of the country, building on those already launched in the other six western departments with funding from GIZ. It would also finance data collection for the School Infrastructure Census, a consultancy to evaluate human resources in SEDUC and its departmental branches and propose a new organizational chart for SEDUC under the newly decentralized structure, and a series of consultancies to provide technical support to key SEDUC authorities to strengthen their capacity to implement the Project. 18. Component 4: Project Administration. This component increased significantly since the Project had to finance additional staff critical to its operation, for which funding had not originally been set aside. 1.7 Other significant changes First restructuring: March 22, 2011 19. The withdrawal condition affecting Sub-Component 3.1 (Schedule 2, Section IV.B.1(b) of the Financing Agreement dated July 2, 2008) was waived. The condition called for an update of the SIAHRD on the basis of a teachers census and post audit, which would be tested by way of random audits. The condition was partially met upon completion of a teachers census and post audit, and the subsequent updating of SIARHD to reflect census and post audit recommendations. The partial waiver referred to the pending verification of the updated SIARHD by independent audit. 5
Second restructuring: June 29, 2012 20. The withdrawal condition affecting Component 2 (Schedule 2, Section IV.B.1(c) of the Financing Agreement dated July 2, 2008) was waived. The condition called for the deposit of the amount owed for PROHECO teachers pension benefits dating back to January 1, 1999 into a separate account, for the benefit of PROHECO teachers. It was determined that the spirit behind the condition had been met since INPREMA had reinstated pension rights for PROHECO teachers by signing an Agreement to reincorporate PROHECO teachers and put a plan in place to fully refund teachers who were eligible for pension payments since 1999. The remaining legal covenants were revised accordingly. Project activities, especially those originally linked to Component 2 and Sub-component 3.1, were revised to adjust for the shorter implementation period, new GoH priorities, and funding from other sources for complementary activities. The Results and Monitoring Framework, including several IOIs and targets, were revised to reflect new activities and data generated by the Project. Out of 16 original IOIs, 2 remained unchanged, 14 others were consolidated into 9, and 3 more IOIs were added resulting in 14 IOIs. Project costs were revised, consistent with revised activities (with significant decrease in scope for Component 2 and increase in scope for Components 3 and 4), and Credit proceeds reallocated accordingly across the five categories. 2. Key Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcomes 2.1 Project Preparation, Design and Quality at Entry 21. The Project benefited from its complementarity with Honduras long-term education strategy, contributing to coverage and quality goals in basic education, especially for poorer segments of the population, and strengthening governance and accountability. Two main risks emerged from evaluations of previous IDA financed projects in the education sector: sustainability of multiple interventions and a consistent inability to improve institutional weaknesses. The Project s aim was thus to strengthen and streamline existing structures and processes that would support sustainability of successful past interventions (e.g. the PROHECO model) through a simple design with selective interventions (the focus on pre-primary education). 22. The original design was rather complex, however, especially with regard to the high number of line units involved in Project implementation (18 in total), and the PDO s focus on four broad areas (coverage, quality, accountability and governance). Project design benefited nonetheless from consultation with other donors and with the GoH to ensure that EFA goals (as the overarching platform in the country) remained at the forefront and Project activities did not overlap with other donors. Project components and activities were aligned with these four goals, more so to the PDO indicators. 23. During preparation, the Bank was made aware that INPREMA had stopped collecting pension contributions from PROHECO teachers and granting them benefits, in spite of cumulative contributions received since 1999 in the amount of US$ 1.8 million, a portion of which had been financed by the International Development Association (IDA) under the previous Bank Project. Given the Bank s long-standing investment in the PROHECO 6
program, two withdrawal conditions were added to the Financing Agreement. These conditions pertained to Component 2 and Sub-Component 3.1, which amounted to about 50% of Credit funds. Section V of the Financing Agreement (Other Undertakings) provided a schedule for the PROHECO-related condition to be fulfilled by March 1, 2009. 24. Another sustainability risk identified was the use of a self-contained implementation unit within SEDUC. To mitigate that risk and improve coordination with other donors, Project management would fall to the existing EFA Coordination Unit (ECU) within SEDUC. Prior assessments of the ECU had determined that it had no internal capacity to maintain financial management and procurement procedures consistent with IDA standards. As such, five consultants would be hired to exclusively manage Project fiduciary aspects and coordination. Additional training and guidance on IDA fiduciary procedures would be built in for other ECU staff. 2.2 Implementation 25. Prior to Effectiveness, SEDUC (with the Bank s approval) decided against transferring project administration responsibilities to the ECU as planned, given mounting concerns over its capacity. Instead, a new Project Management Unit (PMU) was created within SEDUC to manage the Project, with additional staffing and budgeting needs, plus the originally envisaged five consultants. The strengthened PMU was better able to manage the complex design and numerous implementing units involved. Financing for the PMU initially came from counterpart funds but, by November 2011, SEDUC was unable to sustain financing for the PMU and fund other activities, like stipends for CCEPREB volunteers. The Bank absorbed the PMU costs, freeing up counterpart funds to pay all stipends through Project closure. 26. There was a 10-month delay between Board approval (January 24, 2008) and Effectiveness (November 14, 2008). This was mostly due to delays in ratifying the Loan Agreement, which required the President s signature. Further delays resulted from the political crisis that ensued when President Zelaya was ousted on June 28, 2009, and the Bank (and all other donors) put operations on hold. Operations resumed when President Lobo took office in January 2010. High turnover in the Executive also filtered down to the ministerial level and to heads of line units, departmental and municipal offices, and so forth. This resulted in a total of four different Ministers of Education throughout the life of the Project, and, with each one, a reshuffling of SEDUC staff, especially those in managerial positions. These changes curtailed institutional memory, including knowledge of the Project and Bank fiduciary procedures among implementing units. 27. There were delays by the GoH in satisfying the withdrawal conditions, in part due to the political crisis. As a result, about 50% of Credit funds was blocked until 2011; another 25% was blocked until 2012. The Bank also incorporated critical steps related to the withdrawal conditions into the design of two complementary Development Policy Lending (DPL) operations. The Bank restructured the Project in March 2011, as soon as the first of the withdrawal conditions was waived (the SIARHD-related condition), releasing that portion of the funds. When the second condition was met satisfactorily, the 7