Stre

ngth

enin

g Ea

rly C

hild

hood

Car

e an

d Ed

ucat

ion

Programme Completion Report

February 2017

1 | P a g e

PROGRAMME INFORMATION

Programme Name Strengthening Early Childhood Care and Education (SECCE)

Goal Increased access, improved quality and strengthened sector management.

Intended outcomes 1) Improved quality of Early Childhood Care and Education (ECCE) in pilot communities;

2) Increased support for, and access to, ECCE in pilot communities; and

3) SECCE pilot program performance enhanced by value-added mechanisms.

Programme start and end dates 31 January 2014 – 31 January 2017

Reporting period 31 January 2014 – 31 January 2017 (Completion Report)

Total program budget VT 143,023,979

WVV expenditure January 2014 – January 2017 VT 141,055,706

Total budget remaining at end of contract (31 January 2017) VT 1,968,273

REPORT PREPARATION

Prepared by Pallen Philip, Progamme Manager

Amy van der Burg, Programme Management Advisor

Others consulted Kendra Derousseau, Programming Quality and Operations Manager

Caesar Gayadon, Finance Business Partner

Date of report 15 February 2017

2 | P a g e

SECCE PROGRAMME COMPLETION REPORT

1. Programme achievement against Results Measurement Framework (RMF)

The SECCE programme RMF was approved by the Ministry of Education and Training (MoET) in October 2015. This provided WVV with further clarity around field activities and targets. The full RMF is provided in annex one and shows cumulative results across the life of the programme. The SECCE programme worked towards the targets set for 22 key indicators (at both output and outcome level). In total the following ratings have been given to programme achievement: 13 targets exceeded, 6 targets completed, 2 underway and one rated as not met.

These results show that WVV has achieved the majority of contracted programme outputs and outcomes. The reach of the programme can be seen in the cumulative totals of programme beneficiaries, particularly in the community awareness events (4939 participants) and family conversations with parents (4447 participants). Additionally, the results show a very steady upward trajectory of programme performance which WVV attributes to clarity of expected results, revised work planning and a strong focus on staff performance management.

The programme target ‘not met’ pertained to complete coverage of pilot communities with awareness events focused on disability inclusiveness to be carried out during 2016. In total, 78% of communities received this awareness.

The programme targets which are “underway” are both ongoing national targets: Percentage of children age 6 entering primary school (Year 1) who attended kindergarten; Percentage of children with a disability enrolled in kindergarten. Figures used in the RMF for these two targets were provided by MoET through the VEMIS system and are representative of all Vanuatu kindergartens, not only SECCE pilot kindergartens.

2. Lessons learned for future roll-out

Over the past three years, World Vision Vanuatu (WVV) has learned valuable implementation lessons and has had the opportunity to successfully innovate different operating methods. Several management lessons learned have also been key in moving the project forward. WVV is sharing these lessons learned as per contractual requirement and to assist with a successful transition of the programme to the Ministry of Education and Training (MoET).

Staffing and support

Throughout the life of the programme, keeping trained staff in place – particularly remote staff – has been difficult. The job itself is difficult, with staff expected to spend 3-4 weeks at a time away from their families, in very remote areas, with only basic accommodation and facilities available. It has been acknowledged that salary levels, while set by MoET, were approximately 50% less than staff would receive working for another programme or NGO. Salaries were aligned with MoET salaries, but staff

3 | P a g e

were not able to receive any of the extra benefits that come with working for MoET, such as job security and allowances. This caused staff to feel demoralised and undervalued, and meant that many sought higher-paying employment on a regular basis ultimately leading to high project staff turnover.

Recommendation for future implementation: Salaries for remote-based positions are reviewed, and staff are compensated more appropriately for their work.

Aligned with the challenges of staffing in remote areas, WVV has learned the value and importance of providing regular, face-to-face support to isolated staff members. By the final year of implementation, WVV had developed a mechanism to ensure that every staff member had a phone call at least once a week; if calling was not possible, SMS/texts were sent, to check in on staff welfare and wellbeing, as well as to provide the opportunity for staff to discuss any implementation issues. Having bi-annual meetings of all staff also saw a huge increase in retention, with staff reporting increased morale, and an observable increase in performance. Bi-annual all-staff meetings provided opportunities for learning and development, as well as the valuable teambuilding and fostering of support networks. Finally, nationally-based staff members were resourced to carry out monitoring and support visits three times a year, providing invaluable face-to-face mentoring and assistance.

Recommendation for future implementation: Resource and implement: regular SMS/texts (ensuring staff in provinces and in national office have mobile phones and are provided with credit); monitoring/support visits to remote areas; and all-staff meetings/trainings/workshops.

WVV developed and piloted a tool called the Performance Management Framework, which was successful in improving performance, developing management skills in staff, and fostering a sense of teamwork. The framework was designed to differentiate between the two main programme roles of community coordinator and SECCE coordinator, transforming their main tasks into a Key Perfomance Indicator (KPI) checklist. The tool is also used to begin conversations with committees, teachers and parents on programme and staff performance. Face-to-face review meetings were conducted with staff three times annually and WVV found that the framework provided measureable increases in performance. The tool is attached as Annex 4.

Recommendation for future implementation: Maintain the Performance Management Framework and resource its implementation.

WVV also learned valuable lessons in regards to including operational as well as technical requirements included in job descriptions from programme inception. The initial programme recruitment required staff members to be qualified teachers, but did not mandate skills that were found to be more appropriate in the subsequent months, such as having community facilitation and mobilisation skills, having an awareness of programme operation requirements, or being able to travel frequently. A significant amount of time was spent trying to upskill staff members who met initial job description prerequisites, but were not fit for the operational skills that the job required. This, coupled with low pay, led to significant staff turnover.

Recommendation for future implementation: Job descriptions are reviewed to be fit for purpose – emphasising the need for community mobilisation skills in projects such as these, and ensuring staff are aware and able to adhere to programme requirements.

4 | P a g e

Technical Support

WVV acknowledges that provision of ECCE technical support to the SECCE programme was a contractual requirement which merited improvement. Due to the basic nature of the ECCE elements in the SECCE programme, WVV made the management decision that a full-time education technical advisor was not necessary and that only occasional external input was required beyond the expertise already located within MOET. As pointed out in the final programme evaluation, there were certain points where the programme would have benefitted from having more regular technical education support, above what had been provided in the first year. WVV has learned that it would have been more valuable to assess the content of the programme on an annual basis in order to draft and resource a technical support plan. This might have identified a model such as having an ECCE advisor come in quarterly for 5-10 working days to meet with MoET, review the programme, and make tweaks and corrections, which could have benefitted the programme.

Recommendation for future implementation: At the beginning of the programme cycle and on an annual basis, identify times when technical support is likely to be required, and resource accordingly.

An important lesson learned was the value of having technical support in programme management. Given the broad geographical spread of the programme in an environment with poor infrastructure and where cash transactions are often the only form of payment for accommodation and transport, WVV identified the need for greater capacity in programme management. This was resourced a full-time programme management advisor (utilising Volunteer Services Abroad). This ensured that WVV was able to meet its contractual obligations for financial management, reporting and stakeholder relationships. In addition, this model built management capacity for senior ni-Vanuatu programme members. Rather than following a “Chief of Party” style model, WVV supported having a senior management core team for the programme – which saw one member having skills in IT, communications, programming and evidence; one staff member being skilled in programme and grant management, as above; and another being a highly skilled community facilitator/mobiliser. This core team was able to provide much greater support to field staff on a daily basis than one person was able to.

Recommendation for future implementation: For MoET to consider having a technical advisor in programme management within the Ministry, for this style of programme.

Contract Management Relationships

The SECCE programme evaluation raised that there may have been some breakdown in the relationship between WVV and MoET. Throughout the life of the programme, WVV focused on contractual obligations, meeting reporting requirements on time and meeting all legal requirements. A lesson learned for WVV was that this may not have been the style of relationship that MoET might have liked to have with WVV.

Recommendation for future implementation: MoET has open, honest conversations with implementing partners at the beginning of a programme about MoET’s preferences in relationship management, and to keep checking with partners to maintain this. Implementing partners like WVV need to ensure informal relationships are established with different people in MoET in order to build trust and rapport for improved programme management.

5 | P a g e

While MoET was the donor in the relationship with WVV, WVV was aware of MoET having its own donors to report to. A lesson learned for WVV is to not assume that the bilateral donor will consistently monitor and mediate, even when the bilateral donors are aware the programme or relationship may not be going well. Bilateral donors have a responsibility to obtain value for money for their own taxpayers, so they understand and are skilled in good management of contracts; as such, MoET needs to feel empowered to hold their donors responsible for providing support.

Recommendation for future implementation: MoET ensures that staff feel empowered to have discussions with their bilateral donors, and hold them responsible for providing contract and relationship management support as required.

Financial Management

Throughout the life of the programme, WVV learned many practical implementation lessons in regards to financial management and reducing risk. A key lesson is that cash advances are integral to the success of a project such as this, that operates in remote areas: communities and remote suppliers will only accept cash. However, capping cash advances at a maximum of one months’ salary, and mandating a separate bank account for each staff member, used purely for the programme rather than personal needs as well, greatly reduces the risk of fraud occurring. WVV also found that its systems and processes in place were being regularly tested and found to be very robust, with checks and balances catching attempted fraud as it occurred.

Recommendation for future implementation: Resource/facilitate/enable staff members to open a second bank account, used purely for receiving programme cash advances. Account fees should be paid for out of the programme budget. This keeps staff members’ personal finances separate from programme funds.

Recommendation for future implementation: Cap cash advances at a maximum of one months’ salary for the staff member. Staff can acquit more regularly than this; keep their bank account (see above) topped up to the maximum of equal to one months’ salary. Ensure the resources are in place to monitor this from an accounting perspective (finance officer to manage, monitor and implement).

Recommendation for future implementation: Have robust checks and balances in place, and to not be discouraged when those checks and balances catch fraud – fraud is something that occurs in all sectors, and discovering it on a regular basis is something to be encouraged by, as it demonstrates that rigour of systems in place.

Small Grants Scheme

WVV learned several lessons in implementing the small grants scheme aspect of the programme, over the past three years. Firstly, having the small grants scheme as open tender resulted in raising community expectations and disappointment, as communities applied for huge amounts of support – there were not enough funds available to resource all requests.

Recommendation for future implementation: Be clear from the beginning that only certain items will be funded, with a financial ceiling specified.

Secondly, setting guidelines and requirements around the applications with a focus on sustainability was found to be very effective: committees were able to put their budgeting training into practice, and were able to use the small grants scheme as an opportunity for forward-thinking.

6 | P a g e

Recommendation for future implementation: Ensure there is a focus on items that will generate income for the kindergarten, focusing on long-term sustainability. All applications should meet specified sustainability criteria that is given to kindergartens in advance, and that will demonstrate how the kindergarten will become financially independent.

Finally, it was found that purely supporting cash grants was not the most effective practice: facilitating the procurement and logistical delivery of goods filled a much more needed gap for rural and remote communities.

Recommendation for future implementation: MoET should support procurement and logistics for goods for the kindergartens, rather than direct cash grants.

Formal versus informal kindergartens

World Vision’s experience in piloting both formal and informal kindergartens presented several lessons learned for future implementation (full design presented in annex 5). Having the same staff delivering both the formal and informal kindergartens, in similar geographic areas, was the greatest challenge. It was difficult for both the staff implementing, and for the communities participating, particularly in the informal space; communities did not always understand why they weren’t receiving a formal kindergarten when the organisations – World Vision and MoET – were the same ones delivering to a neighbouring community. Communities took this as a challenge and stepped up: those targeted for informal kindergarten delivery built their own formal structures for kindergartens, expressing their desire to receive the formal kindergarten support. While this is a wonderful example of community buy-in and sustainability, it was not the original intended outcome.

Recommendation for future implementation: Have different staff members and different geographical areas for trialling and delivering formal and informal kindergartens.

World Vision also experienced difficulties in retaining volunteers for informal kindergartens. World Vision believes this could have been addressed earlier on by spending more time on raising awareness of the importance of ECCE, and how informal kindergartens could be an effective model – that formal kindergartens are not the only option for implementing ECCE.

Recommendation for future implementation: At least 6 months of implementing the “Family Conversations” tool in communities before starting an informal kindergarten.

Finally, it is worth questioning and examining the appropriateness of informal kindergartens being implemented under a government programme. The presence of MoET branding and information on informal kindergartens was shown to be confusing for communities, who saw other communities receiving a greater level of support and services for their formal kindergartens, who also had a MoET presence. This is not to underscore the importance of trialling different types of informal kindergartens: international effectiveness research has shown that the formal, centre-based model is effective only in limited situations, where high quality can be assured, and where children live in difficult circumstances and are at high risk for sub-optimal early development and school readiness.

In a recent review of the early childhood sector in the Solomon Islands1, when examining future informal kindergarten models and arrangements, it was expressed that NGOs could play important roles with communities to help them develop community-based, community-operated, community-funded strategies to support development and learning of young children. Should this recommendation for a neighbouring Melanesian country that faces similar challenges to Vanuatu be applied to the context here, there could be scope for stand-alone civil society programming that holistically

1 Ball, J. (2015). Solomon Islands Early Childhood Education Sector Review.

7 | P a g e

addresses the needs of children. As an example, World Vision previously implemented a home-based ECCE model in Timor-Leste2 that was found to increase learning outcomes for children and to provide opportunities for parenting education.

Recommendation for future implementation: MoET consider its investment model in informal early childhood education, and the potential place that civil society could play in informal education arrangements.

3. Risks and management responses

Risks that emerged over the duration of the programme and actual management responses are as follows:

Tropical Cyclone Pam and El Niño weather event

Eight kindergartens were severely affected by Tropical Cyclone Pam, halting implementation in those kindergartens. These were reconstructed and operational again by early 2016, however this effectively represents a whole year of disrupted education for kindergarten children in those pilot catchment areas. WVV was able to use its international networks to raise funds and reconstruct three kindergartens (one on Efate and two in North Ambrym), and gave heightened attention to remaining communities rebuilding in Efate.

Around 10% of kindergartens across the entire pilot were also affected to such a point by El Niño that they had to close operations.

Field reporting and data collection from staff not fit-for-purpose

WVV is committed to continually improving the quality of programming. Over the course of the programme, WVV revised and developed a number of new initiatives to assist with this. A new monthly reporting template was developed and introduced to staff at a training workshop. The template attempted to simplify reporting and help elicit key data needed from field staff, including participant lists, visit logs and observed changes. The M&E officer provided individual feedback on reporting to staff each month; as a result, WVV saw a huge improvement in the quality and thoroughness of field reporting. From this, a new monthly reporting template for MoET was also developed, to try and provide more targeted information in a simple snapshot of how the programme is tracking. WVV received positive feedback on this new format from MoET.

With the introduction of the standardised annual work plans, a very simple annual work plan tracker was developed. This document showed which kindergarten catchment areas were visited by the community coordinator or SECCE coordinator on a “round by round” basis. This made it incredibly easy to see if staff were on track and following the work plan, or which areas needed attention. This document was included in the monthly reporting to MoET.

A programme dashboard was also developed. This is a simple one-page document which tracks progress against the contracted targets as per the results measurement framework. This document and the annual work plan tracker were mailed to field staff each month so they could see how the programme was tracking and which areas needed improvement. Initiatives like this, coupled with

2 Andina, S. & Boardman, M. (2016). Evaluation Report: Timor-Leste Early Childhood Care and Development Project.

8 | P a g e

monthly reporting feedback and performance monitoring were helpful for staff to feel part of a team and understand the direction/progress of the programme more broadly.

SECCE Community Coordinator resources didn’t reflect the level of understanding of our pilot communities, making engagement challenging

As well as ensuring programme monitoring tools are fit-for-purpose, as above, WVV learned that the programme resources needed to be pitched at a level that was suitable for low and no literacy, and were considerate of the paradigm shift being asked of communities under the programme. In response to this, SECCE developed a “Family Conversations” resource, which then formed the basis of Community Coordinators’ work programme. The book is largely pictorial with notes for staff translated into Bislama. It only covers four topics: importance of ECCE, pre-literacy at home, pre-numeracy at home and positive interaction with children. It is deliberately simple, focused and includes repetition of key ideas throughout. The success of “Family Conversations” has been a cornerstone of the SECCE programme.

Changes in staffing meant that existing field staff had to take on additional duties to meet agreed programme targets

A number of strategies were put in place to manage staff changes and relieve undue stress on field staff throughout the programme lifecycle. Having a senior management team in place within the project allowed the programme manager to shift focus to field implementation and directly support when required. WVV also supported staff members to step up when requested. “Small duties” allowances were given to staff who took on additional responsibilities and workload to compensate them for their time and effort.

4. Budget Summary

Annex three provides an acquittal of SECCE programme funds across the life of the programme. A number of the programme budget lines have been overspent (despite an overall underspend across the programme life). This is largely due to the mismatch between the original budget and approved RMF. The focus of activities slightly changed which meant expending more on some activities than previously budgeted for. Additionally, it can be seen that both staff training lines are overspent due to the need to invest further in staff to ensure quality programme delivery in the field.

5. Asset Register

Annex two provides a full SECCE programme asset register. As per the contract, all items will be handed over to MoET. This has partially been completed, with resources going back to closest provincial MoET offices, all remaining items will be returned no later than 28 February 2017, with the exception of five laptops and three phones which will be used by remaining SECCE staff during phase two of the programme. WVV proposes giving left over stationary held by former SECCE staff to kindergartens and the filing cabinets in Ambrym and Gaua to be donated to the relevant branch associations as the cost of shipping to MoET provincial offices is prohibitive. Approval for this will be sought from the National ECCE coordinator.

9 | P a g e

Annex One: SECCE Results Measurement Framework (whole of programme life)

The following table provides an outline of progress against output and lower level outcome indicators for the period, January 2014 – January 2017).

Results Indicators Baseline Data / Targets Progress against indicators at 31 January 2017

SECCE Program Outcome 1: Improved quality of ECCE in pilot communities

Percentage of pilot kindergarten children age 6 who demonstrate they are ready for primary school (Year 13) in the next year.

Baseline:(Conducted at the beginning of school year 2015): 78% demonstrate they are ready for primary school.

Target:65% of children age 6 demonstrate they are ready for class one by 2015; and 80% by 2016.

Status: Exceeded targetResults from the class one assessment (conducted in October 2016) show that 85% of pilot kindergarten children are ready for class one. This is a 7% increase from the baseline assessment.

Intermediate Outcome 1.1: Improved teaching of pre- literacy and pre-numeracy in the vernacular and Bislama language.

Percentage of pilot kindergartens where teachers teach pre-literacy and pre-numeracy skills in vernacular or Bislama language.

Baseline:(2015): 61% of pilot kindergartens have teachers who teach pre-literacy and pre-numeracy skills in vernacular or Bislama language.

Target:98% of pilot kindergartens have teachers who teach pre-literacy and pre-numeracy skills in vernacular or Bislama language by December 2016.

Status: Exceeded targetResults from the ‘Teacher’s Observation and Mentoring Assessment’ (conducted in October 2016) show that 100% of pilot kindergarten teachers are teaching pre-literacy and pre-numeracy skills in vernacular or Bislama language. This is a 39% increase from the baseline assessment.

Output 1.1.1: Pilot kindergarten teachers trained to teach to the National Curriculum (2013) in the vernacular language.

Number of pilot kindergartens teachers attended workshop on teaching to the National Curriculum in the vernacular language.

Baseline:(2014): Zero pilot kindergartens have teachers trained in teaching the National Curriculum in the vernacular language.

Status: Target met60 pilot kindergartens have teachers who have attended a workshop on teaching the curriculum in the vernacular language.

3 “Ready for school”, in the context of the SECCE Class 1 Readiness Assessment tool, is determined by the level of Class 1 children’s development in five learning areas.

10 | P a g e

Target:60 pilot kindergartens have teachers who attended a workshop on teaching to the National Curriculum in the vernacular language by December 2016.

Intermediate Outcome 1.2: Pilot kindergarten teachers demonstrate sound ECCE instructional practice4.

1. Percentage of pilot kindergartens which use lesson plans.

2. Percentage of pilot kindergartens which use the resource “Observing and Assessing Children’s Learning” to assess children’s progress.

3. Percentage of pilot kindergartens which implement positive classroom instructional practice.

Baseline 1:(2014): No pilot kindergartens use the new lesson plan resources.

Target 1:30% of pilot kindergartens are consistently using the new lesson plan resources by December 2014; 60% by December 2015; and 80% by December 2016.

Baseline 2:(2014): 28% pilot kindergartens use the “Observing and Assessing Children’s Learning” tool.

Target 2:30% of pilot kindergartens are using the “Observing and Assessing Children’s Learning” tool by December 2014; 60% by December 2015; and 80% by December 2016.

Baseline 3:(2015): 22% of pilot kindergartens are consistently implementing positive instructional practice.

Target 3:60% of pilot kindergartens are

Status: Exceeded targetResults from the ‘Teacher’s Observation and Mentoring Assessment’ (conducted in October 2016) show that 96% of pilot kindergartens are using the new lesson plan resources. This is a 96% increase from the baseline assessment.

Status: Exceeded target Results from the ‘Teacher’s Observation and Mentoring Assessment’ (conducted in October 2016) show that 95% of pilot kindergartens are using the “Observing and Assessing Children’s Learning” tool. This is a 67% increase from the baseline assessment.

Status: Exceeding targetResults from the ‘Teacher’s Observation and Mentoring Assessment’ (conducted in October 2016) show that 100% of pilot kindergartens were assessed as consistently implementing positive instructional practice. This is a 78% increase from the baseline assessment.

4 Outcome 1.2 in full is: “Pilot kindergarten teachers demonstrate sound ECCE instructional practice based on the national kindergarten curriculum program”.

11 | P a g e

consistently implementing positive instructional practice by December 2015; and 80% by December 2016.

Output 1.2.1: Pilot kindergarten teachers trained in instructional practice, assessing children’s progress, and kindergarten management.

Number of pilot kindergartens where teachers have attended the workshop on teaching on instructional practice, assessing children’s progress, and kindergarten management.

Baseline:(2014): 0 pilot kindergartens have teachers trained in instructional practice, assessing children’s progress, and kindergarten management.

Target: 30 pilot kindergartens have teachers trained on instructional practice, assessing children’s progress, and kindergarten management in 2014; and 60 pilot kindergartens have teachers trained in a second training5 in 2016.

Status: Target Met 51 pilot kindergartens had at least one teacher attend a workshop on instructional practice, assessing children’s progress, and kindergarten management in 2014.

58 pilot kindergartens had at least one teacher attend a second workshop on instructional practice, assessing children’s progress, and kindergarten management in 2016.

The 2 kindergartens that did not attend due to absence of teachers received one–on–one training as part of SECCE coordinators regular visits.

Output 1.2.2: Improved pilot kindergartens access to quality learning resources.

Percentage of pilot kindergartens that have the minimum required teaching materials (using MoET list of minimum teaching materials).

Baseline:(2014): No pilot kindergartens have the minimum required teaching materials

Target:100% pilot kindergarten received teaching materials by August 2014. One replenishment provided to each pilot kindergarten, as needed, by December 2015.

Status: Completed100% of pilot kindergartens have received the initial base kit of minimum required teaching materials. All pilot kindergartens received replenishments to the kits between February and May 2015.

SECCE Program Outcome 2: Increased support for, and access to, ECCE in pilot communities.

Percentage of children age 6 entering primary school (Year 1) who attended kindergarten.

Baseline:(2013): 13% of children age 6 entering primary school (year 1) attended kindergarten (national figure from VEMIS).

Target 1:90% of children age 6 entering

Status: Underway29% of children age 6 entering primary school (year 1) attended kindergarten (2015 national figure from VEMIS).

5 If training is missed this can be supplemented using one on one instruction.

12 | P a g e

primary school (year 1) attended kindergarten (national figure from VEMIS).

Intermediate outcome 2.1: Community awareness developed through ECCE champions and other means.

Percentage of pilot kindergarten catchment areas where local ECCE champions have engaged in awareness raising activities.

Baseline:0% of pilot kindergarten catchment areas have had local ECCE champions engaged in awareness raising activities.

Target:25% of pilot kindergarten catchment areas have had local ECCE champions engaged in awareness raising activities by 2015 and; 50% of pilot kindergarten catchment areas have had local ECCE champions engaged in awareness raising activities by 2016.

Status: Exceeded target 56% of pilot kindergarten catchment areas had local ECCE champions engaged in awareness raising activities during 2015.

100% of pilot kindergarten catchment areas had local ECCE champions engaged in awareness raising activities during 2016.

This is a 100% increase from the baseline.

Output 2.1.1: Local champions identified and supporting ECCE.

Percentage of pilot communities that have a local ECCE champion

Baseline 1:(2014): 2% of pilot communities have a local champion (i.e. one local ECCE champion).

Target 1:75% of pilot communities have at least one local ECCE champion identified by December 2015.

Status: Exceeded target 100% of pilot communities have identified a local ECCE champion (one champion per kindergarten catchment area, 60 in total).

Intermediate Outcome 2.2: Parents support the kindergarten, through home learning.

Do you perceive that parents are better equipped to provide early stimulation, reading, storytelling, and other activities at home with their children?

Baseline:(2015): In general parents feel they are not equipped to provide early stimulation for their children.

Target:Parents feel that they are better equipped to provide early

Status: On track Focus group discussions have been carried out in all three programme target provinces during 2016 to assess progress towards this outcome.

Overall, parents report feeling better equipped to provide early stimulation at home. Many of them have commented on how they did not know spending time with their children was good

13 | P a g e

stimulations through reading, storytelling and other activities at home with their children by December 2016.

for their development and feel ashamed that they haven’t been doing this. There is a big increase in parents spending time with children doing household chores (washing, gardening) and going to special events like church, when previously they would have told the children to play around the community on their own.

There is a demand from parents for additional Family Conversation topics on WASH, household budgeting and brain development.

Output 2.2.1: ECCE awareness and engagement activities in place for parents and community.

Percentage of ECCE pilot communities that had a requisite number of community awareness activities.

Baseline:(2014): Zero

Target:70% pilot communities had at least two ECCE community awareness activities by December 2014; 90% pilot communities had at least three community awareness activities by December in each of 2015 and 2016.

Status: Exceeding target During 2015 catchment communities received the following number of awareness activities:

53% of pilot communities had one awareness event14% of pilot communities had two awareness events 10% of pilot communities had three awareness events

During 2016 catchment communities received the following number of awareness activities:

7% of pilot communities had two awareness events 43% of pilot communities had three awareness events 50% of pilot communities had four awareness events

4939 participants attended awareness events throughout the life of the programme (including participant numbers from the ‘Wan Smol Bag’ tour of Malekula on special needs).

Output 2.2.2: Home learning environment strengthened.

Number of Family conversation meetings held on parents as first teachers.

Baseline:(2014): No parent engagement on Parents as First Teachers was held in the 60 pilot communities.

Target:500 pilot kindergarten parents are engaged on Parents as First Teachers discussion by December 2015; and 1000 pilot kindergarten

Status: Exceeded target6141 pilot kindergarten parents were engaged in ‘Family Conversations’ throughout the life of the programme. The annual breakdown is as follows:

1694 parents engaged (2015)4447 parents engaged (2016)

14 | P a g e

parents are engaged on Parents as First Teachers discussion by December 2016.

Intermediate Outcome 2.3: Children with special needs or at social risk identified by communities and enrolled in ECCE.

Enrolment and attendance of children with specials needs at pilot kindergartens.

(To note – statistics presented from previous data source did not disaggregate information on the 60 pilot kindergarten areas, therefore it is not appropriate to use as a baseline).

Target:% increase of children with special needs enrolled at, and attending pilot kindergartens.

Status: Underway12 children with disabilities were enrolled in pilot kindergartens during 2016.

During the May training all SECCE field staff and pilot kindergarten teachers were giving basic training on special needs and inclusive education. In addition, the focus for community awareness during round two visits (as per the annual work plan) was special needs. This area needs to remain a focus for MoET in the coming years to increase understanding of special needs and ensure increased enrolment of students with disabilities.

Output 2.3.1: Parents and communities encouraged to enrol children with special needs.

Number of pilot kindergarten catchment areas that had at least one awareness activity focused on children with special needs

“Special needs” for this context is defined as children with a disability.

Baseline:(2014): Zero

Target:30 pilot kindergarten catchment areas had at least one awareness activities focused on children with special needs in 2015; 60 pilot kindergarten catchment areas had at least one awareness activities focused on children with special needs in 2016.

Status: Not met 18 pilot kindergarten catchment areas had at least one awareness activity focused on children with special needs during 2015.

47 pilot kindergarten catchment areas had at least one awareness activity focused on children with special needs during 2016.

Intermediate Outcome 2.4: Enhanced community contribution to kindergartens.

Percentage of pilot kindergartens who report that parents and/or the community have contributed to the kindergarten.

Baseline:(2014): Zero

Target:25% of pilot kindergartens report parent and/or community contribution to the kindergarten (time/attendance at kindergarten, labor, fundraising, cleaning and storytelling) by December 2015;

Status: Exceeded target 46% of pilot kindergartens reported that parents and/or the community contributed to the kindergarten during 2015.

91% of pilot kindergartens reported that parents and/or the community contributed to the kindergarten during 2016.

This is a 91% increase from the baseline.

Parents have contributed in various ways including; storytelling,

15 | P a g e

and 50% by December 2016. assistance in the classroom, cleaning, repairs around the kindergarten grounds, rebuilding work, fundraising and organization of events for special celebrations (e.g. kindy day and graduation).

Output 2.4.1: Kindergarten Committees established and receive training.

Number of pilot communities with functioning Kindergarten Committees.

“Functioning” is defined as meeting at least once per term with at least three parents.

Baseline:(2014): Zero

Target:30 Kindergarten Committees meeting at least once per term with at least three parents by 2015; and 45 Kindergarten Committees meeting at least once each term with at least three parents by 2016.

Status: Exceeded target

55 kindergarten committees met at least once per term with at least three parents during 2015.

54 kindergarten committees met a least once each term with at least three parents during 2016.

(Meetings remain inconsistent for the three pilot kindergartens in both Ureparapara and Merelava, despite committees being formed. This is due to less frequent support and visitation by SECCE field staff due to logistical challenges of travel to these remote islands).

SECCE Program Outcome 3: SECCE pilot program enhanced by value-added mechanisms.

Number of value added mechanisms utilized that enhance the SECCE pilot program.

Baseline:Zero

Target:5 value added mechanisms utilized that enhance the SECCE pilot program by 2016.

Status: Exceeded target 6 value added partnership mechanisms have been developed and utilised during the during the programme life (see detail below outcome 3.2).

Intermediate Outcome 3.1: Alternative ECCE delivery approaches piloted and replicated.

Number of alternative approaches to ECCE delivery that are designed and implemented.

Baseline:(2014): Zero

Target:One new approach to delivery of ECCE designed and implemented in one pilot community by December 2015; and by December 2016 either: one new alternative approach to ECCE delivery piloted in one province, or 2015 alternative approach replicated in each province.

Status: Completed One alternative approach to ECCE was designed and implemented in the Malampa province during 2015.

The approach was replicated and developed in each target province during 2016, as below:

Shefa – Pang Pang, Efate

Malampa – Portindeur, Malekula

Torba – Valua, Mota Lava

16 | P a g e

Output 3.1.1: Alternative, low cost approaches to ECCE delivery identified.

Alternative low cost approaches to ECCE delivery identified.

Baseline:(2014): Zero

Target:At least one alternative approach to delivery of ECCE identified by December 2014.

Status: CompletedOne alternative approach to ECCE delivery was identified by December 2014. The approach was designed by WVV in conjunction with a WV Education specialist.

Intermediate Outcome 3.2: Enhanced delivery of ECCE through partnership mechanisms.

Number of partners (provincial/national) providing support to SECCE pilot program.

Baseline:Zero

Target:3 National/Provincial partners providing support to SECCE pilot program by December 2015; a total of 5 by 2016.

Status: Exceeded target 6 partners (provincial/national) were providing support to the SECCE pilot programme as at December 2016. They have provided support through a variety of modalities, as outlined below:

Digicel – dissemination of text messages to target SECCE provinces with enrolment messages.

The Daily Post Vanuatu – articles on activity by the SECCE programme and promotion of ECCE more generally.

Wan Smol Bag – Tour Malekula pilot communities performing two plays focused on ECCE and sanitation.

Just Play Vanuatu – Assisting with delivery of community awareness events in Shefa based pilot kindergartens.

WVV Private Sponsorship – supporting the rebuild of kindergartens affected by Cyclone Pam.

Torba Anglican Church Network – dissemination of key ECCE messages to be shared with parents and community members at events run by the church.

Output 3.2.1: Partnership mechanisms to enhance ECCE identified

SECCE Partnership Plan approved by the MoET.

Baseline:(2014): No Partnership Plan exists.

Target:SECCE Partnership Plan submitted for approval by

Status: CompletedWVV developed a ‘Partnerships Plan’ for 2016. This document was approved during the January – June 2016 reporting period.

17 | P a g e

December 2015.

Asset Description Purchased From Asset Number Plate/Serial Number Location Date purchased Amount Insured Key Programme Assets

Sony Digital Camera Australia CAM0027 SO1-4504958L Shefa 28 April 2014 USD 858Sony Digital Camera Australia CAM0027 SO1-4504958L Shefa 28 April 2014 USD 858Lenovo ThinkPad T430Australia LC0051 Shefa 28 April 2014 USD1,507,97Lenovo ThinkPad T430Australia LC0052 Shefa 28 April 2014 USD1,507,97Lenovo ThinkPad T430Australia LC0050 Shefa 28 April 2014 USD1,507,97Lenovo ThinkPad T430Australia LC0053 Shefa 28 April 2014 USD1,507,97Lenovo ThinkPad T440p

Australia LC0054 Torba 28 April 2014 USD1,005,32

Lenovo ThinkPad T440p

Australia LC0055 Torba 28 April 2014 USD1,005,32

Lenovo ThinkPad T440p

Australia LC0056 Torba 28 April 2014 USD1,005,32

Toshiba Satellite C55D Computer World LC0079 Shefa 7th May 2015 USD 409,18Toshiba Satellite Computer World LC0080 Malampa 7th May 2015 USD 409,184X4 Quad Bike On Wheels CA0019 14946 Malampa 14 April 2014 USD 6198 Yes (QBE)4X4 Quad Bike On Wheels CA0020 14947 Torba 14 April 2014 USD 6198 Yes (QBE)NEC Projector Computer World 220037ED 220037ED Shefa 17 April 2014 USD 1239NEC Projector Computer World 220038ED 220038ED Malampa 17 April 2014 USD 1239NEC Projector Computer World 220039ED 220039ED Torba 17 April 2014 USD 1239HP Deskjet 1050 Computer World PM0010 Shefa 28 April 2014 USD 56HP Deskjet 1050 Computer World PM0011 Malampa 28 April 2014 USD 56HP Deskjet 1050 Computer World PM0012 Torba 28 April 2014 USD 56

Annex Two: SECCE Programme Asset Register

18 | P a g e

Asset Description Quantity LocationOther Programme Assets Cell Phones 9 3 x Shefa, 2 x Malampa, 4 x Torba Raincoats 10 3 x Malampa, 7 x Torba Life jackets 10 3 x Malampa, 7 x Torba Solar Lights 11 1 x Shefa, 3 x Malampa, 7 x Torba

19 | P a g e

Annex Three: SECCE Programme Budget (whole of programme life acquittal)

20 | P a g e

Annex Four: SECCE staff performance agreement templates

Community Coordinator:

SECCE Coordinator:

Performance Framework_SC.docx

Annex Five: Alternative ECCE Programme Design

Image one: World Vision and MoET participants of the Alternative ECCE Workshop, facilitated by World Vision International Education Lead seconded from Indonesia (Fiona Winoto).

21 | P a g e

Alternative ECCE programme design:

Redi Pikinini Alternative ECCE Program Design_fionawinoto2015.pdf

22 | P a g e