Official PDF , 91 pages

of 91/91
Document of The World Bank Report No: ICR2705 IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT (IBRD-73930) ON A LOAN IN THE AMOUNT OF US$200 MILLION TO THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES FOR A NATIONAL PROGRAM SUPPORT FOR BASIC EDUCATION PROJECT June 26, 2013 East Asia and Pacific/Education EACPF East Asia and Pacific Region Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized
  • date post

    29-Dec-2016
  • Category

    Documents

  • view

    215
  • download

    1

Embed Size (px)

Transcript of Official PDF , 91 pages

  • Document of The World Bank

    Report No: ICR2705

    IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT (IBRD-73930)

    ON A

    LOAN

    IN THE AMOUNT OF US$200 MILLION

    TO THE

    REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

    FOR A

    NATIONAL PROGRAM SUPPORT FOR BASIC EDUCATION PROJECT

    June 26, 2013

    East Asia and Pacific/Education EACPF East Asia and Pacific Region

    Pub

    lic D

    iscl

    osur

    e A

    utho

    rized

    Pub

    lic D

    iscl

    osur

    e A

    utho

    rized

    Pub

    lic D

    iscl

    osur

    e A

    utho

    rized

    Pub

    lic D

    iscl

    osur

    e A

    utho

    rized

    Pub

    lic D

    iscl

    osur

    e A

    utho

    rized

    Pub

    lic D

    iscl

    osur

    e A

    utho

    rized

    Pub

    lic D

    iscl

    osur

    e A

    utho

    rized

    Pub

    lic D

    iscl

    osur

    e A

    utho

    rized

  • ii

    CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS

    (Exchange Rate Effective May 30, 2013)

    Currency Unit = Philippine Peso PHP 1.00 = US$ 0.02 US$ 1.00 = 42.26 PHP

    FISCAL YEAR

    ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS BESRA Basic Education Sector Reform Agenda CAS Country Assistance Strategy CCT Conditional Cash Transfer COA Commission on Audit DepEd Department of Education DBM Department of Budget and Management DLIs Disbursement Linked Indicators e-BIS Enhanced Basic Education Information System EFA Education for All ESC Education Service Contracting FM Financial Management GAD Gender and Development GASTPE Government Assistance to Students and Teachers in Private Education GDP Gross Domestic Product GOP Government of the Philippines GMIS Government Human Resources Information System IAS Internal Audit Service ICT Information and Communications Technology IP Indigenous People IPsEO Indigenous Peoples Education Office ISR Implementation Status Report KRTs Key Reform Thrusts LEAPs Learning, Equity, Accountability Program Support LGU Local Government Unit LIS Learner Information System MOOE Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses MTB-MLE Mother-Tongue based Multilanguage Education MTPDP Medium-Term Philippines Development Plan NAT National Achievement Test NCBTS National Competency-Based Teacher Standards NGO Non-government Organization NGAS National Government Accounting System NPSBE National Program Support for Basic Education

  • iii

    PASBE Philippines Accreditation System for Basic Education PPP Project Preparation Review PRIME Philippines Response to Indigenous Peoples and Muslim Education PTCA Parent-Teacher-Community Association QAAF Quality Assurance and Accountability Framework QER Quality at Entry SBM School Based Management SIML Sector Investment and Maintenance Loan SIP School Improvement Plan SPHERE Support to Philippine Basic Education Reforms TA Technical Assistance TDIS Training and Development Information System TIMSS Trends in International Mathematics and Social Studies TWGs Technical Working Groups

    Vice President: Axel van Trotsenburg Country Director: Motoo Konishi Sector Manager: Luis Benveniste

    Project Team Leader: Lynnette de la Cruz Perez ICR Team Leader: Lynnette de la Cruz Perez

  • iv

    PHILIPPINES National Program Support for Basic Education 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 ............................................... 12. Key Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcomes .............................................. 63. Assessment of Outcomes .......................................................................................... 144. Assessment of Risk to Development Outcome ......................................................... 215. Assessment of Bank and Borrower Performance ..................................................... 226. Lessons Learned ....................................................................................................... 247. Comments on Issues Raised by Borrower/Implementing Agencies/Partners .......... 26Annex 1. Project Costs and Financing .......................................................................... 27Annex 2. Outputs by Component ................................................................................. 28Annex 3. Economic and Financial Analysis ................................................................. 40Annex 4. Bank Lending and Implementation Support/Supervision Processes ............ 55Annex 5. Beneficiary Survey Results ........................................................................... 57Annex 6. Stakeholder Workshop Report and Results ................................................... 58Annex 7. Summary of Borrower's ICR and/or Comments on Draft ICR ..................... 59Annex 8. List of Supporting Documents ...................................................................... 69MAP .............................................................................................................................. 71

  • v

    A. Basic Information

    Country: Philippines Project Name: National Program Support for Basic Education

    Project ID: P094063 L/C/TF Number(s): IBRD-73930 ICR Date: 6/26/2013 ICR Type: Core ICR

    Lending Instrument: SIM Borrower: Republic of the Philippines

    Original Total Commitment:

    USD 200.00M Disbursed Amount: USD 200.00M

    Revised Amount: USD 200.00M Environmental Category: C Implementing Agencies: Department of Education Cofinanciers and Other External Partners: Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID) B. Key Dates

    Process Date Process Original Date Revised / Actual Date(s) Concept Review: 05/24/2005 Effectiveness: 01/01/2007 01/01/2007

    Appraisal: 03/01/2006 Restructuring(s): 07/16/2009 12/22/2011

    Approval: 06/20/2006 Mid-term Review: 11/09/2009 Closing: 12/31/2011 12/31/2012 C. Ratings Summary C.1 Performance Rating by ICR Outcomes: Moderately Satisfactory Risk to Development Outcome: Moderate Bank Performance: Moderately Satisfactory Borrower Performance: Moderately Satisfactory

    C.2 Detailed Ratings of Bank and Borrower Performance (by ICR) Bank Ratings Borrower Ratings

    Quality at Entry: Moderately Satisfactory Government: Satisfactory

    Quality of Supervision: Satisfactory Implementing Agency/Agencies: Moderately Satisfactory

    Overall Bank Performance: Moderately Satisfactory

    Overall Borrower Performance: Moderately Satisfactory

  • vi

    C.3 Quality at Entry and Implementation Performance IndicatorsImplementation

    Performance Indicators QAG Assessments

    (if any) Rating

    Potential Problem Project at any time (Yes/No):

    No Quality at Entry (QEA):

    None

    Problem Project at any time (Yes/No):

    No Quality of Supervision (QSA):

    None

    DO rating before Closing/Inactive status:

    Moderately Satisfactory

    D. Sector and Theme Codes

    Original Actual Sector Code (as % of total Bank financing) Primary education 60 60 Secondary education 40 40

    Theme Code (as % of total Bank financing) Education for all 100 100 E. Bank Staff

    Positions At ICR At Approval Vice President: Axel van Trotsenburg Jeffrey S. Gutman Country Director: Motoo Konishi Joachim von Amsberg Sector Manager: Luis Benveneiste Christopher J. Thomas Project Team Leader: Lynnette De la Cruz Perez Dingyong Hou ICR Team Leader: Lynnette De la Cruz Perez ICR Primary Authors: Sandra Beemer, Franco Russo F. Results Framework Analysis Project Development Objectives (from Project Appraisal Document) The project development objective is to improve quality and equity in learning outcomes for all Filipinos in basic education. Revised Project Development Objectives (as approved by original approving authority) Not applicable

  • vii

    (a) PDO Indicator(s)

    Indicator Baseline Value

    Original Target Values (from

    approval documents)

    Formally Revised Target Values

    Actual Value Achieved at

    Completion or Target Years

    Indicator 1: Elementary Participation Rate (6-11 years)

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    88.58%

    Original target: 93.0% Revised 2011 government target: 90.09%

    N/A 97.3%

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2011 5/1/2013 5/31/2013

    Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was exceeded. Note that all PDO end targets were reduced: 2010 census data showed a declining population with children attending school from the lowest quintiles having increased; may be related to the CCT and ADM programs.

    Indicator 2 : Elementary Cohort Survival Rate

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    63.57%

    Original target: 78.0% Revised 2011 government target: 76.45%

    N/A 73.46%

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2011 5/1/2013 5/31/2013 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Although the cohort survival rates did not meet the target, the increase implies that the system has been able to sustain a level of quality even under such a rapid expansion. This is a substantial achievement.

    Indicator 3 : Elementary Completion Rate

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    62.06%

    Original target: 77.0% Revised 2011 government target: 75.13%

    N/A 70.97%

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2011 5/1/2013 5/31/2013 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Although the target was missed, the trend for completion rate is positive implying that the system has been able to sustain a level of quality even under the rapid expansion in participation. This is an impressive achievement.

    Indicator 4 : Elementary Dropout Rate Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    8.9% 4.3% N/A 6.38%

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2011 5/31/2013 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    The target was missed but the trend is positive. The improvements are impressive given the increased participation rates from the poorest households with the least preparation to enter school.

  • viii

    Indicator 5 : High School Participation Rate (12-15 years)

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    58.49%

    Original target: 84.7% Revised 2011 government target: 65.16%

    N/A 64.8%

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2011 5/1/2013 5/31/2013 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was statistically achieved; high school enrollment numbers increased from 6.3 to 7 million between 2004 and 2012; policies to improve participation and keep 15-18 age groups in school are being developed.

    Indicator 6 : High School Cohort Survival Rate

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    63.11%

    Original target: 78.0% Revised 2011 government target: 79.35%

    N/A 78.83%

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2011 5/1/2013 5/31/2013 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    The target is judged to have been achieved. The trend in survival rate is positive.

    Indicator 7 : High School Completion Rate

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    58.22%

    Original target: 69.0% Revised 2011 government target: 74.25%

    N/A 74.23%

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2011 5/1/2013 5/31/2013 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    The revised target was met.

    Indicator 8 : High School Dropout Rate Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    14.3% 8.1% N/A 7.82%

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2011 5/31/2013 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    The target was exceeded.

  • ix

    Indicator 9 : Grade 6 Mean Percentage Score in math, Filipino, English, science and social studies

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    Gr. 6 Achievement 54.66% Math-59.1% Filipino 61.7% English 59.1% Science 54.1% Social Studies 59.5%

    Gr. 6 Achievement -66.9% Math-66.47% Filipino 69.15% English 66.27% Science 66.11% Social Studies 65.97%

    Date achieved 3/25/2005 5/31/2013

    Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Impressive elem. level test result improvements; elem. & second. NER increased and approx. 2.2 million more children attended school by 2011, mostly from poor households where factors associated with dropout and repetition more prevalent.

    Indicator 10: Year 2 Achievement (high school)

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    Yr. 2 Achievement46.66% Math-39.06% Filipino 48.91% English 51.81% Science 42.00% Social Studies 51.51%

    .

    Yr. 2 Achievement-47.93% Math-42.0% Filipino 58.39% English 46.45% Science 39.35% Social Studies 52.3%

    Date achieved 3/25/2005 5/31/2013

    Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Improvements in math, Filipino, and social studies; some declines in English and science, yet impressive improvements given that elem. & second. Enrollment increased by approximately 2.2 million more children attending school in 2011 than in 2005.

    Indicator 11 : Inter-quartile ratio for elementary school (Definition = Proportion of teachers available to most favored 25% of students among individual schools over the proportion available to least favored 25%)

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    2.00 1.40 1.95

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2011 5/31/2013 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was missed but study estimated that excess teachers decreased from 83,000 in 2003/04 to 35,512 in 2009/10; decline in excess teachers is estimated to have led to annual savings of approximately PHP 12.4 billion.

    Indicator 12 : Inter-quartile ratio for high school (Definition = Proportion of teachers available to most favored 25% of students among individual schools over proportion available to least favored 25%)

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    2.54 1.80 2.19

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2011 5/31/2013 Comments Target was missed but study estimated that excess teachers decreased from

  • x

    (incl. % achievement)

    83,000 in 2003/04 to 35,512 in 2009/10; decline in excess teachers is estimated to have led to annual savings of approximately PHP 12.4 billion.

    (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

    Indicator 1 : Schools/clusters with a School Improvement Plan Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    19% 80% 90.76%

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2011 5/31/2013 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was exceeded.

    Indicator 2 : Schools/clusters meeting SBM criteria

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    No baseline was available at the time of preparation because this concept was only being introduced under the project

    75% 81%

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2011 5/31/2013 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was exceeded.

    Indicator 3 : Schools/clusters eligible to receive school grants

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    No baseline was available at the time of preparation because this was not yet a budget item

    65% 84.54%

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2011 5/31/2013 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was exceeded.

    Indicator 4 : Schools/clusters with adequate Financial Management system Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    No baseline available 65% 88%

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2011 5/31/2013 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was exceeded.

  • xi

    Indicator 5 : Schools/clusters where school heads have been trained in SBM Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    No baseline available 85% 96.61%

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2011 5/31/2013 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was exceeded.

    Indicator 6 : Schools/clusters using school report card Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    No baseline available 75% 96.61%

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2011 5/31/2013 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was exceeded.

    Indicator 7 : Divisions engaged in tracking students at risk Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    No baseline available 33% 51%

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2011 5/31/2013 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was exceeded.

    Indicator 8 : Teacher performance standards developed and agreed

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    Preliminary work done under the PHRD grant provided during project preparation

    Developed and agreed

    Developed and agreed

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2007 12/31/2007 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was met. The NCBTS were developed and then refined. The process involved experts from the education sector, academe and education practitioners.

    Indicator 9 : Divisions where CBTS used in at least 50% of schools Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    N/A 85% 93.75%

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2011 12/31/2011 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was exceeded. As of 2010, all of the schools were required to use the NCBTS in their hiring, promotion and training needs identification.

    Indicator 10 : Competency-Based Teacher standards applied to pre-service training Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    N/A Implemented by year 3 Implemented by year 3

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 01/15/2010 08/14/2009 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was met. DepEd reported that 90% of teacher education institutions have integrated NCBTS in their curriculum.

  • xii

    Indicator 11 : Competency Based teacher standards used in promotion and hiring

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    N/A Revised and refined

    Developed, trialed, revised, trialed again and currently being refined

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2009 12/31/2010 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was met. As of 2010, all of the schools were required to use the NCBTS in their hiring, promotion, training needs identification.

    Indicator 12 : Five year staffing plan devised for allocation and redeployment of teachers

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    N/A Plan updated

    DepED has yet to develop a five-year projection for school staffing but school-level staffing plans and teacher requirements are updated annually through the Research and Statistics Division, Office of Planning Service of DepEd.

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2009 05/31/2013

    Comments (incl. % achievement)

    No 5-year staffing plan developed but use of color-coding spectrum based on the Basic Education Information System to identify schools with teacher shortages and/or surpluses and inform allocation of teacher items and deployment continued instead.

    Indicator 13: Improved equity in pupil/teacher ratios

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    75% improved

    Mean pupil/teacher ratio in SY2011/12 was 37:1 for public schools; top 25 percentile showed a decrease in pupil/teacher ratio from 43:1 to 40.37:1 in elementary and from 45:1 to 42.03:1 in high school.

    Date achieved 12/31/2011 12/31/2011 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was met.

  • xiii

    Indicator 14 : Strategies devised: teachers compensation, incentives and benefits

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    Strategies devised before Congress

    Strategies devised for various incentives and benefits for teachers (increase in hardship allowance, merit increase, performance incentive bonus, and hazard pay; transfer allowance devised but being piloted

    Date achieved 12/31/2010 12/31/2011 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was met. The different schemes/strategies devised did not have to go through Congress since many of these can could be devised and issued through executive fiat.

    Indicator 15 : National strategies and Action Plan (includes teaching materials) Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    N/A Phases rolled out

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 05/31/2013 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was met. Annex 2 provides details; however an example is, teaching and learning strategies in English, mathematics and science were introduced as well as the K to 12 programs along with hiring and training of kindergarten teachers.

    Indicator 16 : English proficiency for teachers

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    Support target

    National English Proficiency and Process Skills program implemented

    Date achieved 12/31/2008 12/31/2008 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was met. This program was implemented in the early part of the project in response to the high demand for English speakers.

    Indicator 17 : Student Achievement Standards Defined

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    Student Achievement Standards defined by results of the National Achievement Test

    Policy in Place Policy in Place

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2007 12/31/2007 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was met. There is a policy in place that defines student achievement standards, which was revised in line with the enactment of the K to 12 program.

  • xiv

    Indicator 18 : Schools receive feedback from national assessment

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    N/A

    Phase 4 In-service Training of teachers to utilize results of National Achievement Test to inform learning

    Policy in place and being implemented to provide feedback to schools on the results of the National Achievement Test; Annual In-Service Training of selected teachers from each division conducted in response to the results of their Teacher Strengths and Needs Assessment (TSNA) self-assessment some of which includes training on addressing the least-learned skills of the students

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2011 12/31/2011

    Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was met. Schools receive feedback through their division offices or can access the results of the National Achievement Test online; test results and assessment outcomes used to adjust in-service teacher training programs, adjust teachers TSNA etc.

    Indicator 19 : National standards framework developed for inputs (minimum service standards) and outcomes (participation, completion, achievement)

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    N/A Policy in Place by Year 1 of Project (2007)

    Policy in place by year 1 of project; standards for some inputs (classroom construction, curriculum, textbooks, student assessment revised within the life of the project

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2007 12/31/2007 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was met. Standards were redefined for classrooms, textbooks, teachers, instructional materials etc. to integrate quality standards and also as part of the accreditation standards developed for elementary as well as high schools.

  • xv

    Indicator 20: Divisions with their schools receive feedback from EMIS

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    There was no explicit policy in place during project preparation

    75% of divisions (with their schools) receive feedback from EMIS

    All schools provide basic data and information on their schools.

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2011 12/31/2010 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was exceeded. The roll out of the e-BEIS nationwide has allowed central offices to upload the school data they receive onto the website, allowing schools and divisions to download and share the information.

    Indicator 21 : ICT Policy Framework developed

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    ICT Policy Framework was not yet existent during project preparation and at the start of the project in 2007

    Policy in Place by Year 1 (2007)

    Policy was in place by Year 1.

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2007 12/31/2007 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was met. In addition, the Bank mobilized technical assistance (funded by the AusAID SPHERE AAA managed by the Bank) in 2011 to assist DepEd in refining its ICT Policy and master plan for basic education.

    Indicator 22 : ICT Policy implemented

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    ICT Policy was implemented in 2008 by the previous DepEd Secretary

    Phase 4 rollout (assumes continued implementation of the ICT policy developed in 2007/08)

    ICT policy developed and currently being implemented

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2011 12/31/2011

    Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was met. In 2010/11, DepEd management developed and implemented an ICT policy framework. ICT master plan for basic education that supports targeted outcomes and outputs stipulated in its reform agenda and MDG and EFA commitments.

    Indicator 23 : Cost sharing between GOP and Local Government Unit (LGU) applied to classroom construction, including equity factors

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    There were cost-sharing arrangements in place at the time of project preparation and upon commencement of the project but very informal and done in a very informal bases

    65% of classroom construction follows scheme

    All classroom construction project, involved a statement of interest, prior to construction between the DepEd and the Local Government Units (LGUs).

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2011 12/31/2011 Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was met. Statements of interest signed to ensure LGUs involved and committed in sharing the burden of construction either through cash or in-kind contributions (i.e. local engineers, site preparation, extra LGU manpower).

  • xvi

    Indicator 24 : Financing framework developed

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    10 year Multiyear Spending Plan for Basic Education was in place at that time of project preparation and commencement

    Policy in place in year 1

    Financing framework in place on year 1

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2007 12/31/2007

    Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was met. A financing framework was in place year 1 through the Multiyear Spending Plan for basic education; in 2010, Bank mobilized TA support for DepEd to develop the Medium Term Expenditure Framework for 2011-2016.

    Indicator 25 : Demand side financing mechanisms introduced to support needy students and their families

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    No major demand-side financing mechanisms in place except for the Food for School Program implemented by DepEd and the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD)

    Use results of policy review to apply finance to feeding programs or other demand-side interventions. New policy should guide those applied centrally and those to operate through school improvement plans. Listing of national and local programs annually. Monitoring and evaluation of impact of programs on student outcomes as well as evaluation of efficiency and effectiveness

    Policy and program reviews were undertaken with support from the Bank on the Food for School program and the Education Service Contracting Scheme Program. The Bank provided extensive technical assistance in the design of the Conditional Cash Transfer Program (CCT) of the Government, which has since become the flagship program providing demand-side interventions to poor households to improve uptake of education and health interventions

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2011 12/31/2011

    Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was met. Government expanded implementation of demand-side financing programs which were assessed/evaluated as having a positive impact on needy students and education outcomes (CCT, ESC); abolished cost-ineffective and inefficient ones.

  • xvii

    Indicator 26 : Private sector participation

    Value quantitative or Qualitative)

    The Education Service Contracting Program was in place at the time of project preparation and commencement

    Policy reviewed based on M&E of the Education Service Contracting schemes

    Program review of the Education Service Contracting Scheme completed in late 2010

    Date achieved 10/21/2005 12/31/2007 12/31/2010

    Comments (incl. % achievement)

    Target was met. Bank conducted an ESC Program review at the high school level, and based on the findings, Government expanded the budget allocation by 50% the year following the review and adjusted policy guidelines and implementation.

    G. Ratings of Project Performance in ISRs

    No. Date ISR Archived DO IP Actual

    Disbursements (USD millions)

    1 09/21/2006 Satisfactory Satisfactory 0.00 2 07/26/2007 Satisfactory Satisfactory 3.55 3 04/28/2008 Satisfactory Satisfactory 27.90 4 12/01/2008 Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 71.16 5 10/16/2009 Satisfactory Satisfactory 107.25 6 06/29/2010 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 151.80 7 04/26/2011 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 157.50 8 04/10/2012 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 187.22 9 12/24/2012 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 197.46

    H. Restructuring (if any)

    Restructuring Date(s)

    Board Approved

    PDO Change

    ISR Ratings at Restructuring

    Amount Disbursed at

    Restructuring in USD millions

    Reason for Restructuring & Key Changes Made DO IP

    07/16/2009 S MS 104.12 Reallocation of funds 12/22/2011 MS MS 186.43 Extension of closing date

  • xviii

    I. Disbursement Profile

  • 1

    1. Project Context, Development Objectives and Design

    1.1 Context at Appraisal 1. Country Context. Over the period 1961- 2003, the Philippines had a high average annual population growth rate of 2.6 percent (compared to 1.7 percent in the region). Over the same period, the Philippines had had a correspondingly modest 1.4 percent average annual per capita gross domestic product (GDP) growth rate. This compared to an average increase of 5.4 percent in per capita GDP for other East Asian countries over the same period. In 2004, the GDP of the Philippines was estimated at US$84.6 billion up from 6.1 percent in 2003. The GDP per capita in 2004 was estimated at US$1,025. The major economic sectors included agriculture and industry, especially for processing, textiles, garments, electronics and automobile parts. The economy was dominated by the service sector, representing 54 percent of GDP and over 37 percent of workers were self-employed. The unemployment rate in April 2005 was 7.5 percent. Inflation was on the rise and in 2005 it was 7 percent, up from 5.5 percent in 2004. 2. There was a lack of social inclusion in the Philippines. Inequality was high and when coupled with low growth over the longer term, it translated into slow progress on poverty reduction. The richest five percent of households accounted for nearly one third of national income, while the poorest 20 percent accounted for only six percent. The poverty incidence, based on household consumption, had declined marginally from 27.6 percent in 2000 to 26.1 percent in 2003, after an increase of two percentage points between 1997 and 2000. Poverty severity remained about the same between 2000 and 2003 which meant that the living standards of those who remained poor had not improved. 3. Sector Context. In 2005, the total Department of Education (DepEd) budget represented approximately two percent of GDP and 18.5 percent of the total Government of the Philippines (GOP) budget net of debt service. Spending on teachers salaries and other personnel services made up 89 percent of the DepEd budget. An additional four percent was spent on educational infrastructure, which left seven percent of the DepEd budget to cover other recurrent costs such as operating expenses, teacher in-service training and the purchase of instructional aids. At the time of project appraisal, DepEd, with support from the World Bank, had prepared a spending plan that showed a worsening fiscal pressure over time, which would limit the countrys ability to achieve its 2015 Education for All (EFA) targets. The three factors influencing the fiscal pressures were: (i) the high fixed costs of salaries and personnel benefits; (ii) rapid growth of the school aged population, requiring the system to expand rapidly at the expense of quality improvements;; and (iii) the need to increase the number of public high schools to accommodate private high school students following the 1997 Asian financial crisis. 4. Education outcomes in the Philippines were low compared to the rest of the East Asia region. The 2003 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Studies (TIMSS) showed that the Philippines ranked 34th out of 38 countries in Grade 8 Mathematics and 43rd out of 46 countries in Grade 8 Science. For Grade 4, the Philippines ranked 23rd out of 25 participating countries in both mathematics and science. In addition, there was poor

  • 2

    internal efficiency in the system. Participation rates in 2003 at the elementary level were higher than high school level, 94.02 percent and 63.88 percent respectively. However, the dropout rates were 7.34 percent for elementary and 13.1 percent for high school, which meant that approximately 50 percent of students beginning elementary school graduated from high school. The high population growth rates and the tight fiscal situation contributed to these outcomes. There were also several teacher related concerns: (i) teacher qualifications, particularly at the high school level, were low in mathematics and science; (ii) no performance-related pay structure which made it difficult to reward top teachers; (iii) quality pre-service teacher training was poor, and (iv) teacher deployment to hard- to-reach areas was difficult due to provisions in the 1967 Magna Carta for Public School Teachers, allowing teachers to refuse transfer. 5. To combat these problems, the GOP developed a poverty reduction strategy that was defined in the Governments Medium-Term Philippines Development Plan (MTPDP) 2004-2020, which gave high priority to achieving universal basic education. The countrys education strategy was guided by the National Education for All (EFA) 2015 Plan and was intended to contribute to the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). While remaining committed to the overall development and poverty reduction strategies, the Government also acknowledged the particular challenges for basic education. Important initiatives on rationalization were introduced by DepEd administration following the passage of the Governance of Basic Education Act (Republic Act RA 9155) in 2001 with its emphasis on decentralization and its declaration that schools should be the heart of the formal education system. The reform proposals were progressively refined, and by 2005, consensus emerged on the need for urgent sector-wide strategies, placing schools first and empowering local communities to achieve school improvement. The strategies were articulated in a policy called the Schools First Initiative (SFI) and translated into policy actions under the Governments Basic Education Sector Reform Agenda (BESRA).1 6. The overall objectives of BESRA encompassed universal access to basic education schooling and success for children in that age group, with community support enabling effective school-based management, and the provision of universal functional literacy for adults using alternative learning schemes. The policy actions of BESRA were collected under five key reform thrusts (KRTs): (i) school-based management (ii) teacher standards; (iii) quality assurance; (iv) complementary early childhood education, alternative learning systems and private sector participation; and (v) organizational development. 7. Project Context. Building on the lessons of the past and aligned to the Governments MTPDP, the Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) 2006-2008 sought to achieve economic growth and promote social cohesion. While improving education in general would contribute to this overall objective, support for BESRA had a strategic

    1 Basic education in the Philippines includes kindergarten, elementary and high school (K-12).

  • 3

    focus since it tackled two key challenges: fiscal reform in the short-term and making public institutions more effective in the long-run. The strategy was designed to support the Governments overall, coherent reform agenda and in particular to align Bank assistance to those strategic priorities in the existing national budget that address reforms to achieve fiscal stability and improved governance. The National Program Support for Basic Education (NPSBE) was the first Bank operation in the Philippines that adopted a National Program Support (NPS) approach. This approach required a shift from financing discrete projects towards support for coherent programs. The project was designed to support strategic elements and key thrusts of the countrys basic education reform program. It was a move toward a program-based approach which provided more support to sector-wide type operations focused on core mandates, functions and service delivery improvements within the budget. As such, the project adopted the program objective of the BESRA as well as government targets. These targets are considered the higher order outcome targets given that Bank assistance was only 1 percent of the annual budget of DepED. 8. The Bank assistance through the NPSBE facilitated implementation of reforms furthering decentralization and rationalization of the system of basic education in ways that improve equity, quality, governance and financing of basic education services. Project financing was targeted to selected budget line items that are strategically important for reforms (see Table 4 in Annex 3). With its program approach, the NPSBE provided the impetus to launch system-wide reforms by targeting strategic policies and monitoring their implementation such that there was greater effectiveness in the use of existing resources focused on implementing targeted reforms. It also sharpened the Governments policy framework for coordination of donor assistance and provided a roadmap for subsequent additional financing from the donor community for implementation of the reform agenda. The sector wide program approach of NPS also helped mobilize resources not only from donor partners but also among local private sector-partners to support sector-wide reforms. It also allowed the Bank to provide advice on a broad range of issues given the Banks broad involvement and engagement in the country through the fiduciary work, governance and anti-corruption agenda, PEM, among others. 9. Project financing represented approximately 1 percent of the yearly DepEd budget and 5 percent of the line item support for one year. While the project resources were a small portion of the overall government budget, it was viewed as important for leveraging additional resources for the governments education policy reforms. In addition, the BESRA provided the government with the first opportunity to coordinate donor assistance in an effort to meet the reform goals. The government worked with the donors to ensure that donor assistance did not overlap and that all aspects of the reform agenda could be covered based on the needs of the government. Related to this donor coordination, AusAID provided trust fund money to be administered by the Bank for the

  • 4

    Support to Philippine Basic Education Reforms (SPHERE) 2 project, which mainly financed the needed technical assistance (TA) for critical areas of BESRA that were not supported under the NPSBE. This project ran in parallel to the NPSBE and was instrumental in supporting the necessary studies to assess the governance issues as well as studies needed to ensure the impact of the NPSBE resources. The SPHERE recipient executed grant: (i) mobilized experts and experienced practitioners for the BESRA technical groups responsible for implementing the various components of the reform agenda; (ii) provided SBM grants; and (iii) constructed classrooms in high need areas in Southern Philippines. 1.2 Original Project Development Objectives (PDO) and Key Indicators 10. The project development objective is to improve quality and equity in learning outcomes for all Filipinos in basic education. The key indicators selected to measure progress toward the PDO were: Elementary Participation: (i) participation rate, 6-11 years; (ii) cohort survival; (iii) completion rate; and (iv) dropout rate. High School Participation: (i) participation rate 12-15 years; (ii) cohort survival; (iii) completion rate; and (iv) dropout rate. Quality and efficiency: (i) Grade 6 Achievement in mathematics, Filipino, English, science, and Hekasi (social studies); (ii) inter-quartile ratio 3 for elementary schools; and (iii) inter-quartile ratio for high schools

    1.3 Revised PDO (as approved by original approving authority) and Key Indicators, and reasons/justification 11. The PDO was not revised during project implementation, and the key development indicators remained the same throughout the life of the project. However, in 2011, DepEd adjusted the PDO targets. These adjustments were made based on the 2010 census data, which showed a decline in population growth and the recognition that the targets were too ambitious. The government only officially validated the new end targets in December 2012. The Bank team was not able to restructure the results framework given that the project was closing December 31, 2012. Since the revised targets provide a

    2 The recipient-executed SPHERE project will close November 30, 2013 and at that time a separate ICR will be prepared to assess its impact. The recipient executed grant implemented by DepEd consists of: (i) mobilization of experts and experienced practitioners for the BESRA technical working groups; training of teachers, regions and divisions on various areas of the reform; provision of teaching and learning materials and construction of Learning Resource and Management Development Centers; (ii) provision of SBM grants; and (iii) construction of classrooms in high need areas in Southern Philippines. There were two Bank-executed grants, one for incremental supervision costs and another provided demand driven analytical work, which includes: (i) ESC program review; (ii) mobilization of technical assistance in various areas of the reform such as on SBM, organizational development, ICT in education, financial management, teacher development, etc.; (iii) complementary resources for the development of the medium-term expenditure framework; (iv) development of the Special Education Fund budget manual; and (v) policy review of all DepEd policy issuances from 1970 to date with the end view of improving policy formulation, identifying policy gaps and eliminating policy overlaps. 3 Defined as the proportion of teachers available to most favored 25 percent of students among individual schools/proportion available to least favored 25 percent

  • 5

    more realist picture of the education system, the ICR will use the adjusted targets to assess system improvement and measure project achievement.

    1.4 Main Beneficiaries 12. The targeted beneficiaries in the project consisted of: (i) the schools and their communities, encompassing individual parents, the Parent-Teacher-Community Association (PTCA), local government, the private sector, and non-government organizations (NGOs); (ii) basic education teachers; and (iii) basic education learners. 1.5 Original Components4 13. Component 1: Strengthened School-Based Management (US$71 million). This component aimed to: (i) develop school-community partnerships; (ii) establish a structure of support and accountability; (iii) capacity building; and (iv) ensure quality and equity at the school-level. The project-related outcome was enhanced learning outcomes for all, resulting from improved efficiency, transparency, fairness, accountability and responsiveness in the local delivery of education services. 14. Component 2: Improved Teaching Effectiveness (US$23 million). This component supported: (i) the development of professional standards for teachers; and (ii) teacher deployment. The project was to finance: (i) the development of policy on the refinement and use of competency-based standards for teachers and training on the use of such standards; and (ii) a hardship allowance for teachers moved too hard to-staff schools, as currently committed within the 2006 DepEd budget. 15. Component 3: Enhanced Quality and Equity through Standards, Assessment and Support (US$96 million) aimed at developing: (i) a National Standards Framework; (ii) a Quality Assurance Framework; and (iii) an ICT Policy. In addition to policy development, the project financed Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses grants (MOOE), key textbooks and learning materials, training, database hardware and software, advocacy and technical assistance related to quality assurance, and provided funds for the school building program to help schools meet minimum standards. 16. Component 4: Effective Resource Mobilization (US$2 million). This component supported the enhancement of: (i) financing framework and budget process; (ii) demand-side financing; and (iii) private sector participation. Financial support was provided for policy formulation and its application to options for the delivery of demand-side interventions (e.g., school feeding) and public/private partnerships (e.g. government assistance to students and teachers in private education or GASTPE) in a decentralized environment.

    4 Original project financing by component also included US$7.5 million for unallocated, and the Front End fee of US$.5 million.

  • 6

    1.6 Revised Components The components were not revised during the implementation period. 1.7 Other significant changes 17. On July16, 2009 project funds were reallocated to increase the funds available for classroom construction because the principal led construction program was highly successful. The allocation was increased from US$26 million to US$97.5 million. The additional US$71.5 million was taken from the allocation for school feeding, training, textbooks, hardship allowance and school MOOE. While there was reallocation across categories to support additional classroom construction, this did not affect the amount of allocation provided by the Government through DepEd for these important components of the NPSBE. 18. On December 13, 2011, the Bank, at the request of the government, granted a twelve month extension of the original project closing date from December 31, 2011 to December 31, 2012 in order to complete the procurement and delivery of the English, mathematics, and science and technology textbooks financed under the project.

    2. Key Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcomes

    2.1 Project Preparation, Design and Quality at Entry 19. Project Preparation. In 2005, the Government of the Philippines and the Bank decided to support the BESRA with a Sector Investment and Maintenance Loan (SIML) which aimed to bring sector expenditures, policies and performance in line with the BESRA. This decision was based on an agreement with the government on the 2005-2010 sector investment program that was predicated on the medium-term expenditure framework and sector policy reforms necessary for the program to succeed. In addition, it was based on the Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) 2006-2008 that called for a graduated response to policy reforms that enabled public institutions to be more effective. The Bank preparation and appraisal teams consisted of technical experts that were appropriate for the development of the project. Project preparation was also spread over several months, which allowed for the development and continuation of a sector-wide dialogue with the government, DepEd and the donor community on the project support for the BESRA. This was done in an effort to engender strong and sustained political leadership, championship and ownership, which the team felt were important for the success of the project. On the government side, DepEd held meetings and workshops, to build consensus around the BESRA and the development of the NPSBE among donors, the rest of government and civil society. DepEd also created technical working groups (TWGs) to focus on the KRTs and help develop the four project components and to ensure effective communication with the DepEd on project preparation. The project preparation process was thoughtful, collaborative, and technically sound and to the extent possible, based on lessons learned from previous operations.

  • 7

    20. Project Design. The NPSBE project design fit squarely into the governments BESRA (2006-2010), MTPDP and the Banks 2006-2008 CAS. They shared the common objectives of fostering economic growth and social inclusion through improved governance, together with fiscal reform. The NPSBE project underwent a thorough quality at entry (QER) process: The project design took into consideration comments from the November 2005 project preparation review (PPR)5, which included the need to provide: (i) more details on the level of government commitment; (ii) clearer terms on the budget items to be financed; (iii) an enhanced economic and financial analysis; (iv) a more in-depth financial management and procurement assessment; and (v) a review of the National Government Accounting System (NGAS). The preparation team also incorporated lessons learned from past specific investment loans (SILs), such as: (i) for SBM to promote school effectiveness, schools require adequate and appropriate resources; (ii) clear delineation of roles and responsibilities within a decentralized environment is critical to the success of a reform strategy; and (iii) participation of local stakeholders in school improvement planning and implementation is critical to achieve desired learning outcomes and to mobilize needed resources.

    21. The project design included the appropriate activities to assist the government in reaching their reform agenda goals of: (i) continuous school improvement facilitated by active involvement of local stakeholders; (ii) better learning outcomes achieved by improved teacher standards; and (iii) desired learning outcomes enhanced by national curriculum strategies, multi-sector coordination, and quality assurance. The PDO of improve quality and equity in learning outcomes for all Filipinos in basic education was appropriate since this was the objective of the BESRA. The key indicators in the results framework were national in scope and derived from the BESRA and, again, this was appropriate given the NPSBEs direct link to the BESRA. The project design also included 26 intermediate indicators all of which were appropriate for measuring implementation of the project components. It should be noted that the PDO indicator targets were the BESRA targets, which were adopted by the preparation team at the request of DepEd since the project design was supportive of the BESRA. In addition, government asked the preparation team to include all 26 intermediate indicators to ensure that important project reform activities would be continuously monitored. The budget items of: (i) classroom construction; (ii) SBM grants; (iii) textbooks; (iv) training, which included teacher and capacity development training; (v) MOOE support; (vi) school feeding; (vii) hardship pay and (viii) policy development were selected to ensure that the BESRA reforms related to decentralization received adequate and sustained support. This was an appropriate design decision. The preparation team identified project risks and proposed adequate mitigation measures. To support the implementation of the NPSBE, it was decided to mainstream implementation within the DepEd units that were ultimately responsible for meeting the objectives of the BESRA at the central, regional, division offices and schools as mandated in the Governance of Basic Education Act (RA 9155).

    5 The PPR was the equivalent of a Quality at Entry Review as indicated in project preparation documentation.

  • 8

    This structure was appropriate to ensure continued ownership of the NPSBE project and the BESRA. The preparation team conducted an in-depth institutional capacity assessment at all levels, which gave the team confidence that DepEd had built the foundations required to implement the reforms and NPSBE. 2.2 Implementation 22. Implementation began with workshop sessions for theme groups responsible for implementing particular reforms, as well as for officers responsible for handling procurement, financial management, disbursement and monitoring and evaluation. The DepEd continued the TWGs with the mandate that they would be responsible for the implementation of the reform agenda and the NPSBE activities. While there were initial capacity concerns, the implementing units, through their daily work, were able to ultimately implement all project activities. Where there was a need for support, technical assistance was provided as well as capacity training. 23. During the first 12 months of project implementation, disbursements were low due to limited financial management capacity at the regional and division levels. However, by April 2008 disbursements had increased from US$3.55 million to US$28.12 and by June 2008 to US$56.21 million. This was mainly due to the strong implementation of the principal led school construction and procurement of textbooks. Since the school led construction was so successful, the government, in July 2009, asked the Bank to restructure the project to reallocate an additional US$71.5 million of project funds to school construction. Because there was an independent evaluation of the principal led construction that showed the quality of construction was high, the Bank team felt that the reallocation was appropriate for the project. The government also indicated that they would increase the allocation for school feeding, training, textbooks, hardship allowance and school MOOE, which they were able to do. (See Annex 3 for increased budget allocations for these line items.) By October 2009, the project had disbursed US$108.01 million and in November 2009, there was a mid-term review of the project and, at that time, disbursements were in line with the original disbursement profile. 24. There were substantial successes in the implementation of project activities. The SBM TWG developed an SBM manual and an equitable and formula based MOOE allocation. The SMB TWG also: (i) developed SBM standards and framework that were rolled out across the country, (ii) provided training on the development of school improvement plans and their utilization; (iii) introduced school report cards nationwide; and (iv) developed and provided guidelines on school-community partnerships. While the systems are in place there is still some work to be done in terms of the strengthening of the roles of the governing councils specifically as they relate to accountability as well as increasing community participation. Further impact of SBM is likely to be realized as these roles get strengthened. Although challenges remain, SBM, through training, capacity development, and socialization activities has shown that: (i) 90.76 percent of schools have school improvement plans; (ii) 84.54 percent of schools have school governing councils; (iii) 97.85 percent of schools have school report cards; (iv) 97.27

  • 9

    percent of school heads have been oriented to SBM; and (v) 88 percent of schools have been oriented to simplified accounting procedures. This is a considerable achievement. 25. The BESRA with support from the NPSBE also: (i) introduced the National Competency Based Teacher Standards Assessment (NCBTS) and a teacher self-assessment tool, which informed teacher hiring guidelines and in-service training programs respectively. These standards were also incorporated into teacher support materials, teacher professional development, and the national assessment. The government also: (i) universalized kindergarten, making it officially part of the basic education cycle, hiring and training kindergarten teachers6 and the development of a kindergarten curriculum; (ii) revised the entire basic education curriculum content and framework to accommodate the new Kindergarten to Grade 12 program (K 12); (iii) revised Alternative Learning Systems (ALS) programs; (iv) revised the grades 110 learning competencies, (v) developed an assessment framework; (vi) piloted mother-tongue based-multilingual education (MTB-MLE) in 20 national languages in 921 schools nationwide, and developed supporting materials for teaching and learning in the 12 main languages, 7 and (vii) distributed approximately 16.5 million textbooks and teachers manuals for English, mathematics, social sciences and science and technology. The project also has supported the rehabilitation of 13,659 classrooms and constructed 4,813 new ones. (See Annex 2 for more highlights of implementation.) 26. There were also challenges during implementation. The NPSBE had a goal of developing a 5-year staffing plan to facilitate the equitable distribution of teachers to remote disadvantaged schools. Although this plan was not developed during the life of the project, DepEd did have a color-coded scheme that designates needy schools, which was used in lieu of the staffing plan. There were systemic delays with teacher deployment that were identified through a governance study conducted by the Bank. The studys findings led to policy changes that ultimately reduced deployment time from one to two years to six months. As a result, DBM has allocated an additional 61,000 teacher positions for fiscal year 2013. There continue to be a small number of schools that are not collecting or receiving the full amount of MOOE.8 To address this issue, one of the steps DepEd took was to start posting MOOE allocations on the DepEd website. This has

    6 During FY 2011 and 2012, approximately 8,000 new Kindergarten teachers were hired, 42,880 trained as part of the Kindergarten Volunteer program, 13,962 as part of the 2011 summer program, 633 as trainers of the summer or the 40-week Kindergarten curriculum program, 471 received scholarships to attend the summer Institute-Based training for kindergarten teachers, and there was a 20-day training program offered by the State Universities and colleges for the equivalent of a 9-unit course for a Masters degree in Early Childhood and Development. Although not financed by NPSBE, the project served as a catalyst for mobilizing additional support to develop and roll out these reforms and activities. 7 The 12 languages include Tagalog, Ilokano, Pangasinense, Kapampangan, Bikol, Cebuano, Hiligaynon, Waray, Maranao, Maguindanao, Yakan and Chavacano. 8Some of the reasons for not receiving or collecting the full MOOE amounts include: (i) technical and capacity constraints (division retaining funds; insufficient MOOE budget especially for small schools; human resource and workload constraints; etc.); (ii) divisions resistant to decentralizing funds management to schools; (iii) few institutional incentives to comply with full downloading; and (iv) lack of effective monitoring of MOOE downloading or awareness of school heads regarding MOOE amounts.

  • 10

    increased schools and communities awareness of their allocation, which has improved distribution, collection, transparency and accountability related to the MOOE. The overarching implementation challenges were related to: (i) financial management; (ii) capacity constraints at the division and regional levels; and (iii) procurement of textbooks. NPSBE was the first education project to be mainstreamed and to use country systems for implementation. The preparation team had identified financial management as a risk due to weak government systems and limited financial management capacity with appropriate mitigation measures. However, they still presented problems related to withdrawal applications which slowed the reimbursement process. Some capacity constraints at the local levels were encountered during the roll out of SBM and the implementation of its different components. However, DepEd remained responsive and supported the decentralized structures through training and capacity building activities. The procurement issues were related to the quality/completeness of bidding documents for textbooks and some books not meeting the required technical specifications. These delays required the government, in December 2011, to request an extension of the project closing date from December 31, 2011 to December 31, 2012. The textbooks were procured and delivered and by project closing 100 percent of the loan was disbursed. 27. There were nine Bank review and implementation support mission from the period September 2007 through March 2012, with a final BESRA review mission in August 2012. The makeup of the Banks teams was well balanced with financial management staff well represented on missions, along with procurement, monitoring and evaluation specialists, both Bank staff and consultants as well as technical specialists9 where necessary. The US$200 million was fully disbursed by May 22, 2013. 2.3 Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Design, Implementation and Utilization 28. Design. As stated previously, the results framework was appropriate for the project design and reflected the goals of the BESRA. The indicators were linked to the PDO and were adequate to measure achievement of the PDO. The targets for the PDO indicators were projections based on the 2000 census. At the time of design, the QER panels suggested that the target might be overly ambitious. However, after discussions with the government, the targets were kept since they were based on the official government targets. The intermediate indicators were also linked to the components and were appropriate to measure intermediate level achievements. The results framework included 26 intermediate indicators. While this is a large number of indicators, they were included in the framework at the request of DepEd to ensure that important project and reform activities would be continuously monitored. In addition, the indicators were included to ensure that other partners, both local and international, would provide technical and financial resources to support the achievement of the BESRA results indicators. The design also included support for: (i) a web-based Enhanced Basic

    9 The missions included SBM specialists, teacher development experts, quality assurance practitioners, and data management experts when appropriate for review of project activities.

  • 11

    Education Information System (e-BEIS) to enable performance reporting in real-time as well as to inform planning, resource allocation, and performance reporting; and (ii) a Quality Assurance and Accountability Framework (QAAF) to lay the foundation for redefining school input standards including textbooks, school infrastructure, teacher training materials, etc. 29. Implementation and Utilization of Monitoring and Evaluation. The roll out of the e-BEIS nationwide has allowed central offices to upload the school data they receive onto the website, allowing schools to access the information directly or for divisions to download and share the information with their respective schools. This has had the intended impact of being able to provide real-time information at all levels of the education system. In 2010, the government adopted the QAAF, along with the roll-out of the Philippines Accreditation System for Basic Education (PASBE). PASBE is a unified schools standards assessment tool that is applicable to both elementary and high schools, and facilitates measuring their level of compliance with service standards. The QAAF and PASBE did lay the foundation for re-defining school input standards and all schools are now using these standards. DepEd, with support from AusAID, developed a learner information system (LIS) that includes a learner reference number for each student irrespective of whether enrolled in the formal or non-formal education system. This system currently holds information on approximately 20 million learners and is providing DepEd with valuable information on each learner and allows it to make informed decisions for the planning and budgeting process. 30. Under the BESRA as a whole, the M&E system includes: (i) a learning resources materials development system that is being used to upload learning materials; (ii) an asset management system which is operational at the central level and will be expanded down to the regional and division levels; (iii) a Training and Development Information System (TDIS) being piloted in Regions 6, 7 and 8 and which includes an inventory of training, research and development activities conducted at the regional levels; (iv) the ongoing development of a project monitoring system being developed under the Philippines Response to Indigenous Peoples and Muslim Education (PRIME) program, which created a system of providing demand-driven grants to respond to indigenous people (IP) education needs; and (v) the ongoing development of a human resources information system, which has been put on hold pending the governments plan to roll out a government human resources information system (GMIS). 31. The DepEd provided Bank missions with data and information that allowed the teams to make judgments on progress toward achieving the PDO and the projects implementation progress. This information was regularly reported on by the Bank in aides-memoire and ISRs. As mentioned, the targets for the PDO level indicators were adjusted and are being used to measure project achievement. It should also be noted that 26 intermediate indicators were monitored and reported on over the life of the project. 2.4 Safeguard and Fiduciary Compliance 32. Safeguards. The environmental rating of the project was C based on the fact that no environmental risks were foreseen and construction would comply with national

  • 12

    environmental laws for environmental impacts. Therefore, OP 4.01 Environmental Assessment was not triggered and no environmental assessment tools were developed as part of the project. The project did, however, conduct a review of the environmental safeguards at mid-term and determined that there was compliance with local regulations. At the time of project closing, again all environmental safeguards were in compliance with local regulations. 33. The project did trigger the Indigenous Peoples OP 4.20 because the reform agenda was to address both quality and equity especially for the poor and disadvantaged groups, including indigenous peoples. The project was satisfactorily carried out in accordance with the Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework IPPF and the governments Philippines Indigenous Peoples Rights Act IPRA. Although encountering initial delays, the government approved and disseminated the National Indigenous Peoples Education Policy Framework in August 2011. The framework is to ensure that IPs basic education concerns and needs are taken into consideration as part of BESRA implementation. DepEd supported several activities related to the promotion of indigenous peoples education, which were: (i) piloting MTB-MLE in 20 languages; (ii) dissemination of the National Indigenous Peoples Education Policy Framework; (iii) issuance of guidelines on the use of PRIME grants, which created a system of providing demand-driven funding to respond to IP education needs; (iv) creation of an indigenous peoples education office (IPsEO); and (v) with AusAID support, conducting a baseline survey on the educational situation in IP and Muslim households in PRIME priority divisions and regions. The other IP activities included: (i) review of standards for the recognition and accreditation of private schools for IPs; (ii) development of a national curriculum framework on IP education for kindergarten, elementary and high school levels; (iii) guidelines and standards for the development of indigenous learning materials; and (iv) an IP education training plan for teacher and education managers. School visits have shown that interventions through the school SIPs to support IP students are designed but are often separate rather than an integral part of the plans. The next steps are to fully integrate them into the SIPs. Safeguards compliance is rated satisfactory. 34. Financial management. As discussed previously, the project was designed to use the government accounting system. In October 2001, the Commission on Audit (COA) introduced the new government account system (NGAS) that followed international public sector accounting procedures. The bookkeeping segment of NGAS was computerized and was referred to as eNGAS. The NGAS updated and replaced the government accounting and auditing manual, which had been in use since the 1940s and was viewed to be a milestone in the government accounting procedures. While the system was viewed as a significant step forward, the implementation of the system proved to be problematic for project implementation and financial management (FM) performance. The FM challenges were: (i) establishment of an Internal Audit Service (IAS), which only became fully operational in early 2011; (ii) DepEd central, regional and division offices had to be adequately staffed and trained to carry out the high volume of FM transactions, which took time; and (iii) the eventual roll-out of the eNGAS after it was suspended in December 2008 in an effort to harmonize the Philippines general accounting standards with the international public sector accounting standards. This led

  • 13

    DepEd to consider developing its own web-based financial management information system (FMIS), which is being finalized with AusAID support. Since all the computerized systems were either put on hold or are still being finalized, the project FM activities were carried out manually. 35. Manual accounting for the central office staff was a challenge because they were understaffed for such a large task. Given the large volume of financial transactions, weak capacity and inadequate staff, the central office was unable to cope with the work load. This led to: (i) delays in meeting loan covenants (i.e. timely submission of financial reports, SBM validation reports or supporting documentation for auditing purposes); (ii) timely liquidation of cash advances; (iii) the absence of physical inventory reports and non-maintenance of Property, Plant and Equipment Ledger Cards in the case of school construction; and (iv) funds having to be returned due to non-compliance with procurement or disbursement rules. In addition, COA re-instituted a selective pre-audit of cash advances and school construction expenditures in 2009, which added to the transaction processing delays. 36. Despite these difficulties, DepEd was able to, after a slow start: (i) significantly increase disbursement levels from 11 percent in March 2008 to 54 percent by November 2009 and 100 percent by project closing; (ii) encode a substantial number of 2004 2010 financial transactions in eNGAS once COA lifted its suspension in 2011; (iii) partially mitigate the staffing issue by using FM staff from the division offices to assist with FM responsibilities; and (iv) by 2011, significantly improve its compliance with time-bound financial statement submissions, submitting all outstanding audit reports and school grant validation reports. Efforts on DepEds part to address COAs comments on the 2007 Agency financial statements led the COA to modify its opinion from adverse to qualified in 2010. While DepEd worked to improve their FM, they were not able to fully address COAs recommendations on FM staffing issues. This, coupled with the overall weak record keeping and the qualified audit for CY2011, resulted in a final project rating of moderately unsatisfactory for financial management. Despite the unresolved staffing issues and MU rating, DepEd still exerted its best effort towards the application deadline date to collate all disbursement documents for submission to the Bank resulting to full disbursement of the loan proceeds. 37. Procurement. Procurement performance of the project is considered satisfactory. Shortly after effectiveness, the project had been able to contract US$26 million for school construction, and conducted a school-mapping exercise to ensure schools are built/rehabilitated in the most critical areas. One of the most remarkable achievements was the use of the principal led approach to construction, where the school principal oversaw progress of classroom construction or rehabilitation.10 This procurement method was consistently rated satisfactory due to the fact that construction was of better quality to other government led construction programs. The approach was so successful that it required an increase of funds allocated to school construction from US$26 million to

    10 Prior to each construction/rehabilitation, DepEd would sign a Statement of Interest with the LGU that established the level and type of contribution to the works (cash or in-kind), and ensured community buy-in.

  • 14

    US$97.5 million in July 2009. By August 2010, all civil works had been completed and dedicated funds disbursed, leading to the rehabilitation of 13,659 classrooms and construction of 4,813 new ones. The project was also able to purchase and distribute approximately 16.5 million textbooks. However, there were delays in procuring some of these books due to the quality/completeness of bidding documents and some books not meeting the required technical specifications (i.e. paper weight, etc.). There were also minor infractions for civil works (i.e. incomplete record keeping, inclusion of small ineligible activities, etc.) but overall, the project carried out its procurement according to the legal agreement and operations manual. 2.5 Post-completion Operation/Next Phase 38. A new lending operation and a series of analytical works are currently being prepared. The Learning, Equity, Accountability Program Support (LEAPS) provides a US$300 million loan to continue to support the gains made under BESRA and NPSBE. LEAPS is expected to: (i) look at ways to improve teaching and learning in early grade reading and math through teacher capacity building, and develop and use mother-tongue based reading and math assessment tools; (ii) strengthen accountability, which is a major part of the SBM approach, especially at the school level while also strengthening DepEds financial management capacity; and (iii) improve program designs targeting disadvantaged groups by expanding the knowledge base on selected programs targeting disadvantaged groups, such as ALS, and improve program design and implementation capabilities. Furthermore, LEAPS will use disbursement-linked indicators, which will reduce the number of required financial transactions and documentation and help with project implementation. 39. A proposed series of analytical works will support the CAS objective of improving access to quality education services. The analysis will be centered around the following strategic pillars: (i) Efficiency and Equity of Education Finance and School Funding, analyzing DepEds education finance policies for more equitable and better quality of service delivery; (ii) Quality of Service Delivery Analysis, which aims to take a comprehensive look at the determinants of effective education service delivery; (iii) School to Work Transition: Skills Demand and Supply in order to shed light on skills gaps/mismatches as well as the strengths and weaknesses of the basic education system; and (iv) Basic Education Reforms Dissemination and Communication. The result of these pieces of analysis is expected to provide DepEd with valuable information and facilitate their efforts to sustain and expand the BESRA goals. 3. Assessment of Outcomes

    3.1 Relevance of Objectives, Design and Implementation 40. Relevance of Objectives. The project development objectives were highly relevant to the countrys sectoral needs when the project was developed. The objectives fit squarely into the governments BESRA, MTPDP and the Banks 2006-2008 CAS. They shared the common objectives of fostering economic growth and promoting social cohesion. Like the 2006-08 CAS, the new CAS (2010-12) also focuses achieving more

  • 15

    inclusive growth by supporting the Philippines increased access to better public services for the poor by deepening the reform agendas in key public services sectors and expanding basic service delivery directly to the poor. The project and BESRA continued to fit into the 2010-2012 CAS objectives. There is a new CAS currently under preparation that is expected to continue the focus on supporting the Philippines reform agendas in key public services sectors. In addition, it is expected that the government will continue its education reform agenda through the BESRA. 41. Relevance of Design. The relevance of the project design is substantial. The project was appropriately aligned with the BESRA PDO and PDO indicators, and it included appropriate activities to assist the government in reaching their reform agenda goals. The mainstreaming of project implementation was also appropriate to foster improved capacity within the system. Furthermore, the project risks and mitigation measures were also appropriate given the government systems in place at the time of design. While the PDO level indicators were appropriate, the targets for the indicators proved to be overly ambitious. The preparation team discussed this issue during the QER however, as indicated earlier, the decision was made to keep the DepEd targets since they were based on the 2000 census and the government made a strong request to keep the project targets the same as the government targets. Achieving the targets year over year presented challenges for the project and it was not until 2011 that targets were revised downward.

    42. Relevance of Implementation. The relevance of project implementation is judged to be substantial. As indicated above, implementation of the majority of project activities was highly successful: SBM has been institutionalized, system-wide monitoring systems are in place and will continue to be expanded, NCBTS has been institutionalized, and MOOE allocations have been institutionalized. The substantial rating is mainly based on the persistent FM implementation issues. While the project was able to disburse 100 percent of the project funds, DepEd still has to produce required FM documentation and reports manually. This is a slow and cumbersome process and the project audit reports reflected these problems. Since DepEd could not resolve these issues in a timely enough way to satisfy the COA audit, they issued a final qualified audit and the project completed with an MU rating for financial management. 3.2 Achievement of Project Development Objectives 43. The overall achievement of the project development objectives is moderately satisfactory. The project contributed to a number of positive outcomes for the Philippines education system. As indicated, the targets were revised downward, which is new information provided at the time of the ICR. Therefore, this section evaluates the outcomes against the results based on the new targets. The project development objective was to improve quality and equity in learning outcomes for all Filipinos in basic education and the PDO level indicators selected to monitor achievement of the PDO were as follows: 44. Elementary participation. The participation rate for 6-11 year increased from the baseline of 88.58 percent in 2003/04 to 97.3 in 2011/12 percent exceeding the revised

  • 16

    target of 90.09 percent. The overall enrollment numbers have also increased from 13 million to 14.4 million from 2003/04 to 2011/12. These are both substantial increases for the system. Although the 2010 census reports a decline in population growth over the period 2000-2010, the increase in enrollments seems to be attributed to the fact that more children of elementary school age are going to school even though population growth has declined. Enrollment increases have also been larger for the poorest households. For example, between 2004 and 2011 attendance rates for 6 to 11 year old children increased by 7.5 percentage points for the poorest 10 percent of households compared to a less than 1 percentage point increase for children in the wealthiest 30 percent of households.11 Increases in enrollment may be attributed to: (i) improvements in the alternative delivery modes which are allowing children, particularly boys, to participate even though they have to work and (ii) the conditional cash transfer (CCT) program that provides resources directly to poor households to enable their children to attend school and avail of health services. The CCT program currently covers children ages 6-14. Cohort survival rate increased from 63.57 in 2003/04 to 73.46 in 2011/12 percent, missing the 2011/12 revised target of 76.46 percent. Although the cohort survival rates did not meet the targets, the rates did improve which implies that the system has been able to sustain a level of quality even under such a rapid expansion. Completion rate increased from 62.06 percent in 2003/04 to 70.96 percent in 2011/12 missing the revised target of 75.13 percent. Again, the completion rates did not meet the targets, but improvements overtime implies that the system has been able to sustain a level of quality even under rapid expansion.12 This is a substantial achievement. The dropout rate has declined from 8.9 percent in 2003/04 to 6.38 percent in 2011/12. While this is an appropriate trend, the original target of 4.3 percent was missed. 45. High school participation. The participation rate for 12-15 years increased from the baseline of 61.16 percent in 2003/04 to 64.8 in 2011/12 percent slightly missing the revised 2011/12 target of 65.16 percent. The overall enrollment numbers for high school have increased from 6.3 million to 7 million between 2003/04 and 2011/12. While these numbers do not mirror the increases in elementary enrollments, there have been some improvements in equity in school attendance between poor and wealthy households. For example, between 2007 and 2011, school attendance among 12-14 (15-18) year olds increased by 5.5 (5.1) percentage points for the poorest 10 percent of households compared to only 1.1 (0.6) percentage points for the wealthiest 10 percent of households (Reyes, Tabuga, Mina and Asis, 2013). However, gaps between older children aged between 15 and 18 widened slightly over the same period. The government continues to

    11 Reyes, Tabuga, Mina and Asis, 2013.

    12 The completion rate in the Philippines is measured by the percentage of first year entrants in a level of education who complete the level in accordance with the required number of years. However, the completion rate formula being used by the Bank and UNESCO, which measures the grade/year level of all completers, shows that elementary completion rates have already reached 91 percent at the elementary level. The achievement of this indicator is attributed to the improvements in the delivery system and the increase in the demand-side interventions to improve participation of children from poor households.

  • 17

    develop policies to try and improve the enrollment numbers. As of 2013, the government is finalizing its policy to extend the CCT program coverage to children up to age 18. This policy change is being made in an effort to provide over-aged children entering the system with the means to continue their education through high school as well as to respond to the additional years of schooling in high school as a result of the implementation of the K-12 program. Cohort survival rate increased from 63.11 percent in 2003/04 to 78.83 in 2011/12 percent barely missing the revised target of 79.35 percent. Completion rate increased from 58.22 percent in 2003/04 to 74.23 percent in 2011/12 again, barely missing the revised target of 74.25 percent. Drop-out decreased from 14.3 percent in 2003/04 to 7.82 percent in 2011/12. Again, this trend is positive. 46. Quality and efficiency. The measure of quality at the elementary level was measured based on the Grade 6 achievement test for mathematics, Filipino, English and science, for both elementary and high school. Table 1: National Achievement test scores, Grade 6 and Year 2

    SY 2003/04 Actual 2011/12 Grade 6 Achievement* 54.66% 66.90% Mathematics 53.66% 66.47% Filipino 61.70% 69.15% English 54.05% 66.27% Science 46.77% 66.11% Hekasi-Social Studies 59.50% 65.97%

    SY 2006/07 Actual 2010/11**Year 2 Achievement* 46.66% 47.93% Mathematics 39.06% 42.00% Filipino 48.91% 58.39% English 51.81% 46.45% Science 42.00% 39.35% Hekasi-Social Studies 51.51% 52.30%

    *The National Education Testing and Research Center test equated to allow valid comparisons across years. **The 2010/11 scores are being used for actuals due to the fact that for SY 2011/12 the high school test was administered to year 4 students. Since 2011/12, the national achievement test has assessed Year 4 high school students instead of Year 2 students. In order to provide a meaningful time trend at the high school level, 2010/11 scores for Year 2 students are compared with 2006/07 test scores.

    47. Test results at the elementary level have shown improvement in all subjects. In the case of high school, test results have shown improvements in mathematics, Filipino, and Hekasi (social science) with some declines in English and science. These improvements are impressive considering the elementary and high school net enrollment rates increased and approximately 2.2 million more children were attending school in 2011 than in 2005. In addition, a large proportion of these children are likely to have come from poorer households where support for education is more limited and factors associated with dropout and repetition more prevalent. This could explain why there was some decline in the English and science test scores. Additional evidence for improved achievement come from the recent SBM impact evaluation, which confirms the

  • 18

    significant and positive impact of SBM on education performance (World Bank and AusAID 2013). The study measured the impact of SBM on learning outcomes by looking at the differences in the roll-out of SBM and associated grants between 2006 and 2009.13 The study found that, over three years, the introduction of SBM and the provision of grants improved scores on the National Achievement Tests (NAT) by 4 to 5 percentage points (approximately 0.25 standard deviations). In that the NPSBE provided considerable support to the roll-out of SBM, this is a significant impact for the project and the BESRA. 48. Project efficiency indicators selected were measured using the inter-quartile ratio of pupil to teachers, using the school as the unit of analysis.14 The inter-quartile ratio for elementary schools decreased from 2.05 in 2003 to 1.95 in 2011 missing the target of 1.50. The inter-quartile ratio for high schools also decreased from 2.53 in 2003 to 2.19 in 2011 missing the target of 2.00. 49. Although the targets were missed, a study estimated that there were 83,000 excess teachers in the basic education system (68,000 at elementary and 15,000 at high school) in 2003/04 (Department of Education, 2005). A follow up study, using 2009/10 data and the same methodology, showed that the number of excess teachers had declined to around 35,512 basic education teachers (Department of Education, 2012). Assuming this had the effect of reducing the need for new teachers by an equivalent amount, this would have reduced the overall salary bill by approximately 10 percent or PHP 12.4 billion.15 While there is no current study available to assess improved distribution of teachers, there is some evidence that suggests that the allocation of the hardship allowance provided for multi-grade teachers has e