Impact Evaluation Study of Post Literacy and Continuing Education for Human Development Project-2 (PLCEHDP-2)

Transcription

1 Impact Evaluation Study of Post Literacy and Continuing Education for Human Development Project-2 (PLCEHDP-2) Evaluation Sector Implementation Monitoring and Evaluation Division Ministry of Planning Government of the Peoples Republic of Bangladesh June 2017

2 Executive Summary The Non Formal Education Project 1, 2 and 3 were the important initiatives of the government in order to provide knowledge to the illiterate people of the country with the support of the development partners. These projects have been implemented through the Non Government Organizations (NGOs). The Non Formal Education Project 4 has been implemented by the district administration, which became very popular as Total Literacy Movement (TLM). From earlier experiences, it has been observed that the neo-literates often fail to remember their acquired knowledge or they could not increase the quality of their literacy status due to these programs. In this situation, it was important to take an action plan to launch new training programs to improve the quality of literacy, create new employment opportunities, and poverty reduction. Due to this reason, Post Literacy Continuing Education and Human Development Project 2 was implemented, with the financial and technical assistants of Asian Development Bank (ADB), throughout 210 Upazilas in 28 Districts (excluding 03 CHT Districts).The project was implemented by the Bureau of Non Formal Education under the Ministry of Primary and Mass Education. The project was implemented at a cost of BD Tk lac during July 2002 to December Empowerments of the rural community, reducing poverty through human development activities, and skill development by implementing different training programs are the long-term goals of this project. This project has been implemented to develop productive labor, targeting dropouts of primary school and post literacy graduates, vocational skills, improve the quality of life, and other life-skills through need based training organized by the continuing education centers. This evaluation has been undertaken to review and evaluate the functioning of this project, especially to review the background, objectives, process of approval/correction, costing, accomplishment period, the source of finance, year wise allocation, project termination process, monitoring mechanisms and to evaluate the total achieving of the project activities based on primary and secondary data. This evaluation used a series of formal and non-formal interviews by employing both quantitative and qualitative research techniques such as Focus Group Discussion, Key Indepth Interviews, Case Studies, Structured Surveys with the beneficiaries, review of secondary data, and inspection of the project areas by the research team. The evaluation also examined the procurement process (goods, construction work and commodities), purchase process (tendering, evaluation, and approval method) and execution of contract, etc. A systematic sampling procedure with probability proportionate to size is applied to this study in selecting and obtaining study subjects. The list of beneficiaries and study centers supplied by the project office helped the study team in this regard. Eighty (80) continuous education centers of 40 Upazilas, out of 209 Upazilas in the project districts, were selected randomly to obtain the study samples. Applying systematic random sampling techniques, 10 beneficiaries from each education centers (5 men and 5 women) has been selected covering 80 centers. Thus, the total survey sample for this evaluation was 800 (400 men and 400 women). Besides, a considerable number of respondents were approached for the qualitative study. Triangulation of quantitative findings was successfully done in this evaluation by crosschecking the qualitative data. As observed, the current status of the project is varied by areas. At present, there are no continuing education centers in the project areas. No training is going on and almost all activities are suspended in the project areas. The training centers had no visible effects to increase vocational skills and new employment opportunities. In some areas, women received Page-i

3 training on tailoring and awareness on some other social discourses was improved. These sorts of improvements were visible throughout the country due to government and other NGO initiatives. The projects had nominal role in this regard. However, most of the beneficiaries perceived that they need those trainings with increased resources and expert trainers. Some of the centers had role in providing support to job seekers, helping the beneficiaries to start new business and refereeing them to trade organizations. However, only about 27% of the beneficiaries were able to get a new job due to their trainings. As observed by the research team, other public and private initiatives were also involved in getting a new job for the center graduates. The project itself had no job referral system for their graduates. This evaluation revealed that due to project activities, there has been a slight change in the professions of the beneficiaries and, this achievement is very negligible if we compare the cost of this project. As observed by the beneficiaries, they were encouraged to use hygienic toilets and drink pure water due to sensitization sessions of the continuing education centers. However, these are not the major objectives of this project and this sort of awareness is visible throughout the country due to concerted efforts of the government and other development partners. Similarly, except some electronic goods, the situation of family wealth of the beneficiaries remained almost static. In some areas, beneficiaries had slightly increased skills only in 1/2 trades - mostly in tailoring and gardening. However, as beneficiaries opined, they did not see any skilled trainers and there was not enough furniture or educational materials in the centers. As a result, although they received some training, they often failed to become self-efficacious in working outside or doing their own business. Only 33% of the beneficiaries said that the training received from the project had played a moderate role in changing the quality of their lives. An overwhelming majority of beneficiaries (60%) said the training had no effect in changing their standard of living. This happened, mostly, due to the lack of need-based of trade courses and lack of expert trainers and financial resources. In response to a question on the causes of not creating employment, 80% of the beneficiaries replied that they lacked money, 78% did not receive any loans, and 60% opined that they did not receive any cooperation from the project staff. One of the major problems of implementation of the project was that the selection of 29 implementing NGOs was not properly done. Most of these NGOs were inexperienced and lacked proper staff. There was a lack of adequate training materials and efficient trainers. Besides, there was serious shortage of adequate BNFE education staff at Upazila levels to supervise the project activities. The salary of the field level facilitators and supervisors was insufficient and they did not receive the salary in time. As a result, the project activities were disturbed. Due to shortage of quality instructors and huge cost, it was not possible for the male participants to receive trainings on their preferred trades. Implementing NGOs were reluctant and the BNFE and other donors were idiosyncratic in this regard. There should be liaison cell, after the project, so that beneficiaries could join new employments. There should be an increased monitoring mechanism on the project activities. FDR money should be taken back to government treasury, as they remained unused. The centers were not sustainable as they were not built on government land and the allocation was very low. This issue should be under consideration in future project. Otherwise, huge amount of money could be wasted again. Project design should include the possibilities of avoiding delay and make it sustainable. There should be incentive to involve people with the project. There should be external and internal audit and any financial irregularities should be Page-ii

4 settled quickly by informing the IMED. Measures should be taken to settle any objection during the project period in future. Training unit of the Bureau of Non Formal education should be more active in future. District and Upazila level officials should be involved more in the project implementation. Project officials should follow PPR 2008 properly in the procurement of product, service and construction work. In future, PPR 2008 should be followed strictly to select NGOs and make a strong committee with the representative of planning commission/ IMED. The activities of implementing NGOs were questionable. There should be accountability for their activities. There should be more monitoring with cooperation of ministry/bureau or other government institute. There was no coordination between the directorate and implementing NGOs. It was necessary to ensure the accountability of the Center Management Committee (CMC) and implementation NGOs. It was a wrong decision to choose 29 NGOs district wise. As a result, some inexperienced NGOs were selected. In future, experienced NGOs should be selected based on strict criteria. It was a complete wastage of money to conduct baseline tracer survey with the implementing NGOs. Any baseline survey should be conducted by independent organizations. As the Bureau of Non Formal Education has not enough human resources at district and Upazila level, local government should be involved with the CEC centers and they should be asked to build and repair the center structures. The project had no significant impact on the beneficiaries. As this evaluation report revealed, there was a little change in the employment situation in the project areas due to project implementation. However, beneficiaries were encouraged to use sanitary latrine and safe drinking water due to CEC training, though this was not the direct objective of the project. These sorts of changes are common all over the country due to government and NGO initiatives. Social awareness was increased on some issues under indirect activities, but the project has no sustainability in creating employment, make the beneficiaries self-sufficient and in reducing poverty in absence of targeted activities in the project areas. Page-iii

5 DTCL DEVELOPMENT TECHNICAL CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD. (DTCL) House # 62, Road # 14/1, Block # G, Niketon Gulshan-1, Dhaka-1212, Bangladesh Phone: , ; Fax: info@dtcltd.org; Website: