Summary of Terminal Evaluation
1. Outline of the ProjectCountry: Republic of Indonesia

Project title: Program for Enhancing Quality of Junior
Secondary Education (PELITA-SMP/MTs)

Issue/Sector: Education

Cooperation scheme: Technical Cooperation

Division in charge: JICA Indonesia OfficeTotal cost (as of the evaluation) : About 800 million yen

Period of
Cooperation

Partner Country’s implementing organization:
Ministry of Education and Culture (MOEC)
Ministry of Religious Affaires (MORA)

15 March 2009 – 14 March2013 (4 years)

Supporting Organization in Japan: International
Development Center of Japan (IDCJ)
1-1. Background of the ProjectIn the Republic of Indonesia, since the Decentralization law was put into effect in 2001, educational
administration is also decentralized in order to enhance response to local needs. Moreover, school
management has been enhanced to meet diverse needs of schools. In reality, however, local governments aswell as individual schools still lack capability to analyze and solve their own problems by themselves.
Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) has cooperated with the government of Indonesia since1998 on developing models on participatory school-based management (PSBM)7 and Lesson Study (LS)8,and implementation of the developed models at district level9. These models aimed at enhancing capabilityof local governments and school management by various stake holders such as educational administrators,
school principals, teachers, parents, and community as well as at enhancing schools’ capability throughenhancing teachers’ capability to improve their lessons. Through implementation of these models,
improvement of school management and enhancement of quality of education in the target sites, such as
improved communication among educational stakeholders, strengthened commitment from school principals
and teachers, improved lessons, and improved motivation and understanding of students on lessons, havebeen widely observed.
The Government of Indonesia has been entangling to improve relevance and reliability of educational
administration and school management and to enhance the quality of education though enhancing thecapacity to cope with local needs. Under this circumstance, the Government of Indonesia has submitted arequest to the Government of Japan for a technical cooperation project to institutionalize and disseminate themodels, which were developed through JICA’s past cooperation, nation-wide as good practices to improve
quality in education through developing functional structure at national and sub-national levels.
In response to the above request, Program for Enhancing Quality of Junior Secondary Education(PELITA-MP/MTs) was implemented by Ministry of National Education (MONE) /Ministry of Education

7
8

9

PSBM intends to strengthen school-based management responsive to the local and school needs with parents and community participation.
LS aims to aid the professional development of teachers to learn from each other based on real practices in a classroom through the process of
PLAN (designing a lesson), DO (conducting a lesson and colleagues observe the lesson) and SEE (reflecting the observed lesson).
Regional Education Development and Improvement Program (REDIP-1: 1999-2001), (REDIP-2: 2001-2005), (REDIP-3: 2004-2008), Projectfor Development of Science and Mathematics Teaching for Primary and Secondary Education (IMSTEP: 1998-2003), (Follow-up: 2003-2005),
Strengthening In-Service Teacher Training of Mathematics and Science Education at Junior Secondary Level (SISTTEMS: 2006-2008)ix

and Culture (MOEC)10 and Ministry of Religious Affairs (MORA) which holds jurisdiction over Islamic
junior secondary schools, as counterpart organizations from March 2009 to March 2013.
1-2. Program Overview
The Program is aimed at supporting MOEC and MORA to disseminate PSBM and LS nationwide, as well as
supporting the six districts and three cities in seven provinces to introduce either of them.
(1) Overall Goal
Quality of junior secondary education is enhanced through lesson study (LS) and participatory school-based
management (PSBM) extensively in the nation.
(2) Program Purpose
The capacity of central and local governments 11 for implementing LS and PSBM nation-wide isstrengthened.
(3) Outputs
1. At the national level<Output 1-1>The capacity of MONE and MORA is developed for implementing its policy to introduce LS
nation-wide.
Output 1-2:	The capacity of LPMPs and Balai Diklat is developed for conducting training on LS.
Output 1-3:	The capacity of MONE is developed for introducing essence of PSBM to national program.
2. At the reference and target sites
Output 2-1:	At the LS reference sites, a showcase of LS practice is developed.
Output 2-2:	At the LS new target sites, a showcase of MGMP-based LS implementation mechanism isdeveloped.
Output 2-3:	At the PSBM reference sites, the capacity of the local governments is developed for PSBM with
their own resources.
(4) Inputs (at the time of evaluation)
Japanese side: Total input: About 799 million JY● Experts: 12experts, 129.6MM (inclusive of remaining period of the program )● Training in Japan: 85 participants● Operational cost: JY350 Million JY (inclusive of costs for equipment)● Equipment: 8 Million JY (PCs, A-V devices and office machineries)
Indonesian side:● Assignment of counterpart (No. of major organizations) : 28 organizations● Office and facilities: an office at MOEC building with necessary facilities● Operational cost: IDR16,943.6 million

10
11

MONE was reorganized to MOEC in 2011.
"Local governments" means provinces, districts and cities.

x2. Evaluation Team

MemberLeaderMr. Takaaki OIWA

Senior Representative, JICA Indonesia Office

Education Planning

Dr. Keiko MIZUNO

Senior Advisor, JICA HQs

Cooperation Planning

Mr. Naoaki MIYATA

Representative, JICA Indonesia OfficeEvaluation Analysis

Ms. Yuko OGINO

Senior Consultant, KRI International Corp.

Period of Evaluation

21 October ～ 10 November 2012

Type of Evaluation: Terminal Evaluation

3-1. Project Performance(1) Outputs
Output 1-1 is mostly achieved. LS dissemination strategies are developed by MOEC and MORA; guideline
was also developed; dissemination is already in place; joint monitoring of MOEC and MORA was
conducted once only but efforts appreciated including regular MOEC-MORA joint coordination meetings.
Output 1-2 is mostly achieved. Human resources of the institutions at provincial level mainly LPMPs, Balai
Diklat have been developed; budget size was not confirmed but implementation status of training including
development/utilization of training modules is confirmed in PELITA sites; implementation is not confirmedin non-PELITA sites but assumed through national dissemination programs and others.
Output 1-3 is mostly achieved. Essence of PSBM12 are reflected into national program (School Operational
Assistance: BOS); the PDM indicator is deleted due to situational change.
Output 2-1 is achieved. All the LS reference sites developed strategies; human resources for dissemination/
resource persons have been developed with progressing dissemination efforts; the target number of School
based Lesson Study (LSBS) reference schools are mostly met.
Output 2-2 is mostly achieved. All the LS new target sites developed strategies and secured budget for
MGMP-based LS; monitoring by LPMP/universities varied by site, but at least 2 subjects are functioning
and well implemented in MGMPs.
Output 2-3 is mostly achieved. All the PSBM reference sites developed own guidelines and are utilizing
them; block grants to selected MTs also started by MORA; the reference sites secured their own budget(block grant) for Kecamatan (Sub-district) Education Development Team (TPK) activities, but not to schools
which is not a must in light of the essence/wider interpretation of PSBM.
(2) Program Purpose
Program Purpose is mostly achieved. At national level, both LS and PSBM (in a wider interpretation) areincorporated into the national programs (e.g. Novice Teacher Induction Program (Decree No. 27) , inclusionof LS into a standard curriculum of Central and Regional Training Centers of MORA, and BOS; atprovincial level (33 provinces) , human resources as dissemination force of national policies are developed
and conducting training/dissemination activities; at district/city level, LS and PSBM are implemented
and disseminated in PELITA sites very actively and expected in non-PELITA sites as well through TOTparticipants and in line with the national program implementation. Although comprehensive data about
the implementation status in non-PELITA sites both at provincial and district levels is not available, it isassumed that human recourses developed are performing following the national dissemination programs

12

The Team made an assessment of PSBM based on the genuine/wider interpretation but not on formality of Kecamatan (Sub-district) Education
Development Team (TPK) or block grant in the whole Terminal Evaluation exercise.

xi

on the ground. As a result, the capacity of central and local governments for implementing LS and PSBM
nation-wide is considered to be strengthened.
3-2. Summary of Evaluation Results(1) Relevance: High
1) Consistency with Indonesian Needs and Policies●	The Program is firmly consistent with National Medium Term Development Plan (RPJMN: 20102014) effective in February 2010 placing education as one of the eleven priority areas. MOEC National
Educational Development Strategic Plan (RENSTRA: 2010-2014) also emphasizes improving
educational quality and relevance as one of the 5 missions.
●	Consistency with the Indonesian policies as well as responding to the needs of the target groups is highly
evident as LS is institutionalized in the national policies such as Novice Teacher Induction Program(Decree No. 27) and inclusion into standard curriculum of MORA’s central and regional training
centers. Dynamic teacher upgrading reforms currently undertaking in Indonesia is very conducive todisseminating LS nation-wide as an effective means to continuous professional development of teachers.
●	In addition, PSBM stands in line with the context of decentralization as PSBM conforms to local andschool needs. Essence of PSBM is reflected into a national program of BOS.
2) Consistency with Japanese Policies●	In addition to the Japanese policy to assist reducing internal disparities in Indonesia, the Program isconsistent with Japanese global policy on educational assistance which focuses on quality improvement.
The case of assistance to Indonesia is regarded as a leading one.
3) Appropriateness of approach●	The approach of the Program has mostly been appropriate and effective in view of optimum utilizationof experiences of precedent projects, demonstrating synergy effects of LS and PSBM, effective exit
strategies such as developing reference sites/show cases and other financial and human resource
development as well as utilizing existing training mechanism. On top of the Novice Teacher Induction
Program and BOS, synergy effects with good coordination with relevant projects/programs includingones assisted by World Bank and Asian Development Bank have also been witnessed. Japanese technicalcomparative advantages particularly in relation to LS are highly appreciated by Indonesia.
●	However, “essence of PSBM” should have been well articulated in the nation-wide dissemination modelwith wider/genuine interpretation, which does not necessarily require “TPK” nor “block grant”.
(2) Effectiveness: High●	Program Purpose is mostly achieved as mentioned earlier. Regarding important assumptions, there havebeen some cases of personnel reshuffle within the national and subnational governments but did notaffect the legitimacy of the program.
●	At school level, there are some cases that frequent change of principals due to government rotational
policy hampered the progress of LS and PSBM. As a significant contributing factor on the other hand isstrong commitment and active participation of Indonesia University of Education (UPI) , University of
Malan (UM) and other universities. Another major factor beneficial to the Program is the achievements
brought by the long history of Japan-Indonesia collaboration through the precedent projects.

xii

(3) Efficiency: Medium●	All the Outputs 1 and Outputs 2 are mostly achieved by implementation of planned activities, leading
to an attainment of Program Purpose. All the inputs from Japanese and Indonesian sides have also beenmostly appropriate in terms of quantity, quality and timing. They are efficiently utilized to produce
Outputs as planned.
●	As mentioned earlier, the Program fully utilized experiences and resources developed through theprecedent projects, and adopted an approach of utilizing existing training mechanism, which all increased
efficiency of the Program.
●	However, Japanese budget was increased by 140 million yen from the original estimates (660 to 800
million yen) for strengthening reference/target sites to be able to function as model/showcase. The budget
increase is a factor affecting the judgment of efficiency as “medium”.
(4) Impact: High●	Overall Goal of “quality of junior secondary education is enhanced through LS and PSBM extensively inthe nation” is likely to be achieved. UN pass rates, one of the PDM 4 indicators of Overall Goal, alreadyachieved more than 99 ％ . In addition, there are improvements in teaching-learning process according
to the endline-survey results. In order to ensure to achieve the Overall Goal, it is critical to continue
the national programs with quality assured. At the same time, in assessing the cause-effect relationshipbetween the Program and Overall Goal in post-program evaluation, the indicators are proposed to berevised.
●	There are number of positive impacts observed such as establishing LS association by resource/partner
universities, LS clubs, hosting visits and training from world-wide such as Ethiopia and etc., a proposal
for group training on LS in Japan with cost sharing by Directorate General of Higher Education (DGHE), and many more.
(5) Sustainability: High●	On the policy and institutional aspect, both LS and PSBM are institutionalized in the national programs
such as the Decree No. 27 of Novice Teacher Induction Program, the standardized training curriculum of
MORA’s training institutions and BOS.
●	On the organizational and technical aspect, human resources for dissemination have been developed
at various levels, and dissemination mechanism is embedded in the Program. It is expected to further
strengthen human resources by the Indonesian side for nation-wide dissemination in terms of quantityand quality.
●	On the financial aspect, currently already LS and PSBM are implemented or disseminated basicallywith Indonesian own resources. Moreover, since LS and PSBM are all institutionalized and aligned into
national programs, there is a solid expectation for budget appropriation from the government.
3-3. Factors contributing to the progress of the Program(1) Factors related to planning●	The Program has made significant achievements because it has a high consistency with thecomprehensive teacher upgrading reforms currently undertaking in Indonesia. LS has been
institutionalized in the national policy in line with the reforms as means to promote mutual learning andprofessional development by teachers.

xiii

●	The design of the Program to utilize the past achievements, experiences and resources cultivated in theprecedent projects has contributed considerably to increasing efficiency and effectiveness. Long historyof Japan-Indonesia collaboration has brought in an institutionalization of LS and PSBM as national
policies. The past efforts have provided a solid basis for effective capacity development of the reference
sites to be able to function as “show case”.
●	The Program approach of utilization of existing training systems, development of resource persons andlocal facilitators (mainly principals and teachers) , and financing from the Indonesian budget has all
contributed to securing sustainability.
(2) Factors related to implementation process●	Professional support from the 6 resource/partner universities in LS dissemination is a significant
contributing factor. They have a strong commitment in LS dissemination together with the activities
related to the competitive grants from Directorate General of Higher Education (DGHE) .
3-4. Issues/possible factors affecting the progress of the Program(1) Issues/factors related to planning●	Mechanism to track the progress in accordance with PDM indicators particularly the status in nonprogram sites was not properly installed in the Program and therefore the monitoring in line with PDM isnot sufficiently done. In addition, the some definitions of Outputs, Program Purpose and their respective
indicators are not clear, and common understanding among all the stakeholders about the PDM is not
sufficient.
●	There is a clear separation with regards to C/P organizations for LS and PSBM. For LS, Center for
Education Personnel Development that Chief Program Manager belongs to is the only C/P for LS. Suchcompartmentalized educational administration might have impeded a full collaboration with Directorate
General of Basic Education (DGBE) which is a C/P of PSBM but should have been more involved in LS
as well.
(2) Issues/factors related to implementation process●	The Program has advocated TPK, block grant and cooperation of SMP and MTs as the 3 fundamental
elements of PSBM. However, TPK is a newly created unit and not in place in the existing administrative
structure. Therefore, its organizational sustainability as well as allocation of government budget
cannot be guaranteed. Block grant may not be an essential element any longer because BOS has been
implemented at school level. In this situation, the message of promoting the critical essence of PSBM asa model for nation-wide dissemination should have been much stronger than promoting the formality of
TPK and block grant.
●	Personnel reshuffles due to reorganization of MOEC in 2011 and the frequent personnel changes
observed in some Program sites have affected the smooth implementation of the Program to a certain
degree.
3-5 Conclusions
In summary, the Program has demonstrated a good achievement in terms of 5 evaluation criteria;“relevance”, “effectiveness”, “impact” and “sustainability” are considered to be “high” with only efficiency
as “medium”. The Team concludes that the objective of the Program has been mostly achieved to adapt

xivthe approaches and core essence of PSBM and LS to education reforms taking place in Indonesia, and theProgram will terminate as planned.
3-6 Recommendations(1) Ensuring the quality of Induction Program to be launched by PUSBANG-TENDIKThe success of Induction Program totally depends on the depth of knowledge and insight of “local
mentors” which are desired to be further cultivated through actual practice and thus Induction Program andcapacity development of supervisors, principals and senior teachers need to be approached hand in hand. In
this respect, increasing and strengthening the capacity of resource persons as well as field facilitators is to
be ensured so that a sufficient number of professionals will be able to support the dissemination at national,
provincial and district levels as well as to facilitate the actual implementation at sub-district (MGMP) andschool levels. In this regard, the followings are suggested:●	PUSBANG-TENDIK to share the relevant information on the current situation and progress of Induction
Program with the Expert to discuss and come up with HRD strategies and ideas about a feasible
monitoring/follow up mechanism.
●	The terminal report of PELITA to include the outline of HRD strategies, a mid-term implementation
plan, and a monitoring/feed-back mechanism to be installed for Induction Program as the result of thesaid discussions. The mid-term implementation plan may include qualitative as well as quantitative
information describing the Indonesian overall human resource development prospect for disseminationand implementation of LS in a consolidated manner so as to clearly illustrate the present level ofcontribution and achievement by the Program in such an overall picture. The format can comprise charts
and tables.
●	Resource persons from LPTKs to be invited to the discussions for the purpose of identifying andensuring the necessary technical support from the partner and resource universities of PELITA in the
HRD implementation plan.
(2) Utilizing reference sites more strategically for effective dissemination
It is expected the central ministries (MOEC and MORA) take more proactive role in introducing
good practices and reference sites of LS and PSBM in an integrated manner to facilitate interactive
communication among provincial offices. In this context the Team recommends the following:●	The Experts to provide the comprehensive information on experiences accumulated through the Programto DGBE, OHRDECQAE and MORA including both aspects of LS and PSBM so that they become moresensitized to the different outputs achieved on the ground.
●	MOEC and MORA in collaboration with the Experts to effectively and efficiently utilize their existing
communication and coordination channels with provincial level (periodical coordination meetings, etc.)
to disseminate a variety of good practices.
●	The case of West Java to be socialized as a good practice of establishing a functional coordinating
mechanism among different stakeholders with strong commitment and leadership by provincial officeand the partner university namely UPI backed by MOU. A team of relevant stakeholders should be
invited to such an occasion so that provinces can gain direct knowledge from the case.
●	Before the termination of the Program, the list of resource persons to be updated and shared with thecentral ministries for their further dissemination to the provincial level.

xv

(3)	Expanding and strengthening resource persons to meet up with an expected increasing demand
for the nationwide dissemination.
LPTKs as well as training institutes under MOEC and MORA are expected to play an important role inproviding resource persons. In this respect the following needs to be considered:●	Clear orientation to be given by the central ministries (MOEC, MORA) to their training institutes that
periodic participation of their instructors in MGMP LS need to be ensured as their prioritized task.
●	Commitment and professional leadership of higher authorities of LPTKs to be promoted in order toensure the participation of their relevant instructors in MGMP LS. In this regard it is suggested that
instructors put further efforts to convince the authorities of the merit of participating in MGMP, forexample, demonstrating the impact of LS on the students’ learning outcomes, etc.
●	Strong linkage with the Group Training on Lesson Study in Japan requested by DGHE underconsideration of the government of Japan to be explicitly emphasized when recruiting/selecting thecandidates so as to promote an institutional incentive of the participating universities to demonstrating
their strong commitment and leadership in the nationwide LS dissemination.
●	DGHE to explore the possibility to provide financial support to recently launched Indonesian Association
for Lesson Study so that it can start functioning as a professional body to pull the dissemination andimplementation of LS forward.
(4) Re-examination of indicators for overall goal and data consolidation
The following are recommended in order to assess the achievement of the overall goal in the post-program
evaluation appropriately.
●	Discussions should be held between the Program/Expert and JICA to re-identify and decide whichindicators to be added for overall goal to measure the level of achievement for dissemination, by the endof the Program.
●	Additional data as a baseline information aligning to indicators for overall goal, namely rates of drop-out
and repetition after the beginning of the program from the target schools (e.g. core schools recognized by
the Experts) or the target districts need to be consolidated to appropriately demonstrate the direct impactsof the Program on improving quality of education.
3-7. Lessons(1)	Strong commitment of principal backed up by local education administration is a key to success of LS tofunction as continuous teacher professional development. and thus synergic efforts of school /education
management and LS is indispensable. Additionally, ensuring professional support from teacher education
universities shall significantly contribute to the enhancement of quality and thus meaningfulness of LS.
(2)	When pursuing sustainability of the “model”, the implementer needs to be careful and clear about what tobe sustained. The case presented here tells us that it is difficult to bring in new system such as “TPK” in arigid manner. Optimal utilization of existing schemes and mechanisms needs to be prioritized rather thanestablishing new ones, and more attention needs to be given to the enhancement of the already existing
schemes and mechanism rather than being strict about “formality”.
(3)	Enhancement of quality has formed a part of ultimate goals (overall goal) by not only the Program but
also the former programs namely REDIP and SISTTEMS. However, all of them has faced the challengexvi

of demonstrating quality improvement in an objective and tangible manner since it usually requires
long term process for educational interventions to induce improvement in academic outcomes and muchemphasis has been given to “process “ rather than “results”. However, we need to be more mindful of
ultimate quality goals and relevant indicators need to be monitored and any changes should be tracked.

xvii