終了時評価調査結果要約票（英文）I. Outline of the Project
Project Title: Support for Improvement of PrimaryCountry:

Nepal

Issue/Sector:

Basic Education

School Management
Cooperation Scheme: Technical Cooperation Project
Total cost (as of the time of evaluation):

Divisionin Charge:

234,686 thousand yen

Basic Education Team I, Group I(BasicEducation),

Human Partner Country’s Implementing Organization:

Development Department

Departmentof Education (DOE),

Ministry of

Education (MOE)thCooperation
Period(R/D):17 of October, 2007

Supporting Organization in Japan:

Three years

JICA in collaboration with International Development(February 2008~February 2011)

Center of Japan

Related Cooperation:
1

Background of the Project

The Government of Nepal (GON) has committed to provide a basic education for all children of Nepal.
This commitment is evidenced by the development of the National Plan of Action for Education for All(2001-2015) under which EFA program (2004-2009) was formulated and the program is followed by
School Sector Reform Plan (SSRP) from 2009-2015.
The School Improvement Plan (SIP) is an important instrument of EFA Program, providing mechanism
to strengthen school-based management and community participation. The Government, however,recognizes that SIP has produced little expected results due to inadequate capacity at the school and thecommunity level, while appropriate budget allocation for school improvement based on education dataand education plan is fully not in place due to limited administrative capacity at the district and schoollevel. In addition, while decentralization is an opportunity, it has increased the disparity among theschools and communities, which has impeded the improvement in the enrollment rates and the dropout
rates of the primary schools.
Under these circumstances, GON requested the Government of Japan (GOJ) for a technical cooperation
to develop the capacity in the school management and in the education management at the district level
in Nepal. In response to this official request, the GOJ decided to conduct “the Support for Improvementof Primary School Management” in accordance with the results of discussions with the authorities
concerned of GON.
After the Preliminary Study of the Project in April and July 2007 conducted by JICA, the minutes of themeeting was signed on August 3rd by the Ministry of Education and Sports (MOES, now renamed as
Ministry of Education: MOE) and JICA, followed by the record of discussions (R/D) that constitutes theagreement of the Project signed on October 17th 2007. Upon this agreement, JICA commenced thethree-year technical cooperation project for the duration of 36 months from 26th February 2008 to 25th
February 2011.

2 Project Overview(1) Overall Goal
The enrolment rate and dropout rate of primary school in the target areas are improved.
(2) Project Purpose
School management is improved with community participation and with government support in the target
area.
(3) Outputs of the ProjectOutput 1
The capacity of School Management Committee (SMC) to manage school by community participation is
improved.
Output 2
The capacity of District Education Office (DEO), District Development Committee (DDC), Village
Development Committee (VDC) to technically and financially support school-based management is
improved.
Output 3
Policy options to suggest measures to be taken by MOE/Department of Education(DOE) to achieve
minimum quality in education nationwide are developed.
(4)Inputs
Japanese side：
Experts

Seven in total, 56.69M/M Equipment about 56.2Million Yen

Trainees received

Seven

Local cost

about 4.3 Million Yen

Technical Exchange Six
Nepalese Side：Counterpart

Sixteen in total

Office space and Utilities provided

Local Cost (Training Cost) about 1.45 Million Rp.(1.2 Million Yen)
II．Evaluation TeamMr. Hiroyasu Tonokawa

Leader, JICA

Members of

Ms. Chie Tsubone

Evaluation Analysis, Global Link Management

the evaluation teamMs. Chie Ezaki

Cooperation Planning I, JICA

Evaluation Period

Ms. Maiko Takeuchi
Cooperation Planning II, JICA
Mr. Krishna Lamsal
Mission Coordination, JICA
7 Nov. 2010 – 19 Nov. 2010
Type of Evaluation: Terminal Evaluation(Consultant: 26 Oct. – 19 Nov. 2010)

III. Results of Evaluation
1 Summary of Evaluation Results(1) Relevance
Relevance is high.

・ The Project is in line with the School Sector Reform Plan (SSRP) (2009-2015), a national strategicplan for basic and secondary education in Nepal, raises improving school-based management
through empowerment of SMC by linking with local government and PTA/community as one of thestrategies to achieve the goal of ensuring equitable access to quality education.
・ The Project is also in line with the Japanese aid policy for Nepal. Assistance to basic education was
categorized within poverty alleviation in rural regions based on the perspective that basic education
is an important basic social service which contributes to poverty reduction.
・ The target districts were selected considering access from Kathmandu, basically for the purpose of
frequent monitoring and support from the centre, and other JICA projects and SSRP program. Also,
selecting two districts with different characteristics was relevant in terms of comparing the results,
and developing a nationwide plan in future.
・ The Project is in line with the needs of: DEO, SS and RP, which have needs to develop their skills to
support SMC through providing effective training and monitoring; DEO, DDC and VDC which haveneeds to develop DEP and VEP reflecting SIP; SMC which has needs to develop their capacities toprepare realistic SIP which reflects community needs and implement it together with PTA andcommunity people, and PTA and community which have needs to improve their school so thatchildren can receive quality education.
(2) Effectiveness

The Project approach was effective to achieve the Project Purpose.
・ As most of the indicators are achieved, and many improvements at the school level were observed,
the prospective to achieve the Project Purpose is high, and the effectiveness of the project is verified.
・ By providing intensive and systematic training in participatory and practical manner followed byclose monitoring and follow-up activities, capacity development at the local level was ensured.
・ The training procedure developed by the Project was packaged into the Trainer’s Guide, which has
been distributed to all the 75 districts. It is appreciated by the districts as a practical guideline.
・ Community mobilization activities conducted by the two partner NGOs were effective in ensuring
effects at the community level.
・ As for the coordination among DEO, DDC and VDC, it did not function effectively.
(3) Efficiency

Efficiency is relatively high.
・ Most of the project activities were implemented as planned.
・ The Project implemented a number of activities to produce steady Outputs. As a result, not only
stakeholders in pilot VDCs, but also RPs and SMCs in non-pilot VDCs were trained and benefitted
from the Project. Moreover, student representatives at Lower Secondary School (LSS) andSecondary School (SS) were trained as many pilot schools have affiliated LSS and SS.
・ Regarding training in Japan and in the third country, the effects produced by the input could havebeen maximized if counterparts who are more directly involved in the Project had participated in the
training.
・ The Project was able to utilize existing resources of the Nepal side, which include SMC and SIP
system, EMIS data, staff at DoE and MoE as resource persons in DEP workshop, and experiences ofpartner NGOs.
・ Regarding coordination with other development partners, experiences and materials of Save theChildren and World Education in their SMC/SIP related programs were shared. As for coordination
with other schemes, information sharing with JOCVs, CASP and SHNP was made.
(4) Impact (Prospect)
Impact is observed to some extent and can be expected in future with MoE’s continuous initiative.
・ The signs to achieve the goal are observed.
・ Some positive impacts are observed. Firstly, the schools in non-pilot VDCs benefit from the Project,planning to or already having been able to improve their SIP. Secondly, Training Guide developed by
the Project was printed and distributed nation-wide. It is evaluated highly from other districts as apractical guide. Thirdly, PTA, Child Club and Mothers Group were activated. Activation of these
SMC/school-affiliated groups helped to reinforce community participation in school improvement.
Lastly, students at higher level (L.S.S, S.S.) benefited from the Project as well, and participate in
implementation of activities planned in SIP.
(5) Sustainability (Prospect)
Sustainability can be expected if appropriate budget is ensured, and MoE/DoE mainstream the modeland the process in the existing system.
・ The policy to promote school management with community participation and capacity developmentof SMC will continue as stipulated in SSRP.
・ Policy and budgetary sustainability will be ensured if the project approach is integrated into SSRP
and Capacity Development Plan. In terms of budget, utilization of RC fund could be one option.
・ The project implementation system will be continued because the Project utilized existing
government system such as DEO, SS, RC, RP, SMC, SIP and PTA. However, continuing contract
with NGO will be difficult.
・ In DoE, the school management and SIP activities are coordinated by the School Management
Section, while the DEP and VEP are coordinated by the Program and Budget section. Therefore, it isimportant to establish sustainable coordination within DoE to sustain and scale-up the ongoing
efforts.
・ Participation of VDC and DDC in the Project was not satisfactory. Iit may be difficult to expect
sufficient involvement of VDC and DDC in future as well unless some kind of coordination is madebetween MoE and MoLD.
・ Since many VDC secretary posts, and some SS/RP posts are vacant, it is necessary to fulfill the posts
to continue and scale up activities.

・ It is important to develop a system to retain institutional memory in case of transfer and assignmentof new personnel.
・ Capacities of DoE, DEO, SS, RP, VDC, and SMC were developed enough to continue theimplementation of the activities. It is essential to secure monitoring budget for RPs to act ascommunity mobilizer to some extent in order to sustain and spread the effects produced by the
Project.
2. Factors that promoted realization of effects(1) Factors concerning to Planning・Utilization of existing system and tool such as SMC and SIP(2) Factors concerning to the Implementation Process

・Close assistance and mobilization at the community /school level
3. Factors that impeded realization of effects(1) Factors concerning to Planning

・Difference of supervising ministries between DEO and DDC/VDC(2) Factors concerning to the Implementation Process

・Political transition in Nepal
4. Conclusion

The Project presented the effective approaches and measures to plan and implement the
improvement of school management by mobilizing SMCs, communities, parents and children in order toenhance the effects of the Government Policy that promotes the improvement of school management bycommunities themselves, which has been the core agenda for the decade.
For this purpose, it was found out that the central government should not only disseminate thepolicy but also provide the necessary capacity development at district and school level in order toenhance the effectiveness of its policy.
As a result, in the target areas of the Project, the terminal evaluation team confirmed that the school
management has been steadily improved with community participation and with government support
which is the Project Purpose. It is widely observed that SIP is a minimum requirement to be submitted to
get the Grant from the Government and is formulated by the specific people such as Head teachers.
However in the target areas, SIP functions as an active instrument for the communities to understand thereal situation of their own schools and makes them consider how they could contribute to the school
without enough budget, which drove the communities to take actions by themselves for better school
management in many pilot schools.
On the other hand, because of the political transition , it makes difficult to fully function thedecentralization. Due to this situation, it is still difficult to link SIP, VEP and DEP and for the community
to access to the fund to be released by DDCs and VDCs.
Therefore, to make the school management with the participation of the community fullyfunctional, the external factors should be met. However, the measures to enable the outcomes gained
from the Project sustainable, namely, appropriate monitoring and follow-up by the education
administration would maximize the outcomes of the Project when the appropriate environment would bein place in the future.
In spite of the constraining factors beyond the Project as mentioned above, good relationship andtrust established among MoE/DoE/DEO, Japanese Experts, Partner NGOs and Project staff, and their
responsible attitudes led to the achievements at the satisfactory level. The Team respects for the efforts
made by them on this occasion.
The Team is sure that the outcomes presented by the Project would contribute to the effective andefficient implementation of the SSRP initiated by the Nepalese Government.

The team could observe

the impact such as MoE already distributed nationwide the Teaching Guide for SMC/PTA training
developed by the Project and held the dissemination workshop in several regions. Also the Project
Director expresses his strong will to spread out the outcomes of the Project in the other districts.
While there are some issues remained for further consideration as mentioned in the next section, it
is expected that the outcomes and challenges of the Project should be shared among MoE as well as
various stakeholders like development partners and NGOs, and collaboration mechanism should be inplace for attaining the common goal presented in SSRP, which expects to enable the Nepalese
Government to reform the education sector by its own hand.
5. Recommendations【Recommendations to be implemented during the Project Period】(1) Full implementation of the activities in the remaining period of the Project
It is recommended that following activities planned during the Project should be fully implemented.
1) Output 1: Feed back of the Result of Evaluation Study to the Field Level
During the exercise of the terminal evaluation study, some school requested that the result of thesurvey should be shared with them. As pointed out by the school, it is important that the Project
members would feedback the result of the survey in response to the information each school has
provided. It could be also expected that effective utilization of the result of the survey could encouragethem and enhance their activities for school improvement furthermore.
2) Output 1: Follow up of Non-Pilot Schools
The Project supported the training of the non-pilot schools as a part of the national SMC/PTA
training program initiated by MoE. In the terminal evaluation exercise, it was confirmed that awarenessof non-pilot schools has just been raised. In this regard, it is necessary to conduct continuous follow-up
by SS/RP so that those schools would be encouraged to take actions for improvement of the school
management. These activities should be continuous by accommodating them in the SS/RP’s regular
work and this could contribute to the achievement of the Overall Goal.
3) Output 2: Activities to Strengthen the Continuous Collaboration and Coordination with
VDCs and DDCs

The terminal evaluation team found that the linkage among DEO/SMCs and VDCs/DDCs is being
established but still weak, while the various intervention by the Project have been conducted such as
formulation of VEP, DEP with involvement of various stakeholders and coordination activities between
SMC and VDCs/DDCs for SIP implementation. Although there is a limitation of the interventions by the
Project due to the situation that members of VDCs and DDCs are not yet elected, it is suggested that
continuous awareness raising among concerned stakeholders should be conducted on the occasions of
Bi-Monthly Meeting and the workshops so that the meetings and gatherings introduced by the Project
would be sustainable.
4) Output 3: Recommendations to be considered by MoE/DoE
The Project proposed some recommendations for school improvement with community
participation based on the practices on the ground. It is suggested that MoE/DoE should consider
accommodating the relevant recommendations in the existing system for better functioning of the MoE
Policy.
And, while it is for sure that participatory school management call for community’s initiative andthey can improve the school management by themselves to some extent, there are some issues whichcannot be solved by them. It should be noted that those issues should not cause the gaps between
districts and/or schools. Therefore, on the process of elaboration of the current recommendations underOutput 3, not only the equity from the view point of the administration side, but also someconsiderations for the schools in disadvantaged situation should be taken into account.
5) Standardization and Documentation of SISM Initiative
The Project does not intend to introduce new concepts nor system, rather improve the existing
system of SIP/VEP/DEP formulation and implementation process. In this regard, it can be said thatSISM Initiative proposes the approaches toward the improvement of school management. Therefore, it issuggested that the outcomes of the Project and the approaches applicable to the other districts should becompiled in an easy manner based on the achievements of the Project and should be shared with
Nepalese stakeholders, NGOs and other development Partners.
(2) Actions to be taken after the termination of the Project and Clarification of the roles andresponsibilities of the concerned sections under DoE
After the termination the Project, it is expected that the Project activities in the two Pilot Districts
would be continued as well as spread out to the Non-Pilot VDCs in these Districts. In addition,
continuous support to the two Pilot Districts as well as expansion to the other districts is anticipated by
MoE/DoE’s initiative. Therefore, it is suggested that the roles and responsibilities of the concerned
sections under MOE/DOE/DEOs should be clarified with the assignments of the staff in charge and clear
job order and necessary budget should be secured.
(3) Importance of the field visits by MoE/DoE
MoE/DoE staffs conduct field visits on the occasions of the training, the mid-term review and theterminal evaluation study. Those occasions are precious to confirm the outcomes of the Project as well as
to observe the real situation at DEO and school level.

MOE is in charge of policy formulation and DoE is in charge to develop implementation strategies.
However, at the same time MOE/DOE are to be a main actor to consider the measures to implement thepolicy. In view of this, it is expected that MoE/DoE staffs to find the time to visit the field and regularmonitoring should be taken place during and after the the Project period.
【Recommendations to be implemented after the termination of the Project】(1) Actions to be taken for mainstreaming the outcomes of the Project
As mentioned above, in order to make effective school management with community participation,
the necessity for capacity development at school and district level is proved by the practices of the
Project. On the other hand, some development partners and NGOs have conducted the same kinds ofsupport in this field. Therefore, MoE should share and coordinate the various interventions and outcomes
including SISM Initiative, and accommodate the outcomes of the capacity development by the Project in
SSRP including Capacity Development Plan which is under formulation, with appropriate allocation of
the budget. And, the activities for Capacity Development should be comprehensive as trainings followedby monitoring and follow-up activities.
(2) Utilization of Resources developed by the ProjectIn the implementation of the Project, the training task-force team was established at the centrallevel and the elaboration of the training contents has been made at the district level. The staffs involvedin this process are the precious resources for the expansion of school management model developed by
the Project in other districts. In fact, RPs capacitated by the Project played an active role in introducing
SIP in the other districts where the other JICA Project “SHNP” is implemented, so that the same could
be applied in the other occasions. In addition, it is also proposed that Pilot schools could be goodreferences for other districts as well as other stakeholders engaged in SIP activities.

6. Lesson Learned(1) Application of existing tools
The Project has just presented how to apply the tools for the participatory school based
management which had been already introduced by the Government of Nepal, not something new.
Because of that, it was easily accepted by the concerned officials of MOE/DOE. Therefore, it could besaid that it is necessary to survey the existing systems and tools in the country at the beginning of the
project and apply them effectively in order to enhance the sustainability of the Project.
(2) Consideration of sustainability of the Project in the involvement of NGOs
It would be effective to involve NGOs in the project in order to have tangible results within certain
period. However, it is not appropriate to alternate the government with NGOs from the viewpoint of thesustainability of the project. In the Project, the NGOs have played the backseat roles and hired thecommunity people as social mobilizers in stead of dispatching most of staff from outside the districts.
Because of that, it could be said that the Project has been implemented in the sustainable way. Therefore,
it is suggested that the same consideration will be taken in case the partner NGOs are involved in similar
future projects.
(3) Lessons for the implementation of the participatory school management
1) Importance of facilitation for raising awareness of community
In the Project, community realized the actual situation and aware of their own roles andresponsibility by utilizing a tool such as School Self Assessment as well as the non-budgetary school
management activities have been focused. Because of this facilitation at the earlier stage of the Project,
SMCs, schools and communities have raised awareness and gained the confidence that they can improve
schools by themselves, which has become the promoting factor for further school management activities.
2) Improvement of the quality of education by the participatory school management
The participatory school management enhances the community awareness. It leads to monitoringof schools by communities and decreases the absence of teachers and students as a result. However, inorder to respond to the communities’ higher expectations on the students’ learning achievement, theactivities for the improvement of the quality of education should be included in the participatory school
management with referring to the cases of similar projects