Table 1.8: Baseline Data Collection Work Plan Date(s) Task Key Personnel Deliverable 23 March virtually meet with project manager and relevant other staff for initial briefing and discussion of tor G Heaner and N gardek 25 - 26 March review project documentation; write evaluation protocol and workplan; discuss with plan G Heaner and N gardek evaluation protocol and workplan for baseline 26 - 27 March review existing data collection tools from plan projects and adapt G Heaner and N gardek inception report and draft instruments 27 March begin recruitment of local innumerators (virtually) if needed. identify suitable pilot site close to freetown M Chea; G Heaner resumes for potential staff 27-31 March design and review data collection instruments and questionnaires with input from plan staff; test instruments with contacts on the ground in liberia and sierra leone G Heaner; N Gardek; C Aldinger draft questionnaires and interview GUIDES; all questionnaires, all qualitative tools for each target group, data entry processes for plan’s review 04 April virtual meeting with plan to review and revise sampling strategy; selection of pilot site G Heaner; N Gardek RECCOMENDATOINS ON strategy FROM em 7 April discuss and coordinate research methods with partners and gec evaluation manager for final agreement G Heaner; N Gardek beginning of DISCUSSIONS and revisions to m&e strategy 10-11 April international travel days; early arrival in country and firming up logistics; preparing for training events G Heaner; M Van Epp; M Chea 11 April team meeting; kick off meeting with local office; device update w/ surveys and testing; meeting with it consultant G Heaner; N Gardek (virtual); M van Epp; M Chea 12 April field team training in methodology and data entry/upload with it G Heaner; M van Epp; M Chea with local field team training and capacity building for data collection and entry;
consultant guidance document 13 April first pilot (full) in moyamba for training purposes and final refinement of instruments G Heaner; M van Epp with local field team finalized instruments to be used for duration of data collection; uploaded into devices 14-17 April additional training and pilots as needed; refinement of instruments and sampling strategy G Heaner; N Gardek (virtual); M van Epp; M Chea finalized qualitative instruments 18 -19 April qualitative data collectionin moyamba and port loko G Heaner; M van Epp; M Chea with local field team 20-22 April further recruitment and training for additoinal enumerators and team leaders; G Heaner; S Kelliher; M Chea; S Tolley 22 April finalization of qualitative and quantitative instruments; final upload to tablets G Heaner finalized instruments 22 April – 14 May refinement of baseline methodology and m&e framework with pwc/coffey/dfid G Heaner; Plan staff approved m&e framework 22 April – 14 May further traiing, recruitment and prepartion for additional tasks for household surveys and learning assessments G Heaner, S Kelliher, Plan staff, local field teams 15 May – 22 June data collection with support from staff – oversee the start up of PROJECT. field coordinator transition to local team leaders G Heaner; S Kelliher; M Chea; S Tolley; local field team progress reports from field coodinator (by phone) every other day to team leader; uploaded to computer nightly; and internet when possible but minimum 2x per district 03– 21 June data collection for school data and learning assessments in kono and kenema S Kelliher, local field teams with remote support from G Heaner
outside of school during term-time. baseline figure of 5 plus 2 hours of children’s clubs giving a 40% increase for participants] indicator on NPSE and BECE pass rates % of girls receiving bursaries who complete an academic year Project Management Data (individual tracking of all annually) 0 95% of girls receiving a bursary completing the academic year Added to logframe. Will be disaggregated by girls in/out of school prior to bursary % parents/care-givers with girls of age (appropriate for P5, P6 and JSS1) citing financial barriers as a reason why their girl child is not in school Household survey [C98d] - -30% [bursaries received by approx. 40% of target girls but cannot assume all surveyed HH will benefit] Added to logframe % of girls expressing positive attitudes to benefit/right to education Household survey [exact indicator to be refined when survey instrument finalized] - +30% Will be disaggregated by disability (same questions to be asked of CwD referred through CBR approach) % of parents who take an active interest in their child’s learning / in the performance of their local school Household Survey - +20% % of marginalised girls who feel their parents and community members support their education Current logframe indicator. Will be disaggregated by disability status (see note on disability above) # of CWD enrolled in target Primary schools Project Monitoring Data (as relating to CBR activities) and School Survey Data - 2,052 Added to logframe % of CWD as a proportion of school population in PS School Survey Data of all project and control schools - [1.4% from one district] No target Suggest to monitor but not use as indicator as increase in enrolment of girls as well as CWD so ambiguous interpretation] Additional Output and Intermediate Outcomes for Output 2 Indicator Source Baseline Milestones/ Notes