Executive Summary
Executive Summary At the July 2000 G-8 Summit on Okinawa, the United States announced plans to commit $300 million in resources to establish a school feeding program for developing countries, particularly countries that had made a commitment to provide universal education for their children. An estimated 120 million children around the world do not attend school, in part because of hunger or malnourishment. A majority of these children are girls. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) administers the pilot Global Food for Education (GFE) program, which builds on ideas promoted by Ambassador George McGovern and former Senator Robert Dole. Under this program, USDA provides surplus commodities, as well as funds to cover commodity transportation and distribution, to the World Food Program (WFP), 13 private voluntary organizations (PVO’s), and one national government for use in 48 school feeding projects in 38 countries. USDA also provides administrative and technical assistance, as well as project monitoring and evaluation. The goal of the GFE program is to bring more children into school by providing them with a nutritious meal or take-home ration. Education is a path to upward mobility that can help poor children improve their standard of living, and poor nations develop more productive, self-reliant economies. The United States has long been committed to providing school meals for children of low-income American families in the belief that a school meal improves children’s minds and bodies. Under the pilot GFE program, this commitment has been extended to millions of children in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and Eastern Europe. GFE projects were selected using a set of criteria that included need, technical feasibility, contribution of resources by the host government, and that government’s commitment to the Education-for-All goals of the World Education Forum held in April 2000 in Dakar, Senegal. Selection criteria also assessed the experience and capabilities of the PVO or other cooperating sponsor proposing to implement each project. Additionally, each project proposal was analyzed to ensure that the donations would not disrupt local markets or commercial sales opportunities. The first project agreement with a cooperating sponsor was signed in March 2001. This evaluation focuses on the implementation and outcomes of the projects awarded under the pilot GFE program. The report will review all the projects that have been funded, providing information on changes in student enrollment, attendance, and performance. Perhaps most importantly for future school feeding efforts, this evaluation provides preliminary findings on best practices and lessons learned from a variety of GFE school feeding projects conducted by various organizations in different countries, cultures, and settings around the world. Briefly, the results to date show measurable improvements in school enrollment, including increased access by girls. In projects involving more than 4,000 participating schools, the WFP reports an overall enrollment increase exceeding 10 percent, with an 11.7-percent increase in enrollment by girls. The PVO’s report an overall enrollment increase of 5.75 percent in GFE-participating schools. In some projects, increases in enrollment were as high as 32 percent compared with enrollment rates over the previous three years. Attendance and performance are more difficult to measure reliably over the limited duration of the pilot projects. Both the WFP and PVO’s are gathering baseline statistics for future measurements. However, many teachers, school administrators, and parents report declines in absenteeism rates and improved concentration, energy, and attitudes toward learning on the part of students. GFE projects are also resulting in additional benefits beyond those directly related to attendance, enrollment, and performance. These benefits include increases in local employment and economic activity related to the projects, greater activity and participation in local infrastructure and other community-improvement projects, and greater involvement by parents in the schools and their children’s education. All cooperating sponsors are required to conduct baseline surveys using a standardized questionnaire based on a questionnaire developed by the WFP and modified by USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service. The methodology used in evaluating this program is explained in Appendix 1. Monitoring is spearheaded by a group of Washington-based regional and country coordinators who, along with Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) field staff, review the projects and ensure that local monitors collect baseline surveys using the standardized questionnaire. In addition, the locally hired monitors conduct targeted focus group interviews to gather information on perceptions, barriers, and alternatives that may not be captured in a standardized questionnaire. In compiling this report, this evaluation team also used a large amount of data submitted by the WFP and PVO’s. The standardized questionnaire used in collecting raw data on the GFE programs contains 210 questions and is used by both the WFP and PVO’s. While the results represent a valuable resource for making future decisions, the data are only as reliable as the source. Even in U.S. schools, students often collect daily attendance for the teacher. In some countries, enrollment numbers at the school level often vary from those at the classroom level, and GFE attendance may include students not officially enrolled. This can be due to a teacher’s desire to allow a student into the classroom even though the family is unable to pay for school. Similarly, teachers may feel pressured to report low dropout rates in order to keep their jobs. Lack of roads and difficult terrain add to the difficulties in collecting data. Local monitors can complete an entire questionnaire in a few hours once they arrive at a survey school. However, travel to the school, particularly in mountainous regions with no road access, can take up to a full day, sometimes hours on foot. Nonetheless, this GFE evaluation is able to report preliminary results on every project implemented by April 2002, due in no small measure to the efforts of the USDA in-country monitors to collect the most accurate data possible to document project impact. The goals of the pilot GFE program were defined as establishing pre-school and school feeding projects in developing countries to improve enrollment and attendance – particularly for girls – and enhancing the nutritional well-being and learning ability of children. The pilot program initially targeted nine million needy children. The cooperating sponsors implementing the individual projects include the WFP, 13 faith-based and secular PVO’s, and the Government of the Dominican Republic. As implemented, the pilot GFE program has reached seven million children through school or pre-school feeding programs, including around five million through the WFP and two million through projects conducted by PVO’s and the Government of the Dominican Republic. These numbers reflect children fed; in some cases, other benefits went to additional children. In several projects, numerical targets were scaled back during project implementation for the following reasons: (1) unreliable data available at the time the program was formulated; (2) changes in targeting to avoid duplication of feeding activities conducted by other implementing partners in the same area; (3) use of pilot testing within a subset of the entire program area; and (4) lower than expected monetized proceeds for program implementation. Of the 24 school feeding projects conducted by PVO’s and the Government of the Dominican Republic, five have now completed one school year, nine have completed a partial school year, and 10 are just beginning or have fall 2002 start dates. At the time of this report, USDA was able to gather data from 165 schools in 11 PVO country projects. The WFP has gathered data on 4,000 schools in 23 countries. The results show that the GFE program has positively affected school enrollment and access for girl students. The WFP reports an 11.7-percent increase in enrollment of girls. The WFP has developed an innovative way of using food aid to help educate girls. Basic food items, such as a sack of rice or several liters of vegetable oil, are distributed to families in exchange for the schooling of their daughters. These take-home rations compensate parents for the loss of the daughter’s labors, enabling girls to attend school. For now, improvements in attendance and performance cannot be fully documented, with most of the feedback available through discussions and informal reports by teachers, school administrators, parents, and students. Changes in the attendance rate can be measured against previous months in schools where feeding began after school was already underway. Sustained attendance rate changes must be measured against attendance baseline data, which has been collected and will be measured against data for the next school year. Quantitative measures of performance require a longer period for assessment. The GFE program has also demonstrated benefits beyond the established performance criteria. Some additional project benefits include economic stimulation, civil society support, community capacity building, and re-energizing parents, teachers, and the community to address education issues. For example, economic activity generated by GFE projects has saved existing jobs, created additional jobs, and resulted in the development of new commercial products, such as aseptic milk. The PVO’s also report over a million dollars in local and outside donor support. Moreover, this amount is dwarfed by in-kind contributions from parents and substantial support from complementary programs providing assistance in the areas of health, water and sanitation, agriculture, nutrition, teacher training, and the environment. The WFP reports support from Italy, France, Andorra, the United States, Cargill, and private individuals. There have been some unanticipated outcomes. For example, in Bangladesh, increased attendance in schools initially resulted in crowded classrooms without enough desks or chairs for the children. Parents and the community responded by building extra desks and chairs for the school. The official enrollment figure reported by the head teacher to the appropriate ministry or department responsible for collecting such information is being used to evaluate the GFE pilot projects. Enrollment data can only be tracked from year to year rather than month to month, since schools have a fixed, limited enrollment period. Anecdotal reports are an important cross check to official records because governments often exert pressure on schools to report high enrollment figures and low dropout rates. Recognizing these constraints, the evaluation found that overall enrollment in GFE-participating schools increased by 10.4 percent and 5.75 percent for WFP and PVO projects, respectively. The greatest increases were documented in areas with serious food deficits and previously low enrollment levels. Enrollment increases were reported in most of the countries with available data. Declines were reported in two countries. The reported declines represent a statistically insignificant number of schools and appear to reflect official enrollment data collected before the school feeding actually began in those schools. Examples of enrollment increases include:
*Findings are based on projects implemented by April/May 2002.
The GFE school feeding projects have increased school attendance according to discussions with and informal reports by teachers and administrators. An increase in attendance is one of the most significant measures of the importance of school feeding for two reasons: 1) increased attendance signifies heightened parental understanding of the importance of sending their children to school; and 2) the alleviation of short-term hunger allows students to be exposed to learning material for a greater length of time. To capture this data, both the PVO’s and the WFP are gathering baseline statistics. For the school year, both are basing the estimate on a four-month average. The four months include the month with the highest attendance for the previous year, the month with the lowest attendance for the previous year, and two months with an average rate of attendance for the previous year. With this data established as a baseline, the same months will be selected in the next school year to compare rates. However, school attendance is by far the most difficult data to reliably document. The examples cited below are based on monthly attendance rates where data for feeding and nonfeeding months were available within the same school year. Examples of increased attendance include:
Performance indicators generally rely on data collected for more than five years. Since such data would not be available under the pilot program, this evaluation relied on informal reports by teachers and school administrators. These reports indicated that students concentrate better, demonstrate improved attitudes toward learning, comprehend subject material more quickly, and are more energetic. Examples of improved performance include:
Economic activity generated by the GFE project has stimulated local economies. Existing jobs have been saved, additional jobs created, and new commercial products developed. Examples include:
In many regions, GFE projects have created new opportunities and enhanced existing opportunities to strengthen communities and other civil society groups. Examples include:
Parents, teachers, and school administrators report that the GFE program is a unifying force in the community and has been a catalyst in addressing long-standing educational problems. Examples include:
In identifying best practices, the evaluation team looked not only at the program’s objectives but also at the experiences gained in implementing the program. These best practices are actions that implementing partners took to creatively implement the program and are suggested as practices that could be replicated in future projects. These actions can be categorized into the following four areas: (1) Strengthening program sustainability; (2) Using food creatively to support educational programs; (3) Involving parents and community members in support of local schools and increasing their commitment to educational attainment; and (4) Taking steps to integrate health, nutrition, and hygiene education. (1) Examples of actions to strengthen program sustainability include:
(2) Examples of activities that use food creatively to support educational programs include:
(3) Actions to involve parents and community members in support of local schools and to increase their commitment to education include any number of ways to integrate projects into the community. Community involvement increases commitment because it gives parents and community members a greater role and feeling of empowerment in their children’s education. (4) Examples of steps to integrate health, nutrition, and hygiene education include:
All of the WFP projects and over half of the PVO projects received direct or indirect support from international organizations. Donor support for the GFE program comes in many forms and at different levels. These donor contributions either directly support school feeding and education infrastructure or support complementary programs related to health, water and sanitation, agriculture, nutrition, teacher training, and the environment. For example, the WFP has worked with a variety of partners to implement de-worming treatments in its school feeding programs. Coordination with the World Health Organization, commitments from the national ministries of education and health in the host country, and the availability of financial support are key elements in the success of these projects. See the table beginning on page 279 for a list of donors and their contributions. Commodities used to support direct feeding activities in GFE programs were found to be appropriate to the recipient countries and were delivered without major incident. A few of the PVO’s expressed a desire for a wider selection of commodities for the direct feeding portion of their projects. Monetization has proceeded smoothly in all countries to date, except Madagascar due to civil conflict. Delays and other problems associated with commodity shipment and delivery to the implementing PVO primarily revolved around host country government policies and procedures. Late commodity arrival caused some PVO’s to adjust implementation schedules by months. Examples of delays or other problems associated with shipment or monetization of donated commodities include:
In its February 2002 report on the GFE initiative, the General Accounting Office (GAO) identified several areas of concern, including issues relating to targeting, health and nutrition, impacts on the learning environment, and the lack of broader donor support to ensure the sustainability of the program. Targeting—The GAO report stated that appropriate targeting within the solicitation of program proposals is lacking. The report further emphasizes targeting high-risk communities, as opposed to targeting individual children within the school. USDA findings: In evaluating the projects funded under the GFE program, we found that clear, well-defined targeting of beneficiaries is essential to ensure measurable results under the program. Most of the GFE project agreements did create indicators directly related to beneficiary selection in areas with chronic malnutrition and poor school enrollment and attendance levels. In those few instances where individual children were targeted rather than feeding the whole school, such as Bosnia, the objectives of the program were not based solely on increased attendance but rather toward the development of parent-teacher associations. In Bosnia, the objective was to bring parents together to accept different ethnic groups. This objective could also be achieved through means not directly linked to the school feeding program. Health/Nutrition—The GAO report stated that health interventions such as micronutrient and/or vitamin A tablets are a more cost-effective way to improve health than school feeding. USDA findings: Vitamin tablets may improve nutrition but do not bring children into school. Parents can easily relate to and understand the need for feeding their children. Understanding the importance of strong nutritional interventions requires additional education as the program develops. In addition, many of the agreements include the distribution of vitamin A supplements, fortification of food products with needed micronutrients, and de-worming campaigns. Learning Environment—GAO contended that increasing the number of children in the school may create an environment where learning is negatively impacted, especially for those students already attending school. USDA findings: Focus group meetings will provide better information about the learning environment and how it is affected. To date, concerns from school administrators about overcrowded classrooms have been limited. In most cases, administrators would prefer crowding to the lack of students. Under some of the agreements, small-grant projects with parent-teacher associations are being used to improve or enlarge the physical setting. This is an area that needs additional attention and emphasis by local governments and other donors. One fact remains true: No formal learning will occur if children do not attend school. Sustainability Through Other Donors and Government Commitment—The GAO report stated that other donor contributions to the GFE program agreements were sorely lacking, noting that this was a priority when the GFE initiative was announced. USDA findings: When both the regional coordinators and local monitors entered the field and began asking about outside donor commitments and the role of the host government, the responses indicated a significant level of additional contributions. Many contributions are not received until a project is firmly established, with the base donation guaranteed. More donor contributions are expected in the future. |
|
|