basic education for children with special needs...1 japan fund for poverty reduction (jfpr) jfpr...

Grant Assistance Report

Project Number: 38657 February 2006

Proposed Grant Assistance Republic of Uzbekistan: Basic Education for Children with Special Needs (Financed by the Japan Fund for Poverty Reduction)

CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (as of 26 January 2006)

Currency Unit - sum (SUM)

SUM1.00 = $0.0008 $1.00 = SUM1,185.07

ABBREVIATIONS ADB – Asian Development Bank ICT – information and communications technology CBO – community-based organization JFPR – Japan Fund for Poverty Reduction JICA – Japan International Cooperation Agency M&E – monitoring and evaluation MOH – Ministry of Health MLSC – Ministry of Labor and Social Care MOPE – Ministry of Public Education NGO – nongovernment organization SNE – special needs education STDP – Second Textbook Development Project UNESCO – United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural

Organization UNICEF – United Nations Children’s Fund

NOTES

(i) The fiscal year of the Government of Uzbekistan ends on 31 December. (ii) In this report, “$” refers to US dollars.

Director General H. S. Rao, East and Central Asia Department (ECRD) Director R. Wihtol, Social Sectors Division, ECRD Team leader S. W. Handayani, Poverty Reduction Specialist, ECRD Team members L. Wu, Principal Social Sector Economist, ECRD M. Prina, Young Professional, ECRD

1

JAPAN FUND FOR POVERTY REDUCTION (JFPR)

JFPR Grant Proposal

I. Basic Data Name of Proposed Activity Basic Education for Children with Special Needs

Country Uzbekistan

Grant Amount Requested $1.5 million

Regional Grant Yes / No

Grant Type Project / Capacity building II. Grant Development Objective(s) and Expected Key Performance Indicators Grant Development Objectives: (i) To improve the learning performance, social confidence, and social integration of children with

special needs in selected pilot schools via inclusive and integrated approaches. (ii) To develop teacher training modules and learning materials for children with special needs and

to use these for pilot schools that can be replicated throughout the special education subsector. (iii) To demonstrate via the pilot schools the benefits of inclusive and/or integrated educational

approaches for children with special needs in basic schools and to develop proactive strategies that will lead directly to the effective inclusion and integration of children with special needs in mainstream basic schools.

Expected Key Performance Indicators: The following should have been accomplished by the end of the Project: (i) an improvement in socialization and increased participation in school by special needs students; (ii) an improvement in attitudes on the part of teachers, students, parents, and other major

stakeholders toward inclusive and integrated approaches for special needs education; (iii) an improvement in the quality and availability of teacher training and of learning materials for

special needs education in pilot schools; (iv) an improvement in academic performance by special needs students in key subjects; and (v) the development and implementation of practical Ministry of Public Education strategies for

inclusive approaches toward special needs education (SNE). III. Grant Categories of Expenditure, Amounts, and Percentage of Expenditures

Category Amount of Grant Allocated in

$ Percentage of Expenditures

1. Civil Works 330,000 22.0 2. Equipment and Supplies 360,000 24.0 3. Training Workshops and Seminars 141,600 9.4 4. Consulting Services 318,000 21.2 5. Management, Monitoring, and Publicity 194,560 13.0 6. Contingency 155,840 10.4 TOTAL 1,500,000 100.0

2

JAPAN FUND FOR POVERTY REDUCTION

JFPR Grant Proposal Background Information

A. Other Data Date of Submission of Application

9 November 2005

Project Officer Sri Wening Handayani, Poverty Reduction Specialist Project Officer’s Division, E-mail, Phone

Social Sectors Division, East and Central Asia Department Phone: (632) 632 5964 E-mail: [email protected]

Other Staff Who Will Need Access to Edit/Review the Report

M. Prina, Young Professional Social Sectors Division, East and Central Asia Department E-mail: [email protected] L. Wu, Principal Social Economist Social Sectors Division, East and Central Asia Department E-mail: [email protected]

Sector Education Subsector Basic education Theme Inclusive social development Subtheme Human development Targeting Classification Poverty Intervention Name of Associated ADB Financed Operation(s)

Second Textbook Development Project (STDP) Information and Communications Technology (ICT) in Basic

Education Project Executing Agency Ministry of Public Education (MOPE) Grant Implementing Agency

Project Implementation Unit for the STDP 3rd Floor, MOPE Building 80 Uzbekistan Street Tashkent Bobir Gafurov E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 998 71 139 1573 Fax: 998 71 139 1571

B. Details of the Proposed Grant 1. Description of the Components, Monitorable Deliverables/Outcomes, and Implementation Timetable Component A Component Name Social Preparation Cost ($) 51,720 Component Description • Creation of a national pilot project steering committee

comprising representatives of MOPE, the Ministry of Health (MOH), the Ministry of Labor and Social Care (MLSC), the Republican Education Center, the Republican Center for Social Adaptation of Children, In-Service Teacher Training Institute, external funding agencies, regional representatives, specialized and boarding schools, and representatives of parents.

3

• Establishment of a regional steering committee at the oblast(province) level comprising representatives of local governments, specialized and boarding schools, parents, and local nongovernment organizations (NGOs) and community leaders.

• Identification and selection of participating pilot schools in the city of Tashkent and in the oblasts of Kashkardarya and Sukandariya. Eighteen schools—6 SNE and 12 general basic—schools will be selected. Selection criteria will be developed through a participatory process.

• Identification of types of disabilities to be included. Children who are not covered by the special schools (children being educated at home or defined as not eligible for education) will also be incorporated. The disabilities may vary according to the schools and regions selected.

• Finalization of the mechanism for selecting participating students and obtaining agreement from parents.

• Design of the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) methodology and instruments.

• Development and implementation of an awareness-raising and education program for parents and other key stakeholders on inclusive education.

Monitorable Deliverables/Outputs • National Pilot Project steering committee is operational. • Regional Steering Committees are operational. • Participating raions and schools identified. • Disabilities to be included in pilot projects identified. • Three NGOs or research center appointed as pilot project

managers • Methodology for selecting participating students established. • M&E methodology, procedures, instruments, and

implementation schedule determined. Implementation of Major Activities: Number of months for grant activities

April–July 2006 (4 months)

Component B Component Name Minor School Rehabilitation and Provision of Basic Equipment Cost ($) 696,000 Component Description • Identify and agree on a list of requirements for participating

specialized schools, including physical refurbishment and upgrading (estimated at $25,000 per school) and basic equipment (estimated at $30,000 per school) appropriate for learners with identified disabilities (for example, hearing aids for children with hearing disabilities and wheelchairs for children with motor disabilities), including an ICT suite and equipment.

• Agree on and implement basic upgrading and refurbishment requirements for participating general basic schools to make the schools suitable for children with special needs (for example, ramps for students in wheelchairs, guide rails for blind and partially sighted students, clear visual signs and signals for deaf and hearing impaired students, and barrier-free toilets).

• Agree on and provide a package of basic equipment for the pilot schools, which might include a special ICT suite, internet connectivity, specialized software, and so on. The cost of refurbishment and equipping of general schools is estimated at

4

$15,000 per school for refurbishment and $20,000 per school for equipment and specialized software applications.

Monitorable Deliverables/Outputs Six refurbished and re-equipped specialized schools and 12 participating general secondary schools.

Implementation of Major Activities: Number of months for grant activities

April–December 2006 (8 months)

Component C Component Name Teacher Training and Materials Development Cost ($) 221,600 Component Description • The development of specialized training modules for teachers

working in the pilot schools and for pilot classes. • The provision of specialized training to pilot school teachers in

the use of ICT and specialized software. • The provision of training in the development of learning and

teaching materials, including the use of ICT resources and equipment.

• The creation of a specialized Internet portal where all schools and teachers working with children with special needs can locate materials, share ideas, and develop collaborative approaches. This component will provide benefits to SNE in Uzbekistan well beyond the participating pilot schools.

• A 12-week course at the regional in-service teacher training institute in Tashkent for 4 teachers from each of the 16 participating schools (64 teachers). The course will be supported by an international SNE specialist with skills in teacher training and ICT materials development, who will train the teachers to develop a series of 2-week teacher training modules and accompanying materials and software.

• A further 4-week course for four teachers from each of the participating general schools aimed at developing ICT and Internet familiarity using standard applications software and specialized software. The course will also introduce the teachers to techniques for materials development.

Monitorable Deliverables/Outputs • Training modules on inclusive and/or integrated approaches to SNE taught to 64 teachers.

• Training modules on SNE learning and teaching methodologies appropriate for the specified disabilities covered by the pilot projects developed.

• Sixty-four teachers in both pilot specialized and pilot general secondary schools trained in the techniques and implications of inclusive and integrated approaches and in subject-specific learning and teaching approaches.

• Sixty-four teachers trained in the application of ICT to SNE. • Courses for training SNE teachers and developing sample

materials completed. • Prototype versions of sample learning and teaching materials

for SNE prepared. • Web site or portal specializing in learning and teaching

materials and providing support for SNE in local languages established.

Implementation of Major Activities: Number of months for grant activities

Teacher training components: July 2006–April 2008 (20 months) Materials development Components: April 2006–July 2007 (14 months)

5

Component D Component Name Management, Monitoring and Evaluation, Impact Assessment, and

Publicity Cost ($) 374,840 Component Description • Implementing a pilot project

• Developing M&E systems • Reporting to stakeholders • Disseminating information to other regions • Holding three national conferences • Launching a public awareness program through the mass

media • Undertaking policy review and making recommendations on

inclusive education • Carrying out an impact assessment on the sustainability of the

inclusive approach Monitorable Deliverables/Outputs • Annual M&E reports

• Regular information newsletters on progress to other external funding agencies, NGOs, oblasts, and raions

• Annual workshop and/or conference on progress and outputs • National publicity campaign • Report on policy review and recommendation • Impact assessment report on financial, institutional, educational,

and social sustainability of the inclusive approach Implementation of Major Activities: Number of months for grant activities

Implementation of pilot project in schools: Sept 2006–Dec 2008 (28 months)

2. Financing Plan for Proposed Grant to be Supported by JFPR

Funding Source Amount ($)

JFPR 1,500,000

Government 195,280

Other Sources (parents and teachers) 21,600

Total 1,716,880 3. Genesis In 2000, Uzbekistan signed the Dakar Framework for Action for Education for All, and in 2003 developed and published the National Action Plan for Education for All, which included a chapter dedicated to special education. As part of the plan, the Government of Uzbekistan has recognized the need for a shift in emphasis from the current segregated approach to SNE1 toward the integration of SNE and general education as basic policy. However, the progress from segregation toward alternative policies has been slow. Inclusion is not only better

1 The Salamanca Statement, adopted at the Salamanca World Conference on Special Needs Education in 1996,

provides the most detailed description of inclusive education. Special education needs refer to the needs of “all those children and youth whose needs arise from disabilities or learning difficulties”. Inclusive education implies that “children and youth with special education needs should be included in the educational arrangements made for the majority of children.”

6

educationally, pedagogically, emotionally, and psychologically for children with special needs,2 but it is also a better financial option because it is more cost-efficient and more cost-effective. This situation suggests the need for carefully constructed pilot projects that should provide good examples of inclusive education in action and can then serve as models for similar developments on a national scale. SNE is a neglected area of the formal education system. Most students in specialized and boarding schools come from poor families, and special needs students are one of the most vulnerable groups in Uzbekistan. Specialized and boarding schools are free of charge and students in these schools are reported to be from poor families who cannot afford the costs of home-based maintenance and care. Most special needs children being educated at home are also reported to be from poor families. The incidence of disability is highest and growing in poorer regions. The reasons for this are widely reported to be environmental pollution, lack of access to good health care and early diagnosis, and inadequate living conditions. The risk of social exclusion as a result of disability is almost certainly higher in poor families. Many studies note that people with disabilities are among the poorest in the world. Environmental, technical, and attitudinal barriers and consequent social exclusion reduce the opportunities for disabled people to contribute productively to the household and to the community and further increase their risk of falling into poverty.3 In 2003, 320,000 disabled people (about 1.34% of the total population) were registered with the MLSC, of which 123,000 were children younger than 16. According to MOPE, approximately 45,000 to 50,000 disabled students are currently enrolled in special education facilities. Historically, the education of disabled children, even those with mild disabilities, has been through boarding schools and/or institutions. In Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, for example, some 60% of children in residential institutions are disabled.4 They are segregated from the mainstream school and often do not have the opportunity to leave the institutions. Few of these children actually require institutionalization for educational or other reasons. At the same time, according to NGOs operating in different regions of Uzbekistan and focusing on various disabilities, Uzbekistan has far more disabled children than are currently registered by medical, social, or educational bodies, all of whom, to a greater or lesser extent, fall outside the current special education system. Segregation through residential institutions remains the backbone of the Uzbek education system for children with special needs and is hampering the development of more integrated and more cost-effective systems of schooling. A recent survey showed that the quality of SNE is deteriorating. A number of reasons account for this situation, namely: (i) the absence of state education standards for SNE; (ii) a severe shortage of methodological and didactic materials for schools; (iii) the low quality and shortage of textbooks; (iv) the scarcity of school equipment; (v) the shortage of teaching professionals for SNE; and (vi) the lack of special equipment and devices to facilitate teaching for children with special needs, that is, wheelchairs, prosthetics, hearing aids, braille paper and

2 The relevant terminology used in the education sector has changed dramatically in recent decades. The narrow

disability-based classifications, and the resulting labeling of children, are being replaced by wider definitions such as “disadvantaged children,” “children in especially difficult circumstances,” or “children with special educational needs.” These broader terms include the whole range of learning difficulties, from profound disabilities to minor difficulties in performing necessary functions. In Jonsson, T., and R. Wiman. 2001. Education, Poverty, and Disability in Developing Countries. Technical note prepared for the Poverty Reduction Sourcebook. World Bank, Washington, DC.

3 Sandhu J. S, I. Saarnio, and R. Wiman. 2001. Information and Communication Technologies and Disability in Developing Countries. Washington, DC: World Bank.

4 Tobis, Davis. 2000. Moving from Residential Institutions to Community-Based Services in Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union. Washington, DC: World Bank.

7

pencils, braille readers, and so on. Recent studies indicate that the most significant problem of the current segregated system is that it creates a gap between children with special needs and wider society, and thereby preventing them from being integrated into normal social life, finding jobs, reducing their vulnerability, and improving their well-being. The current system is widely perceived to be too expensive, too rigid, and in need of reform to bring it more in line with the requirements of the new policies requiring a gradual shift to inclusive and/or integrated education. Emphasizing inclusive education does not, however, completely rule out specialized or boarding schools, which would still be required to cater to some children with profound and complex difficulties. These children are, however, few in number. If key preconditions were met, as many as 80 to 90% of children with special needs could be educated in regular schools and classrooms. There is a clear need to develop good working models of inclusive education that can serve as exemplars of good practice and that can be built on as the starting point for a decisive shift toward new approaches to SNE. This suggests that the concept of establishing partnerships between selected boarding and specialized schools and one or more adjacent general secondary schools has merit, because it would imply a genuine, two-way, collaborative relationship between the staff and students of boarding and specialized schools and general secondary schools that could be extended beyond the operation of inclusive and/or integrated classes into wider educational and social contacts. 4. Innovation The Project is innovative in a number of ways. First, by introducing the partnering of specialized and boarding schools with local general secondary schools, it enables support to be provided both for the development of new approaches to SNE and for the large majority of children with special needs who live in the segregated boarding school system. Second, partnering also allows for the development of wider educational and social institutional links between specialized and boarding schools and general secondary schools. Third, the Project also addresses current education problems, such as the lack of teacher training for SNE teachers and the lack of appropriate learning and teaching materials for children with different kinds of disabilities. Prototypes of teaching and learning materials appropriate for SNE will be supplied to the MOPE Textbook Department for inclusion in annual printing programs managed in the context of the STDP,5 and will therefore start to address the lack of suitable learning materials on a national scale. This project can be used to magnify and expand the impact of the Japan Fund for Poverty Reduction (JFPR) Project. The provision and use of ICT facilities in specialized and boarding schools will link in with the ICT in Basic Education Project, which will provide teacher training and maintenance support and is expected to be approved in late 2006. The adaptation and translation of learning materials into local languages is both easier and cheaper using electronic formats than print formats. Thus the ICT component could be used to address the problem of a lack of suitable textbook materials. Finally, the Project will also establish a specialized electronic portal for use by key stakeholders in SNE.

5 ADB. 2004. Report and Recommendation of the President to the Board of Directors on a Proposed Loan to the

Republic of Uzbekistan for the Second Textbook Development Project. Manila. (Loan 2093-UZB, approved on 29 September).

8

5. Sustainability The inclusive approach will be achieved at the education level by creating opportunities for special needs children in mainstream schools and at the social level by creating opportunities for closer interaction between special needs children and children in mainstream education by piloting partnering between 6 SNE and 12 general secondary schools. The Project will provide an opportunity to evaluate the benefits of an inclusive approach to SNE and will be a model for a national program to improve SNE and achieve better learning outcomes for and social inclusion of children with special needs. The Project will also rationalize financial expenditures for SNE by improving the efficiency and sustainability of the SNE system. In addition, the Project will provide reliable materials to be replicated on a larger scale through other projects supported by the Asian Development Bank (ADB), and will thereby help integrate SNE in the national education system. The pilot project will provide ready-made course modules that will be scaled up and trained teacher trainers through in-service training for special needs teachers. The teacher training components will start the process of developing methodological modules for training of teachers for SNE and will train local teacher trainers in special education techniques, which will fill an immediate gap. The course modules will also be useful for preservice training and will be adapted for use in special education courses. Printed course materials developed for students by the Project will be published and made available by MOPE’s Textbook Department as part of the STDP, which has funds for this purpose. The investment in upgrading premises will provide valuable experience in adapting school premises for SNE that could be applied to the 2004–2010 school rehabilitation program currently being funded by the Government through the School Development Fund. Continuing funding by MOPE will be required to cover the costs of transporting disabled students to and from schools and of recurrent operation and maintenance costs for the participating schools, which are estimated to be minimal and which MOPE has indicated its commitment to provide. The Project will provide detailed information on the minimum costs of operating inclusive education, which will need to be part of future recurrent cost budgets for basic and general secondary schools. Successful pilot projects on inclusive education will provide the focus for a national awareness campaign that will be the core of a national debate on SNE. Key stakeholders have indicated their strong support for a pilot project to demonstrate the benefits of inclusive education. 6. Participatory Approach The Project has been designed through a participatory process. Analysis and consultation have been conducted with such key stakeholders as Government ministries (MOPE, MOH, and MLSC), external funding agencies with substantial local knowledge and expertise (the Japan International Cooperation Agency [JICA]; the United Nations Children’s Fund [UNICEF]; and the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization [UNESCO]), local NGOs with relevant experience and local knowledge, and oblast and raion education departments along with school, teacher, student, parent, and community representatives. Discussions have dealt with such issues as (i) the choice of pilot locations; (ii) the selection of participating schools; (iii) the selection of disabilities to be covered; and (iv) the selection of students, grade levels, and so on. A national steering committee representing all stakeholders will be established and will be responsible for national overview of the pilot. Three regional steering committees will be responsible for oblast participation. The regional and national steering committees will supervise monitoring and evaluation, share information,

9

promote publicity nationwide, and engage in policy debate on inclusive education for special needs children.

Primary Beneficiaries and Other Affected

Groups and Relevant Description Other Key Stakeholders and Brief Description All children with special needs from six specialized and/or boarding schools who will be provided with improved living, working, and educational facilities. A smaller group of disabled students and some students currently studying at home will be provided with opportunities to participate in inclusive or integrated classes at local general secondary schools.

Teachers, students, parents, and communities relevant to the 12 general secondary schools that will participate in the Project and will come to appreciate and understand the problems and opportunities of inclusive and/or integrated approaches and their benefits. The schools will be refurbished to make them user-friendly for disabled students.

Local NGOs that will be involved in the public awareness program in project locations.

Raion, oblast, and national authorities (MOPE, MOH, and MLSC), which will be provided with the opportunity to observe, participate in, and evaluate partnering and inclusive and integrated approaches.

JICA, UNESCO, and UNICEF all have an interest in SNE and will have representatives on the National Steering Committee and receive regular monitoring and evaluation reports that will focus on both progress and problems.

Japanese NGOs have been involved in recent special needs education activities, including the publication of a trilingual sign language dictionary in Uzbek, Russian, and English. This and other learning and teaching materials developed by Japanese NGOs will be used in the pilot projects.

7. Coordination The Government, NGOs, project beneficiaries, and all external funding agencies with a significant interest and track record in special education were consulted during the feasibility study (March–May 2005) and Fact-Finding Mission (August 2005). This consultation has involved JICA, UNICEF, UNESCO, the U.S. Agency for International Development, and key external NGOs involved in SNE (for example, Mercy Corps). The Project has been discussed with the foregoing stakeholders, who have been supportive of the approach. External Funding agencies with an interest in special education will be invited to participate in the National Steering Committee, where they will be able to provide advice and guidance based on their experience. NGOs with national coverage will also be invited to participate in the National Steering Committee. NGOs operating in pilot regions will be selected with guidance from the National Steering Committee with additional inputs from regional steering committees, which will be more aware of local organizations and their activities. The regional and national steering committees will have access to all implementation and M&E reports, and will therefore be fully informed of successes, failures, problems, and opportunities. An annual workshop and/or conference is planned to critically review progress, and external funding agencies and NGOs will be represented at these in addition to MOPE, the regions, and special education experts. The Project will be closely coordinated with other related projects, especially the ICT for Basic Education Project and the STDP. Thus the provision of teaching and learning materials for SNE will be funded by the STDP, which plans to supply braille textbooks to schools in 2006. The ICT components will be coordinated with the new cluster leader schools supported under

10

the ICT for Basic Education Project, which was expected to be approved in late 2005. The Project will use JICA-funded learning and teaching materials for deaf and hearing impaired students, and other learning materials in local languages produced by JICA, UNESCO, and UNICEF will be included on the proposed electronic portal for SNE learning materials. 8. Detailed Cost Table The detailed cost estimates presented in Appendix 1 are based on locally tendered prices and preliminary quantity estimates. Fund flow arrangements are presented in Appendix 2 and implementation arrangements in Appendix 3. C. Linkage to ADB Strategy and ADB-Financed Operations 1. Linkage to ADB Strategy Basic education is and will remain a key area of ADB assistance to Uzbekistan, and ADB is the lead external development partner for basic education. ADB’s sector strategy in education has focused on (i) supporting efforts to improve the quality and relevance of and the access to education; and (ii) enhancing national capacity to manage sector reforms. Accordingly, policy dialogue and assistance for basic education have emphasized addressing key issues and challenges in the subsector, with ADB having provided five loans since 1997. To date, ADB’s assistance has constituted comprehensive support to implement reforms in the education sector. This support includes (i) establishing an overall, coherent policy framework for the sector; (ii) improving governance, education financing, and sector reform management, which is built into all projects; (iii) continuing with curriculum, assessment, and language of instruction improvements, a focus of all projects; (iv) strengthening the capacity of teachers and the teacher training system, which is a priority of the STDP; (v) meeting critical investment needs in relation to learning materials, especially textbooks and school libraries, which is a focus of the STDP; and (vi) providing support for the poor and disadvantaged, which is a focus of all projects. Support for SNE is fully consistent with ADB’s education strategy in Uzbekistan.

Document Document Number

Date of Last Discussion Objective(s)

Country Strategy and Program Updates (2005–2006)

Sec.M94-04 August 2005 ADB’s operational strategya focuses on enhancing economic growth through (i) regional cooperation, (ii) investment in the rural sector, and (iii) direct support for the private sector. ADB’s sector strategy in education has focused on (i) supporting efforts to improve quality, relevance, and access to education; and (ii) enhancing national capacity to manage sector reforms.

a ADB. 2002. Country Strategy and Program (2002–2005): Uzbekistan. Manila. 2. Linkage to Specific ADB-Financed Operations

Project Name Second Textbook Development Project

Project Number 36510 (Loan 2093)

Date of Board Approval 29 September 2004

Loan Amount ($ million) 25

11

Project Name ICT in Basic Education Project

Project Number 37698 (Loan 2191)

Date of Board Approval 27 October 2005

Loan Amount ($ million) 30

3. Development Objectives of the Associated ADB-Financed Operations A key objective of ADB’s country strategy for Uzbekistan is to promote inclusive social development with a focus on education. ADB’s sector development objectives are to (i) support sector policy reforms, (ii) strengthen national capacity to manage and deliver sector reforms, and (iii) support specific strategies to improve the quality and relevance of education. Two ongoing ADB-financed education projects in Uzbekistan emphasize key sector reform issues; capacity building; enhanced efficiency; and improvements in education quality, access, and equity for all students. ADB aims to support the development of an education system that is responsive to the needs of a modern market economy and a democratic society. ADB’s development objectives also focus on the need to support the poor and disadvantaged, which is a component of all education projects. The two projects described below all have components that will support and link into key components of the JFPR Project. These include the development of new teacher training course modules, the training and upgrading of teachers, the development of learning and teaching materials, the use of ICT as a teaching and learning tool across curriculum subjects, the participation of communities, the devolution of management and decision making to schools, the use of pilot projects to demonstrate and leverage change, and the design and operation of M&E systems. 4. Main Components of the Associated ADB-Financed Operations No. Component Name Brief Description

Second Textbook Development Project 1. Establishing a policy framework 1.1 Curriculum review

1.2 Assessment review

2. Sustainable textbook provision 2.1 Ongoing management of textbook rental scheme 2.2 Development of a computerized textbook ordering

system 2.3 Establishment of an autonomous national textbook

revolving fund

3. Library development 3.1 Creation of 1,000 upgraded pilot school libraries based on open access

3.2 Provision of modern books and other media stock for use in the school libraries

3.3 Provision of ICT and other media equipment for use by students and staff in the school libraries

3.4 Teacher and librarianship training in running a modern school library

3.5 Software development for use in the school libraries, other media equipment

4. Book sector development 4.1 Local book sector training

12

4.2 Support for private sector involvement 4.3 Improved author remuneration

ICT in Basic Education Project 1. Establishing 860 school clusters 1.1 Identifying school clusters and cluster leader schools

1.2 Equipping 860 school clusters with ICT hardware, software, and internet connectivity

2. Strengthening teacher and staff development for ICT

2.1 Designing of intensive courses for teachers to support the introduction and use of ICT in schools

2.2 Training of eight school staff members in every school cluster in aspects of ICT skills and applications to support ICT use and development across the curriculum

2.3 Launching a program of continuous professional development in every cluster

3. Developing e-learning materials 3.1 Using grant money to develop appropriate software in local languages to support ICT use in priority subjects and grades

3.2 Providing intensive training in software adaptation and translation to develop local capacity

4. Building capacity and supporting management

4.1 Supporting national financial planning to achieve ICT sustainability

4.2 Supporting the delivery of decentralized recurrent budgets to schools for school-based decision making

4.3 Designing and implementing ICT-related research and pilot projects

4.4 Launching a national publicity campaign on ICT in schools

4.5 Carrying out M&E 5. Rationale for Grant Funding versus ADB Lending ADB’s support for the education sector in Uzbekistan is relatively comprehensive; however, SNE has not been mainstreamed in the country’s education reform and is not included under current ADB loan projects. SNE is neglected in Uzbekistan and urgently requires a much higher national and public profile to generate positive strategies for change and reform. The JFPR Project would not only have an immediate and beneficial impact on the lives and education of children with special needs in specialized schools, it would also have a significant impact on teacher training and materials development and would give rise to public awareness programs and broader public debate on SNE, thereby sustaining advocacy actions aimed at achieving better education and social opportunities for children with special needs. Furthermore, the JFPR Project’s use of participatory approaches, NGOs, and community-based organizations is new to this sector. Effective approaches, adjusted to the local situation, must first be developed and tested before scaling up nationwide. The JFPR Project will allow this process. D. Implementation of the Proposed Grant

1. Implementing Agency Ministry of Public Education

13

All procurement under the JFPR grant will be conducted by the STDP PIU in accordance with ADB’s Guidelines for Procurement. Consultants will be recruited by the STDP PIU in accordance with ADB’s Guidelines on the Use of Consultants and other arrangements for the engagement of domestic consultants acceptable to ADB. A Grant Implementation Unit will be established and staffed with consultants to implement the JFPR Project. The Grant Implementation Unit will work under the guidance of the STDP’s PIU. The terms of reference for consulting services are in Supplementary Appendix 1. 2. Risks Affecting Grant Implementation Type of Risk Brief Description Measures to Mitigate the Risk Social Parent, student, and teacher opposition

to inclusive and integrated policies • Local stakeholders will be

sensitized to special needs education issues

• Communities and stakeholders will be fully involved in all decision making at the school level

• Pilot regions and schools will only be selected on the basis of support from local government, schools, students, and communities

3. Incremental ADB Costs Component Incremental Bank Cost

Amount requested Not applicable

Justification

Not applicable

Type of work to be rendered by ADB

Not applicable

4. Monitoring and Evaluation6 Key Performance Indicator Reporting Mechanism Plan and Timetable for M&E Socialization of and participation by SNE students will improve from xxx to xxx as measured by the number of socialization and participation opportunities with mainstream schools (from xxx to xxx) and a survey among both SNE students and mainstream education students on attitudes toward and perceptions of socialization and participation. Results will be measured as improvements compared with baseline data collected during the

Questionnaires and focus group discussions at the beginning and end of the pilot

Baseline data collection at the launch of the pilot in September 2006 and follow-up data collection in September 2007 and 2008

6 The benchmark data for monitoring and evaluation will be collected at the beginning of project implementation and

the monitoring framework will be updated accordingly.

14

Key Performance Indicator Reporting Mechanism Plan and Timetable for M&E first 6 months of project implementation. Improved attitudes of teachers, students, parents, and the main stakeholders on SNE as measured by an improvement from xxx to xxx number of policies and xxx to xxx events per year. Enhanced public awareness from xxx to xxx in relation to knowledge about disabilities and from xxx to xxx about inclusive education issues, as measured by quantitative and qualitative surveys and before and after project results. The result will be compared with baseline data collected during the first 6 months of project implementation.

Questionnaires and focus group discussions at the beginning and end of the pilot

Baseline data collection at the launch of the pilot in September 2006 and follow-up data collection in September 2007 and 2008

Improved availability from xxx number of programs and materials to xxx by the end of the Project and improved quality of materials from xxx to xxx both in SNE schools and mainstream schools, based on quantitative and qualitative improvements in baseline data collected during the first 6 months of project implementation. Improved technical knowledge of mainstream teachers on SNE methodologies, measured as improvement in baseline data and before and after training quantitative and qualitative surveys.

Quantitative and qualitative assessments at the beginning and end of the pilot, training assessment reports, before and after training evaluation, and in-service assessment of learning

Assessments undertaken in September 2006 and September 2008 on the basis of data provided by MOPE and before and after the implementation of training modules

Improvement in the learning outcomes of SNE students from baseline value xxx to xxx by the end of project implementation.

Test results in core subjects at the beginning and end of the pilot and compared with control groups in segregated education

Baseline testing at the launch of the pilot in September 2006 and follow-up testing in September 2007 and 2008

Development of xxx number of policies and strategies and implementation of xxx number of policies for social inclusion within 3 years of project implementation.

Policy and strategy assessment and interviews with key policy makers in MOPE, MOH, and MLSC

Baseline assessments and interviews in Sept 2006 and on completion in Sept 2008

15

5. Estimated Disbursement Schedule Fiscal Year (FY) Amount ($)

FY2006 403,248 FY2007 672,080 FY2008 268,832 Total Disbursements 1,344,160 + 155,840 (contingency) = 1,500,000

----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Appendixes

1. Summary Cost Table 2. Detailed Cost Estimates 3. Fund Flow Arrangement 4. Implementation Arrangements

1SUMMARY COST TABLE

($)

Inputs/Expenditure Category

Component A

Social Preparation

Component B Minor School Rehabilitation and Provision

of Basic Equipment

Component C

Teacher Training and

Materials Development

Component D Management,

Monitoring and Evaluation,

Impact Assessment, and Publicity

Total (Input)

Percent

1. Civil Works

330,000

330,000

22.0

2. Equipment and Supplies

360,000

360,000

24.0

3. Training, Workshops, Seminars, Public Campaigns

141,600

141,600

9.4

4. Consulting Services

21,000

6,000

60,000

231,000

318,000

21.2

5. Grant Management

6,720

123,840

130,560

8.7

6. Other Inputs

24,000

20,000

20,000

64,000

4.3

7. Contingencies (0–10% of total estimated grant fund)

5,996

80,693

25,692

43,459

155,840

10.4

Subtotal JFPR grant financed

57,716

776,693

247,292

418,299

1,500,000

100.0

Government Contribution

160,000

35,280

195,280

Contributions by Other Donors

Community Contributions (mostly in kind)

21,600

21,600

Total Estimated Costs

57,716

776,693

407,292

475,179

1,716,880

Incremental Costs

Source: ADB estimates 2005.

16 Appendix 1

Appendix 1

2

DETAILED COST ESTIMATES

Costs Contributions Code Supplies and Services Rendered Unit Quantity

Units Cost

Per UnitTotal

$ JFPR Government Other

DonorsCommunities

Amount Method of Procurement a

Component A: Social Preparation

Subtotal 51,720 51,720

1.1

Civil Works

1.2

Equipment and Supplies

1.3

Training, Workshops, Seminars

1.4

Consulting Services

1.4.1 Domestic consultant to design pilot project evaluation and monitoring methodology and instrument

Month 3 3,000 9,000 9,000

1.4.2 Domestic community development specialist Month 4 2,000 8,000 8,000 1.4.3 Domestic engineer Month 2 2,000 4,000 4,000 1.5

Management and Coordination of This Component

1.5.1 1.5.2

Traveling to visit potential pilot project locations by pilot project steering committee: 4 visits by 8 people

Accommodation and per diems for visiting pilot project locations: 4 visits by 8 people for 3 days per visit

Visit

Day

48

144

50

30

2,400

4,320

6,720

1.6

Other Project Inputs

1.6.1 Monthly management fee for 3 NGOs (one for each pilot project) for 32 months each

Month 96 250 24,000 24,000

Component B: Minor School Rehabilitation and Provision of Basic Equipment

Subtotal 696,000 696,000

2.1

Civil Works

2.1.1 Refurbishment of 6 specialized and/or boarding schools according to on-site specifications

6 25,000 150,000 150,000 LCB

Appendix 1 17

3Costs Contributions Code Supplies and Services Rendered

Unit QuantityUnits

Cost Per Unit

Total $

JFPR Government Other Donors

Communities


2.1.2 Refurbishment of 12 general schools according to on-site specifications

12 15,000 180,000 180,000

2.2


2.2.1 Re-equipping of 6 specialized and /or boarding schools according to on-site specifications

6 30,000 180,000 180,000 IS

2.2.2 Re-equipping of 12 general schools according to on-site specifications

12 15,000 180,000 180,000 IS

2.3


2.4

Consulting Services

2.4.1 Domestic consultant to determine school upgrading and equipment requirements

Month 2 3,000 6,000 6,000

2.5


2.6


Component C: Teacher Training and Materials Development

Subtotal 381,600 221,600

160,000

3.1

Civil Works

3.2


3.3


3.3.1 72 participants for 6 weeks each to develop INSETT modules (first workshop)

Person-week

432 50 21,600 21,600

3.3.2 72 participants for 4 weeks each for materials development workshop (first workshop)

Person-week

288 50 14,400 14,400

3.3.3 Travel costs for 96 participants Trip 96 50 4,800 4,800 3.3.4 72 participants for 6 weeks each to develop

INSETT modules (second workshop) Person-

week 432 50 21,600 21,600

3.3.5 72 participants for 4 weeks each for materials development workshop (second workshop)

Person-week

288 50 14,400 14,400

3.3.6 Travel costs for 96 participants Trip 96 50 4,800 4,800

18 Appendix 1

Appendix 1

4

Costs Contributions Code Supplies and Services Rendered Unit Quantity

Units Cost

Per UnitTotal

$ JFPR Government Other

DonorsCommunities


3.3.7 Two annual national workshops to disseminate experiences, 100 participants per workshop

Workshop 2 10,000 20,000 20,000

3.3.8 Development costs for new learning materials and allowance for developing prototypes

Lump sum

40,000 40,000 40,000

3.3.9 Regional in-service teacher training institute training costs for 200 special needs education teachers per year for 4 years based on 1-month residential courses

Person-month

800 200 160,000 160,000

3.4

Consulting Services

3.4.1 Consultant to run 2 INSETT workshops Month 1.5 20,000 30,000 30,000 3.4.2 Consultant to run 2 materials development

workshops Month 1.5 20,000 30,000 30,000

3.5


3.6


3.6.1 Web site costs and management

Month 40 500 20,000 20,000

Component D: Management, Monitoring and Evaluation, Impact Assessment and Publicity

Subtotal 431,720 374,840 35,280 21,600

4.1

Civil Works

4.2


4.3


4.4

Consulting Services

4.4.1 Project director Month 36 1,500 54,000 54,000 4.4.2 Accountant Month 30 1,000 30,000 30,000 4.4.3 Engineer Month 18 1,000 18,000 18,000 4.4.4 External monitoring Month 2 3,000 6,000 6,000 4.4.5 Policy review and impact assessment Month 3 20,000 60,000 60,000 4.4.6 Evaluation and audit Month 4 750 3,000 3,000 4.4.7 Capacity building and public awareness Year 3 20,000 60,000 60,000

Appendix 1 19

5Costs Contributions Code Supplies and Services Rendered

Unit QuantityUnits

Cost Per Unit

Total $

JFPR Government Other Donors

Communities


4.5 Management and Coordination of This Component

4.5.1 Monthly allowances to parents of 150 special education needs students for 24 months

Person-month

3,600 15 54,000 54,000

4.5.2 Feeding costs ($1 per day for 360 school days for 90 students in specialized schools)

Person-day

32,400 1 32,400 32,400

4.5.3 Feeding costs ($1 per day for 360 school days for 60 home-schooled students)

Person-day

21,600 1 21,600 21,600

4.5.4 School transportation for 6 schools for 360 days

Transport-day

2,160 15 32,400 32,400

4.5.5 School Internet costs for 6 schools for 24 months

Month 144 60 8,640 8,640

4.5.6 School operational budgets for 6 specialized schools

Month 72 100 7,200 7,200

4.5.7 Information and communication technology maintenance and servicing for 6 specialized schools

Month 96 30 2,880 2,880

4.5.8 Project management Month 36 500 18,000 18,000 4.5.9 Project operational costs Month 36 100 3,600 3,600 4.6


4.6.1 Publicity budget

20,000 20,000

Components A to D = Subtotal

1,561,040 1,344,160

195,280

21,600

Contingency (maximum 10% of total JFPR contribution)

155,840 155,840

Total Grant Costs

1,716,880 1,500,000

195,280

21,600

INSETT = in-service teacher training, JPFR = Japan Fund for Poverty Reduction, a Procurement under the Project will be conducted in accordance with the Asian Development Bank’s (ADB’s) Guideline for Procurement. Goods and related services

estimated to cost the equivalent of $100,000 or less will be procured using ADB’s direct purchase procedure. Goods and services estimated to cost more than $100,000 will be procured using ADB’s international shopping procedure. The procurement of civil works will follow a local competitive bidding (procedure acceptable to ADB. The Project Implementation Unit for the Second Textbook Development Project will be responsible for procurement, with technical inputs from the JFPR Coordination Unit and the Ministry of Public Education.

Source: ADB Staff Estimate. 2005.

20 Appendix 1

Appendix 2

1

FUND FLOW ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE JFPR FUND

Project imprest account held by the STDP Project

Implementation Unit

Component A:

Social Preparation

Component B:

Minor School Rehabilitation and Provision of Basic

Equipment

Component C:

Teacher Training and Materials Development

Government in-kind contribution (inclusive in

component)

$ 51,720

$ 696,000

$ 221,600

$ 374,840

$ 1,500,000

$ 195,280

$ 155,840

Asian Development Bank

Appendix 2 21

Contingencies

Component D:

Management, Monitoring and Evaluation, Impact

Assessment, and Publicity

22 Appendix 3

IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS A. Project Management

1. Executing Agency

1. The Ministry of Public Education (MOPE) will be the executing agency for the Japan Fund for Poverty Reduction (JFPR) Project. Project management will consist of (i) a project steering committee (PSC), (ii) the STDP project implementation unit (STDP PIU), and (iii) a grant implementation unit (GIU).

2. Implementing Agency

2. The implementation arrangements will be in line with the ongoing Education Sector Development Program and the Second Textbook Development Project (STDP), with which the JFPR grant is associated. The GIU will be established and headed by a JFPR project manager. The project manager will guide project implementation and administer the JFPR Project, including reporting to the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the Government. The JFPR project manager will work under the supervision of the director of the STDP PIU in relation to disbursement, procurement, financial management, and monitoring and evaluation (M&E) and in relation to preparing detailed project implementation plans, annual reports, and quarterly progress reports for submission to the PSC, the project director, and ADB. The JFPR project manager will be stationed at the STDP PIU and will be supported by two local consultants (a financial specialist and an engineer).

3. Project Steering Committee 3. The PSC will supervise project activities at the national and project levels. The PSC will consist of representatives from the ministries of Public Education, Health, and Labor and Social Care and nongovernment organizations (NGOs) or community-based organizations (CBOs) working in the field of children with special needs.

4. Local NGOs and Community-Based Organizations 4. To achieve project benefits and sustainability, local NGOs and CBOs that have experience working with special needs education (SNE) will be selected under the Project to develop and implement public awareness programs for stakeholders and to work closely with parents of children with special needs and with schools to help them implement the pilot project on inclusive education. The NGOs and/or CBOs will also conduct project M&E. 5. Flow of Funds 5. The flow of funds arrangements are summarized in Appendix 2. To facilitate disbursements, a JFPR imprest account will be opened at a commercial bank (separate from the STDP account) acceptable by ADB in accordance with ADB’s Loan Disbursement Handbook. Disbursement from the imprest account will be supported by an appropriate withdrawal application and related documentation. Such documentation will demonstrate, among other things that the goods and/or services were produced by and procured from ADB member countries and are eligible for JFPR financing. The initial amount to be deposited in the account will not exceed $100,000. Total advances at any time are not to exceed $200,000, the estimated average expenditures for 6 months. Any individual payment to be reimbursed or liquidated under the statement of expenditures procedure will not exceed $10,000.

Appendix 3 23

6. Disbursement of the JFPR imprest fund will be made by the director of the STDP PIU directly to contractors, suppliers, and service providers. ADB will replenish the imprest fund account based on budget requests prepared by the JFPR project manager and approved by the director of the STDP PIU. The withdrawal application will be signed by the director of the STDP PIU. In addition, the Government and other key stakeholders will provide various in-kind counterpart contributions. 6. Procurement 7. Procurement under the Project will be conducted in accordance with ADB’s Guidelines for Procurement. Goods and related services estimated to cost the equivalent of $100,000 or less will be procured using ADB’s direct purchase procedure. Goods and services estimated to cost more than $100,000 will be procured using ADB’s international shopping procedure. The procurement of civil works will follow a local competitive bidding procedure acceptable to ADB. The STDP PIU will be responsible for procurement, with technical inputs from the GIU and MOPE.

7. Consulting Service

8. Consultants will be recruited by STDP PIU in accordance with ADB’s Guidelines on the Use of Consultants and other arrangements for the engagement of domestic consultants acceptable to ADB. The consultants will be recruited based on no objection from ADB. The terms of reference are presented in Supplementary Appendix 1.

8. Reporting 9. The JFPR project manager will prepare quarterly, semiannual, and annual reports on project implementation, the form and content of which will be agreed with ADB. The STDP PIU and PSC will officially endorse these reports to ADB with their comments. The STDP PIU will maintain separate accounts for all project components financed by JFPR and the Government and have them audited by an independent auditor that has adequate knowledge of and experience with international accounting practices and is acceptable to ADB. The audited project accounts and the auditor’s reports will be furnished to ADB within 6 months of the end of the fiscal year. The Government will be informed of ADB’s requirement regarding the timely submission of audited project accounts and financial statements, including the suspension of disbursements in case of noncompliance. ADB will also finance, through the JFPR Project, annual audits through an independent audit company acceptable to ADB. To facilitate evaluation following Project completion, the Government has agreed to provide ADB with a grant completion report, with the support of the JFPR project manager, within 3 months of physical completion of the Project. All reports will include an assessment of the Project’s impact and output and of project performance M&E, as well as suggestions for further improving project implementation.

9. Monitoring and Evaluation

10. Preliminary indicators for Project M&E will be discussed with key stakeholders. The performance management system for the Project will be finalized during the first 6 months of project implementation. At the beginning of project implementation, the project manager will collect and confirm baseline data on education indicators pertaining to school beneficiaries and prepare social and poverty profiles of children with special needs. Monitoring indicators will be measured during project implementation. Comments and findings regarding the monitoring indicators will be included in the semiannual reports submitted to ADB. In addition to indicators

24 Appendix 3

for monitoring implementation, indicators for project evaluation will be measured at project completion. Where relevant, indicators will be disaggregated by gender. The final report will evaluate changes that occurred in the preceding 3 years. MOPE has developed its monitoring capability for ongoing projects and has the capacity to monitor the proposed JFPR Project as well. 11. The baseline study will include a quantitative assessment of (i) the number of opportunities that SNE students have for socialization and participation with mainstream students, (ii) the number of policies and strategies adopted, (iii) the number of learning materials and programs for SNE students and for SNE students in mainstream schools, and (iv) the learning outcomes in selected subjects and the technical knowledge of teachers. The qualitative assessment will include an examination of (i) attitudes toward inclusive education from key stakeholder such as special needs students, SNE teachers, mainstream students/teachers, parents, and communities (ii) awareness of inclusion issues; and (iii) knowledge of inclusive education and SNE methodologies by teachers in SNE and mainstream schools. 12. Observations and surveys will be used to collect the data for the baseline study. Tests, surveys, interviews, and secondary data will be used to monitor the progress of the inclusive and/or integration approach during project implementation. A control group might be used for tracking the improvement in learning outcomes and in attitudes toward socialization and participation. B. Implementation Schedule 13. The Project will be implemented over 3 years, from April 2006 to March 2009. Project preparation is expected to start in April 2006, with social preparation and the selection of partnering schools. Subsequent teacher training will be scheduled for the end of 2006 until mid-2008. The minor school rehabilitation, equipment, and supplies component is scheduled to begin by August 2006. The detailed implementation schedule is in Supplementary Appendix 2.

basic education for children with special needs...1 japan fund for poverty reduction (jfpr) jfpr...

Documents