1. Decentralisation of Basic Education in Ghana Ghana Impact Evaluation Team (GIET) Charles Aheto-Tsegah, Coachito Thomas Hutton Coleman, Inswinger Matthew Karikari-Ababio, Sweeper Dominic Pealore, Goalee Anthony Arthur, Striker Justin Oliver, Guest Player Eunice Yaa Brimfa Dapaah, Welfare Directress AFRICA IMPACT EVALUATION INITIATIVE, AFTRL Africa Program for Education Impact Evaluation

2. MAP OF GHANA Population (2005)21.5m Administrative Regions10 Districts138 Pop. Growth Rate2.6 Literacy Rate (Age 15+)77 Gross Prim. Enrolment80 Male84 Female76 Key Data

3. Questions Has decentralization helped to improve education outcomes? Will decentralization improve the process of financial allocation and utilization in the districts and schools? How will decentralization impact pupil learning outcomes? Will improving community participation ensure effective management of local schools at the district level? Will decentralization improve the quality and usage of data at the district level?

4. Indicators Pupil/Teacher Ratio Pupil/Textbook Ratio Test scores NEA, SEA, BECE raw scores SMCs established and functioning Increase in Enrolment and Attendance Decrease in Teacher Absenteeism Increase in Completion Rates

5. Evaluation Design Randomly select two Treatment groups (T1 & T2) and one Control group from 138 districts. T1 will be granted authority to implement aspects of the management functions relating to district performance carried out at the central level, e.g. teacher recruitment; management of investment grants. The control group will continue to have the district management functions performed at the central level.

6. Evaluation Design – cont’ SMCs for T2 will receive administration and service funding directly from DEOs for the management of school. SMCs in the Control group will not receive direct allocation of administration and service funds.

7. Sample Assuming intra-district correlation of 5% we anticipate a 15% effect size with a power of 83%. This means in 83% of the experiment with a sample size of 15 schools there will be an effect in the population of 15%. The effect of 15% being the smallest size of impact, will help in making a policy decision to replicate and spend more money to implement the intervention.

8. Sample

9. Data Annual Education Census Report by EMIS: –Contains data on school enrolment, teacher distribution and facilities. –Collected by the MOESS via surveys completed by school heads. District data: –Contains data on schools at the district level, teacher distribution and facilities –Collected by District Education Offices via head counts of pupils conducted by school heads. Administrative data: –Performance Reports, Expenditure returns etc.

10. Staffing Plan PersonnelRole Staff of the PBME and EMIS, MOESS -Design evaluation -Review IE questionnaire -Collection of primary data -Training of field officers -Collation and analysis of data -Prepare IE Report Regional and District Statistics Officers -Participate in field work -Contribute to review of report Research Assistant from Innovations for Poverty Action (IPA) -Support design of evaluation -Design IE questionnaire -Support collation of data and analysis -Monitoring data collection -Support preparation of IE Report

11. Timeline Evaluation Workplan DateActivity Aug-07 Budget Preparation/Hearing BECE Results Jan-08Budget Released Jun-08 Completion Rate Net Enrolment Rate Pupil-Textbook Ratio Pupil-Teacher Ratio School Education Assessment Aug-08BECE Results Jun-09National Education Assessment

12. Budget N o.DescriptionNo. of UnitTotal Pers./Days/CostAmount QtyFreq.$$ 1Research Assistants160 150 9,000 2Field Work Allowance6915 100 103,500 3Field Supervisors Allowance815 120 14,400 4Training of Field Officers772 100 15,400 5Design of Evaluation85 100 4,000 6Development of Application310 80 2,400 7Data Processing715 80 8,400 8Data Analysis & Report Writing815 100 12,000 9Printing of Questionnaires10,0001 1 10Printing and Dissemination of Report2,0001 6 12,000 11Contingency (5% of total cost) 10,058 Total Cost 201,158