IPDET, 27/06/20031 Workgroup I/1 "Infrastructure" Mr. John Byaruhanga / Uganda Mr. Javier Guarnizo / Peru Ms. Annette Ittig / Canada Mr. Sadedin Limani / Albania Mr. Shingirayi Mushamba / Zimbabwe Ms. Ilda Rusha-Bozo / Albania Mr. Patrick Shao / South Africa Mr. Daniel Svoboda / Czech Republic

IPDET, 27/06/20032 evaluation plan WOW ! Team brainstorming 5 options identified 5 options analysed 1 options selected pre-test logic model draft ToR (what & why) overview of the case setting criteria key questions evaluation design evaluation questions tune criteria setting criteria sampling design ToR (what & how) pre-test

IPDET, 27/06/20033 PEAP Poverty Eradication Action Plan Health Care Primary and Secondary Education Adult Literacy Water and Sanitation etc.Pupil EnrolmentQuality Teaching Constructing Classrooms etc. Rapid and Sustainable Economic Growth Good Governance and Security Increased Ability of the Poor to Raise Incomes Enhancing Quality of Life Uganda PEAP Goals

IPDET, 27/06/20034 SFGP approved, ESIP prolonged Logical Framework Matrix Needs identific. Tendering Constructing # applications # accepted applic. #, time, $, quality Improving human development & quality of live All children in appropriate school facilities Appropriate classrooms, Equipment # classes / schools, # districts covered water & sanitation # (%) children attending schools, # students / class Interest of comm. Timely appraisal Land & expertise Financial reports, Quaternary reviews Annual regional and national reports MoES & districts files Projects & contracts Expand secondary education + sustainability other infra, curriculum, ownership & funds School Facilities Grant Program (under Education Strategic Investment Plan) Completed primary educ. (% in 2009), % enrol sec. educ. Mid-term national statistics

IPDET, 27/06/20035 Municipalities 56 districts 56 District Local Governments Implementation process Municipalities Communities School facilities Ministry of Finance Ministry of Education and Sports       School Facilities Grant / funding tendering & contracting needs decision 1 decision 2  School Facilities Grant Program Municipalities 56 districts Subcounties Sub-Counties lessons learned

IPDET, 27/06/20036 Main Evaluation Question: “How effectively and efficiently has the School Facilities Grant Program been implemented to meet its objective?” Scope of the evaluation: Framework/institutional arrangements for implementing the SFG program at all levels of government, with emphasis on identification of priorities, funding and funding mechanism, accountability, participation, and sustainability issues. Terms of Reference School Facilities Grant Program

IPDET, 27/06/ ) Needs Are communities aware of Schools Facilities Grant Programme? How are the needs identified? By whom? With what perspective? 2) Decision-making level 1 (local governments level) What criteria are used for setting priorities at sub-county and district level? Are capacities for projecting and budgeting at local level sufficient? 3)Decision-making level 2 (central government level) What are the criteria for funds allocation and disbursement at government level? What is the timeframe from application to decision? Does it fits to the needs? 4)Funding (central government level) What is the procedure and timeframe for using the School Facility Fund? How is the accountability (and auditing) process at government (ministry) level? Key evaluation questions School Facilities Grant Program

IPDET, 27/06/ )Tendering and contracting (local government level) How effective is the process of tendering and contracting at the district level? Are local capacities for tendering, construction and supervision sufficient? 6)Outputs (community level) Is there evidence of outputs and outcomes (what are the monitoring procedures)? What is the quality of outputs in comparison with the contract documentation? 7) Lesson learned & impacts & external factors What is the feedback (M&E) and how are the lessons used for improvements? What are the crucial external factors at activity - output - outcome level? Key evaluation questions School Facilities Grant Program

IPDET, 27/06/20039 Evaluation Design School Facilities Grant Program 2 x (4+8)relevance, stakeholders review, interview MoES files (4 years) Annual rep., M&E files Lessons learned 2 x (32+12)quantity & quality issues review, obs., focus groups 160 facilities (8 districts) Document., reports Construction & Monitor. 2 x (8+4)transparency, effectivity review, focus group, int. 8 districts (2 years) Projects, contracts Tendering & Contracting 2 x (8+4)accountab., effectiveness review, interview MF, 8 districts (2 years) MF & District files Grant Program 2 x (5+2)timeframe, transparency review, interview all files (2 years) MoES & MF reports Decision level 2 2 x (8+4)timeframe, transparency review, interview 8 districts (2 years) District filesDecision level 1 2 x (16+8)relevance, target groups review, focus groups (8) 160 applic. (8 districts) Applications, District files Needs Identification Men/days (Budget) Data Analysis (Qn+Ql+St) Data Collection SampleData Sources (+ focus gr.) Program level

IPDET, 27/06/200310

IPDET, 27/06/200311