Documentof The World Bank
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Public Disclosure Authorized ReportNo. 12529-ME
STArF APPRAISALREPORT
MEXICO Public Disclosure Authorized
SECOND PRIMARY EDUCATION PROJECT
MARCH11, 1994 Public Disclosure Authorized MICROGRAPHICS
Report No: 12529 ME Type: SAR
Country Department II HL'man Resources Operarions Division Latin America and the Cribbean Regional Office Public Disclosure Authorized
This document has a resicted disMtibutionand may be used by recipients only in theperformance of their offlcial duties. Its contentmay no otherwise be disclosed without Wodd Bank authoroizaon CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS Currency Unit = New Peso (N$) USS1.00 = 3.12 New Pesos (Feb. 1993)
FISCAL YEAR January 1 - December 31
ACADEMICYEAR September 1 - June 30
ACRONYMSAND ABBREVIATIONS ANAM National Agreement for Basic Education Modernization (Acuerdo Nacional para la Modernizacion de la Educaci6n Bdsica) CAPFCE Federal School Construction Agency (Comite Administradordel Programa Federal de Construcci6n de Escuelas) CAS Country Assistance Strategy CONAFE National Council for Educationai Development (Consejo Nacional de FomentoEducativo) at SEP CONALITEG National Free Textbook Commission (Comisi6n Nacional del Libro de Texto Gratuito) CONAPO National Population Council (Consejo Nacional de Poblaci6n) COPLADE State Planning Council (Consejo de Planificaci6ndel Estado) DGEI General Directorate for Indigenous Education (Direcci6n General de Eaucaci6n Indigena) at SEP DGEIR General Directorate for Evaluation (Direcci6n General de Evaiuaci6n, Incorporaci6n y Revalidaci6n) at SEP DGPPP General Directorate for Planning, Programming and Budgeting (Direcci6n General de Planeaci6n, Programaci6n,y Presupuesto) at SEP LGE General Education Law (Ley General de Educaci6n) MIS Management Information Systew NAFIN National Financing Agency (Nccional Financiera, S.N.C.) PAM Teacher Training Program (Programa de Actualizaci6n del Magisterio) at SEP PARE Bank's first Primary Education Project, Ln. 3407-ME, 1991 (Programapara Abatir el Rezago Educativo) PAREB Second Primary Education Project (Programapara Abatir el Rezago en Educaci6n Bdsica) PCU Project Coordinating Unit at the Federal level in CONAFE PME Education Modernization Program (Programapara la Modernizaci6n Educativa, 1989- 1994) PRODEI Bank's Initial Education Project, Ln. 3518-ME, 1992 (Proyectopara el Desarrollo de la Educaci6n Inicial) SCEP Servicios Coordinados de Educaci6n Pzdblica,former SEP delegation in the states essentially replaced by SEE SEB Undersecretariat of Basic Education (Subsecretaria de Educaci6n Bdsica) at SEP SEE State Education Entity (State Secretariat of Public Education or equivalent organization) SEP Federal Education Secretariat (Secretaria de Educaci6n P7blica) SHCP Federal Finance and Public Credit Secretariat (Secretariade Hacienda y Credito Pablico) SNTE National Teachers Union (Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadoresde la Educaci6n) SOLIDARIDAD National Solidarity Program (Programa Nacional de Solidaridad) SOPE State Secretariat of Public Works (Secretaria de Obras Pfiblicas del Estado) SPCU Project Coordinating Unit at the State level located in SEEs TAC Technical Advisory Committee TWP Teaching Career Program (Programa de la Carrera Magisterial) at SEP UPE Education Publications Unit (Unidad de Publicaci6n Educativa) at SEP FOR OFFICIALUSE ONLY
MEXICO SECONDPRPMARY EDUCATION PROJECT
STAFFAPPRAISAL REPORr
TABLEOF CONTENS
LOANAND PROJECTSUMMARY ......
I. THE ECONOMICAND SOCIALCONTEXT .1
H. THE PRIMARYEDUCATION SYSTEM ...... 3...... 3 A. Overview. 3 R Issues in PrimaiyEducation. 4 Quality..... 4 Efficiency. 9 EquitY.12 C. Goverment Strategyfor the EducationSector .13 D. BankRole and Experiencein the EducationSector .15 E. LessonsLearned from PastOperations .16
m THE PROJECT.20 A. Project Conceptand Objectives.20 B. Project Areasand TargetPopulation .20 C. ProjectComponents .21 D. ProjectDescription .23 ComponentA. HumanResoumces Development .23 ComponentB. EducationalMaterial Resources .25 SubcomponentB 1. TeachingMaterials and Student EducationalPackages .25 SubcomponentR2. ReadingCorners ...... 25 SubcomponentB.3. Textbooksand EducationalMaterials for IndigenousEducation ...... : ..... 26 SubcomponentB.4. Improvementof PhysicalInfrastnucture .27 ComponentC. Institutionl Strengthening.29 SubcomponentC. 1. ManagementCapacity .29 SubcomponentC.2. TeacherIncentives .32 SubcomponentC.3. Improvementof the SupervisionSystem 32 SubcomponentC.4. Booksand MaterialsDistnbution System 33 SubcomponentC.S. ProjectAdministration .34
Thisreport is basedon thefindings of the appraisalmission that visitedMexico in November,1993. The ndssion wascomposed of Mmes./Messrs.Antonio Gomes Pereira (mission leader), Eduardo Wlez. Manuel Vra, John Innes,Rosaria Iroza, Robert Etheredge "LA2HR), Silvia Elena Arevalo, CarlosHeymans and MariaElena Anderson (consultangs). Messrs/Mme. ithnNguyen, Rosita V Esnuda, KWinRost (L42HR),and RebeccaCary (consultant)contributed to the reportat headquarters.Peer reviewers are MwchelleRiboud (EC4IIR)and Luis Pisani (LA4HR).Messrs. EdilberroL. Seguraand KyeRbo Lee are theDepartment Director and DivisionChief respectively, for this operation.
Ths documenthas a restricteddistnbution and m beused by recdpients only in the perfornwn of icir officialduties. its contnts mawnot othevws bedisclosedwithout Word Ba authoizadion. - ii'-
IV. PROJECTCOST, PROCUREMENT,DISBURSEMENT, AND AUDITS...... 35 A. Project Costs and Finaning ...... 35 B. Procurement...... 37 C. Disbursements...... 40 D. Accountsand Audits ...... 41
V. PROJECTMANAGEMENT AND SUPERVISION...... 42 A. Project Implementation...... 42 Project Preparation ...... 42 Project Readinessand Implementation...... 42 Project Monitoring...... 43 Annual ImplementationReviews ...... 43 Mid-TermReview ...... 44 B. Project Supervision ...... 44 C. Project Launch Seminar ...... 44
VI. PROJECTBENEFITS AND RISKS .. 45 A. Project Benefits ...... 45 B. Impact on Women...... 45 C. EnvironmentalInpact ...... 45 D. Project Risks ...... 46 E. Program ObjectiveCategory ...... 46
VII. AGREEMENTSREACHED AND RECOMMENDATION...... 46
ANNEXES
1. ComparativeEducation Indicators 12. Strengtheningof Planningand Policy 2. Primary EducationEfficiency Analysis Indicators 13. Termsof Referencefor Process 3. EducationalExpenditures Evaluation& InformationSystems 4. GovernmentPolicy Letter 14. Termsof Referencefor Studies 5. Decentralizationof EducationBudget 15. TeacherIncentives by Project State 6. MarginalityRanking and Project 16. Project Managementand Flow of Areas Funds 7. IndigenousPopulations 17. Costs and Financing 8. ParticipatingMunicipalities and 18. Project Disbursements Beneficiariesby Project State 19. MonitoringIndicators 9. FinancialImplications of Extensionof 20. Amnnaland Mid-TermReviews Basic Education 21. SupervisionPlan 10. TeacherTraining 22. Project ImplementationSchedule 11. PhysicalInfrastructure and 23. List of Documentsin Project File DistributionNetwork
MAP - IBRD No. 25451 MEXICO
SECONDPRIMARY EDUCATION PROJECT
LAN AND PROJECTSUMMARY
Borrower: NacionalFinanciera, S.N. C (NAFIN)
Gumrantor: United MexicanStates
Beneficiaries: The Federal EducationSecretariat (SEP) throughthe National Council for EducationalDevelopment at SEP (CONAFE), and State EducationEntities (SEEs) in ten Mexicanstates (Campeche, Durango,Guanajuato, Jalisco, Michoacan,Puebla, San Luis Potosi, Tabasco,Veracruz, and Yucathin).In addition, the four states (Chiapas, Oaxaca,Guerrero, and Hidalgo)assisted under the first Primary EducationProject (Ln. 3407-ME,1991) would also benefit from the managementtraining program under the proposed project's InstitutionalStrengthening component.
Amount: US$412.0million equivalent.
Terms: Repaymentin 15 years, including5 years of grace at the standard variable interestrate.
Project The project would improveprimary school students' academic Objectives: achievementlevels and reduce the high repetitionand dropout rates within ten of the country'spoorest states, contribute to raising the human capital level, redressingsome of the country's social and economic imbalancesas part of the Government'ssocial compensatoryprogram. These objectiveswould be achieved through: (a) trainingteachers and administrators;(b) providing classroom-testededucational materials for both teachers and students, includingspecific materials for indigenouspopulations; and (c) strengtheningthe institutionalcapacity of the education system, particularlyat the state level, to carry out its mandatewithin a decentralizedsystem. The project would further benefitthe four states being assistedunder the first Primary EducationProject by includingtheir senior-levelofficials under the project's management training program.
Project The projectconsists of three major components: the Human Description: ResourcesDevelopment Component (17.5 percent of total project costs) wouldprovide in-servicetraining and assistanceto upgrade the skills of primary school teachers, principals, and supervisors, emphasizingthe role of principalsand supervisorsin providing pedagogicalassistance to teachers in classroomteaching. The EducationalM ial ResourcesComponent (52.5 percent of total - iv -
project costs) would: (a) provideeducational materials for both teachersand students;(b) supply classroomlibrary and reference books and promotetheir use; (c) design and deliver bilingual textbooksand materials for indigenousschools; and (d) rehabilitate, replace, or build urgentlyneeded educationalfacilities to replace inadequateschools and meet new enrollmentdemand. The InstitutonalStrengthening Component (30.0 percent of total project costs) would: (a) strengtheneducation management capacity at both central and state levelsby (i) providingmanagement training for planningand policy analysis,(ii) installingproject monitoring, evaluation,and informationsystems, (iii) conductingeducation studiesto prepare future investmentsat the preschool and secondary educationlevels, and (iv) supportingproject promotionand diffuision activities;(b) provide incentivesfor teachersto work in remote, indigenous,or hardship areas; (c) improvethe supervisionsystem; and (d) strengthenthe textbooksand materialsdistribution system. The project wouldbe coordinatedby CONAFE at the central level and implementedby SEEs, which wouldbe responsiblefor the delivery,operation, and managementof educationalservices at the state level.
Project By raisingchildren's cognitive achievement as well as their Benefits: probabilityof completingthe primary educationcycle, the project benefitswould consist of a higher rate of human capital accumulation,contributing to economicdevelopment. Due to the project's targetednature within the Government'ssocial compensatoryprogram, project benefitswould also includea more equal distributionof economicopportunities amOng Mexican children, especiallyfor underservedindigenous populations. The project would improvethe qualityof primary education through in- service trainingof teachers and administratorsand enhance the system'sefficiency through investments in institutional strengthening,thus contributingto better allocationand increased productivityof human resourcesin the sector and helping meet the challengesof a recentlydecentralized education system. Altogether, benefitswould accrue to approximately1.5 million children, 53,000 teachers, and 1,140 administators. Becausehalf of the students wouldbe girls, secondarybenefits would include lower ferdtlityand improvedhealth status and educationalattainment of their children.
Project The main projectrisks are associatedwith possible delaysin Risks: project executiondue to the slow improvementof institutional capacityof implementingagents at the state and, where applicable, communitylevels. The risk of weak institutionalcapacities is addressedunder the project through technicalassistance in key areas of managementsuch as planning, information,and evaluation. The project wouldbenefit from CONAPE'sexperience at the central level, which is curny implementingthe first Primaty Education - v -
Project as well as the Initial EducationProject (Ln. 3518-ME, 1992) and wouldeasily tasfer successfl operationalexpertise as well as familiaritywith Bank processesand proceduresto the proposed project. At the state level, SEEs wouldhave had two years of operatinga decentralizededucational system, by the project's effectiveness.At the local level, participationof School Councils (formedunder the 1993 GeneralEducation Law) would benefit from the experienceof similar communityorganizations already operating in differentsectors and other Bank-financedprojects. The risks identifieddunng early project preparationposed by the disparity in salaries for federaland state teachers (who wouldnow all belong to the state system)have been practicallyeliminated: salanes have been leveledin all but three of the participatingstaves, and these three states are scheduledto completethis process in 1994.
Pbverty Catgory: The project would support a program of targeted interventions. The project would support the national policy of compensationfor regionaldisparities in education. Project interventionswould be targeted not only to ten of the poorest states but also to the poorest regions and most indigenors areas therein. The proposedproject and first Primary EducationProject togetherwould cover the 14 poorest states in the county (out of a total of 32 states). Major urban areas within the selected regionshave been excluded. - vi -
Project Cost Summary Local Foreign Total --- US$ million- Human ResourcesDevelopment 99.8 2.6 102.4 EducationalMaterial Resources TeachingMaterials & StudentPackages 85.6 85.6 171.2 ReadingCorners 4.8 2.1 6.9 IndigenousEducation 3.9 2.0 5.9 InfrastructureImprovement 93.8 24.7 118.5 188.1 114.4 302.5 InstitutionalStrengthening ManagementCapacity 11.6 5.3 16.9 Teacher Incentives 97.5 0.0 97.5 Improvementof SupervisionSystem 16.6 3.4 20.0 Books & MaterialsDistribution System 7.6 2.8 10.4 Project Administration 26.6 1.0 27.6 159.9 12.5 172.4 BASECOST 447.8 129.5 577.3 PhysicalContingencies 5.0 1.4 6.4 Price Contingencies 26.3 6.7 33.0 TOTALPROJECT COST' 479.1 616.7
Financing Plan LoAl Foreign Total -TS$ million- Federal Govenunent 204.7 0.0 204.7 IBRD 274.4 137.6 412.0
Total
Estimated Disbursements Tlmetable IBRI) F1scalYear 1994 199S 1996 1997 1998 1999 Annual 30.0' 52.0 88.0 112.0 80.0 50.0 Cumulative 30.0 82.0 170.0 282.0 362.0 412.0
Economic Rate of Return: Not Applicable
Y Includestaxes and duties estimated at aboutUS$44.3 million. ' IncludesSpecial Account deposit of US$25.0million and retroactivefinancing of up to US$6.0million for eligibleexpenditures incurred on or afterCctober 31, 1993. - vii -
BASICDATA SHEET
Mexico Year A. General CountryData GNP Per Capita (US$) 3,030 1991 Area (ThousandSquare Kilometers) 1,958 1993 PopulationEstimate (Millions) 83.3 1991 Urban Population(% of Total) 73 1991 PopulationProjection, Year 2000 99.0 1992 B. Social Indicators Crude death rate 5.4 1990 AverageAnnual Rate of PopulationGrowth (%) 1.9 1990 TotalFerility Pate 3.2 1991 Infant MortalityRate (per 1,000 live births) 36.0 1991 Life Expectancyat Birth (years) 70.0 1991 Adult IlliteracyRate (% of persons 15 and over) 11.8 1991 C Education Statisfics Primary (Net)(Grades1-6)(%) 98.0 1991 Lower Secondary(Grades 7-9)(%) 58.0 1991 Total Primary Enrollment(millions) 14.4 1991 Federal (%) 71.i 1991 State (%) 22.5 1991 Private (%) 6.4 1991 Primary Schooland EfficiencyData Number of Teachers(thousands) 479.6 1991 Student/TeacherRatio 30.0 1991 IncompleteSchools (% of all primary schools) 14.9 1991 Unitary Schools(% of all primary schools) 22.7 1991 RepetitionRate (%) 9.8 1992 Dropout Rate (%) 4.6 1991 CompletionRate (%) 58.1 1991 EducationExpenditure Data TotalPublic EducationSpending (% of GDP) 4.3 1991 Federal EducationSpending (% of Total Public EducationExpenditures) 82.8 1991 Federal EducationSpending (% of Total Federal Exrenditures) 9.4 1991 Federal Pri- -,' EducationSpending (% of Federal EducationExpenditures Among Levels) 39.8 1991
Sources: SocialIndicators of Development,1991-92; INEGI Censo de 1990;World Development Report, 1993;SEP and Bank staff stimaes, 1993. viii -
ElUCATIONGLOSSARY
Completionrate For six-ye-r primaryeducation, the ratio betweenthe number of studentsr sJinggrade 6 in a given year T and the number of studentsentering grade 1 in year T-6, as a close approximation of the percentageof studentsof a given cohort to complete six- year primary school.
Dropoutrate Percentageof studentswho abandonthe systemwithout completingthe educationcycle, e.g., primary school.
Educationalattainment Number of formal school years achievedby a student.
Educationalachievement Magnitudeachievement in any subject area, generallymeasured on the basis of national curriculumlearning objectives.
Enrollmentratio Ratio of total enrollmentin a given school cycle (e.g., primary) to the populationin the correspondingage group.
Incompleteschool Primary school with fewer than the six officialprimary educationgrades.
Net enrollmentrate Percentageof children of a given age group enrolled in their correspondinggrade level.
Promotion rate Percentageof the studentsenrolled in a given grade who enroll in the next higher grade the followingyear.
Repetitionrate Percentageof the studentsenrolled in a certain grade who are not promotedto the next grade and who thereforeenroll again in the same grade the followingyear.
Transitionrate Percentageof the studentscompleting one school cycle (e.g., primary) who enroll in the first grade of the next upper cycle (e.g., secondary)the followingyear.
Unitary school Multigradeschool with a singleteacher (see IncompleteSchool). MEXICO
SECONDPRIMARY EDUCATION PROJECT
STAFFAPPRAISAL REPORr
I. THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIALCONTE
1.1. Over the past seven years, Mexico has consistentlyimplemented a highly successful economicreform programbuttressed by macroeconomicstabilization policies which reduced inflationfrom over 105 percent in 1986 to less than 10 percent in November 1993, reversing the decline in economicgrowth from a negative3.8 percent to a positive2.6 percent over the same period, thereby restoringconfidence and extnml creditworthinessin the Mexican economy. A far-reachingtrade liberalizationprocess has opened the economyto internatonal competition. The ongoingprocess of privatization,aiming to enhance domesuc economic efficiency,has resulted in the sale or closure of over two-thirdsof state enterprises. More recently,reforms have been initiatedin the agricultua sector, and even the communalfarming ownership system, the ejido, is being restructured. Further liberalizationof the Mexicaneconomy through the North AmericanFree Trade Agreement (NAFTA)with the United States and Canada will representan unprecedentedintegration of large economiesat very differentstages of development. This rapid assimilationinto the world marketplacehas increasedthe competitivepressure on domestic industrialsectors, and Mexico appears determir- I to upgrde its labor force level as a prerequisiteto take full advantageof these econo, dc opporuities for sustined growth.
1.2. The stabilizationprogram has highlightedissues in socialdevelopment Despite its macroeconomicachievements, Mexico's potential growthis stdl constained by relativelylow levelsof human capital accumulationand widespreadpoverty. The illiteracyrate for the adult populationis still at 12.4 percent, higher than the rates for Argentina,Costa Rica, Chile, and Venezuela. The averagenumber of years of schoolingfor persons aged 25 and over is 6.5, which is lower than those of Chile (7.5) and Colombia(7.1). The average primary educationrepetition rate for Mexico is 9.1 percent (Annexes1 & 2). The bulk of unemploymentis composedof young individualswith a low level of education, and about 20 percent of unemployedmales have not completedprimary education. An analysis of the determinantsof unemploymentin Mexico revealsthat the probabilityof being unemployed decreases significantlywith age and with educationlevel. The impact of educationas an explanatoryvariable for workers' incomeis twice as high as that of any other examined variable. Consequently,Mexico's capacity to competein the internationalmarket will hinge on its ability to harness an educatedand skilled labor force, increasethe productivityof its workers, adopt modern productionprocesses and technologies,and developnew skldlsas a more diversifiedstructure of labor demandunfolds The economicsof educationhave repeatedlysuggested that primary educationis the cornerstonefor a modernizedhuman capital stock. -2 - 1.3. The continuinginadequacies in human resourcesare caused in part by poverty,and in turn they contribute to the perpetuationof poverty.Y'A 1991 Bank study summarizesthe incidenceof poverty in Mexicoas follows: (a) 19.5 percent of the populationlive' t in extreme poverty (i.e., with a per capita incomebelow US$360per annum in 1984 prices); (b) 76.6 percent of the extremepoor are located in rural areas; (c) 37 percent of the rural populationin Mexico are classifiedas extremelypoor; and (d) the extreme poor have large families, the highest dependencyratios, and the lowest educationallevels. 2' Real per capita incomes in the richer (mainly northern)states are more than twice those in the poorer (mainly southern)states. Given that labor is the principal asset of the poor, improvementin the provisionand qualityof educationrepresents a key mechanismfor reducinginequality and loweringthe number of individualsliving in absoiutepoverty. The retums to schooling, howevermeasured, have demonstratedthat more and better schoolingis an importantpolicy tool for poverty alleviation,through increasedproductivity and income, and for non- economicsuccess. Basic education,by conveyingthe skills of reasoning,communication, and numeracy,enables workersto interact more efficiently,follow instructionsbetter, and completeincreasingly complex tasks, which are crucial for job performance,workplace and communityparticipation, and overallsocial advancement.
1.4. The severe curtailmentof public investmentin the 1980s and the recent liberalization process have created a need for investmentin human resourcesto support continued economicgrowth. The Governmenthas a clear perceptionof social needs and is assigning high priority to the developmentof human resourcesthrough investments in education, particularlyat the primary level. Full success of the adjustmentprogram requires policies L.at are effectivein promotinga more equal distributionof gains and opportunitiesof macroeconomicreforms. Through improvedbasic schooling,a more capable labor force will be developed,which will contributeto offset regionalimbalances and make more Mexicans activebeneficiaries of development. In pursuit of this strategy,the Govermnentof Mexico asked for, and the Bank supported, a Primary EducationProject (PRogmmapara Abatir el RezagoEducativo, PARE, Ln. 3407-MIE,1991) with a total investnent of US$352 million in four of the poorest states. In 1992, the Governmentsought and the Bank approvedan Initial EducationProject (PRODEI,Ln. 3518-ME, 1992)for the ten poorest states, includingthe four in PARE, with an investmentof US$115million. In 1993, the Governmentasked for a secondmajor follow-upinvestment in primaryeducation for the rnextten poorest and educationallyleast developedstates.3' The Bank started projectpreparation in February and appraisedit in October/November.This report analyzesand supportsthe proposedSecond Primary EducationProject, Programapara Abatir el Rezagoen Educaci6nBasica, PAREB.
Behrman,J. TheAction of HumanResources and Povertyon OneAnother. Washington, D.C.: The WorldBank, 1990. 21 WorldBank, Mexicoin TIansition:Towards a New Rolefor the PublicSetor, Washington,D.C.: The WorldBank, 1991. 31 The first Primary Education Project, PARE, covered the states of Chiapas, Oaxaca, Guerrero, and Hidalgo. Accordingto the compositeindex of marginalityused for targetingpurposes (Annex 6), Hidago is actuallythe I0th most disadvanagedstate but was selectedunder PARE(1991) to maximize previoussocial sector imNestmentsin the same four states. The report will refer to the ten proposed proect states as the "next poorest" as a matter of convention. -3 -
H. THE PRIMARYEDUCATION SYSTEM
A. Overviewof SectoralOrganization and Achievements
2.1. Since 1950, Mexico has made great strides in increasingboth the access to and the quality of public education: adult illiteracyhas decreasedfrom 40 percent to 12 percent; the number of schools has tripled, the number of teachershas quintupled, and school enrollments have increasedsevenfold as the total populationincreased only threefold. By 1980, 25 percent of children aged 4-5 attendedpreschool, 91 percent of children aged 6-14 attended primary school, and the enrollmentrate in lower secondaryschool reached48 percent. By 1992, 68 percent of children aged 4-5 had access to preschooleducation and net enrollment rates at the primary and lower secondarylevels reached 98 percent and 58 percent, respectively. In 1992, total primary school enrollment(grades 1-6) was 14.8 million children, attendedto by a networkof 88,918 primary schools and about 510,800 teachers (about half the 1.1 million teachers), or an averageof 29 studentsper teacher (Table 1), a substantialimprovement over the 45 studentsper teacher ratio in 1970. In July 1993, the length of the school year was increas,d from 187 to 200 days, to be enforcedby all states as part of the General EducationLaw (LGE) (paras. 2.18 & 2.32-2.38). Ahble1. Mexican School System - 1992/1993 Students Teachers No.(000s} | % (OOOs) Institutions
IInitial_ r 117.9 0.5 3.3_1,495 Preschool 1,858.9 11.2 114.3 51,554 Basic 19,031.3 74.7 748.5 108,950 Primary 14,828.2 58.2 510.8 88,918 Secondary 4,203.1| _16.5 __237.7 20_032 UpperSecondary 2,177.2 8.5 151.0 6,833 HigherEducation 1,306.7 5.1 138.8 2,239 btal 25,492.0 100.0 1,155.9 171,071
2.2. The formal educationsystem in Mexico includestwo-year preschool, nine years of mandatorybasic education(recently established by integratingthe six-year primary education and three-year lower secondaryeducation cycles, para. 2.36), three or four additionalyears of secondaryeducation, and undergraduateand graduateuniversity programs. A well- designedand mainly non-formalinitial education(ages 0 through3) programprecedes preschool. Of a total enrollmentof 25.5 million studentsat all education levelsin 1992/93, 57 percent were enrolled at the primary level (gades 1-6). Post-basiceducation starts at the upper secondarylevel, leadingto either the liberal arts baccalaureate(80 percent of level enrollment)or the vocationaltrack. Higher educationlasts from three to six years, dependingon the career pursued, and the universitieshave a semi-autonomousrelationship with the Federal EducationSecretariat (SEP). The public sector provideseducational services for 90 percent of total enrollment. -4 - 2.3. In May 1992, the Governmenttansferred the managementand operationof all initial (ages 0-3), preschool (ages 4-5), primary (grades 1-6), special, and lower secondary education (grades 7-9) and of teacher training institutionsto the states (para. 2.34). All the facilities along with technicaland administrativestaff were transferredto the states with a correspondingbudget of N$20.3 billion (US$6.6 billion)for 1993. Currently,SEP maintains direct responsibilityonly for the educationsystem in the Federal District and for upper secondary educationnationwide. SEP's leadershiprole w}'l focuson: (a) preparationand enforcementof educationalpolicy norms; (b) curriculumdevelopment and textbook production; (c) design and financingof compensatoryand specialprograms for an equitable distribution of educationservices; (d) support of educationalresearch; and (e) operationof the evaluationsystems. The total SEP budget for 1993 was N$41.7 billion (US$13.4 billion) and, for 1994, is N$44.8 million (US$14.3million).
24. Primary educationis providedin three modalities(enrollment shares in parentheses): general primary education(92.9 percent); bilingualor indigenous educationaddressing the needs of 46 ethnic groups in 23 states (6.3 percent);-land the CONAFE (NationalCouncil for EducationalDevelopment, Consejo Nacional de FomentoEducativol model, designed to overcomethe problem of buildingand staffingschools in the most remot rural areas (0.8 percent).§' Only the first two modalitieswould be supportedby the proposedproject.
B ssues in Primary Education
2.5. Despite recent educationalachievements, key problemsremain to be addressedunder three sets of issues: quality,efficiency, and equity.
Quality
2.6. Low ducational Achievement. Althoughno nationwideachievement tests are systematicallyconducted in Mexico, data from periodictesting suggestthat effectivelearning in school requires substantialimprovement. A 1988 SEP evaluationon Spanish, mathematics,and the natural and social sciences indicatedthat students' averagescores in grades 4-6 were dismal, only slightlyabove 20 out of a possiblescore of 100.7' A 1992 study found that Mexicanstudents mastered only 53 percent and 30 percent of the national core curriculumin Spanishand mathematics,respectively Al These low educational achievementswere associatedwith inappropriatecurriculum, poor teachingquality, high
V Duringthe past 12 years,enrollment in the bilingualmodality has increasedat an annal rate of 5.6 percent,indicative of strongerdemand and fasterpopulation growt rate in indigenouscomnunities. SEP's GeneralDirectorate for IndigenousEducation (DGEI) is responsiblefor the sector. 5 CONAFE is a semi-autonomousinstitution of SEP and is curently coordinat PARE and PRODEI. §' This community-orientedprogram relies on youngteachers recruited among basic educationgraduates, who receiveteacher training, texbooks, and mateials designedby CONAFE. The 18,798CONAFE schoolswere built and are maintainedby the community For one year of service,teachs receive accommodationsprovided by the community,a monthlystipend, and a three-yearscholarship to purse upper secondarystudies. In 1991/92,total enrollment in this programwas 380,000. Y' WorldBank. Mexico:Primarv EducationProieM, Report No. 9770-ME,Washington, D.C.: 1991. et Palafox,J.C., Prawda,J. and V6eez,E., PriM, SchoolOuality in Mexico- A Viewfrom LAkT* No. 33, The WorldBank: 1992. teacher absenteeism,inadequate supervisory capacity, insuficient didacticmaterials, dilapidatedphysical facilities, deficient management practices, and severalnonschool factors such as parents' lack of involvementin school issues.
2.7. InappropriateCurriculum. The primary school curriculumhad not been revisedfor 20 years until 1992, when the National Agreementfor Basic EducationModernization (ANAM)introduced a new integratedcurriculum stressing basic skills (para. 2.35). Implementationof the new primary educationcurriculum stared in "992/93with the lowest grades; the proposed projectwill support it with teacher training (paras. 3.8-3.13) and updated educationalmaterials (pamns.3.14-3.19). A curriculumplan for grades 7-9, published in September1993, will be implementedin a gradual process through 1995. The proposed project would support four studiesto assess the quality and appropriatenessof the basic educationcurricula (para. 3.25(c)).
2.8. Pbor Teaching Quaity. Only 30 percentof Mexicanteachers, and less than ten percent of the indigenouseducation teachers, possess the requiredcollege-level teaching qualificationor licenciaturm.Thus, many teacherslack the theoreticalbackground and methodologicalskills needed to foster good interactionwith the stdents, teach children effectivelyin the crucial lower grades, make the best use of textbooksand other instructional materials, and identifyand orient chldren with learningdisabilities. These deficienciesare exacerbatedby: (a) the low qualityand old-fashionedcurricula of the teacher truning schools (EscuelasNormales); (b) the insufficientlength and frequencyof in-servicetraining progams, which currently cover too many topicswith little relevanceto classroomteaching; and (c) the lack of financialresources to assist rural teachersto attend tramng progams offered in urban areas. Rural teachersare those most in need of trainingbecause of their relative inexperience,lack of supervision,and the added difficultyof handlingmultigrade teachingof children from deprivedcommunities. The case of unitary (22.7 percent of all primay schools) and incompleteschools (14.9 percent)deserves special attentionbecause effectivemanagement of multigradeclassrooms (almost the rule in rural schools) is one of the key waysto improveteaching quality, requiring coordinated action betweentraining, provisionof educationalmaterials, and supervision. Disadvantagedsocioeconomic conditions add to the learningdifficulties of children in rural communities,whose familieshave little or no educationalbackground. Teachersmust leam how to deal with these situationson the job. The project would providebetter-designed and more comprehensivein-service teacher training offeredin convenientlocations (paras. 3.8-3.13), which would be followedup by a continuumof technicalsupervision with improvedpedagogical inflection (para. 3.29).
2.9. TIeacherAbsenteeism and Misallocation. Teacherabsenteeism in nrual areas stems from: (a) difficultworking and livingconditions; (b) the long disunces teachers have to commutefrom their residences;(c) the amountof time teachers must spend (an averageof four workingdays a month)just to cash their bimonthlychecks; and (d) the paucity of incentives(e.g., trainingopporunities. hardship pay, or faster promotion)to accept rural assignments. As a result, teacher absenteeismis high, and many studentslose a lot of class days each year (an averageof 56 days or 28 percent of the school year in the worst cases). In addition, a high turnoverrate among rural teachers (approximately17 percent each yea.) leads to the assignmentof inexpenencedentry-level teachers to the most crucial inital grades and difficultlocations. Difficultiesare further compoundedby hiring and teacher assignment practices which are influencedby the NationalTbachers Union (SNTE), which supports -6- teacher tansfers to urban areas. resultingin overstaffingof many urban schools and understaffingin rural schools. Low teacher salaries have been a demotivationalfactor, having deterioratedin real terms by more than 33 percent from 1983 to 1990. Since 1990, however,a concerted effort has been made to redress this situation and teacher salaries have risen by 18 percent in real terms. Teachersalary levelshave doubled from the equivalentof 0.9 times the 1985 per capita GDP to 1.8 times the 1993per capita GDP, and have risen 36 percent more rapidly than the minimumwage over the same period. Providingincentives for teachingin remote nural areas under PAREhas yieldedgood preliminaryresults of teacher attendanceas measured by the number of effectiveschool days. Similar teacher incentives would be providedfor the ten project states, relying on communitysupport for monitoring the presence of teachers in classrooms(paras. 3.26-3.28).
2.10. Inadequate Supervision. Teachersupervision is intequent and highly inadequatein the poorest states. This results in: (a) little or no feedbackon teacher performance;(b) no systematicfollow-up on school improvementin student achievements;(c) weak control over teacher attendance;and (d) insufficientsupervisors' input to timely textbookand materials distribution. The problem is especiallyacute in rural schools,which typicallylack a principal, have the least experiencedteachers, and are most in need of supervision. Inadequatesupervision is a multifaicetedadministrative problem, strongly influencedby the SNTE, and involvingsupervisors' training and difficultwork conditionssuch as lack of transportationand adequateoffices. The number of schools allocatedto each supervisor (between 10 and 24) and their location in remoteareas make frequent visits almost impossible. Shortagesof transportand budgetry allocationsfor per diem costs further exacerbatethe problem, as supervisorsmust use public transportationand pay their own expenses. As a consequence,isolated mrual schools are for the most part left unattended. There are no supervisionoffices, and supervisorsmust borrow workingspace in schoolsor other public buildingsor work out of their own homes. The project would improvethe supervisionsystem thmugh specifictraing, the creation of a broader supervision framework,the financingof traewlincentives, and the provisionof vehiclesand supervision offices(pam. 3.29).
2. 11. Shortages of Library Books and Other lUachingMaterials. Support materials such as library books, maps, models, posters, school supplies, audiovisualaids and basic equipmentfor the natural sciencesdemonstrably increase educational achievement and attainment. The lack of school library books is problematic,since few mrralMexican schoolchildrenhave access- at school or at home - to any reading material besides their schoolbooks. The lack of early reading stimulationcan retard children'sprogress in developingreading and writing skills. The absenceof additionaleducational materials is particularlyserious among indigenouschildren who often do not speak Spanish, have less qualifiedteachers, and exhibit the worst educationindicators. A recent preliminary assessmentof the impact of PAREindicates that the ReadingCorners program 2' has not been sufficientlyincorporated into classroomstrategies, mainly because most teachers do not
2' The ReadingCorns Program(P,gnma de Rinconesde Lectura)has beenoped since1986 by SEP'sEducauional Publications Unit (UPE) to providestudems and teachers with both an easy-access hlbra and the motivationaltools to promoteits regularuse. Theprogram sarted on a smallscale but its conceptis nationalin scope;the programis beingexpanded with support provided by Bank projects. -7 - know how to use them. ' The projectwould provide: (a) sets of educationalmaterials for classroomand school use, includirg instructionsfor appropriateuse of classroommaterials, textbooks,and ReadingCorners (paras. 3.15-3.17); (b) referencebooks for teachers(para. 3.17); and (c) textbooksand readingmaterials for indigenousschools (paras. 3.18-3.19).
2.12. Deficienciesin TextbookProduction and Distribution. For over 30 years, Mexican children have benefittedfrom a national federally-fundedtextbook production system. Since 1959, the National Free TextbookCommission (CONAUTEG) has asserted the right of each student to own a full and free set of textbooksfor all subjectsof prnmaryeducation. Productionof textbooks(not under the project) has been impressive,with over 90 million low-cost,well-designed and -illustratededucational books being producedin 1992/93 alone. Textbookdistribution, however, is a major problem, particularly in rural regions, since many poorer states lack the resourcesand administrativecapability for timely delivery of textbooks. Since textbooksand teacher guides are all too often the only didactic materials studentsand teachers can rely on, deficientdistribution diminishes the qualityof education. To help correct these deficiencies,the project wouldstrengthen the distributionsystem by providirg for the constructionof regionalwarehouses in strategiclocations and the devising of state-specificdistribution plans and mechanisms(para. 3.30).
2.13. DilapidatedPhysical Facilities. In 1992, a total of about 81,000 classroomsneeded rehabilitation. In addition, there is a current shortageof classrooms,estimated at nearly 23,460 at the primary educationlevel based on enrollmentsand projecteddemand, which representsa total investmentcost of over US$660million. While multi-shift schoolscould mitigatethis type of shortageto a certain extent, such programshave proveddifficult to implementin rural areas due to infrastructurelimitations. In addition, many schools lack toilets, many classroomslack sufficientdesks, chairs, and other furniture and equipment, and schools often have no funds for basic physicalmaintenance.
2.14. For decades now, school constructionhas been under the responsibilityof the Federal School ConstructionAgency (CAPFCE), a SEP body with strong technical capacityand extensivebidding experience. CAPFCEalso managesand supervisesmost federallyfunded school construction. Under PARE,difficulty of access to mrualcommunities resulted in high unit costs of construction. The experiencewith the "MunicipalFunds" approach sponsored by the National SolidarityProgram (SOLIDARIDAD)under the Decentralizationand RegionalDevelopment Project (Ln. 3310-ME, 1991)has led to reducedcosts and increased local participationwith only a small loss in quality. Under the proposedproject, the diversityof geographiclocation wouldmake it necessaryto take advantageof both CAPFCE and participatoryapproaches to school construction(paras. 3.20-3.23).
2.15. Need for GreaterCommunity hrtlcipation. Communityparticipation in school- related activities enhancesthe community'sresponsibility for betteringacademic performance and fosteringa positivelearning environment. Historically,a centralizedbureaucracy has coexistedin Mexico with a strong traditionof communityorganization. However,two key issues remain: (a) the lack of structuresfor communityparticipation in many areas; and (b) the failure to make full use of them in others. One of the geat successesof
101Epeleta, J. et al. Phgramawa Abaur el Reago_Fucatiio. Evaldad6nCuolitatva del Imn"ao. MexicoD.F.: Cent de Investigacid6ny de EsmwosAvanzados del Instito Polit*nicoNacional, 1993. -8 - SOLIDARIDADhas been to meld these two tendenciesinto a process of actual decentralizationand effectivecommunity participation. Communityparticipation, via communitycommittees, Municipal Education Councils, parents associations,or School Councils (ConsejosEscolares de Participaci6nSociaOU is an effectivevehicle for social commitmentand a catalyst for practicaland regular involvementwith the school. The creation of SchoolCouncils in each school with the joint participationof parents, teachers, and local leaders is expectedto foster closer cooperationbetween local communitiesand their schools. The differenttypes of entities participatingin the project (authoritiesat the national, state and local levels, professionalsin nationaland state institutions,teachers, and the communittyat large) need to be adequatelyand timely informedabout project activities to developinterest and start participationin the project. The proposed project would enhance participationthrough: (a) enlistingSchools Councils to support and monitorteacher attendance;(b) involvingcommunities in school construction(para. 3.20); (c) transferring resourcesfor school maintenanceto municipalities;(para. 3.22); and (d) implementingan intensiveproject promotioneffort amongauthorities and communities(para. 3.25(d)).
2.16. Lack of Evaluation. Limitedresources and technicalcapacity contribute to difficulty in monitoringand evaluatingacademic achievements and teachingstandards across the system. SEP's General Directoratefor Evaluation(DGEIR) is the only public institution undertalkingevaluation research on qualitativeand quantitativeaspects of the education sector. However,such evaluationresearch is typicallylimited in its sample coverage, periodicity,scope, depth of analysis,and accessibility. At the state level, practically no capacity for evaluationexists. This reduces the eli-iency and jeopardizesthe sustainability of educational investmentprograms. The result is a systemin which the selectionof the most productiveinvestments and most effectiver'fonrms are cloudedby scarce understanding of the impact broughtabout by previousprograms and policies. The project would foster the capacity for sustainablemeasurement of the qualityof educationboth at the central and state levels, includinga project process evaluation(para. 3.25('b)
2.17. Inadequate ManagerialCapacity. State governmentshave assumed full responsibilityfor managingtheir basic education systems,which until 1992 were under the federal goverunent. Existingmanagerial abilities in the states, althoughgenerally satisfactory,vary from one state to another,and weaknessesare still expecteddurng the early years of decentralization. However,the state administrativestructures are not entirely new, since for decadesthe federalgovernment developed field officesat the state level (Serucios Coordinadosde Educaci6nP(dlica, SCEPs), which gatheredconsiderable experiencein operatingthe state educationsystems.
2.18. The 1992 ANAMiformally transferred the administrativeapparatus, the schools, their assets and staff to state administrations; redefined SEP's normative functions; and required a new SEP structure to comply with those functions. The 1993 LGE confirmedthe distributionof responsibilitiesbetween the federaland state govenmnents.SEP's internal regulationsand procedures(Reglamentos Internos) are still being revisedto conform with the LGE, but the operationof the systemin general and, in particular,the delivery of educationalservices in the states have not been hamperedby their absence.
LI SchoolCounwils and Municipal Eduaion Councilswere established by the 1993WE. -9 -
2.19. Effectiveintegration of the transferredprimary educationsystems into the existing state systemspresented practical difficulties at first. Differencesin teacher salaries and benefitsbetween the state and federal systems,separately negotiated with differtnt labor union chapters, made it very hard to unify the systemsin most states. Nevertieless, the gradual equalizationof state and previously-federalteacher salaries, started in December 1992, is nearly completed. Only three states have not finished the process, but are due to do so in 1994. Altogether,427,000 teachers and educationworkers will have benefittedfrom approximately$160 million of salary supplementsfrom federal and state funds.
2.20. BeforeMay 1992, the SCEPs had been in charge of translatingcentral policies into concreteactions in the field. Since that time, the SEEs (State Secretariatsof Public Educationor equivalentorganizations) have been created to take over the educationalsystems transferredby the federal governmentand integratethem with the previouslyexisting state systems. In most cases, the structure and staffingof the former federal SCEPs in the states formed the basis of the SEEs. These SEEs will need to devotemore time to policy analysis and strategicplanning. Federal authoritiesare providingtechnical assistanceto the states to help them build up their institutionalcapacities through the SEP's General Coordinationfor EducationDecentralization. SEP intends to provide this service on a permanent basis at the request of state governmentsand is establishinga residentrepresentative office in each of the states. SEP, however,does not have sufficientqualified human resourcesto provide all the requiredadequate technical assistance,particularly in key areas such as policy analysis, educationalplanning, informationmanagement, distribution systems, and evaluation. The project would financean integratedmanagement training program in educationalplanning and policy analysis (para. 3.25(a)) and the strengtheningof project monitoring,evaluation, and informationsystems at both federal and state levels (para. 3.25(b)).
Efficiency4V
2.21. High RepetitionRates. Mexico is beset by problems of high repetitionrates - a typical Latin Amencan proxy for school failure - leadingto a costly and inefficient education system. In 1993, officialestimates for primary educationrepetition rates in Mexico were 9.1 percent. Independentestimates, using a differentmethodology, place nationwiderepetition rates at 16.5 percent for the first grade and at 50 percent in the poorer states.!3) Recentestimates suggest that these inefficiencycosts amount to nearly 12 percent of total expendituresin primary education.Al The problem is further aggravatedby wide repetitionrate disparitiesbetween and within states. SEP data for 1993 reveal that repetition rates vary from 4.6 percent in the Federal District to 14.9 percent in Oaxaca (Annex 2), and 14 states have rates of 10 percent or more. Other sources suggestthat repetition rates higher than 30 percent can be observedfor the first two grades in many rumralschools. A
12 Withinthis section,there wil be mentionof severalalternative measurements of schoolefficiency levels,which likely provide a more objectiveview against an internationaland comparativebackdrop. Nevertheless,official Mexican statistics are beingused for the project,particularly for monitoringand other indicatorspurposes. 13/ Schiefelbein,E., Outputof the SMMGModel with Data from the GDPPB.Santiago, Chile: UNESCO-OREALC,Siri System,June 1991. W' Carlson,S.: Transformingthe ViciousCircle: The Costsand Savingsof Schoollnefficiency in Mexico,A Viewfrom LATHR,"No. 8: The WorldBank, 1991. - 10- preparatorycase study on two rural schools of Oaxaca revealedthat the percentageof students who repeatedat least one year over a seven-yearperiod were 48 percent and 63 percent, respectively.1Lv
2.22. High DropoutRates. Low internalefficiency in Mexico is also characterizedby high rates of primary school dropout. Everyyear, about 0.7 million children (or 4.6 percent of enrollments)drop out from schools,half of them beforecompleting the third grade, i.e., before achievingfunctional literacy. Again, there are wide disparitiesamong the states, from 0.6 percent in Baja Californiato 13.9 percent in Chiapas; 11 states exhibit rates of 5 percent or higher (Annex 2). The Governmentis addressingthis issue by: (a) improvingthe quality of teachingthrough upgradingof teacher skills, strengtheningthe supervisionprocess, and increasingthe supply of didacticmaterials; and (b) grantingscholarships (Becas de SOLIDANDAD)in the poorestareas to a limited number of students(up to 8 per class, or 24 per school) based upon continuedattendance. Since the latter approachhas a high cost per beneficiary(about US$600 per student),the proposedproject would support only the first element of this strategy (paras. 3.8-3.13), which has more widespreadbenefits.
2.23. Low CompletionRates. The net effect of these high repetition and dropout rates is a low rate of studentscompleting the full six years of primary education. In 1991/92, only 58 percent of the studentsentering the first grade were likely to completethe sixth grade. Wide disparities in completionrates exist betweenstates, rangingfrom 31 percent in Chiapas to 82.4 percent in the Federal District. This impliesthat accessto the upper level of basic education (grades 7-9) also variesgreatly between states. Children from the poorer southern states are only half as likely as those from the northern states to gain access to grades 7-9. Many of the factors responsiblefor low quality,such as teacher training and absenteeism, insufficientdidactic materials, and incompleteschools (paras. 2.6-2.20) are responsiblefor these low efficiencyrates.
2.24. High rates of grade repetition,as well as substantialnumbers of studentsdropping out of school, reflect the low efficiencyrates. Approximately50 percent of the reasons can be attributed to socioeconomicfactors that affectthe lives of children in the project area, such as poor nutrition, the need for childrento participateat an early age as members of the labor force, or migradonof the family in search of seasonalwork for the heads of household. Other factorscan be traced to educationalconditions such as poor training of teachers, lack of adequateeducational materials, teachersnot speakingstudents' native languages,materials not available in native languages,and deficienttechnical supervision.L6' The lowestquality and efficiencyindicators are observedin states with higher proportionsof rural and indigenouspopulations. The completionrate of indigenouschildren for primary schooling is only 27 percent comparedwith 58 percent for all children, and their repetition rate is 42 percent comparedwith 9 percentfor all children. Researchhas shown that improvingthe quality of instructionalinputs can increase studentlearning and motivateparents to keep their children in school longer, thereby increasingthe efficiencyof the system. The project would finance investmentsin improvingthe efficiencyof educationthrough teacher training (paras.
' Myers,R., SchoolRepetition and Dropout- CaseStudies of TwoRual Schoolsin the Stateof Oaxaca.Mexico. Reportprepared for The WorldBank, 1993. 16' Ibid. - 11 -
3.8-3.13), updatededucational materials (paras. 3.15-3.19), and improvedsupervision strategies(paras. 3.8-3.13 & 3.29).
2.25.2 inancialConstraints and Patternsof FederalEducation Spending. Both efficiencyand quality in the educationsystem are heavilyaffected by limitationsin the availabilityof financialresources and by the way the federal governmentallocates resources to the states. Federal educationspending declined sharply in the 1980s, but has recovered rapidly since 1991, evidenceof the heightenedimportance the Governmentis placing on education as a core element of future economicgrowth. The federaleducation budget grew rapidly during the 1970sfrom 1.6 percent of GDP in 1970 to 3.1 percent in 1980, a period when real GDP growth averagedabout 7 percent per annum. Since 1982, federalspending on educationdropped from 3.7 percent of GDP (14 percent of the total federalbudget) to 2.6 percent of GDP (12.1 percent of total federal budget) in 1986 as a result of the economic crisis, affectingall sectors. Real federal spendingin the 1990shas regainedpre-crisis levels, reaching an estimated4.1 percent of GDP in 1993 (Annex3). Comparedwith many other Latin Americancountries, Mexicohas maintainedlow levelsof education spendingin relation to GDP, particularly in per pupil spendingon primary education. Mexico's educationexpenditures as a percentageof GDP per capita averaged4.1 percent in the 1980s, whereas those of Chile, Costa Rica, and Venezuelaaveraged 4.5 percent, 5.1 percent, and 5.5 percent, respectively. Althoughthe situation is improving,financial constraints still hamper the education sector, particularlyin the provisionof sufficientteaching materials and adequate salaries for teachers. Given the high levelof Governmentcommitment to education, it is anticipatedthat there will further, albeit small, increasesin the percentageof GDP and of the federal budget allocatedto educationover the next few years, plateauingto a level of about 4.5 percent and 13.0 percent, respectively. Such expenditureincreases, along with the positivepolicies adoptedby the Governmentto improvequality (para. 2.35), are anticipatedto make a major positiveimpact on school achievement.
2.26. Unbalanced Educational Expenditures. The repercussionsof the deep budget cuts in the education sector in the mid-1980swill remain for the medium-term. These budget declines were accompaniedby an increasein total enrollments,teaching staff, and number of schools, resultingin drastic reductionsin real per pupil expenditures. Between1982 and 1990, federal spendingfor primary educationdecreased in real terms at an averageannual rate of 1.2 percent, while enrollmentsincreased at an averageannual rate of about 5 percent. In censtant 1980 pesos, spendingper pupil decreasedby 47.4 percent in that period, resulting in a scarcityof teachingmaterials and a reductionin the reMalvalue of teachers' salaries of nearly 40 percent. The detenoration of the educationbudget is also reflectedin the inbalance between investmentand recurrentexpenditures. Almost 95 percent of federal spending now goes to recurrent costs (personneland operatingcosts), up from 81 percent in 1980. Only about 5 percent of the budget is investedin buildings,teacher training, educationmaterials, and classroomaids (Annex 3).
2.27. Inadequate Intra-Sectoral Allocation. There has been a long-termand increasing bias in favor of higher educaton expendiures. In fact, the index of public subsidizationLy
12' The indexof public subsidizationmeaures the percentageby whichthe privaterate of rturn exceeds the social rate of return. h G. Psacharopoulosand Y. Ng, Earningsand Educationin Latin America. AssessingPriorities for SchoolImestent. WorldBank Policy Research Worldng Paper 1056, 1992. - 12 - showsthat higher educationis the most heavilysubsidized level of schooling(41 percent) and primary educationthe least subsidized(12 percent). Governmentpolicies addressing educationalfinancing and allocationof spendingare outlined in its PolicyLetter (Annex 4).
Equity
2.28. Allocationof FederalGovernment Expenditure. Public educationalresources have traditionallybeen allocatedby the federalgovernment, accounting for over three-quartersof the actual educationalexpenditures, with private financingand contributionsfrom states' own resourcesproviding the balance. The percentageof expendituresfrom the federal governmentdropped from 86.3 percent in 1985 to 78.2 percent in 1991, whereas the state expendituresincreased from 8.7 percent in 1985to 16 percent in 1991 (Annex 3). Because of the national salary policy, which divides the country intO three zones to reflect cost-of- living differences,unit costs have been higher in the richer states: in 1992, they were N$1,154 per student in the non-projectstates comparedwith N$948 in the project states. This explainswhy the ten proposedproject states, which account for 41.0 percent of national primary educationenrollment in federally-fundedschools, receivedonly 38.2 percent of the federal allocationfor primary educationin 1993. Since these poorer states are less able to supplementfederal allocationsfrom their own resources(Annex 5), the Governmenthas introducedcompensatory education programs as a key elementin reducing inequity in the education systemby channelingmore resourcesto the poorest states. The project states were chosen based on selectededucational and povertyindicators, which make up a marginality index (Annex 6), and includeSan Luis Potosi, Veracruz,Michoacan, Puebla, Jalisco, Guanajuato,YucatAn, Durango, lTbasco, and Campeche(para. 3.3); the states of Chiapas, Oaxaca, Guerrero, and Hidalgo(covered under PARE)would also benefitdirectly from managementtraining programs for SEEs (para. 3.25(a)) and indirectlyfrom other institutionalstrengthening programs at CONAFE(paras. 3.25(b)-(d)). Primary education statistics for the project states are included as Annex 2. To ensure that federalallocations are maintainedat a level in line with the compensatoryscheme, monitoringof both federal and state allocationsto primary education wouldbe trackedon a regular basis and reviewed on an annul basis (paras. 6.1 & 7.2(v)).
2.29. DifficultSchool Access. Povertynot only causes low educationalefficiency, but also limits access to school for childrenin rural and indigenousareas. In primary education, the net enrollmentrate has remainedat 98 percent for the past five years, but this nationwide figure disguises regionalpockets of low matriculation. In the state of Campeche,for example,30 percent of the schoolsare incomplete,i.e., they cover only the first three or four grades of instruction. Moreover,on a nationalbasis, 0.4 million children still have no access to primary educationat all, and a further 0.7 millionchildren drop out of school each year. The populationstill without access to primaryeducation is characterizedby extreme poverty,geographic isolation, and early entry into low-payingpositions in the labor market. The proposedproject would increase accessto prinary educationfor poor children living in the most deprivedand remote municipalitieswithin the ten states,particularly those children in indigenousschools (e.g., 91 percent of indigenousschools in the state of Veracruzwould be covered),and schools temporarilywithout teachers(paras. 3.3-3.6).
2.30. Lack of Initial and PreschoolEducation. Both initial and preschooleducation increasethe reurn on pnmary and secondary school investmentsand raise participant - 13 - productivityand incomelevels. In 1991, the total number of children benefittingfrom initial education in Mexico represented2.8 percent of this age group. Overall, preschoolservices were offeredto 2.8 million children in 1991-92,only 10 percent of whom lived in rural or indigenousareas. To respondto these needs, in 1992 the Bank supportedPRODEI to help Mexico developnon-formal education for 1.2 million poor childrenby training910,000 parents (mostly mothers)in the ten poorest states in the care and educationof their young (aged 0-3) children. The Bank is supportingpreschool education in the proposedproject through a pre-investmentstudy in preschooleducation (para. 3.25(c) & Annex 14, Part A). The study would be completedwithin the first two years of project implementationand would be reviewedjointly with the Bank.
2.31. Shortage of lextbooksfor Indigenous Schools. Even though Mexicohas the greatest mnuber of indigenouspopulation in Latin American(between 7 and 12 million, accordingto estimates),quality education for these groups has receivedonly superficial attention. The bilingualapproach applied in indigenousschools has not been adequately supportedby national programs. Becauseof their languageand cultural characteristics, indigenouschildren have found themselvesin a disadvantageouslearning situation whenever they have been exposedto books and other reading materialsdesigned to be used by Spanish- speakingchildren. Annex 7 providesstatistics on Mexico'sindigenous population and on educationalservices currently being providedto them. The proposedproject would finance the productionof textbooksand reading materials for the indigenousprimary schools of 17 ethnic groups scatteredthroughout the ten project states (paras. 3.18-3.19).
C. Government Strategy for the Education Sector
2.32. To address these issues, the Governmenthas implementedover the last five years a comprehensivereform of the educationsector. A national plan was launchedin 1989 to ransformthe educationsystem; in 1992, the systemwas decentralizedto the states; and in 1993, a national teachingcareer programwas instituted,mandatory nine-year basic education established,and the LGE passed. These measureshave been buttressedby a budget recovery for the sector (para. 2.25). The Government'ssectoral policies are outlined in a Policy Letter, which is in Annex4. At negotiations.the Govenment presenteda finalPolicy Letter for the educationsector (para. 7.1(a)).
2.33. An overallpolicy statementon educationwas made in 1989 by the incoming administrationto embody the commitmentto build up Mexico'shuman capital. This document, the EducationModernization Program 1989-94(PME), was later incorporatedinto the National DevelopmentPlan 1989-1994and identifiedand set the basic frameworkfor taclding pressingissues of nationaleducation: decentralization,need for quality and modernization,linkages between schoolingand production,community participation, scientificand technologicaladvances, and need to increasethe educationbudget. The PME had four overridingobjectives: (a) to decentralizethe system;(b) to improvethe quality of education; (c) to raise the levelof schoolingthroughout the population;and (d) to strengthen communityparticipation. Additionally,the need to increase resourcesfor educationand the commitmentof federal and state governmentsto commit resourcesthereto, within available resources,nav been clearly expresseddhrough both the PME and the LGE. - 14- 2.34. Decentralization. Basic educationwas decentralizedto the states in May 1992 through the ANAM, which transferredfrom the federal governmentto the states the managementof initial, preschool,primary, lower secondary,and special educationand teacher training. To carry out their new.mandate,the states receivedall related facilitiesand equipmentand technicaland administrativeelements of the educationalsystem as well as correspondingbudgetary allocations. An integratedmodel %-asimplemented to address not only the structural frameworkof the system,but also issuesof curricular contents(para. 2.7), re.-aluation of the teachingfunction (paras. 2.8-2.9), communityparticipation (para. 2.15), and the nonnative (para. 2.3) and compensatory(paras. 2.3 & 2.28) roles of the central Government.
2.35. Quality of Education. The Goverunent's strategyto improvethe quality of education incluaes three elements: (a) upgradingof teachers; (b) updatingof curricula; and (c) provisionof instructionalmaterials. To support excellencein classroomteaching, foster teacher interest in professionalimprovement, and offer better salaries based on refined performanceevaluation, the national TeachingCareer Program (ICP) was launched,later to be enhancedby an in-serviceteacher training strategywidening performance standards for teachers to include class planningand evaluationactivities, teaching strategies, and communityinteraction. A secondquality-related input involvesthe redefinitionand updating of the stuidyprograms. The new curriculum, which was confirmedby the 1993 LGE, stresses a back-to-basicsapproach, emphasizingreading, writing, and practical math, with history and geographyreplacing the previousintegrated 'social sciences" discipline. The third quality enhancementelement is the maintenanceand upgrding of the nationwidefree textbookprogram, strengthenedby the "ReadingCorners" program(paras. 2.49 & 3.17), and the provisionof teachingmaterials and students' packages(paras. 3.15-3.16) and indigenoustextbooks and materials (paras. 3.18-3.19).
2.36. Schooling Level in Society. The Governmentis seeking to raise the general schoolinglevel by: (a) facilitatingschool accessto wider populationsegments; (b) prolongingmandatory school services; and (c) increasingstudents' retentionand their learning achievements.To reach broader social segments,the SEP is extendinga wide range of compensatoryeducation progrms targetedat underservedpopulations through PARE (paras. 1.14, 2.42-2.50 & 2.59) and PRODEI (paras. 1.14, 2.51 & 2.59), bilingual education programs, and the CONAFE model (para. 2.4). The proposed projectwould expand the Government'scompensatory program to reach an additional1.5 million children in disadvantagedcommunities. To augmentthe length of learningexperience, the Government (i) increasedthe school year from 187 to 200 days and (ii) establisheda new nine-yearbasic educationmandate. This commitmentto higher levelsof basic educationstems from results of econometricstudies which suggestthat length of schoolingplays a significantrole in explainingcross-country growth differentials.A8' The cost implicationsof the proposed reform would be analyzedunder the project through a study (para. 3.25(c) and Annexes9 & 14), but the Goverrnent does not expect any significantadditional budget commitmentsdue to existingunused capacityin secondaryschools. To increaseretention of students in the
La' In January1993, compulsoryand free nine-yearbasic educationwas enactedby integratingthe six- year primaryeducation and the three-yearlower secondary cycle, consistent with with UNESCO recommendationsand the policiesfollowed by other Latn Americancounties at a similardevelopmental - 15 - school systemand raise their academicachievements, the Governmentis undertaking necessary measuresto enhance the qualityof the teaching-learningexperience through teacher and administratortraining (paras. 3.8-3.13) and provisionof updatedbooks and educationalmaterials (paras. 3.14-3.19).
2.37. CommunityParticipation. To make nationaleducation more democraticand relevantto social promotion, the Governmentis reorganizingthe educationsystem to involve communitiesin various aspects of school life, drawingthe commitmentof teachers, parents, students, educationauthorities, and communitymembers and leaders. Since the PME, and mainly through the ANAM and the LGE, principleswere stated, operationalstrategies recommended,and mechanismscreated to providelocal communitieswith sufficientstructure and support for effectiveparticipation in school matters. "Councilsof social participation" were created at the community,municipal, and state levels,respectively, and are starting to contributevalued input into the decision-makingprocess.
2.38. IncreasingEducation Resources. Both the PME and the LGE express the Government'scommitment to increase financialresources for primary educationand provide specialassistance to keep rural children in school. Recenteducation expenditures have confirned this commitment,and it is expectedthat this levelof commitmentwill at least be maintainedin the foreseeablefuture (para. 2.25 & Annex 3). Reviewof federaland state budget allocationswould occur during the proposedproject's annual and mid-termreviews (paras. 5.4-5.5 & Annex 20).
I). Bank Role and Experiencein the EducationSector
2.39. Prior to the 1990s, the primary focus of Bank assistanceto the educationsector was on technical training, which reducedthe shortagesof skilled technicians,long considereda major constraintto industrialgrowth. Throughthe First, Second, and Third Technical TrainingProjects (Lns. 2042-ME (1981), 2559-ME (1984), and 3358-ME (1991), respectively),the National Systemfor Vocationaland TechnicalEducation with 252 vocationaltraining centers and an enrollmentof approximately300,000 studentswas established,and about 40 mobiletraining units were constructedto providepractical training to conmnunitiesin marginalareas. The ManpowerTraining Project (Ln. 2876-ME, 1987) supportedretraining for the unemployedand in-servicetraining for workers in small enterprises. These projects havemet their objectivesand targets, and there have been no notable implementationproblems. These activitiesare being consolidatedby the Labor Market and ProductivityEnhancement Project (Ln. 3542-ME, 1992).
2.40. Followingthe 1985 earthquake,the Bank financedthe reconstruction,rehabilitation, and reinforcementof public schools in five states (Colima, Guerrero, Michoacan,Chiapas, and Oaxaca)and in Mexico City through the EarthquakeRehabilitation and Reconstruction Project (Ln. 2665-ME, 1986). Under the Decentralizationand RegionalDevelopment Project (Ln. 3310-ME, 1991), the Bank is supportingrehabilitation of 14,328 schools and reconstructionof 2,006 classroomsand 2,540 annexesfor poor and indigenouspopulations in the rural areas of the same four states coveredby PARE, also supportedby the Bank. - 16 -
2.41. In the 1990s, the Goverunent requestedmajor Bank support for primary education. The 1991 PAREand the 1992 PRODEI,currently under implementation,seek to increase education quality througha varietyof targetedinterventions in the states with the worst educationalindicators. With recent emphasisplaced on Governmentpolicies for basic education,the Bank can make a significantcontribution to human resourcesdevelopment by addressingthe critical issuesof quality,efficiency, and equity in primary education.
E. LessonsLearned from Past Operations
2.42. Relevantlessons from the implementationof ed icationprojects in Mexico, chiefly PARE, but also PRODEI,are discussedin this section.
2.43. Compensatory Projects and Education Quality. The compensatoryPARE led to an increase in primary educationexpenditures for four of the poorest states by 2.2 percent in 1991, 3.7 percent in 1992, and 24.3 percent in 1993 when project implementationaccelerated substantially. In particular,non-personnel expenditures per student increasedby 6 percent in 1992 as a result of the compensatoryprograms, and by 305 percent in 1993, contributingto a subsequentquality improvementof primary educationin those states.)9 While the education impact on studentscannot be measuredreliably over the short-term,there have been reductions in repetitionand dropout rates in the PAREstates. In Hidalgo,for example, the repetition rate declined from 12.4 percent in 1990/91 to 9.4 percent in 1992/93 and the dropout rate from 4.1 percent to 3.6 percent, resultingin an increase in the terminal efficiencyrate from 58.7 percent to 67.0 percent over this period. Based on these positive results, the proposedproject would cover the next ten poorest states in Mexico, channeling the resourcesmostly to non-personnelcosts, which would be inshumentalin improvingthe quality of primary educationin those impoverishedstates; the four PAREstates would also benefitfrom the managementcapacity building subcomponent. By 1998/99the project states' share of all SEP primary educationexpenditures would increase fim 38.3 percent in 1993 to 40.3 percent, and the expenditureper student in the project states would increase rapidly,thereby reducingthe gap betweenricher and poorer states.
2.44. ITrgeting. The first project targetedfour of the economicallyand educationally poorest states. However,since even the pooreststates were found to have municipalitiesat differentlevels of development,the efficiencyof investmentis being further maximizedby focusingmost project activities not only on the next ten poorest states, but also on the 511 poorest municipalities(out of a total of 934) within these ten states ("project areas") (paras. 3.3-3.6).
2.45. Decentralization. PAREhas been carried out withdthesupport of state Coordinating Units, which have played a successfulrole in implementation. Based on that experience,the proposedproject would expandsupport to decentralizationby: (a) involvingthe participant states' SEEs in the project preparationprocess; (b) creating state-levelCoordinating Units (SPCUs, Unidades de Coordinaci6nEstatal) for project implementation and monitoring (para. 3.32); (c) providingtechnical assistanceand human resourcesdevelopment to
12' The non-personnelfederal expenditures per studentper year increasedfrom US$14.26without the projectto US$22.98with the projectin 1991, and mostdramatically from US$13.99without the project to US$56.76with the projectin 1993. - 17 - strengthenthe SEESin the areas of planningand policyanalysis, educational management information,and evaluationsystems (para. 3.25); and (d) empoweringSchool Councils to carry out school constructionand maintenance(paras. 3.20-3.23).
2.46. Teacher Training. The PAREhas shown that its teacher training courses were too short and needed to be reinforcedwith practical in-servicesupervision. Consequently,under the proposedproject, the courses wouldbe expandedin length and content and follow-up technical assistancein classroomperformance has been designedto provide for a more active role by supervisorsand principalsafter the formal trainingperiod (paras. 3.8-3.13).
2.47. Teacher Incentives. The evidencefrom PAREsuggests that financialincentives for teachers serving in the most remoterural schools has been successfulin many ways. Teacherabsenteeism has been significantlyreduced, the number of teachers willing to fill teachingpositions in isolatedschools has increased,and teacher turnoverhas been reducedto a minimum. Attachingthe incentiveto the school rather than to the teachers has succeeded in promotingteachcr stability. Communitycooperation in helping overseeteacher attendance has increasedparental commitmentto other parts of school life, such as transportationof educationalmaterials to the school and the use of the ReadingCorners. Under the proposed project, the teacher incentivesprogram would be extendedto the projectareas, focusingon schools without teachersand on multirade and indigenousschools (paras. 3.26-3.28).
2.48. Instructional Materials. The provisionand use of instructionalmaterials (such as paper, pencils, maps, games, and globes) under PAREhas contributedto: (a) more active learning in those poor schools; (b) more cooperativeclassroom work; and (c) more productiveuse of teachers' time in the classroom. Some materials of poor quality had to be replaced, and teachers had to be trainedto use the materials adequately. The proposed project would: (a) expand the provisionof instmctionalmaterials to the project areas; (b) carry out a more careful selectionand design of didactic materials;and (c) train teachers on how to get the best educationalresults from these materials(paras. 3.15 & 3.17).
2.49. Reading Corners. From PARE, it was learnedthat the ReadingCorners program can: (a) complementteachers' strategies;(b) stimulatestudents' interestsand reading habits; (c) expand the benefitsof selected reading to poor families; and (d) support teachers' continuingeducation through the provisionof referencematerials. The proposedproject would: (a) strengthenthe ReadingCorners in the project areas; (b) increasethe number and selectionof titles, includingbooks with regionalcontent; and (c) introducereference and technical materials to support teachers' classroomand communityactivities (para. 3.17).
2.50. Indigenous Texbooks. The developmentand productionof new textbooksfor indigenousschools under PAREyields two main lessons: (a) the participatorystrategy used by the GeneralDirectorate for IndigenousEducation (DGE) in developingthese materials throughclose dialoguewith indigenousleaders, teachers, schoiars and parents has been highly successfuland unanimouslysupported; and (b) the visual improvementof the textbooksby using indigenouscolors and iconographyhas increasedcommunication effectiveness. The proposed projecthas incorporatedthese two featuresin the design and productionof textbooksand other instructionalmaterials for 17 additionalethnic groups in the project areas (paras. 3.18-3.19). - 18 -
2.51. EnvironmentalEducation. PRODEIhas indicatedthat environmentaleducation can and should be promotedfrom the early years of a child's life through: (a) the development of good health and hygienichabits; (b) considerationfor the micro-enviromnent,particularly the domesticenvironment; and (c) the formationof a positiveattitude towardnatural resourcesand public facilities. The proposedproject wouldfinance an assessmentof enviromnentaleducation at the basic educationlevel in Mexico and offer recommendations that could lead to further action (para. 3.25(c) & Annex 14, Part C}.
2.52. Educational Materials Distribution System. A preparatory study concluded that textbookdistribution has been hamperedby the absenceof: (a) a comprehensiveand participatoryplan of delivery to schools; and (b) adequatetransportation from warehousesto schools. In addition, the design of regionalwarehouses built under the first project needed some adjustmentsto better perform their required functions. Accordingly,the proposed project would: (a) require a logisticaldistribution plan to be developedby each state, includingthe use of state or municipaltransportation along with community-basedinitiatives; and (b) provide vehiclesfor supervisorsto use for both supervision(para. 3.29(d)) and distributionof educationalmaterials (para. 3.30).
2.53. School ConstructionModels. A preparatorystudy has indicatedthat construction costs have been higher in isolatedrural communitiesand that technicalsupervision has been insufficient,thereby underminingthe qualityof construction. Furthermore,construction costs have been higher than expectedand constructionof schools in remote ruralareas under the Decentralizationand RegionalDevelopment Project via the SOLIDARIDADmunicipal funds (a strategy not appliedunder PARE)was able to mobilizecommunity contributions and reduce constructioncosts. The proposedproject wouldtherefore: (a) maintainPARE's strategyfor urban areas and more readilyaccessible rural areas, but with closer cost-control instruments;(b) introducea decentalized and participatoryapproach modeled after the SOLIDARIDADexperience for more remoterural areas; and (c) strengthenthe technical supervision of constructionby local CAPFCEand privatesupervisors (paras. 3.20-3.23).
2.54. Project ImplementationExperience. The GeneralDirectorate for Planning, Programmingand Budgeting(DGPPP) under which the Project CoordinatingUnit (PCU) operated had limit2dexperience in workingwith Bank projects,thus there were some delays in PARE start-up. Now, the coordinatingteam, operatingunder CONAFE'sdirection, has learned to successfullycoordinate, monitor and evaluatethe activitiesof PARE. For the proposed project, the experiencedPCU team wouldbe retainedand complemented. In addition, specific stafftraining has been plannedto furtier improvetheir skills (paras. 3.25(a) & 3.31-3.33).
Bank-WideEducation Projects
2.55. Project Design. Feedbackfrom severaleducation projects in Latin America indicates that a proper policy frameworkand adequateinstitutional capacity are major factors determiningthe success of projectimplementation. The proposedproject, based on experiencegained from PARE, focuseson improvingthe qualityand efficiencyof primary educationon the basis of (a) a clearly statedGovermment policy frameworkand (b) improvementof the institutionalcapacity of central and state educationentities. - 19 -
2.56. ProjectManagement. When a project implementationunit is created separatelyfrom the existingorganizational units, existingunits often miss the opportunityto acquire technical expertiseduring the process of project implementationand to strengthentheir institutional capacity. Moreover,externally-financed projects and the overallnational programcan developsimultaneously without proper synchronization.On the basis of such lessons, the proposedproject has been explicitlydesigned to fit within the overallnational program, and most project activities wouldbe implementedand supervisedby the SEEs through their existingoperational structures, in coordinationwith the PCU and some central SEP units.
F. Rationalefor Bank Involvement
2.57. The Bank's most recent Country AssistanceStrategy (CAS) for Mexico dated May 18, 1993 focuses on strengtheninghuman resourcesand enviromnentalprotection and stimulatingpnvate sector-ledgrowth. The CAS was presentedto the Board with the HighwayRehabilitation and TrafficSafety Project (Ln. 3628-ME, 1993) on June 24, 1993. The proposed SecondPrimary EducationProject, PAREB,is consistentwith the CAS. After the successfulimplementation of Mexico'seconomic adjustment program, the Bank has shifted its emphasisto investmentlending geared towardsassisting sustained growth and poverty alleviationprograms. To supportgrowth, the Bank will help the Government enhancethe country's institutionalcapacity for efficientallocation and use of public resources. To support poverty alleviationprograms, the Bank will assist the Government's efforts in targetingthe poor for public resources. The Bank is supportingmajor initiativesin the human resourcessector aiming at improvingthe qualityand efficiencyof social services, the labor market, and nutrition (in the near future) throughprojects and well-targetedsector work. Future proposedprojects in educationwould focus on preschooland secondary education and on the modernizationof technicaltraining, backed in all cases by sector work. This proposedproject representsthe analyticalfoundation for this additionalsupport in education. The Bank, with its long involvementin Mexicoand with its experiencein other countries, is in a unique position to play a catalyticrole in: (a) increasinginvestments in primary education, thus helping to accumulatehuman capital, the lack of which is a serious constraintto growth; and (b) focusingon the most disadvantagedstates and areas within these states, thus addressingthe needs of the poor and contributingto a more equitable distribution of educationaland economicopportnities.
2.58. The Bank has acquired significantexperience in assistingprimary education worldwideand has become the single most importantsource of external financingfor the primary,education sector in Mexico. The Governmenthas shown interestin involvingthe Bank more closely in policy and programdevelopment in the human resourcessector in general and has requestedthe Bank's support for the basic educationsector in particular.
2.59. By focusingon the poorest states, the proposedproject wouldcomplement a set of Bank-financedprojects targeted on the poor, including: (a) the 1990Basic Health Care Project (Ln. 3272-ME)to extendhealth care servicesto 13 million uninsuredpoor in four of the poorest states (Chiapas,Oaxaca, Guerrero,and Hidalgo)and in the Federal District; (b) the 1990 Low-IncomeHousing Project (Ln. 3140-ME); (c) the 1990Third Technical TraninmgProject to provide vocationaltraining to adolescentsfrom poor families, and unemployed;(d) the 1991 Decentralizationand RegionalDevelopment Project to improvethe - 20 -
irdhastructureand productivecapacity of rural communitiesin the four poorest states; (e) the 1991 Water Supply and SanitationSector Project (Ln. 3271-ME),to improvethe living conditionsof 24 million people, most of whom are in the lowestsegments of society; (f) the 1991 Primary EducationProject (PARE),to improvethe quality and efficiencyof primary education in the four poorest states; (g) the 1992 Initial EducationProject (PRODEI),to support the early developmentof 1.2 millionchildren in the ten poorest states of Mexico; and (h) the 1992 Labor Market and ProductivityEnhancement Project to retrain unemployed workers,upgrade unskilled workers,and improveemployment services for the poor.
M. THE PROJECr
A. ProjectConcept and Objectives
3.1. The objectiveof PAREBis to assist the Governmernin improvingthe qualityand efficiencyof primary educationin ten southern states with a high incidenceof povertyand low educationalindicators (Campeche, Durango, Guanojuato, Jalisco, MichoacAn,Puebla, San Luis Potosi, Tabasco,Veracruz, and Yucatfin)in order to reduce their educational deficienciesand bring them closer to the national average. It would also reinforce managementcapacity in the four states (Chiapas,Oaxaca, Guerrero, and Hidalgo)covered by PARE. The proposedproject drawson the experienceof PAREand would support the Government'spolicy of providingcompensatory assistance to the less developedstates.
3.2. The expectedimprovement in qualityand efficiencyof primary educationwould be reflectedin: (a) a decrease in repetitionand dropout rates; (b) an increase in the level of children's cognitiveachievement; and (c) a more effectivemanagement of the primary education system. These are high-priorityobjectives of the Government(paras. 2.32-2.38 & Policy Letter (Annex4)), to be pursuedby the states in the contextof the decentralization policy (paras. 2.33-2.34).
B. Project Areas and Tlrget Populaion
3.3. The ten states includedin PAREBwere selectedbased on three indicators: (a) the CONAPO(National Population Council) poverty index;2 0' (b) the primary education completionrate as a proxy for internal efficiency;Aand (c) the indigenouseducation rates. Out of the ten project states, all are below the medianand the mean of the CONAPO index (Annex 6) and all but one have primary educationcompletion rates lower than the national
20/ The CONAPOindex is a povertyindex based on the resultsof 'principalcomponents analysis", using 1990census data and composedof severalmunicipal indicators: (a) population;(b) percentageOf population15 yearsor more who are illiterate;(c) percentageof populationover age 15 withoutprimary schooleducation; (d) percentageof householdswithout electricity; (e) percentageof overcrowded households;(f) percentageof occupantsin householdswithout a constructedfloor; (g) percentageof populationin localitieswith fewerthan 5,000 habitants;and (h) percentageof populationwith fewerthan two minimumsalaries (about N$14 on countrywideaverage per minimumdaily salary). 211 The schoolcompletion rate for primaryeducation was chosenbecause it resultsfrom a numberof factorsaffecting educational performance, including high repetition and dropoutrates, a large numberof incompleteand single-teacherschools in remoterural areas, inadequacyand shortageof educational materials,and poorlytrained teachers. These educationaldeficiencies largely parallel weak economies and inabilityof the statesto channelthe resourcesnecessary to improveeducation. -21 - average(Annex 2). In 1991, the ten states made up 39 percent of the populationaged 6-11 in the country, 39 percent of the total primary enrollment, and 38 percent of enrollmentin then federallyoperated (and now state) primary schools. lb reenforcethe management capacity of the four states under PARE(which encountered some start-up difficultiesdue to institutionalweakmesses, see para. 2.54), their managerswould also benefit from the managementtraining subcomponent.22
3.4. Withinthe ten project states,project areas were selectedon the basis of the municipality'spoverty and educationalindicators. In line with the national policy of basic educationdecentralization, each participatingstate conducteda diagnosticstudy to determine which areas within the municipalitiesshould be included in the project. As a result, the project targets the neediestpeople living in areas where economicconditions are most severe and educationalmarginality most critical. A total of 511 municipalities(54.7 percent) w--re thus selected out of 934. The selected municipalitiescomprise 56 geographicregions, including29 regions of high sierras and deep tropical valleysor semi-aridplateaus where indigenouspeoples predominany live. State capitals and most major urban areas were excluded. Approximately97 percent of project areas are poor, rural, and isolatedvillages of fewer than 1,000 inhabitants,lacking basic services like water,sewerage and electricity,and where the averagefamily incomeis less than the minimumwage. By targetingthe poorest areas, the project would also indirectlyconcentrate project activities in areas of high indigenousconcentration (see Box next page).
3.5. The project would cover 13,858 schools, or 38 percent of the primary schools in the ten states. Approximately1.5 million children are enrolled in the project schools, representing27.5 percent of primary school enrollmentin the project states, or 10.4 percent of the national primary school enrollment. The selected schools are served by 52,859 teachers, representing29 percent of the teachingforce in the ten states, or 11 percent of the national teachingforce at the primary educationlevel (Annex 8).
3.6. Poverty,usually associatedwith poor health and nutrition,also correlates with a low level of education. Averageadult illiteracyin the project states is estimated at 13.7 percent, higher than the national rate of 11.8 percent. Averageprimary school completionrate for the ten states is 52.6 percent; dropout rates average5.5 percent; and repetition rates stand at 18.7 percent, all worse than the national averagesof 58.1 percent, 4.6 percent and 17.1 percent, respectively(Annex 2).
C ProjectComponents
3.7. The project has been organizedinto three major components,as follows:
A. Human Resources Development(US$107.9 million or 17.5 percent of total costs includingcontingencies), to provide in-servicetraining and upgradingfor classroomteachers, principals,supervisors, and selectedtechnical personnel;
B. EducationalMaterial Resources (US$324.2million or 52.5 percent of total costs includingcontingencies), to provide good educationalmaterials and facilities,
221"Project staes" in this reportwill refr strictlyto the ten staes previouslyidentified (pama. 3.1). - 22 -
INDIGENOUSPEOPLE AND THE PROJECT Mexicohas the largestindigenous population in Latin America,approximately 8.7 millionpeople (overthree timesthe popuation of Costa Rica), correspondingto 10.4 percent of the nationalpopulation. The indigenouspopulation is massivelyoccupied in the primary sector (76 percentcompared to 22.6 percentcounrywide) and geographicallyconcentrated, with 78 percentliving in one-thirdof the country's2,403 municipalities.Being of indigenousorigin is synonymouswith backwardnessand poverty. Educationalindicators have remainedsignificantly lowerin indigenousthan in non-indigenousareas of Mexicoas shownbelow: Education Indicators - General vs. IndigenousPopulations (%) Primary Education(PE) AdultEduc. Attainent Preschool Enrollment Enrollnent Repetition Completion % With 6- Adult Rate Rate Rate year PE Illiteracy General 67 98 9 58 68 12 Population _ Indigenous 41 72 42 27 14 46 ,Population ____ _ Indigenousschools suffer from specificshortcomings: (a) the absenceof culturally- orientedtextbooks and appropriateeducational materials, a particularlyserious problem among indigenouschildren who do not speak Spanish;and (b) 90 percentof indigenousteachers do not possessthe officiallyrequired licenciatura. The project wtuld devoteUS$125 million (or approximately22 percentof totalproject cost) to supportthe educationof indigenouschildren by providingfor teachertraining and incentives,textbooks, didactic materials, Reading Corners, and schoolconstruction/rehabilitation and maintenance. Indigenouspopulations are targetedfor project interventionsin the ten project stateswhich, togetherwith the four PAREstates, comprise 81 percent of Mexico'sindigenous population. Using a more explicittargeting mechanism weighted heavily with povertyand indigenouspopulation indicators, the projectwould benefit, on a relativescale, indigenousareas more. The teachertraining courses would enroll an estimated31,900 indigenousteachers, or 10.5 percent of all projectteacher training instances. All indigenousschools in the project areas will receivethe teacherincentives program, and 43 percentof the incentiverecipients would be indigenousteachers. These same schoolswould also benefitfrom construction/rehabilitationand maintenanceprograms, and DGEIwould develop native educational materials for the Reading Corners in indigenousschools. Textbooksand readingmaterials would be developedin the 17 main native languages spoken in the project areas: Chol, Chontal,Huasteco, Huichol, Maya, Mazahua, Mexicanero, Nahuatl, Purepecha,Tepehuano, Totonaco, three variantsof Nahuatl,and one each of Huasteco, Maya,and Totonaco,covering about 90 percentof all ethnicgroups in the project states. Book contentswould be gatheredthrough ethno-linguistic field researchconducted through a participatorystrategy successfully developed under PARE;about 126,000textbooks, 126,000 studentworkbooks, and 5,000 guidebookswrould be printed. The projectwould thus add to the eight languagesfor which materialswere developedunder PARE. Indirecdy,by developing technicalknow-how at DGEI, the projectwould also assistthe productionof textbooksand materialsin 21 other languagesthat DGEI is workingon in other states; eventually,indigenous textbookswill havebeen producedfor 46 of the country's56 main indigenousgroups. - 23 - namely: (i) teachingmaterials, school supplies,and school library books both Spanishand bilingual(US$190.3 million); and (ii) urgentlyneeded rehabilitationor replacementof approximately6,900 classroomand other school facilities(US$131.7 million); and
C. InstitutionalStrengthening (US$184.5 million or 30.0 percent of total costs includingcontingencies), to strengdtenthe managementcapabilities and skills of educationalorganizations at the national, state, and local levels. It would: (i) strengthenthe managementcapacity of SEP and of SEEs by supportingimprovements in planningand policyanalysis and in the monitoring,evaluation, and information systems,conducting selected studiesto help design future educationprograms, and designingand carrying out projectpromotion; (ii) provide work incentivesfor approximately7,000 teachers serving in isolatedareas; (iii) support a more effective educational supervisionsystem; (iv) strengthenthe textbookdelivery and materials distribution system;and (v) financethe project administrationat the central and state levels.
D. ProjectDescription
ComponentA. Human ResourcesDevelopment (US$107.9 million including contingencies) 3.8. The objectiveof the human resourcesdevelopment component is to produce more effectiveteaching and learning conditionsin rural schools by enhancingspecific teacher skills and tying teacher career advancementto objectiveperformance criteria and by introducingan integratedpedagogical foundation to educationalsupervision. The contentsof the training courses have been selectedto fill areas of expertisenot coveredby the teacher education curricula in colleges and Normal Schools,but deemedcritical to teachingunder the special circumstancesof project schools. The trainingprogram has borrowedfrom the experienceof PAREand its componentshave been acceptedby the PAMprogram, which intendsto apply similar training conceptsto other states. Teacherswho graduate from the training courses would be eligible for the '1CP career advancementprogram (Annex 10 providesan in-depth descriptionof the teachingtraining strategy).
3.9. TrainingProgram. The trainingprogram would be administeredto all project teachers, principals, supervisors,and assistantsupervisors. Each programparticipant would be required to take a five-daysummer program(40 hours) consistingof the three core courses - EducationalResources, Educational Problem Prevention, and RemedialEducation - plus a number of other courses over sevenone-day workshops (a total of 42 hours), approximatelyonce a month on a Saturdayover the followingschool year. Teacherswould be required to take one state-specificcourse, either Written Languageor Mathematics (dependingon their specialty),and, where applicable,Multigrade Class Teaching(for new teachers likely to be assigned to a multigradeschool) and a choice of one or more indigenous teachingcourses (for teachersin indigenousareas): Bilingualismin IndigenousEducation, Spanish as a Second Language,or Use of IndigenousTexts and Materials. Emnphasiswould be on the teachingrequirements of the first and second grades where the highest repetition and dropout rates are found. For administrators,a course in PedagogicalCounseling would be requiredof supervisors,principals, and technicalassistants, while supervisorswould take an additionalcourse in Supervision. Educationalsupervision would be pushed beyondthe -24 - present concern with administrativecontrol. To this end, an innovative"pedagogical network" concept would be appliedthroughout the trainingcourses and follow-upactivities, thereby training principalsand supervisorsto provide teacherswith guidance on sound educational principlesand effectiveclassroom techniques. Teachertrainers would be selected primarily from well-performinggraduates of this group, principals,and supervisors.
3.10. Each year, the trainingprogram participants would be selected accordingto the priority needs of the area in which they work, using the same index used to target the 511 project municipalities(paras. 3.3-3.4); it is expectedthat all project participantswould be trained by the fifth year of the project. This approachprovides further incentivesfor teachers and administratorsto work in the most disadvantagedlocalities by providingthem the means for earlier career advancementunder the TCP. Trainingcenters would be housed in either an existingNormal Schoolor in a secondaryor technicalvocational school with a wide geographicaldistribution to minimizetravel and lodgingcosts. No additional physical infrastructurewould be requiredfor the training centers,but the project would finance requiredcomputers and audiovisualmaterials and equipment. The Govermnent'slist of selected training centers was reviewedat appraisal and found satisfactory. The project would also financethe costs of transportationand meals, training materials, and remuneration (equivalentto overtimepay) for trainers, supervisors,and school principalsfor participation in the Saturdayworkshops.
3.11. The training programwould operateunder the same steeringunit in the Undersecretariatfor Basic Education(Subsecretaria de Educaci6nBdsica, SEB) which overseesthe PAM to avoid course contentduplications and to ensure that credit points for successfulprogram completion are properlyrecorded under the TCP. The summer courses would be integratedwith a regular PAMone-week summer workshopto update curricular contents. A Central TechnicalGroup attachedto SEPs normativeunits for general and indigenousprimary educationwould be responsiblefor overallplanning of trainingactivities, designingthe courses, and developingtraining materials. This group would, in turn, be responsiblefor trainingthe State TechnicalGroups and for followingup and evaluatingall project training activities in the states. State TechnicalGroups would similarlybe organized in project SEEs for general and indigenousprimary education,respectively. The State TechnicalGroups would be responsiblefor organizingthe trainingcourses for state trainers, teachers, and supervisors,and for evaluatingthe performanceof trainers. Both the central and state TechnicalGroups would be made up of technicalstaff membersof SEP and SEE, respectively,serving on a full-timebasis. The State TechnicalGroups, together with the state trainers, would conductfollow-up activities to the Saturd workshopsto encourage teachers to pursue further trainingthrough continueduse of the ReadingCorners and other self-trainingopportunities.
3.12. Printed trainingmaterials would be specificallydeveloped for each training course. They would include study guides,a bibliography,a trainer's manual, evaluationinstruments, and an anthology of selected readings. Postersand promotionalmaterials would also be developedand distributedto encourageteacher participationin the training program. Materialsdeveloped for PAREhave been revised for use in this project.
3.13. Beneficiarieswould includeall of the estimated52,859 existingteachers in the project municipalities,who wouldparticipate in the required three general primary and the - 25 - one state-specificcourses; of this number, approximatelyhalf would also each take either WrittenLanguage or Mathematics,depending on their concentration. Over the project life, an estimated 6,780 new teacherswould attend the MultigradeClass Teachingcourse, while the indigenouseducation training courses would enroll an estimated30,390 participantsper course in the 12-day(summer and workshops)courses, and 1,520 in the 5-day (summer only) courses. Altogether,a total of approximately302,985 teacher training instanceswould have been carried out. An estimated8,730 participantswould take the Pedagogical Counselingcourse, and 945 wouldtake the Supervisioncourse, for an aggregatedtotal of about 9,680 participants.
ComponentB. EducationalMaterial Resources (US$324.2 million including contingencies) 3.14. The objectiveof the educationalmaterial resourcescomponent is to improvethe quality of learning, studentperformance, and schoolattendance and therebyreduce student dropout and repetition rates throughthe provisionof: (a) school and classroomteaching and learning materials; (b) student educaticnalsupplies; (c) books for the ReadingCorners; (d) texts and educationalmaterials for indigenouseducation; and (e) urgently needed rehabilitationor replacementof inadequateschool facilitiesand constructionof new classroomsto meet expandingenrollment.
3.15. SubcomponentB.1. TeachingMaterials and StudentEducational Packages (US$179.2million including contingencies). Packagesof teachingmaterials containing maps, charts, posters, anatomicmodels, and other items wouldbe distributedto each project school. Schoolshaving access to electricitywould receivean additionalpackage of audiovisualequipment, includingaudio cassettes, a radio, a tape recorder, and an overhead projector. The packagefor schools withoutelectricity wouldcost, on average,approximately US$3,850, and for those with electricity,about US$4,600. Each classroomwould receive a packageof grade-specificmaterials, includingrulers, dictionaries,games, geometricsolids, and chalkboards. Multigradeclasses wouldhave appropriatelydesigned packages servicing all grades taught. These packageswould cost approximatelyUS$276 each per year for multigradeclasses and US$160 for each of the six primarygrades.
3.16. All studentswould receive a packageof school supplies, includingnotebooks, pencils, crayons,dictionary, and rulers to encouragemore activeparticipation in learningboth in school and at home, and to relievethe financialburden on their families. Packageswould be differentiatedin the number of items includedaccording to the type and level of marginality of the communityinvolved. The cost of a packagewould range from US$8 to US$13 per student per year. The Bank would financenon-durable student educational packages on a decliningbasis. The projectwould support an improveddistribution system for both the national textbooksand the project materials (para. 3.30).
3.17. SubcomponentB.2. ReadingCorners (US$7.1 millionincluding contingencies). The proposed project would support the productionand distributionof ReadingCorners packages,through SEP's EducationPublications Unit (Unidadde Publicaci6nEducativa, UPE) to all project classrooms. The ReadingCorners programwas included in PAREand was requestedby the proposedproject's participating states. During project preparation, it was observed that existingReading Corners were often underuseddue to (i) insufficient mumbersof books and/or (ii) placementof the ReadingCorners within a central and often - 26 - bureaucratizedlibrary system. Under the project, more books would be available,schools would be encouragedto providebooks in the classroomsthemselves, and teachers and principals would receivetraining on how to use and promotethe ReadingCorners. There are two versionsof the ReadingCorners package,one with at least 200 books (for schools with five or less classrooms)and the other with at least 350 books (for schools with six or more classrooms). These are higher numbersof booksthan under PAREor other Reading Corners elsewhere,which wouldmake the books more accessibleto studentsthrough teachers or directly in each classroom. Each packageconsists of books on varioussubjects, selected to enrich the educationalexperience of students,broaden their cultural outlook, and reinforcetheir reading skills. The books are used to supplementtextbook materials, or they are borrowedby teachers, students,and the communityfor side reading. A further improvementto the programunder the proposedproject consists of a supplementarypackage of at least 15 educationalreference books for teacher self-trainingand at least 30 books with regionalcontent for each classroom. Trainingin the regular use of ReadingCorners would be providedas part of the teacher training curriculumand reinforcedthrough the pedagogical network. SEP's DGEI would also developa specialpackage of reading materials with native educationalcontents for ReadingCorners in indigenousschools (paras. 3.18-3.19).
3.18. Subcomponent B.3. Textbooksand EducationalMaterials for Indigenous Education(US$6.2 millionincluding contingencies). Languagetextbooks and reading materials for the ReadingCorners wouldbe developedin the 17 native languagesspoken by the major ethnic groups in the project areas, which would cover the languagesof about 90 percent of the indigenouspopulation in the project states.L3'Content material for the books would be gatheredthrough ethno-linguisticfield research conductedunder DGEI. A participatorymethodology for text design and variousvisual presentationand communication modalitieshas already been developedwith PAREsupport by a DGEI team, which would remain to develop indigenoustextbooks under the project and other DGEI-sponsored programs.
3.19. Indigenouslanguage textbooks and ReadingCorners materialswould be developedfor the six primary grades. A technical group, with a DGEI coordinatorand a state-level representativefor each of the 17 languages,would be in charge of coordinatingthe selection and preparationof the native languagetexts. Each indigenousgroup representativewould, in turn, head a four-memberworking group with direct responsibilityfor developingthe respectivetextbooks and other instructionalmaterials. The DGEI coordinatorwould supervisethe work and ensure that national educadonalnorms are observed. An outside consultantwould advise the workinggroups and providetechnical support during the first project year. Preliminaryversions of textbooks,student workbooks,and teacher guidebooks for grades 1 and 2 would be designed,produced, and field testedon a pilot scale during the first project year; results and recommendationsof the field tests wouldbe incorporatedinto the final version which would then be printed and distnbuted. This process would be repeatedfor grades 3 and 4 during the secondyear, and those for grades 5 and 6 during the third year. This slow start-up period is requireddue to the large number and complexityof
23 The languagesare Chol, Chontal,Huasteco, Huichol, Maya, Mazahua, Mexicanero, N6huatl, Puarpecha,Tepehuano, Totonaco, three variantsof Nahuad,and one each of Huasteco,Maya, and Totonaco. For a broaderperspective of the project'simpact on indigenouseducation, see the Box IndieenousPeople and The Projecton page 22. - 27 - indigenouslanguages, the need for appropriatetreatment of cultural differences,and the small number of experts available. About 126,000textbooks, 126,000 studentworkbooks, and 5,000 guidebooksfor bilingualteachers wouldbe evenually printed.
3.20. Subcomponent BE4. Improvement of Physical hnfrastructure (US$131.7million includingcontingencies). Schoolrehabilitation and/or constructionsubprojects would be implementedby the SEEs, followingone of two strategiesdepending on the educational needs, location,access, and productivecapacity of the project municipality. The first is a communityparticipation strategy modeled after the successfulSOLIDARIDAD program, which would be used for schools located in remote areas unlikelyto generatecontractor interestsbeyond the immediatevicinity and where the communityis willing and able to contributethe required labor and time. It is expectedthat about 50 percent of construction/ rehabilitationunder the project wouldfall under this modality. A basic design from the CAPFCEmenu of school prototypeswould be selectedby in consultationwith local School and MunicipalEducation Councils, with variationsas applicableto accommodatelocal and regionaldiversity in climate, ecology,and availablematerials. This buildingmodality does not use public bidding and operatesthrough SchoolCouncils under the oversightof municipalitiesand under technicalsupervision provided by State Secretariatsof Public Works (Secretarfade ObrasPgiblicas del Estado, SOPE) (para. 3.23), with guidancefrom a self- help constructionhandbook. This handbookis being designedbased on existing SOLIDARIDADmaterial, with necessarymodifications to reflectthe type of civil works to be carried out and the local or regionalconditions. Contractingfor small works such as rural schools wouldbe done directly with local contractorsfor al or part of the work, using regionalizedreference prices, and the communitywould contribute labor and locally available materials. The second strategywould be to transfermanagement, proement, and supervisionresponsibility to CAPFCEfor the estimatedremaining 50 percent of the imfrastructureworks (located mainly in more urbanizedareas or with easy access), which are considered'.arge enough to attract a number of contractorsthrough a public bidding process. Annex 11 providesa more detaileddescription of the civil worksto be carried out under the project.
3.21. School constructionneeds were determinedby SEEs in each state through a survey of schools in the project areas. Civil works requirementswere based on the need to: (a) improveexisting school facilities,replacing rented or dilapidatedclassrooms or those that cannot conformto functionalpedagogical or architecturalstandards; and (b) expand schools to accommodatecurrent and expandingenrollments. Prioritizationof infrastuure subprojectswould be made by SEEs in consultationwith State Planing Councils(Consejo de Panificaci&ndel Estado, COPLADE)according to an OperationalManual (pam. 3.23) which would clearly state selectioncriteria including, er alia, overrowed conditions, grossly inadequatefacilities, and consultationwith supervisors. The OperationalMamnal would furher ensure that the followingprocedures, inter alia, be followed: (a) the CAPFCE prototypedesigns would includetechnical drawings, budgets, and technical specificationsfor at least three designs using differentconstuction materials for classrooms,sanitary services, and latrines; (b) evidenceof rightful ownershipof land by SEP or state governmentsthrough donationor purchase wouldbe a conditionfor subprojectapproval; (c) in the case of civil works to be carried out through the communitymodel, financialresources would have been transferredto the respectivemunicipal government (ayunmentos). Teachersfor new classroomswould be providedand financedby state governments,but this number is -28 - expectedto be small (approximately350) and sustainableunder state educationbudgets. Assuranceof teacher availabilitywould be obtainedprior to authorizingnew classroom constructionunder the project; and (d) SchoolCouncils would have been created and fully operationalto provide consultationand maintenance(para. 3.22). At negotiations,the Governmentarovided assurances that bv October31 of each Year. startingin 1994. the Governmentwould present: i) a list of schools and/or classroomsto be constructed/rehabilitatedin the next year: (ii) ewdencethat lnd is availableto the SEEs for civl works: (iii) ewdencethat adequa¢estaffing plans. includinf budgetarvallocations thereto have been pnalized- and Civ)evidence that local School Councilshave been created and ar or erational rpaa.7. 1(b)). 'lb meet urgent enrollmentneeds for the schoolyear 1994195,a small number of classrooms(approximately 315) wouldbe constructed/ rehabilitatedaccording to the CAPFCEmodel, subjectto (a) all prior conditionsrelated to this subcomponentand (b) an ex-antereview by the Bank scheduledfor August 1994.
3.22. New and rehabilitatedclassrooms would be providedwith appropriateclassroom furniture, includingstudent desks and benches and teacher desks and chairs. All schools in the project would be providedwith bookcasesand shelvesas needed. The cost of classroom funiture and equipmenthas been includedin the rehabilitationand constructioncosts. The project would supportan innovativemaintenance program for schoolsbased on the operationalexperience (but not the financingmechanism) of the successfulthree-year-old EscuelaDigna program. 4/ Municipalitieswould receiveeach year a fixed amount based on the number and type of facilities in the municipality(an estimatedaverage of US$320per facility)for infrastructureand furniture maintenance. The ayuntamientos,in coordination with the School Councils, wouldensure that maintenanceis carried out either by obtaining the services of a local contractoror by purchasingmaterials and carrying out the maintenance work themselveswith the help of the community. In a relativelyfew cases (for about 5,500 existing classrooms),maintenance activities are more broadly defined to include some rehabilitationservices necessitatedby years of lack of maintenance. Becausethere is no previous local experiencewith systematicmaintenance programs, the project would phase in implementationof the maintenanceprogram in selectedareas to test mechanismstOr trnsf*r of maintenancefunds to the ayuntamientosand to monitortheir performance. Based on the results of this maintenancemodality, the programwould be expandedto cover the remaning project areas. The project would also financeprinting of a maintenancehandbook (currentlv being developedwith technicalassistance from internationalarchitects) which would be widely disseminatedin the project areas, and the promotionprogram (para. 3.25(d)) would include stressing the importanceof maintaning school buildingsand furniture.
3.23. An OperationalManual for the implementationof the physicalinfucture subcomponentis being prepared by CONAFE in consultationwith CAPFCE, with technical assistancefrom iemtional experts. Technicalsupervision of on-goingcivil works will be carried out by supervisorsat CAPFCEand at SOPEs for the CAPFCEand community
24 TheEscuela Digna ("Pridein Schools")is a SOLIDARIDAD-supportedprogram for schoolrepair and maintenance.Using a participatoryapproach, part of the costsis fundedby the FederalGovernment (50percent in the richerstates, and 75 percentin the poorerstates), part by the state(40 percent and 15 percent,respectively), and 10 percentby the localcommunity. Since 1990, 80,000 schools have been assistedby the program.Under the project,the proposedmaintenance would draw from federal funds and contnbutions(monetary, labor, or inkind)from local communities. - 29 - participationmodels, respectively,under terms of referencesatistactory to the Bank. Each year, technicalsupervision reports would be presentedand discussedduring the annual and mid-term reviews(paras. 5.4-5.5) as part of the ex-antereview of infrastructuresubprojects for the coming year, and auditsof projectaccounts (para. 4.16) would includea specific reviewof a sample of infrastructuresubprojects to verify that they were procured in a manner consistent with Bank guidelines,meet the minimumquality standards,and were priced within prvailing regionalizedstandar unit prices. At negotiations.CONAFE presentedto the arnka satisfactorydrft OperationalManual for inrastructuresubproiects (pam. 7.1(c)). As a conditionof loan effectiveness,the Governmentwill present. satisfactory to the Bank: (i) a inalizedOperational Manual for istructure improvement:(ii) a hanbook for self-help construction:and Niii)a handbookfor buidn and furniture maintenance(para. 7.2(a)). As a conditionof disbursementfor irastructure subproiects. the Governmentwll present terms of referencefor technicalsupervision of infrastructure subprojectsunder both the -CAPFCEand communitvparticipation models. satfactora to the Bank pam. 7.3(a)).
Component C. Istitutional Strengthening (US$184.5miDion including contingencies) 3.24. The main purpose of the InstitutionalStrengthening Component is to assist state governmentsm developingmanageial capacitycommensurate with their newly acquired resonsibility for operatinga decentralizedbasic educationsystem. The project would support: (a) developmentof the managementcapacity at SEP, mainly CONAPE, and in project SEEs in the areas of (i) planning and policy analysis,(ii) monitoring,evaluation, and informationsystems, (iii) education studies,and (iv) projectpromotion and diffusion;(b) implementationof a teacher incentivesprogram; (c) improvementof the supervisionsystem; (d) improvementof the texbook and materialsdistribution system; and (e) administrationof the project. The four states under PAREwould also receiveassistance directly thuough managementtraining for planing and policy analysis(para. 3.25(a)) and indirectlythrough institutionalstrengthening activities at CONAFE aras. 3.25(b)-(d)).
3.25. Subcomponent C1. Manageent Capacity (US$17.6million including contingencies). In the contextof the 1992 decentralizationagreement, SEEs are facing new administrativechallenges which require an improvedset of managementskills and tools to carry out tasks previouslyconducted by SEP and SCEPs. The followingactivities would be financedby the project: (a) Maagement rining for Plnning and olicy Analysis. The project would strengthenthe capacityof the state educationplanning bodies, enhancingskills among high-levelofficials through an integratedmanagement training and technical assistance program in educationalpolicy analysisand planning(Annex 12). The training would cover the followingtopics: (i) educationquality and efficiency;(ii) methodologiesfor policy analysis and sector performanceassessment; (iii) optionsto reform initial, basic, secondary,and hiu - education;(iv) the relationshipbetween education, work and employment;(v) educationfinancing; (vi) resourceallocation modeling; (vii) strategicuse of data collectedfrom the educationmanagement information system; and (viii) evaluationand measurementof educationalachievements. Other education issues which would be included in the trainng includedecentralization, curriculum reform, and languageof instruction. The project wouldprovide 90 staff-monthsfor overseastraining fellowshipsand 380 staff-monthsof local training. Local training - 30- would be providedby educationaland traininginstitutions with recognizedexpertise in the relevanttopics. The overseastraining wouldbe providedthrough workshops and internshipsin internationallyrecognized educational and research institutions. Participantswould be nominatedby the SEEs and selectedaccording to predetermined criteria. Educationofficials in the four PAREstates wouldbe includedunder this program. At negotiations,the Governmentpresented the selection criteriafor the managementtraining component.s ecificallyfor the overseastraining fellowships. satisfactor to the Bank (para. 7.1(d)). (b) Monitoring,Evaluation and InformationSystems. The project would support the strengtheningof CONAFE'sinstitutional capacity by developingits monitoring,evaluation, and infornation processingand analysiscapabilities. The project would providetechnical assistance to help developan integratedproject managementinformalion system (MIS) to be implementedat both central and state levels which would allow close monitoringand evaluationof project activitiesas well as sustainablemeasurement of educationalquality through (i) reviewingthe content of data registers, (ii) improvingdata collectionprocessing and data analysis, and (iii) supportingthe diffusionof informationto all levelsof the educationalsystem. Project data collected and processedthrough the project MIS wouldadd to the data banks of the country's existingeducation inforTation systems and enhance CONAFE'scapacity for policy planningand analysisand for assessmentof educationalquality in conjunctionwith DGEIR. CONAFE is undertakingan informationneeds study to determine the requirementsof the projectMIS. Consultantswould carry out the design and developmentof the process evaluationsystem, building on data to be collectedthrough the project MIS, which wouldassess the qualityand short-term effectsof various (sub)-zwnponentsvis-a-vis project outcomes. Termsof reference and consultantshort list of the process evaluationsystem have been reviewedand found satisfactory. Resultsof the monitoringand process evaluationsystems would be discussedwith the Bank during the annual implementationreviews and be made availableto the states. Termsof referencefor the process evaluationsystem are included as Annex 13. At negotiations.the Governmentprovided assurances that the project MIS and the process evaluationsystem would be &ul operationalno later than December31. 1994 (para. 7.1(e)). The project wouldalso financedevelopment of the capacity for sustainable assessmentof the quality of primary educationby supportingthe DGEIR in conductingone round of test applicationsin June 1996 on a sample of primary education studentsin the projectstates. Cognitiveachievement by subject wouldbe measured across variables such as age, grade, gender, type of school, grade, educationalmodality, and geographicalarea. Additionaldata relative to school inputs, family and communitycharacteristics, and social and economicenviromnent would control for school and non-schoolfactors. This round of tests and other technical assistancewould help Mexicoparticipate in the next international comparativestudy of the InternationalAssessment of EducationalProgress, anticipatedto take place in 1997. At negotiations.the Governmentprovided assurancesthat: (i) tests. questionnaires,and administrativemanuals for the testing of primary educationstudents would be presentedfor Bank reviewno later than December 31. 1995: and Cii)it would carv out the testing in June 1996 and anaze and disseminatethe resultsin a manner satisfactorvto the Bank (para. 7.1() - 31 -
(c) EducationStudies. The proposedproject would support studiesto assess preschool, secondary,environmental, and scienceeducation to support sector policies and programs. The studieswould be coordinatedby CONAFE and SEB and its associatedGeneral Directoratesand carried out by selected researchersacceptable to the Bank. The project would financetechnical assistance,survey design, and the collection, processin, analysis,and disseminationof data and results. The PreschoolEducation Study would identifymajor quantity,efficiency, and equity issues affectingthis educationlevel, to appraisethe relevance,efficiency, and effectivenessof preschooleducation programs and recommendstrategies on how to improvethis level of educationto meet the LGE requirements. The SecondaryEducation Study would be conductedalong five dimensions: (i) a diagnosticstudy on the major issues facing secondaryeducation, incluling quality, internal and externalefficiency, curriculum, and equity; (ii) the socioeconomiccharacteristics of secondaryeducation dropouts based on aggregated data from SEP statistics,CONAPO indicators, and householdsurveys, with an aim towarddeveloping targeting criteria for possible investmentprojects; (iii) the working conditionsof teachersand supervisors,attitudes toward their profession,opinions on problems in secondaryeducation, and opinions about their trainingneeds; (iv) the characteristicsof effectivesecondary education schools; and (v) the financial implicationsof the new nine-yearbasic educationmandate. The EnvironmentalEducation Study wouldreview the literatureand the current state of educationon the environmentin Mexico, includingcontents of progams at differentlevels, public and private institutionsinvolved, and official commitnents and resourcesinvested in environmentaleducation. Strategieswould be devised on how to systematizethe fragmentedexperiences and recommendations would be made on how to orient them more directly to the country'senvironmental concerns. The ScienceEducation Study would provideanalysis of a pilot experienceon cost-effectivescience teachingin primary schools. The exercisewould consist of implementationof two differentmodels of scienceeducation in a sample of 270 (180 experimentaland 90 control)schools in the project states under supervisionfrom SEB and the SPCUs. The models would be selectedduring the first project year after reviewingthe most importantexperiences in Latin America. The study would start in the 1995/96academic year and finish with the 1996/97school year. Terms of referencefor the educationstudies (Annex 14) were discussedat appraisal. At negotiations.the Governmentconfirmed agreement on the final terms of- rference, implementationschedules. and consa short lists for the education studies. satisfactorato the Bank (para. 7. 1(g)). Interim and/or final results and conclusionsof all studies, and follow-upaction, as appropriate,would be discussed during the project almual and mid-termreviews. The main follow-upaction wouldbe the preparationof investmentprojects for preschooland secondaryeducation. (d) Project Promotionand Diffusion. The project would financetechnical assistanceto CONAFE and the project states for developinga strategyto promotethe project, inforimabout its activitiesand benefits,and stimulateand sustain the interest of all segmentsinvolved (decision-makers at differentauthority levels, SEP and SEE - 32 - officials, teachers, principals,and supervisorsin the schools, parents and community leaders, and multi-ethniccommunities) to play their respectiveroles and contribute to the project. The project would make extensiveuse of a varietyof media such as radio and television,videotapes and murals, and bookletsand leaflets.
3.26. SubcomponentC2. Teacher Incentives(US$104.3 including contingencies). The objectiveof this subcomponentis to increaseteachers' time on task by providingmonetary incentivesto teachersfor serving in schools of rural and isolatedcommunities with difficult access and limited living conveniences(Annex 15). This systemwas tested in PARE with 2,700 teachersand was deemedeffective at ensuring and increasingtheir classroom availability(para. 2.47). Althoughno formal evaluationhas been conductedas yet, reports from supervisorsand informationfrom parents and PAREstaff suggestthat student attendancehas improvedand fewer failures and a lesser tendencyto drop out have been reported. Incentiveswould be linkedto the school and not with the teacher, and would not be consideredto be part of his/her salary and wouldbe financedby the Bank on a declining basis.
3.27. The project would apply basicallythe same criteria of school marginalityas PARE. Top priority wouldbe given to remote projectschools with the greatest need for teachers and indigenousschools. Multigradeschools with two or more teachers in isolatedareas would be given a secondpriority. The Governmenthas presentedto the Bank a satisfactorylist of target schools and localities selectedfor the first projectyear. At negotiations.the Governmentconrement on the list of tgMetschools and localitiesselected where teacher incentiveswill be grantedfor the first Year of the project and that the selection of schools for subsequent3ears of the project will be discussed and agreedex-ante with the Bank at the annual and mid-termreviews (para. 7.1(h)).
3.28. The per-monthincentive is equivalentto the averageprimary teacher's basic monthly salary,v25and is paid every three monthsprovided the teacher has been present at the school throughoutthe period. Residencein the community,however, has not been always possible, and incentiveteachers wouldbe allowedto live in nearbyvillages. The local communityand the SchoolCouncil would certify that the teacher has been regularly involved with classroomteaching during the incentiveperiod. Any minor absencewould be noted and deductedfrom the paymentunless the teacher makesup for the lost time. About 7,000 teacherswould benefitfrom the incentiveby the end of the project. Of these, approximately 3,000 (43 percent) wouldbe from indigenousprimary schools and 4,000 from general rral primary schools. Approximately1,400 teacherswould participatein the first year, and a similar number would be added each subsequentproject year.
3.29. SubcomponentC-3. Improvementof the SupervisionSystem (US$21.9million includingincentives). The projectwould support the improvementof the supervisionsystem by: (a) amplifyingthe role of supervisorsfrom strictly administratorsto pedagogical advisors; (b) establishingsupervision offices in strategiclocations to facilitatesupervision activities and lessen supervisors'travel burdens; (c) offeringtravel incentivesto encourage more frequentsupervision; and (d) purchasingvehicles for supervisors'use.
;5 Thebasic salaryrepresents about two-thirds of teachers'total pay. The incentivewould increase total pay by about 60 percent. - 33 -
(a) Changein Supervisors'Role. Supervisorsand educationadministrators would receive extensivetraining (paras. 3.25(a)-(b))and would becomeactive membersof the "pedagogicalnetwork". Supervisors'school visits would become opportunitiesfor exchangeson teachingproblems and for providingtechnical assistance in the classroominstead of just instancesfor administrativecontrol. To reinforce their pedagogicalcontribution, supervisors would be eligible for selection for specialtraining to becomecourse trainers (as would be principals). (b) Supervision Officeswould be built and equippedto supplementthe existing supervisionnetwork. They would be placed in strategiclocations to ensure access to schools to be supervised,usually on the grounds of an existingschool, and would have simple documentreproduction facilities to duplicateeducational or informational materials. The proposedproject would financethe construction,furnishing, and equipmentfor 519 supervisionoffices and 80 sector chief offices. The location of supervisionand sector chief officeswas reviewedat appraisaland found satisfactory. (c) TravelIncentives would be given to 926 supervisorsand 160 sector chiefs in the project areas. Travelincentives would help defraysome of the supervisors' travel expensesand encouragea more active role in promotingthe quality of teaching in the uralschools through a regular programof school visits. The incentiveswould be paid quarterly against visit reports as verifiedby the SchoolCouncils. The value of the incentiveevery quarter wouldbe approximatelyUS$350 for supervisorsand US$190 for sector chiefs(the differenceis due to the higher frequencyof travel required of supervisors). (d) Vehicles. About 80 vehicleswould be provided,to be used mainly by supervisorsfor school and communityvisits. Supervisorsmay pay for the fuel and use of the vehiclesfrom their per diem allocation,or they may use public transportationor their own vehicles,whichever is more convenient. The vehicles would also be used by the supervisorsto carry textbooksand other educational materials from regionalwarehouses to their zone schools.
3.30. Subcomponent C.4. Books and MaterialsDistribution System (US$11.6 million includingcontingencies). The project would support improvementof the existing distribution systemfor textbooks,educational materials, maintenance materials, and school furniture to ensure that all materials reach the schools when they are needed. Inadequate storagefacilities and poor distributionlogistics have long hamperedthe Government's national free textbookprogram (para. 2.12). Using early PAREexperience, each state has carried out an analysisof the flow of materialsthrough the varous steps of the distribution networkfrom the supplier at one end to the school at the other and estimatedthe transportationtimes and costs in order to assess the need for warehousespace and distributionmeans while optimizingthe use of other availablestate and communityresources. The project would financethe constructionof 68 regionalwarehouses (see Annex 11, PhysicalInfrastructure and DistributionNetwork) and vehicles,which wouldserve mostly (but not exclusively)the project areas. The design and location of these warehouseswould be determinedby an analysisof the distributionplan presentedby each project state, nine of which have been carried out. The proposalsfor distributionand inventorysystems already submittedhave been reviewedand generally foundsatisfactory; all systemswould be integratedunder a consistentframework. CONAFE is currently carrying out this integration - 34 - process, particularly in definingcommon norms (e.g., averagetransport and storagetimes, waste and loss standardsetc.) which wouldserve as monitoringindicators. Progress in the development,integration, and implementationof the distributionand inventorysystem would be reviewedannually (para. 5.4 & Annex 21).
3.31. Subcomponent C-5. ProjectAdministration (US$29.1 million including contingencies). The project would financesalaries, technicalassistance, vehicles and equipment, and operatingcosts of the PCU and SPCUs. Overall authority for project nmanagementwould be vested in CONAFE's DirectorGeneral, with operational responsibilitieslying with the PCU. To better benefitfrom experienceunder PARE, a PCU would be created that would integratethe operationsof both projects; this has the added benefit of reducingadministrative costs for the first two years of the proposedproject during which PARE will be payingpart of the PCU operatingcosts. The PCU wouldbe staffedby one General Coordinator,assisted by two technicalunits (one for project monitoringand evaluationand the other for institutionalsupport), and six line Directors (one each for training, didactic materials, incentives,infrastructure, institutional development, and administration). Each Director wouldbe assistedby one or more analystsand regional coordinatorswho would split their supervisionand support duties on a geographical basis.J This flat organizationalstructure was chosento facilitateteamwork and reduce managementlevels and has been found satisfactoryby the project team during a post- appraisalmission. TechnicalAdvisory Committees (TACs) would be establishedat both central and state levelsearly in the implementationprocess to assist the PCU and to secure necessary support and cooperationfrom all SEP and SEE sectors, and other institutions involvedin project activities. The central TACwould be presidedby the General Director of CONAFE and would comprise the PCU General Coordinator and, inter alia, representativesfrom SEB, the Undersecretariatsfor EducationCoordination and for Primary Education, DGEI, DGEIR, the National PedagogicalUniversity, UPE, and CAPFCE. State TACswould be presidedby the SEE GeneralDirector (or equivalent)and would comprise the SPCU General Coordinatorand line Directors(para. 3.32), and, inter alia, the state-level Directors for primary and indigenouseducation, SOPE, and CONAFE, and a representative of the supervisors. The compositionof the TACswill vary slightlyfrom state to state due to their differenteducational organizational structures, but the overall frameworkand organizing principles have been reviewedand found satisfactory.
3.32. At the state level, SPCUs wouldhave the responsibilityfor carrying out the project. Each SPCU wouldbe staffedon a full-timebasis by one GeneralCoordinator, assisted by one technical unit and one institutionalsupport unit, and five line Directors(training, incentives/evaluation,didactic materials, infrastructure,and financialadministration). The General Coordinatorand possiblyother managerswould be existinghigh-ranking officials in the SEEs (to secure the states' ownershipof the project). SPCU staffbelow the management level would be recruitedfrom the existingSEE administrativestructure and their salaries would continue to be paid by the states. The proposedSPCU structure has been reviewed and found satisfactory. The PCU and SPCU organigrams,other project management arrangements,and the flow of funds are described in more detail in Annex 16. At
W' CONAFEis dividingthe combined14 PAREand PAREBstates into twoadministrative regions: RegionI comprisesDurango, Guanajuato, Jalisco, Michoacin, Puebla, San Luis Pbtosi,and Vracruz; Region2 comprisesCampeche, Chiapas, Guerrero, Hidalgo, Oaxaca, 'Ibbasco,and Yucatfin. - 35 -
neRotiations.the Governmentconfirned agreementon the staffingplan and terms of referencefor keversonnel in the PCUand SPCUsand on the comaositionof the TACsat both central and state levels (para. 7.1(i)). As a condition for loan effectiveness. CONAFE will present evidencethat the central PCU is staffedsatisfactorily in accordancewith the staffingplan agreedat negotiations(para. 7.2(b)).
3.33. The relationship between CONAFE, the PCU, and SPCUs (and by extension, between SEP and SEEs) under the project would be government by Participation Agreements signed betwveenSEP and SEEs in each of the participating states. Witi each such participation agreement, a technical annex would set out specific guidelines and monitoring indicators matched to the needs of each state. The four PARE states would sign agreements covering only their participation in the management training program (para. 3.25(a)). At negotiations.the Governmentconfirmed agreement on the final contentand form of the participationagreement and technicalannexes for carring out activities under the project to be signed with each of the project states plus the four under PARE(pam. 7.1(j)). As a condition for loan effectiveness. the Government will present evidencethat for at leas four project states: (i) participationagreements. includLng technical annexes. will have been signed: and (ii) the respectiveSPCUs will have been satisfactonrlystaffed (para. 7.2(c)). As conditionsfor disbursementto each proiect or PAREstate, (i) participation agreementsincl-udng technical ann_exes will have been signed. and (i) for project states, the SPCU will hav been staffed satisfactorilyNsatisfactoiv to the Bank (para. 7.3(b)).
IV. PROJECT COST, PROCURFMENT, DISBURSEMENT, AND AUDIT
A. Project Costs and Financing
4.1. Project Costs. The total project cost, including physical and price contingencies and taxes, is estimated at about US$616.7 million equivalent, of which about US$138.6 million would be foreign exchange; taxes amount to about US$44.3 million (Annex 17). The table below summarizes the estixmatedcosts by component. Investment costs amount to 57 percent of base costs and incremental recurrent costs amount to 43 percent of base costs. Recurrent costs are usually higher in human resources projects as they emphasize quality improvements rather than expansion of infrastructure. Project costs are estimated at October 1993 price levels and include physical contingencies of 5 percent for civil works and equipment, furniture and vehicles. Price contingencies are calculated at 2.5 percent per year for 1994- 98. These rates have been applied to local and foreign costs as well, assuming that periodic currency rate adjustments would compensate for the difference between international inflation on a US dollar base and local inflation rates.
4.2. Estimated construction costs for the project area are based on unit prices per square meter derived from current contracts and costs analyses for similar standards of construction in corresponding facilities in the four PARE states. Estimated educational facilities rehabilitation costs are calculated as a percentage of new construction costs. Estimated costs of equipment, furniture, vehicles, and educational materials are based on unit prices per item obtained in recent international and local purchases. Estimates for technical assistance and studies are based on current rates for local and foreign experts. Cost estimates for training, salaries and operaing costs are based on actual costs of PARE. - 36 -
Project Cost Summary Lca Fbreign Ibtal -- US$ million-- Human ResourcesDevelopment 99.8 2.6 102.4 EducationalMaterial Resources TeachingMateriaL & Student Packages 85.6 85.6 171.2 ReadingComers 4.8 2.1 6.9 IndigenousEducation 3.9 2.0 5.9 InfrastructureImprovement 93.8 24.7 118.5 188.1 114.4 302.5 InstitutionalStrengthening ManagementCapacity 11.6 5.3 16.9 Teacher Incentives 97.5 0.0 97.5 Improvementof SupervisionSystem 16.6 3.4 20.0 Books & MaterialsDistribution System 7.6 2.8 10.4 Project Administration 26.6 1.0 27.6 159.9 12.5 172.4 BASECOST 447.8 129.5 577.3 PhysicalContingencies 5.0 1.4 6.4 Price Contingencies 26.3 6.7 33.0
2 TOTALPROJECT COST 7 479.1 616.7
4.3. ncrement Rcurmrnt Costs. During the implementationperiod, the project would add an averageof about US$52.7 millionper year to the recurrentexpenditres budget of the SEP Operatingcosts generatedby the project are estimatedto grow, in October 1993 prices, from US$30.5 million in the first year of project implementationto US$70.9 million in the last year of project implementation. The incidenceon the SEP budgetwould thus remain small and manageableand is fully consistentwith the Government'scommitment to compensatoryprograms throughCONAFE and to increasethe share of its prinary education expendituresgoing to the pooreststates. No additionalbudgetary commitments are required from the project states as the financingof the project would fall under the federal government'scompensatory scheme. Recurrentcosts under the project, in 1993US$ millions, are estimatedas follows: 94195 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 30.5 45.4 50.5 66.1 70.9 These incrementaloperating costs would be generatedmainly by educationalmaterials for students, incentivesfor teachers and monetarysupport for supervisors,salaries for incrementalstaff, operationand maintenanceof infrastructure,furniture, equipmentand vehicles,office supplies, and traveland subsistencecosts for supervisionactivities. While togedterthese recurrent costs amountto 43 percentof total project costs (a levelnot
Z' Includestaxes and duties estmted at aboutUS$44.3 million. - 37 - uncommonfor primaly educationprojects) as noted in para. 4.1, the yearly averageamounts to less than one percent of the federaltransfers to all states in 1993 and thus should be easily absorbed by the states after project completion. Incrementalrecurrent costs would be financedby the Bank on a decliningbasis.
4.4. Project Financing. The proposedproject wouldbe financedby the Bank and the federal government. The proposedloan of US$412.0million would financeabout 67 percent of total project costs, or 72 percent of project costs net of taxes and duties of about US$44.3 million. The loan wouldfinance 100 percent of foreignexchange expenditures and 63 percent of local expenditures,net of taxes, would be financed. Such levels of local cost fincing are justified under the project due to the highly targeted nature of project activities (rural communitiesof difficultaccess unlikelyto attract any internationalbidding interest) and to the significantportion of investmentfunds going directly to local residents(through communityparticipation civil works, indigenouseducational materials, incentivesfor teachers and others, etc.). This is common in primary educationprojects both in Mexicoand elsewhere in the region. The loan wouldbe made to NacionalFinanciera, S.N. C (NAFIN), which would make the funds ava1ableto CONAFEfor the executionof the project. The federal governmentwould financeUS$204.7 million, or 33 percent of total project costs includingtaxes. iMnancingPlan LAcal Foireign Total -US$ million- Federal Government 204.7 0.0 204.7 IBRD 274.4 137.6 412.0 TOTAL 479.1 137.6 616.7
B. Procurement
4.5. The project would includeprocurement of new constructionand rehabilitationof educationalfacilities, furniture, officeand computerequipment, audiovisual equipment, educationalmaterials, library books, four-wheeldrive vehicles,studies and consultant services. Procurementof civil works,goods and consultantservices would be done followingprocedures consistent with Bank guidelines. For InternationalCompetitive Bidding (ICB), implementingagencies would use the stuidard bidding documents(SBDs) issued by the Bank, with such modificationsas agreed by the Bank to be necessary for the purpose of the project. For Local CompetitiveBidding (LCB), SBDs, satisfactoryto the Bank, would be used. All procurementwould be done by CONAFEexcept for civil works and for school furniture as follows: (a) procurementof civil works for warehouseswould be done by CAPFCE; (b) procurementof civil works for infrastructureimprovements would be done by CAPFCEfor the CAPFCEmodel and by SEEs though municipalitiesfor the community modality; and (c) procurementof furniturewould be done by CAPFCEfor CAPFCE infrastructuresubprojects. For the purpose of comparingforeign and local bids for goods duringICB evaluation,domestic manufacturers would be alloweda margin of preferencein accordancewith Bank guidelines. The table on the next page showsproject cost breakdown by procurementmethods. Annex 16 showsadministion and procurementresponsibilities. - 38 -
1hble 3. PROCUREMENTMETHODS BY CATEGORY (US$ million) Non-Bank Category ICB LCB Other Financed Total
Civil Works (CAPFCE) -- 43.0 30.0 -- 51.9 (21.5) (15.0) (26.0) Civil Works (community) -- -5 53.2a' -- 74.3 (26.6) (37.1) Equipment and Furnitute 3.2 3.5 6.7k' -- 13.4 (3.2) (3.2) (6.1) (12.5) Vehicles ------3.1 3.1 (0.0) (0-0) Education Books & Didactic 70.0 6.0 902-'& -- 85.2 Materials (63.0) (5.4) (8.3) (76.7) Student EducationalPackages 80.0 13.0 12.7V -- 105.7 (40.0) (6.5) (6.3) (52.8) ming -- 106.3 -- 106.3 (106.3) (106.3) Trainig Materials -- 1.3 0.4b' -- 1.7 (1.3) (0.4) (1.7) TechmicalAssistance & Studies -- 6.7 -- 6.7 (6.7) (6.7) 'Teacherand Supervisor - - 168.4d_ 168.4 Incentives,Incremental Salaries & (92.2) (92.2) Other Opeating Costs
Tbtal 153.2 66.8 393.6 3.1 616.7 (106.2) (37.9) (267.9) (0.0) (412.0) Note: Figures in parenthesesare amountsestimated to be financedby the Bank. a/ Diwet contractingwith communitiesor local contractors. To be prcred throughshopping. ¢' IncludesUS$6.1 millionof direct contractingfor proprietarymaterials. ' IncludesUS$14.9 million of directcontracting for mainan ecurrentcosts.
4.6. Civil Works. Procurementfor the constructionof new facilitiesor the rehabilitation works on the existingnetwork, includingrepairs and structuralreinforcement, amounting to about US$126.2 million, would be conductedby: (a) CAPFCEthrough its state-levelunits; and (b) SEEs through municipalities,with technicalassistance from CAPFCE, SEEs, and SOPEsto ensure adherenceto technicalstandards and guidelines(paras. 3.20-3.23 and Annex 11). Both CAPFCEand the SOPEs in the project states have adequateadministrative capacity and ample experiencein managingschool construction. For the CAPFCE modalit, althoughpackaging would be encouraged,contracts are not expectedto exceed US$10.0 million. Becausemost works wouldbe small and scatteredthroughout rural communitiesin ten project states, ICB wuld not be practicaland the works wouldbe procuredthrough: (a) LCB for packagesof works costing US$300,000or more but less than US$10.0 million, totallingabout US$43.0 million; and (b) comparisonof price quotations from at least three qualifiedsuppliers (shopping) for contractsestimated to cost less than US$300,000, up to an aggregateof US$30.0 million; no other procurementmethod is - 39 - expectedfor the CAPFCEmodality. For the communitymodality, works would be small and would not exceedUS$50,000. Therefore,direct contractingwould be allowed,provided that no competitiveprocedures can be reasonablyapplied, for works under US$50,000, up to an aggregateof US$53.2 million (plus US$14.9 million for maintenancerecurrent costs). Direct contractingwould be carried out based on agreementsbetween the municipalityand the community,the municipalityand SchoolCouncils, or the municipalityand local contractors.
4.7. Equipmentand Furniture. Equipmentand furniture for educationalfacilities and officesamount to about US$13.4 million. Approximately24 percent of estimatedcosts, or US$3.2 million, would be procuredby SEP/CAPFCEand CONAFE at central and state levels using ICB proceduressatisfactory to the Bank. Packagesof furniture and equipment valued at US$150,000or more and less than $350,000, up to an aggregateof US$3.5 million, not expectedto attract foreignbidders, wouldbe procuredusing LCB procedures acceptableto the Bank. Furnitureand equipmentpackages costing less than US$150,000 would be procuredon the basis of comparisonof price quotationsfrom at least three qualifiedsuppliers (local or internationalshopping), up to an aggregateof US$6.7 million.
4.8. EducationalBooks and DidacticMaterials. Educationaland printed books and materials amountingto about US$70.0 million would be procuredthrough ICB by CONAFE at the central level for packagescosting US$350,000or more. Packagescosting US$150,000 or more and less than US$350,000,up to an amount of about US$6.0 million, would be procured using LCB proceduresacceptable to the Bank. For packagescosting less than US$150,000,procurement would be done on the basis of price quotationsfrom at least three qualifiedsuppliers, up to an aggregateof US$3.1 million. Procurementof library books and printed materials which are proprietaryand obtainablefrom only one source (for the Reading Corners, which draw from a selectionof existingbooks, see para. 3.17) wouldbe done through direct contractingwith local and internationalpublishers that hold the copyrights;the packages handledunder this method seldomexceed US$10,000 and would not exceedan aggregateamount of US$6.1 million. In cases where authors hold the copyright,publishers would enter into an agreementwith the author and printing would be done throughdirect contractingwith the publisher. SEP has many years of experiencedeveloping books, selectingbooks from national and internationalmarkets, and publishingthem.
4.9. Student EducationalPackages. Educationalsupplies and materialswould be purchased through ICB for packagescosting US$350,000or more up to a total of about $80.0 million equivalent,through LCB in packagescosting US$150,000or more and less than US$350,000up to a total of about $US13.0 million, and throughprice quotationsfrom at least three qualifiedsuppliers for packagescosting less than US$150,000and up to US$12.7 million.
4.10. TrainingMaterials. No ICB is expectedfor procurementof training materials. Trainingmaterials would be purchasedthrough LCB in packagescosting US$150,000or more and up to $350,000 for a total of about US$1.3 million. Local shoppingwould be used for printingof training materialscosting US$150,000or less up to a total of US$0.4 million. - 40 -
4.11. Other Purchases Not Subject to Financing Under the Project. The purchase of four-wheeldrive vehiclesamounting to an estimatedUS$3.1 million would be financed by the Borrower.
4.12. TechmicalAssistance, Training and Studies. Individualconsultants and consulting firms carrying out technicalassistance, studies or trainingwould be hired followingBank Guidelinesfor consultants(August 1981)Bank Guidelinesfor the Use of Consultantsby World Bank Borrowersand by the WorldBank as ExecutingAgency. During appraisal, the timetablesfor contractingthe individualconsultants for technical assistanceand training and the studiesunder the proposed project componentwere reviewedand found satisfactory. The selectionand appointmentof consultantsfor studies and technicalassistance would be consistent with the abovementioned Bank guidelinesand would be done using standard documentssatisfactory to the Bank.
4.13. Prior Review. Prior reviewwould be required for all ICB and the first contract packagesfor all LCB and shoppingfor: (a) civil works by CAPFCE;(b) equipmentand furniture; (c) educationalbooks and didacticmaterials; and (d) non-durableeducational student packages. Prior reviewwould also be requiredfor the first three contracts covering three differentstates for civil works for (i) infrastructuresubprojects by CAPFCE, (ii) infrastructuresubprojects under the communitymodality, and (iii) warehouses. All terms of referencefor consultantcontracts would be subject to prior review. Reviewof selectionand hiring of consultantswould occur as follows: (a) for individualconsultants, in view of the substantialnumber of contractsexpected in the project for technicalassistance and training, contracts would be reviewedby the Bank when the valueof the contract is US$50,000or more or when so requiredunder specific(sub)components. All contractswith individual consultantsunder this thresholdwould be subject to prior reviewand monitoringby NAFIN (limite aut6nomo), up to an aggregate amount of US$1.5 million; (b) for consulting firms, all documentationfor contractsvalued at US$100,000or more wouldbe reviewedex-ante by the Bank, providedthat the aggregatefor contractsexempt from reviewwould not exceed US$2.5 million. All other procurementand consultantdocumentation would be subject to selectiverandom ex-postreview at a ratio of not less than one in every ten contracts by the Bank and would be kept by CONAFE and CAPFCEat central and state levels for periodic reviewduring Bank supervisionmissions. With the aboveprocedures, the Bank's prior review would cover, in value aggregate,approximately 40 percent of Bank-financedcontracts which, due to the decentralizednature of the project and the large number of individual contracts of relativelysmall value, is consideredsatisfactory.
C. Disbursements
4.14. The proposedproject would be implementedover a period of approximatelysix years and is expectedto be completedby June 30, 1999 and closed by December 31, 1999. The proceeds of the loan wouldbe disbursedduring a six-yearperiod as follows: (a) civil works, 50 percent of expendituresfor new constructionand for rehabilitadonof existingeducational facilities; (b) equipmentand furniture, 100 percent of foreignexpenditures, and 90 percent of local expenditures;(c) durable didactic materials(including printed educationalmaterials), 90 percent of expenditures;(d) non-durablestudent packages, 75 percent of total expenditures until an aggregateamount of US$25.0 million are reached, thereafterat a rate of 50 percent until an aggregateamount of US$45.0 million are reached, and at a rate of 25 percent for the -41 - remainder; (d) teacher and administratorstraining, 100 percent of expenditures;(e) technical assistance,studies, public campaigns,and staff training, 100 percent of total expenditures;(f) teacher and supervisorincentives, at a rate of 75 percent of total expendituresuntil an aggregateamount of US$20.0 million is reached, at a rate of 50 percent until an aggregate amount of US$50.0 million is reached, and at 25 percent for the remainder; (g) incremental operatingcosts, includingsalaries, travel allowancesfor project supervision,operation and maintenanceof buildings,furniture and equipment,and officesupplies and materialsat a rate of 75 percent until an aggregateamount of US$15.0 million is reached, at a rate of 50 percent until an aggregateamount of US$25.0 million are reached, and at a rate of 25 percent for the remainder(Annex 18). The Bank's contributionfor incrementalrecurrent costs, on a decliningbasis, wouldgo mostly towardstudent packages, incentives for teachers and supervisors,and a portion of project administration;the sharplydeclining percentages would enhance the sustainabilityof the project beyondBank financingwithin the Government'sbudgetary allocations.' Retroactivefinancing of up to US$6.0 million equivalent(one percent of projectcosts) wouldbe providedto help cover,eligible start-up expendituresfor technicalassistance, mostly for technicalinput and bidding specificationsfor educationalmaterials and civil works and for educationstudies, made on or after October 31, 1993.
4.15. Proceeds of the proposed loan would be disbursedagainst expenditures that would be presented to the Bank and fully documentedfor civil works contractsof US$2.0 million or maore,for goods contractsof US$350,000or more, and for consultantcontracts of $50,000 and $100,000 for individualsand firms, respectively,subject to prior reviewas per pam. 4.13. Claims for expendituresunder contractsbelow those amountsand other expenditures not coveredby a contract, such as work incentives,teacher and staff training costs, incrementalsalaries, travel allowances,etc. would be disbursedagainst presentationof Statementsof Expenditure(SOEs), for which the supportingdocumentation would be retained by the SEP, CONAFE,CAPFCE, and each SEE for periodic inspectionby the Bank and by external auditors. In order to facilitateproject implementation,a specialaccount in U.S. dollars of US$25.0 million would be establishedat the Banco de Mexico. Withdrawalsfrom the Special Accountwould be supportedby the requireddocumentation at the exchangerate prevailingon the date of expenditure. Separateproject accountswould be establishedand monitoredby the PCU in CONAFE and the SPCUs in each of the ten states and in the four states that would have institutionalstrengthening only. At negodations.the Go&ernment provided assurances that the Bank. in consultation withthe Government. could suspend disbursementto a project state which is non-ertfwming under its legal obligations(par. 7.1(k)).
DL Accountsand Audits
4.16. The PCU wouldmaintain records and accountsadequate to reflect, in accordancewith sound accountingpractices, the resourcesand expendituresin connectionwith the execution of the project. Central records wouldreflect the resourcesand expendituresin connection with the executionof the entire project. Other sets of records, one for each state, wouldbe maintainedby the respectiveSPCUs, under supervisionby the central PCU and would reflect the resourcesand expendituresin connectionwith the executionof the project in or for the respectiveproject state. Data from these state cost centers wouldbe sent to the central PCU for consolidationpurposes. At negotiations,the Governmentprovided assurances that - 42 -
CONAFEwould: Q) have the recordsand accounts fincludingall SPCU accountsand technical supervisionreports for infrastructuresubproiects) for each fiscal year audited by indeperdentand qualifiedauditors. in accordancewvith generally accepted auditing standards and procedures.and with the specificcurrent understandingwith the Mexican authorities:(lii furnish to the Bank. no later than six months after the end of each 3ear.a certifed coey of the agreedaudit reports: (Wii)furnish to the Bank such other informationconcerning tlhe recordsand accountsas well as the audit as the Bank would from time to time reasonablyi request(para. 7.1(1)). For all expenditureswith respect to which withdrawalsfrom the Loan Accountwere made on the basis of statementsof expenditure,and for all expenditureswith respect to which withdrawalswere made from the SpecialAccount, SEP and CONAFE would provide to NAFIN all recordsand accountsnecessary to allow the timely performance of its obligations,and to the independentauditors, both the records and the supporting documentation.
V. PROJECT MANAGEMENTAND SUPERVISION
A. Project Inplementation
5.1. Project Preparation. The primary responsibility for project preparation has rested with CONAFE, which has been gatheringvaluable experience with Bank projects through the on-goingPARE and PRODEI, with technicalsupport from SEP's Undersecretariatfor Basic Educationand from the SEEs. In particular,CONAFE has been able to draw on the experienceand preliminaryfindings under PARE (paras. 2.42-2.54), and has been instrumentalin shapingthe project to conformwith and be complementaryto the overall Govermmentstrategy for the educationsector. At the state level, SEEs will have benefitted from two years' experienceof operatinga decentralizededucation system by the anticipated start of implementation. Technicalassistance was providedunder grants financedby the Japanese Grant Fund for the field preparationof variousproject components. Detailed informationwas assembledon target populationsfor the satisfactoryselection of the 511 project areas.
5.2. Project Readincss and Implementatiors. Project preparationhas proceededto an advancedstate of readiness for implementation.The teacher training courses have already been designedand would use the existingadministrative capacity at PAM, SEP's teacher trainingprogram (paras. 3.9-3.11). Didacticmaterials and student packageswere determined using CONAFE'sextensive micro-planning experience and would benefit from the distributionexperience under PARE(paras. 3.15-3.16). For the ReadingCorners, UPE, the originatorof this provenprogram, has completedthe preliminaryselection of books and CONAFE, which would implementit, has extensiveexperience in book procurement(para. 3.17). A satisfactoryparticipatory methodology for design of indigenoustextbooks has alreadybeen developedand field testedby DGEI and a team of specialistsunder PARE; technicalgroups which wouldcoordinate the selectionand preparationof native language texts have already started to assemble(paras. 3.18-3.19). Infrastructureconstruction/ rehabilitationsubprojects would be carried out accordingto a detailed OperationalManual, a draft of which was discussed and agreedat negotiations,and receipt of a satisfactoryfinal version is a conditionof loan effectiveness(para. 3.23). Prototypedesigns for new and rehabilitatedschools have been reviewedand found satisfactory,and civil works would start - 43 - after ex-ante reviewsin Augustand October 1994 of the schools selectedfor infrastructure improvement(paras. 3.20-3.23). The selectioncriteria for the managementtraining program was discussed and agreed during negotiations,and satisfactoryterms of referenceand consultantshort lists are already in place for the process evaluationand management informationsystems and the educationstudies (paras. 3.25(a)-(c)). The schools in which teacher incentiveswould be granted during the first project year have already been selected and were reviewedand agreed during negotiations(paras. 3.26-3.28). The contentof training programsfor supervisors(paras. 3.25(a)-(b))and the location of supervisionoffices (para. 3.29(b)) have been reviewedand found satisfactory. Nine of the ten project states have submittedplans for distributionand inventoryof textbooksand educationalmaterials (para. 3.30). The project's GeneralCoordinator has been appointed,with excellent experiencein educationand management(especially micro-planning), and the PCU at CONAFE stands ready to benefitfrom the PAREexperience due to the proposed integrated PARE-PAREBPCU structure. Many qualifiedprofessionals involved in the preparationof the project are expectedto be appointedto the PCU. At the state level, a number of highly qualifiedindividuals were identifiedand have been activelyinvolved in the preparationof the project; it is also etpected they will be retained to staffthe SPCUs. The staffingplans for the PCU and SPCtJs were discussedand agreedduring negotiations,and the appointmentof key personnel, satisfactoryto the Bank, wouldbe a conditionof loan effectiveness(paras. 3.31-3.33 & Annex 16). To ensure timely and efficientproject implementation,various start-up activities, includingthose relatedto technicaland bidding specificationsfor educationalmaterials and civil worksand those relatedto the education studies, have been undertakenand would be eligible for retroactivefinancing (para. 4.15).
5.3. Project Monitoring. Project implementationwould be monitoredcontinually by CONAFE and the state SEEs and analyzedin preparationfor the annual and mid-term reviews. To assist in the monitoringof project implementation,a comprehensiveand well- focusedlist of monitoringindicators, matched to individualstates, would be used; these monitoringindicators would includeprocess and budget indicatorsand some proxy measurementsfor quality improvement(Annx 19). At negotiations.the vernent confirmedagreement on the set of overalland state-specificproject oroeress and performanceinicators to be monitoredduinng project implementationand presentedand reviewedduring the annual and mid-termrevews. satisfactorMto the Bk (para.7. 1(m)).
5.4. Annual Implemeon Reviews. The annual reviewswould take place in October of each year, starting in 1995, and would: (a) analyzethe previousyear's performanceand budgetexecution against project objectivesand sectorpolicies outlined in the Govermnents policy letter; (b) analyze the proposedwork plan and budgetfor the followingyear; (c) discuss adjustmentsto be made in project's implementationschedule; (d) analyze the results of the process evaluation;and (e) assess changesin budgetaryallocations at the state level. The proposed work plan and budget for the followingyear wouldhave to be previously defined at the central and state levels and contain a detaileddescription of targets and plannedactivities. Plans for civil works would specifytype and scheduleof constructionand provide evidenceof ownershipor donationof land and of adequatestaffing. At negotiations, the Governmentprovded assurancesthat SEP/CONAFEand SEEs would conduct,ioit with the Bank. the FederalFinance and Public Credit Secretariaat,8'and NAFIN annual
' Secrera de Hacienday Crilto PNblco,SHCP. -44 -
DOrLectimplementation reviews by October 31 of each year. starting in 1995 (para. 7. 1(n)). At negotiathons. the Government provided assurances that the PCU and SPCUs would Prepare and present to the Bank annual vrogress reports on the implementation of the project and plans for the next Year. with targets and budgets in each progect state. by September 30 of each year. starting in 1994 (para. 7.1(o)).
5.5. Mid-Telm Review. A comprehensivemid-term review wouldbe conductedin October 1996 to assess project performanceand initial impact in light of project objectives and Govermnentpolicies in additionto reviewactivities normallycovered under annual implementationreviews. The mid-termreview would have a strong focus on the formulation and carrying out of sectoralpolicies, particularlyfor institutionalstrengthening at both central and state levelsand inter-institutionalcooperative arrangements. A more detailed description of the annual and mid-termreviews is in Annex 20. The PCU would be responsiblefor hiring consultantsand preparing the final terns of referencefor the mid-term review,based on experienceaccumulated under the projectand the final or preliminary results of studies, satisfactoryto the Bank, and for preparingthe report with recommendations.At e_tain th Gt govded assunces that: ) terms or reece f the mid-term reie wl be reared and presented to the -Bank for riew by March 31. 1996: (ii) an in-deeth mid-term mrew will be conducted in October 1996. by SEP/CNAEand__OAE SEEs. ointy with the Bank. SHC_P aNdad IN. underM_ terms_ __of reeence___e satifathory to the Ban!k.to assess roe-ctperformance and initial iact: and ti-i on t_he basis of this revew, action plans. satisfactoay to the Bank. wyouldbe iitiated b&Januaiv 31. L997(para. 7.1(p)).
P.Project Supervision
5.6. The proposed project wouldrequire close and intensivesupervision, particularly in the initial years. Bank missionswould visit each participatingstate at least once a year during the first two years of the project. For each of the first two years, supervision requirementsare estimatedat about 20 staff-weeksof headquartersstaff. From the third year on, supervisionrequirements would decrease to about 16 staff-weeksof headquartersstaff each year. Local supervisionwould play an importantrole, particularlyfor supervisionof the civil works components;it is calculatedthat an additionalten staff-weeksper year of local supervisionwould be required. A supervisionplan and strategyis includedas Annex 21, and an overallproject implementationschedule is in Annex 22.
C Project Launch Seminar
5.7. To facilitateproject start-upactivities and familiarizenew PCU and SPCU staff and SEE project-relatedstaff with the projectand with Bank proceduresand bidding documents, a project launch seminar would be conductedearly during the project. At negotiantons. the Government confirmed agreement that i" vould conduct. jointlv with the Bank. a project launch seminar within tw, months of loa. efectiveness which will include the following agenda: (i) rvew of implementation plans and monitonng and evaluation activities: and (ii) vi of Droject manaement rquirements and Bank pmrceduresfor procurement. disbursements. auditinf and hirng of consul (a.as 7.1(q)). - 45-
VI. PROJECI BENEFIS AND RISKS
A. Project Benefits
6. 1. The proposed projectwould support the Goverunent'sprograms for improvingboth the quality and efficiencyof primary education,focusing on ten states with high incidence of poverty and low educationindicators. The levelof cognitiveachievement of children as well as their probabilityof completingthe prinary educationcycle are expectedto increase. Benefitswould thus consistof a higher rate of humancapital accumulationcontributing to economicdevelopment. They wouldalso consistof a more equal distributionof economic opportunitiesamong Mexicanchildren. Since the entire project would focuson the poorest states in Mexico, the compensatoryBasic EducationProgram, supportedby this and previous Bank-financedprojects would contributeto the Governmentfsgoal of redressinginequity- in primary education. .4t negotiations.the Governmentprovided assurances that progressin the coapensatorj Basic EducationProRram and in the allocationaf federal and state Rovernment educationalbudgets in the proiect states will be reviewedduring the annualand mid-term reviews,with a view towardincreasing the share f resourcesallocated to the voorer states or pDimaryeducaion (para. 7.1(r)). The project wold improvethe efficiencyof public resourceuse by reducingrepetition and dropout rates and by increasingthe amount of mvestmentswith high social rates of returm. Teachers,supervisors and principalswould improvetheir productivitythrough systematicon-the-job training, and wouldcontribute to the qualty and efficiencyof the primary educationsystem in the selected states. Institutional strengtheningwould contribute to a better allocationand increasedproductivity of human resources withinthe sector, and to an enhancedcapacity to evaluateand monitor educational policies and programs. Additionalbenefits are expectedfor femalebeneficiaries, as research has demonstratedthat increasingthe levelof educationof womenhas a significantpositive effect on the health sttus and educationalattainment of their children and contributesto lower fertility. The impact may be particularly significantfor girls from the indigenous population. Altogether,approximately 1.5 million primary school children, 53,000 teachers, and 1,140 supervisorswould raise their human capital.
B. Impact on Women
6.2. Approximatelyhalf of the children who wouldbenefit from an improvedquality of educationalservices in the project area would be girls. Their opportunitiesto have access to higher levels of educationand better work opportnities wouldthus improve. Further benefitscan be expectedas researchhas shownthat increasingthe level of educationof womenhas a significantpositive effect on the health status and on the educationalattainment of their children and contributesto lowerfertlity. The impact may be particularly significantfor girls from the indigenouspopulation.
C Environmental Impact
6.3. The project would have an indirect positiveimpact on the environmentthrough greater emphasison enironmental concerns in teacher trainingactivities and in the content of educationalmaterials and througha study on envmironmentaleducation. The project would have no direct enviromuentaleffects and is classifiedas C - 46 - D. ProjectRisks
6.4. The main project risks lie in the complexityof the implementationarrangements among a relativelylarge number of institutionsand entities within a still-evolving decentralizationprocess. More specifically,risks are associatedwith possible delaysin project executiondue to the slow improvementof institutionalcapacity of implementing agentsat the state and, where applicable,community levels. To mitigaterisks associated with lack of inter-institutionalcoordination, TACs composed of representativesof the various implementationagents would be formed at both central and state levelsto ensure adequate communicationand cooperation. The risk of weak institutionalcapacities is addressedunder the project through technicalassistance in key areas of managementsuch as planning, information,and evaluation. The project wouldbenefit from CONAFE'sexperience at the central level, which is currently implementingthe first Primary EducationProject as well as the Initial EducationProject and wouldeasily transfer successfuloperational expertise as well as familiaritywith Bank processesand proceduresto the proposedproject. By the project's anticipatedstart, SEEs would have had two years of operatinga decentralizededucational system. At the local level, participationof School Councils(formed under the 1993 LGE) would be phased in to allow for adequatetraining and adaptationof experiencefrom similar organizationsalready operatingin differentsectors. The risks identifiedduring early project preparationposed by the disparity in salaries for federaland state teachers (who would now all belong to the state system)have been practicallyelinminated: salaries have been leveled in all but three of the participatingstates, and these three states are scheduledto complete this process in 1994 (para. 2.19).
E. Program Objective Category
6.5. The project would support a program of targeted interventions. The project would support the national policy of compensationfor regionaldisparities in education, which was spelled out in the 1993 LGE. Pro,ect interventionswould be targeted not only to ten of the poorest states, but also to the poorest areas therein. The proposedproject and first Primary EducationProject togetherwould cover the 14 poorest states in the country. Most municipal capitals and major urban areas within the selected regionshave been excluded.
VII. AGREEMENIS REACHEDAND RECOMMENDATION
7.1. At negotiatons:
(a) the Governmentpresented a final PolicyLetter for the educationsector (pam. 2.32);
(b) the Governmentprovided assurances that by October 31 of each year, starting in 1994, the Governmentwould present: (i) a list of schools and/or classroomsto be constructed/rehabilitatedin the next year; (ii) evidencethat land is availableto the SEEs for civil works; (iii) evidencethat adequate staffingplans, includingbudgetary allocations thereto, have been iinalized;and (iv) evidencethat local SchoolCouncils have been created and are operational (para. 3.21); -47 - (c) CONAFEpresented to the Banka satisfactorydraft Operational Manual for infrastructuresubprojects (para. 3.23);
(d) the Governmentpresented the selectioncriteria for the managementtraining component,specifically for the overseastraining fellowships, satisfactory to the Bank(para. 3.25(a)); (e) the Governmentprovided assurances that the processevaluation system would be fullyoperational no later thanDecember 31, 1994(para. 3.25(b)); (f) the Governmentprovided assurances that: (i) tests,questionnaires, and administrativemanuals for the testing of primary educationstudents would be presentedfor Bank reviewno later than December31, 1995; and (ii) it would carry out the testing in June 1996 and analyze and disseminatethe results in a manner satisfactoryto the Bank (para. 3.25(b));
(g) the Governmentconfirmed agreement on the final terms of reference, implementationschedules, and consultantshort lists for the educationstudies, satisfactoryto the Bank (para. 3.25(c));
(h) the Governmentconfirmed agreement on the list of target schools and localities selected where teacher incentiveswill be granted for the first year of the project and that the selectionof schools for subsequentyears of the project will be discussed and agreed ex-antewith the Bank at the annual and mid-term reviews(pam. 3.27);
(i) the Governmentconfirmed agreement on the staffingplan and terms of refeence for key personnelin the PCU and SPCUs and on the compositionof the TACsat both central and state levels(pam. 3.32);
(;j) the Goverrnent confirmedagreemen on the final form and content of the participationagreement and tecbnicalannexes for carrying out activities under the project to be signed with each of the project states (para. 3.33);
(k) the Govement providedassurances that the Bank, in consultationwith the Government,could suspend disbursementto a project state which is non- performingunder its legal obligations(pam. 4.16);
(1) the Goverment providedassrances that CONAFEwould: (i) have the records and accounts(inchlding all SPCU accountsand technicalsupervision reports for infrastructuresubprojects) for each fiscalyear auditedby independentand qualifiedauditors, in accordancewith generallyaccepted auditing stndards and procedures,and with the specificcurrent understanding with the Mexicanauthorities; (ii) furnishto the Bank, no later than six months after the end of each year, a certifiedcopy of the agreed audit reports; (iii) firnish to the Banksuch other intrmationconcerning the recordsand accouns as well as the audit as the Bank would from time to fime reasonably request(par. 4.17); - 48 - (m) the Govenmmentconfirmed agreement on the set of overalland state-specific project progressand performanceindicators to be monitoredduring project implementationand presentedand reviewedduring the annual and mid-term reviews,satisfactory to the Bank (para. 5.3);
(n) the Governmentprovided assurances that SEP/CONAFEand SEEs would conduct, jointly with the Bank, the Federal Finance and Public Credit Secretariat(SHCP), and NAFIN annual project implementationreviews by October 31 of each year, starting in 1995 (para. 5.4);
(o) the Governmentprovided assurances that the PCU and SPCUs would prepare and present to the Bank annual progressreports on the implementationof the project and plans for the next year, with targetsand budgets in each project state, by September30 of each year, starting in 1994 (para. 5.4);
(p) the Governmentprovided assurances that: (i) terms of referencefor the mid- term reviewwill be preparedand presentedto the Bank for reviewby March 31, 1996; (ii) an in-depthmid-term review will be conductedin October 1996, by SEP/CONAFEand SEEs, jointly with the Bank, SHCP, and NAFIN, under terms of referencesatisfactory to the Bank, to assess project performanceand initial impact; and (iii) on the basis of this review,action plans, satisfactoryto the Bank, would be initiatedby January 31, 1997 (para. 5.5);
(>) the Governmentconfirmed agreement that it wouldconduct, jointly with the Bank, a project launch seminar withintwo months of loan effectivenesswhich will includethe followingagenda: (i) reviewof implementationplans and monitoringand evaluationactivities; and (ii) reviewof project management requirementsand Bank proceduresfor procurement,disbursements, auditing and hiring of consultant (para. 5.7); and
(r) the Governmentprovided assurances that progress in the compensatoryBasic EducationProgram and in the allocationof federaland state government educationalbudgets to project states will be reviewedduring the annual and mid-termreviews, with a view towardincreasing the share of resourcesfor primary educationallocated to the poorer states (para. 6.1).
7.2. As conditionsof loan effectiveness:
(a) the Governmentwill present, satisfactoryto the Bank: (i) a finalized OperationalManual for infrastructureimprovement; (ii) a handbookfor self- help construction;and (iii) a handbookfor buildingand fiurnituremaintenance (pama.3.23);
(b) CONAFEwill present evidencethat the central PCU is staffedsatisfactorily in accordancewith the staffingplan agreed at negotiations(para. 3.32); and - 49 - (c) the Governmentwill present evidencethat for at least four project states: (i) participationagreements, including technical annexes, will have been signed; and (ii) the respectiveSPCUs will have been satisfactorilystaffed (pam. 3.33).
7.3. As conditionsof disbursement:
(a) for infrastructuresubprojects, the Governmentwill present terms of reference for technical supervisionof infrastructuresubprojects under both the CAPFCE and communityparticipation models, satisfactoryto the Bank (para. 3.23); and
(b) for disbursementto each project or PAREstate, (i) participationagreements includingtechnical annexeswill have been signed, and (ii) for project states, the SPCU will have been staffed, satisfactoryto the Bank (pam. 3.33).
7.4. Recommendation. Subject to the aboveconditions, the proposedproject would constitutea suitablebasis for a Bank loan of US$412.0million equivalentto NAFIN, with the guaranteeof the United Mexican States,to be repaid over a period of 15 years, including 5 years of grace. Retroactivefinancing of up to US$6.0 million equivalentwould be providedto help cover eligible start-up expendituresmade on or after October 31, 1993. - 50 -
[This page left blank] - 51 -
MEXICO
SECONDPRIMARY EDUCATION PROJECr
ANNEXES
1. ComparativeEducation Indicators 2. Primary EducationEfficiency Indicators 3. EducationalExpenditures 4. GovernmentPolicy Letter 5. Decentralizationof EducationBudget 6. MarginalityRanking and Project Areas 7. IndigenousPopulations 8. ParticipatingMunicipalities and Beneficiariesby Project State 9. FinancialImplications of Extensionof Basic Education 10. TeacherTraining 11. PhysicalInfrastructure and DistributionNetwork 12. Strengtheningof Planningand PolicyAnalysis 13. Terms of Referencefor Process Evaluation& InformationSystems 14. Terms of Referencefor Studies 15. Teacher Incentivesby Project State 16. . Project Managementand Flow of Funds 17. Costs and Financing 18. Project Disbursements 19. MonitoringIndicators 20. Annual and Mid-term Reviews 21. SupervisionPlan 22. Project ImplementationSchedule 23. List of Documentsin Project File -53 - ANNEX 1 COMPARATIVE EDUCATIONINDICATORS
COMPARATIVEEDUCATION INDICATORS
% of Age Group Enrolled Primary Primary Primary Pupils Primary (1990PW Net Pupil/ Repetition Reaching Unit Cost Primary Country P a EnrollMYTeacher Ratei - Grade 4k' as ratio of Unit Prtmary Secondary (%) Ratiof GDP per Costs' lbtal |Female lotal mle 1990 1990 (%) (%) Capita,
. _ _ _ _ . _ ___ Argentina 106 19 9 73 0.011 142 Bolivia 82 78 34 31 82 25 53 0.12| 73 Brazil 108 39 88 23 19 59 0.06 214 Chile 98 97 74 77 86 29 - 13 97 0.10 203 Colombia 110 111 52 57 73 30 12 73 0.05 62 Costa Rica 102 101 42 43 87 32 11 90 0.90 175 DominicanRepublic 95 96 47 17 62 0.04 25 Ecuadorb' 117 116 56 118 31 6 74 0.09 97 El Salvador 78 78 26 26 70 40 8 66 0.11 63 Guatemala 79 47 4 60 0.04 35 Hondurms 108 109 16 61 0.11 115 Jamaica 105 105 60 63 99 37 99 0.08 127
|Mexico 112 110 53 | 53 981 31 9 [ 84[ 0.04 114
Nicaragua 98 101 38 441 75 33 9 84 Panama 107 105 59 62 92 20 20 61 0.12 257 Paraguay 107 106 30 30 95 25 9 77 0.03 50 Peru 126 70 95 281 14 82 0.01 23 Uruguay 106 106 77 231 97 0.05 26 Venezuela 92 94 35 1 411 61 23 10 86 0.09 13 Note: Many countriesuse the ages of 6 to 11 for primaryschool enrollment cohort; however,in somecountries primary schoolages includechildren of other ages as well. In this instance,enrollment will exceed 100%. 3! World DevelopmentReport, 1993 P Social Indicatorsof Develooment1991-1992, except fbr Mexicowhere the officialnational average is reported. Independentestimates report higher (adjusted)estimates; while comparative (adjusted) studies report lower estimates. s' In constant1990 US$. In ImDrovinmthe Oualityof PrimaryEducation in Latin America:Toward the 21st Centurv, LATRegional Studies, 1993. -54- ANNEX 2 PRIMARY EDUCATION EFFICIENCY INDICA41ORS
EFFICIENCY INDICATORSFOR PRIMARY EDUCATION BY STATE (191-1992)
States Rankedby CompletionDropout Repedtion Unit Cost EducationalIndex Rate Rate Ratea Rankingb-'per Studentce
NATIONALAVERAGE: 58.1 4.6 9.1 493.4 Primary Education I States (average): 44.8 7.9 13.2 525.8 1. Chiapas 31.0 13.9 13.0 3 488.2 2. Guerrero 40.2 8.1 13.6 2 586.2 3. Oaxaca 43.8 6.4 14.9 1 425.9 4. Hidalgo 64.0 3.1 11.2 9 470.6 PrimaryEducation II States (average): 52.6 5.5 10.2 473.7 1. Veracruz 45.0 6.9 11.3 8 503.5 2. YucatAn 44.4 6.5 11.8 6 497.0 3. Campeche 44.6 6.0 11.3 7 546.7 4. Durango 56.2 7.2 8.6 16 655.0 5. Tabasco 53.2 6.1 10.0 13 403.0 6. Michoacdin 50.3 3.7 12.2 4 427.3 7. Puebla 58.0 4.9 9.7 14 396.2 8. Jalisco 57.9 5.0 6.6 26 426.1 9. Guanajuato 59.4 4.7 9.1 25 391.7 10. San Luis Potosi 57.4 4.1 11.2 10 490.7 Non-Project States (average): 68.1 2.9 7.5 Da. 1. Sinaloa 56.7 5.2 8.2 18 517.9 2. Zacatecas 57.3 5.3 10.1 12 491.8 3. Nayarit 58.2 4.7 6.9 25 574.9 4. Chihuahua 59.2 4.6 7.3 21 590.3 5. Colima 58.1 4.8 7.2 22 584.1 6. Sonora 64.0 3.7 8.3 17 543.7 7. Quinta Roo 62.9 1.3 11.8 5 546.3 8. Queretaro 68.6 2.2 10.2 11 381.9 9. Tamaulipas 68.7 3.4 6.4 27 504.5 10. Mexico 69.6 2.3 7.7 19 466.9 11. Baja CaliforniaSur 69.3 1.9 7.2 23 781.4 12. Coahuila 72.3 2.5 6.1 29 620.5 13. NuevoLe6n 75.4 2.9 5.5 31 517.2 14. Morelos 78.3 2.1 6.0 30 420.6 15. Baja California 76.5 0.6 7.6 20 687.5 16. Tlaxcala 74.3 1.4 6.2 28 531.3 17. Aguascalientes 74.3 1.1 7.0 24 495.0 18. Distrito Pederal 82.4 1.5 4.6 32 575.4
Source: SEP and Bank staff esthiates, 1993. Y Rankingis based on an index of the averagepercentage deviation from the nationalaverage for the three indicators. bI 1990 N$. -55 - ANNEX3 EDUCATIONALEXPENDITURES
ibble 1. RECENTTRENDS IN TOTALEDUCATION EXPENDITURES (1982-1991)
Olher Total Local& Total Totan Other Total (State & Total Current Constant As% of Year SEP Secretariats Federal Municipal) Private Pesos Pesos GDP (miillions ofl l (%) (%)m (%)~M 1982 Pe-sos)l
1982 368,608 46,819 80.6 14.3 5.1 515,327 515,327 5.3
1983 488,667 64,400 82.0 13.4 4.6 674,436 354,221 3.8
1984 826,712 101,510 74.5 16.6 8.9 1,245,464 411,044 4.2
1985 1,332,034 148,510 77.1 15.1 7.8 1,918,991 404,168 4.1
1986 2,112,674 271,339 76.3 14.3 9.4 3,125,720 377,731 3.9
1987 5,034,274 484,806 78.3 12.0 9.7 7,046,794 375,179 3.7
1988 10,120,060 956,954 80.0 11.0 9.0 13,842,634 351,711 3.5
1989 12,998,225 1,754,249 76.5 14.9 8.6 19,281,682 390,768 3.8
1990 17,662,556 3,964,136 74.6 17.1 8.3 29,015,496 455,617 4.3
1991 24,910,704 5,199,639 78.2 16.3 5.5 38,498,782 498,876 4.5
Source: SEP, 1993. Note: All figures in millions of nominal pesos except where stated. Table 2. RECENT TRENDSIN TOTALSEP EXPENDITURES: BY SELECTEDLEVELS OF EDUCATION(1982-1991) (Percentageof Total)
Primary Lower Upper Techncal/ Other Total Total Year School Secondary Secondary Vocational University Education Infra- Misc.h/ Nominal Constant (Grades 1-6) (Grades 7-9) (Gr. 10-12) (College) Levelsa/ structure Pesos Pesos
1982 30.4 13.1 10.2 6.2 10.4 12.2 6.8 10.7 515,327 515,327
1983 25.0 12.7 9.8 6.1 12.5 13.2 8.2 12.5 674,436 354,221
1984 22.5 12.3 7.1 4.4 9.9 16.8 6.6 20.4 1,245,464 411,044
1985 22.2 13.7 9.7 4.6 10.2 17.6 6.0 16.0 1,918,991 404,168
1986 22.7 12.9 13.8 4.9 11.4 18.3 4.8 11.2 3,125,720 377.731
1987 24.1 15.0 10.7 4.2 13.0 19.9 4.0 9.1 7,046,794 375,179
1988 23.0 14.9 11.7 5.5 12.3 18.4 4.6 9.6 13,842,634 351,711
1989 21.0 15.0 12.4 6.5 9.7 18.5 3.8 13.1 19,281,682 390,768
1990 23.0 16.0 10.6 5.5 9.9 18.3 4.0 12.7 29,015,49 455,617 3
1991 23.3 15.7 9.6 5.0 10.1 18.8 4.0 13.5 38.498,782 498,876 2
Source: SEP, 1993. - Note: All figuresin percentageof millionsof nominalpesos. W Other includesother levelsof educationsuch as initial and post-graduate. b' Miscellaneousincludes culture, recreation, sports, and planningand administrationactivities at the central level.
41
ffl ~Table3. SEP ANNUALENVESTMENT & RECURRENT EXPENDITURE BY PROJECTSTATE (1987-1991) (Millionsof CurrentPesos)
1987 19818 19819 199019
PQSt Recurnt invest- Total icRrwmat Invest Total Recurrent lIvest- -oa Recurrent Invest Tota Recunent Inves- Tota
National~ ~ ~ et en ea wn * Average 76,29.5 95.7 76,390.21 146,582.8 253.5 146,83.3 206,945.0 216.0 207161.0 262,178. 57.3 262,755.8 347,756. 884.2 348,640.5
Camnpechie 29.3079. 37.1 29.345.4 56,176.9 113.3 56,290.2 80,247.5 95.3 80,342.8 98,228.11 301.9 98.53U. 132,648.2 511.4 133.159.6
DUMngO 69,733.9 68.2 69,802.1 129,587.1 167.3 129,754.3 191,030.9 183.3 191,214.2 210,046.1 482.3 210,528.4 259,125.1 726.8 259,851.9
Guamjiuaa) 86,055.5 191.3 86,246.8 179,671.3 256.2 179.927.j 235,993.1 224.3 236.217.4 307,871,.3 609.9 308,481.2 410,011.8 983.7 410,995.5
Jalisco 107,107.5 144.5 107,252.0 198,822.6 505.8 199,328.4 290,477.9 374.5 290.852.4 404,199.0 1,045.5 405.244.5 548,951.7 1,437.7 550,389.4
Miclioac4ia 126,836.3 108.3 126,944.~ 242,743.3 349.9 243,093.2 335,834.1 306.5 336,140.6 430,401.2 549,9 430,951.1 590,177.0 1,379.3 591,556.3
Puebla 95,397.6 118.7 95,516.31 186,292.0 365.1 186,657.11 265,445.3 306.6 265,751.9 343,820.1 738.3 344,558.3 470,428.5 134.2 471,772.7
&L. Pbrosl 75,872.7 78.3 75,951.0 147,212.9 233.6 147,446.5 207,438.6 203.7 207,642. 265,609.q 765.4 266,374.4 358,175.5 1,022.8 359,198.3
Takbasco 59,677.3 165.9 59,843.2 111,918.5 172.0 112,090.5 151,034.51 141.0 151,175.5 188,104.4 518.5 188.622.9 260,858.81 893.7 261,752.5
Veracrz 175,805.0 281.8 176,086.8 343,666.1 835.3 344.501.6 511,093.7 691.4 511,785.2 644,815.3 1.118 645,934.2 855.553. 1,635.9 857,189.6
Yucathn 47,045.8 60.9 47,106.7 91,129.6 163.2 91,292.8 124,947.7 136.0 125,083.7 154,950.31 302.6 155,252.9 193,225.2 575.2 193,8004
Project 872,839.7 I,2550 874,094.5 1,687,220.4 3,161.6 1,690,382.0 2,393,543.4 2,662.6 2,396,20.0 3,048,044.7 6,433.2 3,054,477.9 4,079,155.6 9,300174,088,456.3 Area Total Totalz National 2,36,130 2,967 2,368,097 4,544,067 7,858 4,551," 6,415,296 6694.5 6,421,991 8,127,532 17,897 8,145,429110,780,447 27,409 10,807,856
Proect states 36.9% 42.3% 36.9% 37.1% 40.2% 37.1% 37.3% 39.8% 37.3% 37.S% 35.9% 37.5% 3.% 33.9% 37.8% sare of iTota Souwce:SEP and Bank staff estimaes, 1993. Table4. EDUCATIONEXPENDITURES By pROJECT sTATE (1988l199)
1988 199 MO99 19 ProJectStates FederalIState IPrivate Total IFederalIState Private Total Fedenal State Private Tota Federa State Private Total
National Average 76.31 15.0 8.7 13,842.61 75.6 15S.8 8.61 19,281.7 76.0 16.0 8.0 29,015.5 78.2 16.3 5.5 38,498.8
Campeche 87.61 11.4 1.0 98.51 84.3 14.8 0.9 145.6 83.9 15.2 0.9 197.555 88w9 10.5 0.6 270.9
DuiaWg 76.8 IS.9 7.3 248.1 78.9 14.2 6.9 346.2 75.2i 16.7 8.11 428.712 78.9 15.31 5.8 535.0
Guanajuap 69.0 23.0 8.0 410.7 72.4 19.41 8.2 527.4 71.3 19.9 8.81 717,205 76.7 17.41 5.9 955.5
Jalisco 58.4 23.6 18.0 794.81 59.1 24.3 16.6 1.133.6 58.8 22.7 18.8 1,454.062 61.7 23.5 14.8 1,640.6
Michoacan 82.71 11.8 5.5 460.91 83.5 11.01 5.5 607.6 78.8 15.41 5.8 829,8931 83.4 12.8 3.8 1.127.7
Puebla 75.01 16.0 9.0 481.81 76.6 14,8 8.6 662.6 75.4 15.01 9.6 865.911 83.4 1031 6. 'I 1.163.1 00 San Luis'Potosi 85.0 9.0 6.0) 273.31 84.9 9.3 5.81 373.2 84.7 8.9 641 491.461 90.8 4.9 4.3 643.1
Tibbasco 67.71 28.9 3.4 239.9 72.6 24.0 3.4 316.9 70.4 26.0 3.61 442.126 79.6 18.4 2.0 691.9
Wmcrumz 64.71 29.6 5. 45.6 66.5 28.11 5.4 1.174.9 63.71 30.5 5.81 I.S84,403 72.4 23.61 4.0 2,020.7
Yucata 72.11 22.2 5.7 197.81 71,7 22.9 5.41 276.0 79.21 14.2 6.6 327.2 80.1 1571 4.2 457.2
Project Area Total 73.9 19.1 69.6 4,051.4 79.1 19.6 68.9 5464.0 74.1 18.5 74.4 7,338.5 79.6 15.2 51.7 9,505.8~ NationalTota CurrentPawo) 11,077.0 2,170.9 1,253.1 13,84.6 14,565.5 3,415. 1,651.3 19,M81. 22,182.5 4,763.1 2,401. 29,01.5 30,110.3 6,258.4 2,130.0 38,4988 -01~ ~0 ProjectSakte's Shareof National ITotal 25,7% 393 277% 28.1% 27A.4 32.7% 277%, 28.9% 23.2% 31,9%, 27.7% 25.1%, 24.2% 26.1% 27.7%1 24.7% ~ Soutte: SEP and Bank staffesdtemas, 1993. > 59- ANNEX4 POLICY LETTER
LETIER OF SECIOR POLICIES (TRANSLATIONFROM SPANISHTEXT)
SECRETARIATOF PUBLIC EDUCATION SUBSECRETARIATOF EDUCATIONALCOORDINATION
Letter No. Mexico,D.F., March 4, 1994
Mr. Edilberto Segura Director, County DepartmentII Latin America and the CaribbeanRegion WorldBank Washington,D.C.
In accordancewith WorldBank requirementsfor financingthe "Progam to ReduceFailure Rates m Basic Education (PAREB),I am pleased to inform you about the main points of the National EducationalPolicy with respect to basic education:
A. GENERAL POLICY
1. Over the past five years, the MexicanGovernment has carried out structuralreforms aimed at: redefiningthe role of the State; modernizingthe economyand creating conditionsto encouragesustained growth of productivecapital and to respond effectivelyto the most pressingneeds of the Mexicanpeople.
2. It has become obviousto the Governmentthat the main priority for a modem Mexico is investmentin human capital. Unless the economicallyactive population(PEA) is comprisedof a critical mass of educated, hard-workingcitizens, it would not be very realistic for our country to set ambitiousgoals with regard to domestic productionand internationalcompetitiveness. Educationhas assumed its essential role in the country's overallpreparation of plans to achievecomprehensive development.
3. The 1989-94Education Modernization Program, part of the 1989-94National DevelopmentPlan, was undertakento transformthe country's educationalsystem; in 1992, basic educationaland teacher trainig services were tansefeed to states; and in 1993, the professionalteaching career programwas institutedand nine years of basic education became mandatory. The 1973 Federal EducationLaw was replacedby the General EducationLaw. The Governmentpledged to provide a quality,efficient educational systemand to seek a new relationshipbetween government and society and among the three levels of govenment, as well as more active social participation in education.
4. ConstitutionalReforms. Articles 3 and 31 of the Constitutionwere amended in 1993 to: (a) guaranteeall individualsthe right to an educationand the Goverunent's -60- ANNEX4 POIICY LETTER obligationto provide it; (b) extendmandatory education to the secondaryschool level; (c) ensure the national character of basic education;(d) make parents responsiblefor seeking mandatoryeducation for their children; and (e) end the uncertainlegal status that affectededucators.
5. State-AdministeredEducation. Under the frameworkof the National Agreementfor Basic EducationModernization, and as a substantivepart of the reorganizationof the educationalsystem, over a six-monthperiod in 1992 the Federal Government transferrededucational institutions to state governments,including all technicaland administrativeelements, duties and obligations,property and real estate, as well as financialresources, which the Secretariatof Public Educationhad been using to providepreschool, primary, secondary,special and teacher-trainingservices.
Under the auspicesof this new state-administerededucational system, an enormous effort was made in terms of administrationand concertedplaning, includig the transfer of approximately100,000 schools, 22 million items of property,agreement with state governmentson their joint responsibilityfor providingeducational services and hiring a teachingand administrativestaff of approximately700,000 teachers and workers,and graning N$16 billion to make state governmentsresponsible for the educationof 13.5 million students, 10.2 million of them at the primary level. State- administerededucation has consolidatedthe national redistributionof authority, strengthenedstate and municipallevels of decision-making,and encourged better coordinationbetween local authoritiesand the community. State educationalsystems thus becomeextremely important and are responsiblefor providingbasic and teacher- taining services, while the Federal (Cental) EducationalSystem is responsiblefor national educationalpolicy and uniformity.
In order to ensure proper operationof basic educationaland teacher-trainingservices, tie Federal Governmentagreed with state governmentsto provide ongoingtechnical and administrativeassiste, as well as any other type of assistancethat states may require, and that states are requiredto inprove control, monitoringand inspection proceduresin order to view developmentof the state educationalsystem in a more objective,precise and standardizedmanmer. School, Municipaland State Councils were created for the same purpose; these Councils,with social participationin the educationalprocess, will monitoreducational activities, propose and manage resources and solutions to problemsunder their jurisdiction. Liewise, state govemmentsare obliged to provide the Federal Govermmentwith reliable, timely infbrmationon financialand budgetaryresources dealing with planning, programmingand statistics.
Chapter II, section four, of the General EducationLaw also males provisionfor assigningthe assessmentof the nationaleducational system to the Secretariatof Public Education, making all public and private institutionsresponsible for assistingand cooperatingwith educationalauthorities in order to carry out this assessment, includingproviding required data and support in order to carry out statisticaland analytical reviews. -61- ANNEX 4 POUCY LETTER State-administred educationalso impliesthe decentralizationof educationalactivities from state govenments to municipalauthorities. This process is currently being developedand is strengthenedby establishedmechanimsm contained both in the General EducationLaw and in the agreementsformalizing state-administered education.
6. Quality of Education. The achievementof qualityeducation with sufficientcoverage is the key objectiveof the educationalpolicy proposedby the 1992 National Agreementof Basic EducationModernization. To achievethis, three basic strategies were set forth: (a) reorganizationof the educationalsystem; (b) reformulationof the curriculumand teachingmaterials; and (c) public appreciationof the role of teachers.
The reorganizationof the educationalsystem is now underway,and local-level decision-makingon educationalservices, a key elementin achievingimprovement in the quality of education,is beginningto take shape accordingly.
As part of the strategyproposed in the NationalAgreement, a comprehensivereform of the curriculumand of teachingmaterials has startedand will be completedthis year. Thanks to this reform, a new preschooleducation curriculum came into effect in 1992which is more in line with the country'spublic educationneeds; it includes parents' participationand is better organizedso that Mexicanchildren can progress in a gradual and systmatic manner. New primary educationcurricula and programs came into effect in 1993, along with the first new set of free textbooks,as a result of curriculumreform. With this reform, it is expectedthat studentswill learn reading, writing, oral expressionand mathematicsin a natural, effectiveand creativemanmer; acc,ire sufficientknowledge about the natural and social world in which they live; study history,geography and civics in a systematicmanner; lear about and appreciateother types of human communicationand expressionsuch as music and literature,become awareof human rights, and acquirea solid backgroundin human values.
Likewise, in 1992, in responseto the broad consensusof teachers, specialistsand parents, a new curriculumand basic course programwere institutedto replace the previousarea program, increasingthe teachingof Spanishlanguage and mathematics to five hours per week. Educationalcontent is now more relevant,of better quality, and covers more class time, as requiredin the 200-a school year specifiedby the Genefal EducationLaw. This impliesan increaseof 150 hours per year which will be used to enrich the learningprocess.
In the country's educationalprocess, teachersare the main protagonistsof educational reform. This encouragesand strengthenspublic appreciationof the role of teachers while promotingthe processesof teacher training, in-servicecourses, improving salaries, and strengtheningthe professionalteaching career.
During this Administation, teachershave receivedyearly salary increaseswhich have raised their standardof living while exceedingthe rate of inflation. Even the lowest teacher salary has improvedsubstantially from 1.57 to nearly 3.5 times the minimum -62 - ANNEX 4 POLICY LETTER salaries between 1988-1993. Federal and state governmentsare also committedto continuingtheir gradual, sustainedefforts to promotebetter salaries.
A new instrumentto recognizeteachers' work, the professionalteaching c-areer program, came into effect in 1993, retroactiveto 1992. This consistsof a horizontal promotionsystem which reinforcesteacher incentivesand salaries. The objectivesof this career programare to: (a) increasethe quality of educationby acknowledging and encouragingthe work of the best teachers; (b) increaseinterest in in-service courses for teachersby providinghigh salaries to better teachers; (c) recognize teachers' performanceand tenure as well as their academictraining, knowledgeand participationin in-servicecourses; and (d) acknowledgethe dedicated,professional contributionsof teachers at the levelsand in the areas in which they work, particularlythose who teach in schools in underprivilegedcommunities. 450,000 basic educationteachers, 57% of those eligible, havejoined the professionalteaching program.
7. Educational Efficiency. In 1991 the MexicanGovernment began the Solidarity Schoolsprogram with the joint efforts of the Secretariatof Public Education, the Secretariatof Social Developmentunder the National SolidarityProgram, and state governments,which pooled their resourcesand worked togetherto reduce inequality and inefficiencyin those elementaryschools with the country's lowestlevels of educationalefficiency.
This program'sstrategy is to diversifythe provisionof materialsand benefitsto students, teachers, schools and communitiesand thereby reduce educational imbalancesand promotethe integrateddevelopment of those schools with the poorest performancerates.
Under the project entitled Proposal for TeachingWritten Language and Mathematics (PALEM), the Secretariatof Public Educationprovides teachers of the first two grades of primary school with technicaland pedagogicalinputs to support childrenfs leaming of reading, writing and mathematicsin the classroomaccording to the standard syllabus,and thereby try to avoid the need for childrento repeat a school year.
Another effort aimed at increasingthe final efficiencyof primary educationis thc project entitled Preventiveand CompensatoryAssistance, better knownas Assistance for Children with Leaming Disabilities. The purpose of this program is to prevent the need fo.rchildren with learningdisabilities to repeat a school year. It also provides special learningmaterials to providesuch children in grades one and two with special learningmaterials to help them completetwo grades in one school year, as well as materials which are appropriatefor the levelof maturityof those students who are older than their classmates.
The policy of adding missing grades to those schools which do not offer complete primary education is being continued,and schools taught by only one teacher are being convertedinto schools with two or three teachers, as needed. These measures -63 - ANNEX4 POLICY LETIER have contributedto an improvementin the index of primary educationefficiency from 55 to 61.1% between 1988-1992.
8. Compensatory Role. After state governmentsassumed the responsibilityof operating the educationalservices previouslyhandled by the Secretariatof Public Educationat the state level, the Federal Govermmenthas been better at --to promote its compensatoryrole, since it is better able to design and implementtargeted programs to solve the problemsand handicapsof more disadvantagedsocial groups and regions.
Thus, PARE (Programapam Abatir el RezagoEducativo) began in 1992 in four states with the lowesteducational indices (Oaxaca, Guerrero,Hidalgo and Chiapas). In its first year, the programassisted 615,000 primary school studentsin 9,000 schools by means of effortsto improvestudents' performance,reduce the shortageof classrooms,train teachers, increasethe distributionof books and learning materials, and strengthenschool supervisionand assessment.
In order to improveboth the qualityand efficiencyof preschooleducation among preschool-agedchildren and expand its coverage,financed in parallel by a World Bank loan, preparationof the Initial EducationDevelopment Program (PRODEI) began in 1993 in ten states in which 52% of the populationunder the age of four lives in poverty. The objectivesof this Program are to: prepare children of low-income families to begin their schooling,improve their performanceand stay in school; train parents, especiallymothers, in improvedchild-rearing practices; and strengthenthe technical capacityof participatingstates.
In 1994, PAREB(Programa pam Abatir el Rezagoen Educaci6nB&sica) will begin operatingin ten states,under the coordinationof CONAFE,which is responsiblefor carrying out the above-mentionedcompensatory programs.
Educationalalternatives for rural, indigenousand disadvantagedurban populations have also been improved,since the majority of children who do not receiveprimary educationbelong to these groups. In this context, strong encouragementhas been given to indigenouseducation, over the past ten years, enrollmenthas grown at an annual rate of 4.2%, while overallenrollment in the same period has seen a decline of 0.5%. The purposeof this type of service is to try to provide indigenous populationswith a primary educationwhose general and specificcontents allow studentsto realize their potentialand which reinforcestheir indisputableright as members of an ethnic group to preserveand cultivatetheir respectivevalues, customs, and traditions.
Primary school textbooksand preschoolteaching materials are being publishedfor al! of the country'sethnic groups. By 1997, all requiredmaterials are expectedto be ready for all languagesand their dialects, dependingon preponderanceand the availabilityof expertsto prepare them. Work is also being done on Spanish language texts, and 50% of the anticipatedrequired texts are expectedto be met by the end of 1994. Regularand specialtraining programs and strategiesare being improvedso that more teacherscan join the indigenouseducation service to teach regular and -64 - ANNEX4 POLICY LEITER communitycourses. A new indigenouseducation model will be developedand initiated through CONAFE,to strengthenthe teachingof native languagesarid ease transitionto Spanish.
In order to serve those non-indigenousrural communitieswith 5 to 29 school-age children and which lack regular educationalservices becauseof their geographic location and difficultaccess, CONAFEoperates a communityeducation model.
This model tries to facilitatethe learningof reading,writing, mathematicsand science in a critical and analyticalmanner, with a view to providingbasic educationgeared towardslife, work, and study. In 1992, 84,754 studentsin 7,853 communitieswere served.
In order to serve groups who require specializededucational schemes, the following programsare in operation:the Primary EducationModel for Migrant Children, serving children of migrant farm workers who relocateperiodically; the Accelerated Primary EducationService (SEAP9-14) for children who havejoined the job market too early; and the Drop-outEducation Model for children betweenthe ages of 10 and 14, offeredby the NationalInstitute of Adult Education.
Compensatoryprograms, supported by external financing,use these resourcesto implementmeasures that encouragechildren to stay in school, especiallythose that are aimed at improvingthe qualityof educationas demonstratedby better learning, both concreteand permanent. The MexicanGovernment, at its variouslevels, is graduallyabsorbing the costs of the measurestaken during project operationso that they become institutionalizedautomatically, thereby assuringtheir stabilityand continuity. In particular,the Federal Governmentwill continue supportingthe poorest states, in relation to their financialability, until their educationalindicators reach the national average.
9. Texbooks. In order to make primaryeducation truly free as stipulatedin the Mexican PoliticalConstitution, the National Commissionon Free Textbooks (CONALITEG)was created in 1959 to produce and distributebooks at no cost to students in all of the country'spublic and privateschools. These textbooksguarantee the teachingof a minimumlevel of knowledgeand skills to be learned by all Mexican children, with no distinctionin terms of their economicor social status, this embodies the principle of educationalfairness and socialjustice. Nearly 100 million books were distributed in 1992 to studentsand teachers.
10. Comuunity Participation. The magnitudeand significanceof the task of educational modernizationrequires the participationof all levelsof society and is a national responsibility. The GeneralEducation law thereforerequires educational authorities to promotesocial participationin activitieswhich are aimed at strengtheningand increasingthe quality of public educationand expandingthe coverageof educational services. In order to meet this requirement,social participationcouncils have been created at national, state, muniicipaland school levels; these councils have enabled -65 - ANNEX4 POLICY LETrER
parents, teachers, educationalauthorities and membersof the communityto participate in day-to-fy educationalwork and in reorganizingthe school system.
11. EducationalResources. Both the National Agreementfor Basic Education Modernizationand the General EducationLaw of 1993 indicatethe need to allocate greater budget resourcesto public education. In terns of federal educational expendiures, the Governmenthas made serious attemptsto recover levelsprior to the 1982 crisis. In fact, total expenditures(public and private) in 1993 were 5.3% of GNP The Governmentnow assigns the greatest importanceto education, since it is the cornerstoneof economicgrowth, as will be shownby the increasingparticipation of the educationalbudget withinthe total federalbudget. Along with compensatory programscarried out by the FederalGovernent, states, in keepingwith the expandedrole of the state-adminsterededucational system, have increasedbudget amountsto promoteeducation. Thus, in agreementssigned betweenthe Federal and state governmentsto formalizethe NationalAgreement for Basic Education Modernization,states undertookthe obligationof presentingto their respective legislatureseach year a proposal for state resources- in keepingwith their respectivepublic financialstatus - to be used for basic educationand teacher taining, in increasingreal terms, in additionto those receivedfrom the Federal Government. The Federal Governmentpromised to transer funds, in keeping with availableresources as providedfor in the National ExpenditureBudget approved for each fiscal year, to state govemmentsso that they are able to administerthe schools utnsferred to them, meet commitnentsassumed under the Agreement,and raise the quality and coverageof the educationalservices for which they are responsible. Wheneverpossible, these transfersshould imply greater resourceseach time.
If states use these resourcesfor purposesother than those agreed, appropriate measureswill be taken with respect to any relevantcivil and criminal administrative responsibilities,as stated in current legislation.
B. SPECIC ISSUES
12. Nine Yearsof MandatoryEducation. With the amendmentof Article 3 of the MexicanConstitution, secondary education became mandatory. Basic education now includesnine years of mandatoryeducation: six years of primary school and three years of secondaryschool. The country has sufficientcapacity in place to serve all those who require secondaryeducation in accordancewith the new constitutional requirement. In order to expand coverage,the criteria for educationalservice planninghave been streamlined,and micro-planningexercises are being carried out to identifyneeds and install services,even in smallcommunities through the use of televisedsecondary school teaching(which has provedeffective over the years). The Federal Governmenthas allocatedresources for the purchaseof satellitedishes for localities where televisionsignals either do not reach or are unclear.
In order to expandbasic education,the Secretariatof Public Educationhas designeda Basic EducationPopularization Program, to be implementedin 1994, which will encourageparents' and students' interest in requestingpreschool and secondary -66 - ANNEX4 POLICY LETTER education services,especially in the most disadvantagedareas, and in preparing new strategies, types and sources of financingin order to meet new demandsand achieve coveragesimilar to that of primary education. Encouragementfor televisedsecondary school education will be particularlyimportant in view of the successfulresults achievedin this type of teaching.
Similarly, work is being done on designingnew, more efficientteaching materials, with emphasison free textbooks,based on new primary and secondarycurricula and programs.
13. Developmentof Early and Preschool Education. One of the Mexican Government'skey objectiveshas been to achievethe highest possible levelsof nutrition, physicaland mental health, and of educationaldevelopment among children from birth to age 5. The main strategiesinclude:
(a) The NationalAction Program, under the frameworkof the "WorldChildren's Summit- UNICEF", to ensure increasedfederal expenditures for the health of infants,preschoolers and mothers; nutrition;education; basic sanitation;and assistanceto children in particularlydifficult situations, in order to reduce the indices of mortality, illness, malnutritionand unsanitaryconditions, among others.
(b) The programto providepreschool, primary and secondaryeducation to all who require it. This programis a result of the Government'sobligation to provide such services,stipulated in the Constitutionas revised on March 5, 1993.
(c) The Early EducationDevelopment Program, to provide guidanceto parents on educatingand treating their childrenfrom birth to age 5 and beyond.
The basic policy behind all these strategiesis to give priority to the poorest rural and indigenouspopulations as well as underprivilegedurban people, in order to achieve equality in education.
14. Reduction of Salary Differences. Under the state-administerededucational system, state authoritiesare committedto reducingby four percentagepoints per year the differencebetween the combinedsalary of transferredworkers and that of workers who were already part of the state educationalsystem.
In order to carry out this process,general guidelineson calculatingthe reductionof salary differencesin each state were drawn up and agreed upon with the National Teachers' Union (SNTE), with the participationof specificcommissions to define salary differencesin each state.
Paymentof salary differencesbegan in December 1992, retroactiveto the beginniDg of the school year in September. Thanks to the budget efforts of those states with significantdifferences, the agreed commitmentto graduallyreduce differenceswas -67 - ANNEX4 POLICY LETER completed, and the process has concludedthroughout the country, with the exception of three states in which it will be completedin 1994. The programbenefits 427,000 educational workers,with a cost to Federal and state governmentsof over N$500 million.
15. CONAFE:s Role. CONAFE,a decentralizedagency with a public interest and its own legal status and equity capital, was created in 1971 to collect additionaleconomic and technicalresources, both domestic and foreign, and use them to further the developmentof Mexicaneducation. Based on the ParastatalAgency Law (which regulates this type of institutions),it has completeautonomy to developits own functions, subject only to its governingauthority.
Conceivedas an alternativesolution to the country'seducational problems, CONAFE faces the challengeof generatingideas and activitiesto bring educationto the most disadvantagedrural areas and to collect and administerresources for educational programs in an efficient,effective and imaginativemanner. Among its most relevant achievementsis the CONAFE primaryeducation model which has served scattered localities in which children would otherwisehave not had this opportunity.
The MexicanGovernment has granted CONAFE full responsibilityto conduct the PAREB,both in direct managementof most activitiesand in coordinatingthe activities of other federal or state agenciesdealing with the project. In carrying out its duties, it enjoys autonomyguaranteed by the Law, withoutbeing conditionedby any fumre regulations. Other institutionsplay a secondary,but no less important, role in managing resources.
16. Flow of Funds and Levelsof Responsibility. The decision to use a more centralized flow of funds, mainlyunder the control of CONAFE,as opposedto a decentralized flow of funds, was made for two importantreasons. First, funds would come from the federal account, "internationalloans (branch 0026)" to SEP and states; by law, the funds in this federal accountcannot be combinedwith state funds. Second, according to the Constitution,each state is autonomous,and thereforestate treasury funds are consideredinalienable rights. Thus, it is much more desirable to maintaincentral control of PAREBfunds in order to avoidthe risk of financialcontrol. In keeping with the state-levelstrategy, states would be responsiblefor administering subcomponentaccounts.
17. IFderal CompensationScheme. The Federal Governmentis incorporatingfunds for PAREBin a specialaccount. Federal compensationfunds will be disbursed as stated in the PAREBdescription. States are not obliged to participate,but may contribute incrementalbudget allocationsfor basic education(see participationagreements).
18. EducationalPblicy. Federal and state govermmentsand privateinstitutions regulate their respectiveeducational activities based on article 3 of the Constitutionand its regulatorystatute contained in the General EducationLaw, issued on July 12, 1993 and publishedJuly 13, 1993, which, as stated in its first transitionalarticle, became law the day after publication(July 14, 1993). All other regulatoryprovisions which - 68- ANNEX4 POLICY LETTER are not in oppositionto this Law remain in effect. Thus, the General EducationLaw is pennanendy in effect and requires no additionalregulations. The operationof the Secretariatof Public Educationand its agenciesis clearly regulatedby SEP's Internal Regulations,which authorizedofficials may modify or update in the future, as slated for the next administraton based on a previouslyevaluated consolidation of state- administerededucation.
19. Participation in the International Assessmentof Educational Performance. In order to continue encouragingthe process of exchangingexperiences and horizontal cooperation, Mexicois participatingin Phase m of the InternationalAssessment of EducationalPerformance. The purpose of this study is to compare learningrates amongchildren in variouscountries between the ages of 9 and 13 in the areas of mathematicsand science, and to identifythe types of cultural environmentsand educationalpractices associated with high academicperformance.
The results of this study may be used, in a comparativeframework at an international level, to identify the relationshipbetween academic performance and Mexicancultural and educationalfactors, and to facilitatedecision-making on raisingthe quality of education. The results will also be used to experimentwith new methodsand techniquesto improvethe institutionaltechnique of educationalassessment in Mexico, n order to provide feedbackon curriculumdesign, teacher training and the productionof learning materialsat variouslevels of basic educadon.
The above is a brief summaryof the NationalEducational Policy, dealing with basic education, which we hope will serve as a frame of referencefor the objectives,actions and goals of PAREB.
Sincerely,
ESTEBANMOCTEZUMA BARRAGAN UNDER-SECRETARYOF EDUCATIONALCOORDINATION cc: Lic. FernandoSolana Morales, Secretaryof Public Education Dr. GuiUermoOrtiz Martinez, Under-Secretaryof Finance and Public Credit Lic. Carlos Ruiz Sacrisdn, Under-Secretaryof Expenditures,Secretariat of Finance and Public Credit Lic. Jos6 Angel Gurria T1evifto,General Director of National Finance Ing. Jos6 A. Carranza Palacios,General Directorof CONAFE Act. FernancoAgraz Rojas, GeneralDirector of Planning,Programming and Budget, SEP Mr. Kye Woo Lee, Chief, Human ResourcesOperations Division, DepartmentII, Latin America and the CaribbeanRegional Office, World Bank -69 - ANNEX S DECENTRALIZATION OF EDUCATIONBUDGET
DECENTRALIZATIONOF EDUCATIONBUDGET
Pre-DecentmHzation
1. Prior to April 1992, the educationalbudget was distributedunder a centralized budgetary systen to the SCEPsat the state level, which remainedorganically part of SEP. Little discretionwas given to the states in terms of reallocatingresources. The systemwas highly centralizedand became increasinglyinflexible over time. Actualexpenditures in any one state were driven by agreed targetsand objectivesfor that state, with the applicationof unit costs. TWobiases favoringthe richer states tended to operateunder this system. First, teacher salaries are indexedto one of three cost-of-livingzones, resultingin higher per capita salary expendituresin the better-offstates; since salaries constitute96% of primary school costs and 99% of lower secondaryschool costs,J' this results in relativelyhigher allocations to the richer states. Second, given the lack of resourcesfor investments,budget allocations were made based on existingifrastructue - which had not changedsince the mid-1980s- and thus favoredthose richer states with more facilities. Ibble 1. State Contributions to Primary Education Expenditures, 1992
Shareof StateBudget StatePrimary Spendon PrimaryEducation UnitCost (percentage) (NewPeso)
Primary EducationE States 1. Campeche 16.3% 786.3 2. Dupo 40.4% 845.8 3. Guanajuato 12.3% 214.0 4. Jalisco 23.5% 621.3 5. Michoacin 13.2% 213.7 6. Puebla 24.7% 450.7 7. San LuisPbtosi 9.8% 657.8 8. Tabasco 4.8% 243.8 9. Veracruz 29.4% 554.2 10. YucatAn 10.1% 240.3 Source: SEP,1993. Note: ExcludesDistrito FedA.
2. The contributionsof the project states to primary educationfinancing is highly variable. As Ikble 1 indicates,in 1992, state contributionsto total primary education expenditurewithin the state nged from 4.8% (Trbasco)to 40.4% (Durango). These contributionsare highly correlated to the states per capita income. Liewise, the share of the states own resources allocatedto educationstrongly mimicsthe states' primary educational unit costs, ranging from N$243.8 (Tabasco)to N$845.8(Durango) per student.
11 Excludingb=ay capitalimsnuu. -70 - ANNEXS DECENTRAUZATION OF EDUCATIONBUDGET Decentraization- The Budget Process
3. The decentralizationof the educationbudget has changedthe nature of the control and allocationof governmentalresources for educationwhich has been historicallyhighly centralized. Fiscal relationsbetween the federal governmentand the 31 states and the Federal District are definedby the Constitution. SHCP is responsiblefor taxation and revenues,including the revenue-sharingformulae affecting local governments. National DevelopmentPlans and sector expenditurebudgets are approvedby the planningauthorities, excludingthose financedby parstatals from their own revenues. Beforethe decentralization,the federalgovernment funded both capital and recurrent costs of education through sharing capital costs with state and municipaladministratons through agreements (convenios). Since decentralization,the federalgovernment has given direct managerial responsibilityto the states and transferredfunds for basic educationfor the operation of the systemto the states, giving them more discretionin the use of the funds.
4. The national educationbudget is developedaccording to each five-yearNational DevelopmentPlan (the current Plan runs through 1994). SEP developsannual operating programs(Pgrgnmas OperautivosAnuales, POAs)in May/Juneof every year, basing state allocationsaccording to agreed physicaltargets and associatedcosts, taking into account the projectedenrollment and populationprojections. In the past, variouscategories of expenditureshave not been fungible,but decentralizationis allowingstates more control over how to spend their budgets. The reality,however, is that the extremelyhigh percentageof recurrent expendituresin the federaltransfers leave little room for states to adjust their spending accordingto their own priorities. Educationfunds are distributedbeginning in Jamuaryof every year. Each month, a portion of the budget(usually 8%) is disbursed to the states and only in Septemberof every year do states get an additionalincrement to allow for price contingencies. The specificprice contingenciesare determinedduring the May/June POA annual exercise.
5. Educationalbudgets will continueto need to be enhancedby state budgets. Local governments,including state and municipals,use standardbudgeting and accountingformats which divide expendituresby input categories: (a) personnelcosts; (b) goods and services; (c) general expenses; (d) equipmentand plants; (d) public works and construction;(e) miscellaneousexpenditures; and (f) debt service. State Comptrolleroffices will be counted on increasinglyto promoteimproved budgeting practices.
Iuancial EfficiencyDue to Decentralization
6. Decentralizationshould promotetwo areas of efficiency. First, SEEs will have greater freedom to make investmentand programchoices based on their respectivepolicies and priorities and reflectingstate-level demand; this is importantbecause Mexicanstates are very heterogeneousand thus exfhibita wide varietyof demand for educationalservices. Second, decentralizationwill foster local accountabilityin the managementof educational resources, both in the executionof projectsand the operationof services. Under the project, selected SEE officialswill benefitfrom managementtraining programs which will raise the institutionalcapacity at the state level and allow them to apply funds more efficiently. -71- ANNEX5 DECENTRALIZATION OF EDUCATIONBUDGET Table2. RelationshipBetween Unit Cost, Salary Zone, EducationalEfficiency and PublkcF1nances in Education
-EducationSector- Primary Educatton StatesRanked by Lowest Tbtal Federal State Ibtal Federal Salary Composite Share of TbtalUnit Costs Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit ZoneS Indexy' TbtalFed'I. Within Each Group Costal Coste' Costi Costil Cost0 Financings'
Rank National Average 1314.6 1330.5 950.4 493.4 831.9 Zone If - 3.8 PARE Average 1118.6 1230.8 724.4 525.8 766.5 Zone II - 5.2 7. Oaxaca 1062.2 1092.0 601.2 425.9 655.5 Zone 1 -31.0 5.9 11. Guerew 1111.2 1406.2 220.7 586.2 869.1 Zone U -49.7 5.6 13. Chiapas 1139.6 1214.6 1030.1 488.2 824.9 Zone n -98.0 5.6 15. Hidalgo 1161.3 1210.5 1045.6 470.6 716.5 Zone n 10.0 3.7 PAREBAverage 1113.0 1307.5 863.9 473.7 738.9 Zone I - 3.8 1. Guanajuato 829.0 979.5 588.2 391.7 606.8 Zone 1 2.8 4.1 2. Puebla 854.4 1195.8 291.4 396.2 605.6 Zone I 0.1 4.6 4. Jalisco 961.4 1263.6 541.8 426.1 652.2 Zone I 0.9 4.6 5. San Luis Fbtosi 1023.1 1224.6 318.9 490.7 746.2 Zone II 4.0 3.2 8. Michoacan 1072.6 1075.8 1888.3 427.3 656.4 Zone I -3.4 5.6 10. Veacruz 1099.5 1301.9 797.1 503.5 799.4 Zone U -35.7 7.1 12. YucatAn 1114.9 1445.6 635.9 496.9 763.7 ZonelI -30.2 2.0 19. Durango 1295.5 1574.5 697.9 655.0 1036.3 Zone I -22.1 2.6 20. Tabasco 1312.9 1382.7 1278.3 403.0 660.2 Zone Im -20.1 2.7 28. Campeche 1566.6 1630.8 1601.6 546.7 864.9 Zone m -23.9 1.3 Non-Project States 1372.7 1523.1 1702.9 478.6 832.0 Zone II - 2.4 3. Mexico 945.0 1215.8 791.2 466.9 683.1 Zone 1 29.1 7.3 6. Queretaro 1061.8 1133.1 1100.3 381.9 600.6 Zone 1 24.4 1.6 9. Zacatecas 1075.6 1265.2 652.1 491.8 788.3 Zone H -7.7 2.1 14. Tlaxcala 1131.8 1517A 390.4 531.3 821.6 Zone 1 46.3 1.2 16. Motelos 1197.8 1282.0 1160.0 420.6 641.0 Zone U 43.9 1.7 17. Sinaloa 1199.4 1499.5 900.4 517.9 799.6 Zone n -8.7 2.8 18. Nayrit 1272.1 1549.2 493.3 574.9 856.0 Zone U -1.3 1.7 21. Aguascalientes 1332.0 1430.1 1891.5 495.0 746.4 Zone 11 46.9 1.3 22. NuevoLeon 1340.1 1539.8 1308.7 517.2 798.0 Zone 11 33.6 3.1 23. Coahuila 1406.6 1596.0 1444.9 620.5 925.6 Zone m 31.9 3.3 24. Chihuahua 1425.4 1489.3 1495.3 590.3 879.5 Zone U 4.8 3.7 25. Colina 1454.8 1695.9 1071.4 584.1 979.5 Zone II 5.2 0.9 26. QuintanaRoo 1515.4 1572.5 2018.5 546.3 834.9 Zone m 21.6 1.3 27. Sonora 1528.4 1670.1 1561.5 543.7 834.9 Zone U1 8.5 2.6 29. 131maulipas 1681.9 1396.3 7778.6 504.5 757.2 Zone 11 27.5 3.5 30. Baja California 1748.9 1926.8 1757.6 687.5 1031.6 Zone m 44.8 2.3 31. Baja CaliforniaSu019.2 2114.7 3134.2 781.4 1153.4 Zone m 31.3 1.0
Source: SEP, 1992. Note. DistritoFederl is not mcluded. 3' Totaleducational expendiuns per studentare in N$ (N$1= 1000 pesos; US$1=N$3.12) for the 1991-92school year. Primaryeducational unit costs ate for (normal)prinary schoolduring 1990-91school year. Federal, stateand privateunit cost means per pupil cost in schoolsoperated by federal, state governmentsand private organizations.respectively. Y Officialreported unit costs. 5' Salaryzone I is the lowestand zonem (touristicand border) is the highest. W Rankingis based on a primaryschol indexof the averagepercentage deviation from te nadonal average for the completionrate, dropoutrate and reption rate for 1991 schoolyear. f Expenditumesate expressd in shares of crent pesos for the 1991-92budget year. -72 - ANNEX 6 MARGINALITYRANKING AND PROJECTAREAS MARGINALITYRANKING OF STATES
STATE CONAPO UNIFORM COMPLETIONI UNIFORM INDIGENOUS| COMPOSITE I INDEXI SCALE RATE I SCALE POPULATION| INDEX CHIAPASat 0.81 100.00 31.0 100.00 885,605 31.06 OAXACAa 0.62 93.14 43.8 72.94 1,208,821 28.70 GUERREROa' 0.71 96.39 40.2 80.55 360,374 26.72 YUCATANbI 0.23 79.06 44.4 71.67 628,945 24.17 VERACRUZtI -0.11 66.79 45.0 70.40 704,891 22.94 PUEBLAhI 0.39 84.84 58.0 42.92 611,388 21.18 CAMPECHEhI 40.33 58.84 44.6 71.25 105,994 18.73 SAN LUIS POTOSIWb 0.14 75.81 57.4 44.19 248,993 18.34 MICHOACANb -0.39 56.68 50.3 59.20 126,756 17.00 HIDMALGO 0.02 71.48 64.0 30.23 383,665 16.43 DURANGOb -0J.30 59.93 56.2 46.72 21,901 15.58 JALISCObt -0.31 59.57 57.9 43.13 30,010 15.02 TABASCObI -0.60 49.10 53.2 53.07 59,993 14.74 GUANAJUAIOD -0.30 59.93 59.4 39.96 10,839 14.49 ZACATECAS -0.40 56.32 57.3 44.40 1,081 14.37 SINALOA -0.61 48.74 56.7 45.67 37,290 13.59 QUEREU-TARO 0.02 71.48 68.6 20.51 24,884 13.56 CHIHUAHUA .0.55 50.90 59.0 40.80 74,716 13.44 NAYARTr 40.74 44.04 58.2 42.49 29,386 12.39 TAMAULIPAS -0.25 61.73 68.7 20.30 10,489 12.11 MtUCO -0.68 46.21 69.6 18.39 397,336 11.37 QUINTANAROO -0.84 40.43 62.9 32.56 164,919 10.86 COLIMA -1.09 31.41 58.1 42.71 1,826 10.41 TLAXCALA -0.45 54.51 74.3 8.46 28,437 9.46 SONORA -1.21 27.08 64.0 30.23 57,547 8.42 AGUASCALIENTES -0.83 40.79 74.3 8.46 771 7.26 COAHUILA -1.05 32.85 72.3 12.68 4,513 6.71 MORELOS -0.76 43.32 78.3 0.00 24,900 6.65 NUEVOLE6N -1.15 29.24 75.4 6.13 5,783 5.35 BAJACALiPORNIA SUR -1.45 18.41 69.3 19.03 3,372 5.30 BAJACALIFORNIA -1.96 0.00 76.5 3.81 22,427 0.63 a/ States under PARE bi States under proposedSecond Prmary EducationProject PROJECT SCHOOL MUNICIPALITIES List A - Campeche, Durango, Guanajuato, Jalisco, Michoacan
Campeche Durango Guanajuato Jalisco Michoacan Calikni Mezquital. Ocampo Ipa de Allende Puruandiro Campeche PuebloNuevo San Felipe San SebastianDel 0. Penjanuillo Carmn GeneralSimon Bolivar San Diegode la U. Tomatlan Angamacutiro Champoton Tamazula San Luis de la Paz Cabo Corrientes Morelos Escarcega San Ditms Xichu lbxcacuesco Tangamandapio Hecelchakan Canelas Tierra Blanca Cuautla Villamar Hopelchen Tepebuanes Doctor Morm Cuautitlan Ixtlan Palizada San Bernardo Atarjea Purificacion Pajacuaran lTnabo Guanacevi Victoria La Huerta ibrigancicuaro Ocanpo SantaCatarina Juchitlan Panindicuo Canalan Jerecuaro Ejutla Tlazazalca SantiagoPapasquiaro. Coroneo Ayutla fluaniqueo Tbpia CasimiroCastillo Chinicuila Dugo Atengo flmbiscazio Otaez Tonaya Coalcoman San Juan de Guadalupe lapalpa Aquila Conetode Comonlort Tbliman Arteaga Cuencame Alemajacde Brizuela Coaguaya GuadalupeVictoria Chiquilisan L. Cardenas Hida1go VenustianoCarranza Querendaro Inde Tlcuitatlande C. Cuitzeo Mapimi GomezFarias Tbrimbaro NuevoIdeal Zapotitlande V. Sta A Maya Nombrede Dios Tonila Zinapecuaro San Juan del Rio Zapotiltic Huandacareo El Oro Zacoalcode Tones Tancitaro Panuco de Coronado lbxpan Chamapan Rodeo ManuelD. Jilotlande los D. Taretan San Luis del Cordero Quitupan NuevoParangaricutiro San Pedrodel Gallo Pihuuno Periban Suchil Tamazulade G. Ziracuaretiro Manzanillade la Paz Trgambato Tbcalitian Cheran Mazamitla Nahuatzen e Vallede Juarez Los Reyes lizapan el Alto Paracho Guachinango Chilchota i Hostotipaquillo Susupuato Mixtlan Tlzantla II,3 Campeche Durango Guanajuato Jalisco Michoacan Tequila Irimbo San Cristobalde la B. Ocampo Cuquio Epitacio Zapotlanejo Jungapeo Ixtlahuacandel Rio Aporo Amatitan Hidalgo Jocotepec Contepec Degollado Senguio Tototlan Juarez Atotonilcoel Alto Zitacuaro Poncitlan Lagunillas Ayotlan Tzintzuntzan Zapotlandel Rey Acuitzio La Barca S. Escalante Canadasde Obregon Tiquicheo Jesus Maria Turicato Arandas Tzitzio Acatic Caracuaro Mexticacan Madero Vallede Guadalupe Nocupetaro San Miguelel Alto Huetamo San Diegode Atejandria Tacamnbargo Jalostotitlan San Lucas ibpatitlan Ario Yahualicade G. Aguililla San Julian La Huacana Unionde San Antonio BuenaVista Teocaltiche Churumuco San Juande los Lagos NuevoUrecho Encarnacionde Diaz Paracuaro Ojuelos Gabriel Zamora Villa Hidalgo Tepalcatepec Lagosde Moreno Apatzingan Chimaltitan Mujica Mezquitic Maravatio Bolanos Tocumbo San Martin de B. Patzcuaro Z f Huejuquillael Alto lTxpan t z Santa Mariade los A. Zacapu > VillaGuerrero Huejucar Coloilan Totatiche .______-__ Manuel M. Dieguez ,______B'C PROJECr SCHOOL MUNICIPALITIES List B - Puebla, San Luis Potosi, Ibbasco, Veracruz, Yucatan
Puebla San [MS Pbtos. Ilbasco Veracruz Yucatan Thzco Villade Ramos Jonuta Chiconamel Tlixcacalcupul Jolalpan Villade Arista Balancan Tantima Chemax Ctila Honey Santo Domingo Ibnosique Tempoal Tahdziu Tlacuilotpec Venado EmilianoZapata PlantonSanchez Chankom Pahuatian Salinas Huimanguillo lbntoyuca Uayman TlpAca VillaHidalgo Cardenas Chalma Yaxkaba Tlaola Villade Guadalupe Cunduacan Chontla ThnoZon Chiconcuautla Guadalcazar Comalcalco Tepetzintla Espita bpala Calorce Macuspana Cidalhepet Cenotillo Z*uateuda Chalcas acotialpa lxcaepec Chichimila Amixtan Moctezuma Teapa Tancoco Dzitas Coaropec Vaegas Jalapa Texcatepec Kaua Ahuacatlan Cedral l1amatlan Panaba Caniocuautla Villade la Paz Zontecomatlan Thimin lpaio de Rodriguez Matehuala Zacualpan Thum Hemoiegido;aleana Aquismon Tlachwhilco Peto Xbcbiapulco ibTlajas Huat: ootla Chacsinkdn Cuautemapan luncanhuitzde Sanos Ixbui.'ande M. Sucila ' ibaila de Ocamnpo SanAnlonio BenitoJuarez Valladolid Ixtacaraxtitan iTuquiande Escobedo Chiconsepec Tecom Hucydalpan Xilida FilomenoMats Cuncuuil ItPec Ebano Mecatlan Chikinudnnot Huitzilande Serdan Tamasopo Coahuitlan Mayapan Olintda Huehuetlan Zozocolco Tekit Huehuetla Tuunchale Coyuda Sudzal Caxhuacan Tampamobon Coxquihui Canmayniyec XochitlanV.S. SanMartin Chalchicuautla Espinal Timucuy Zongozonda SanVicente Tancuayalab Chumatlan Sotuta Zapodthande Mende Coxcatlan Las Minas Tbabo Chichiquila Axtlade Terrazas Tlacolulan Akil Quimixdan Tamuin Tatatila Tecoh Chilchoda Tanpacan Tonayan XDcchel La Fragua CD.Wiles Atzalan Abala Coyomeapan Alaquines Altonga Kantunil Eloxochitlan Lagunillas Jalacingo Hoctun San SebastianT]acot. SantaCatarina Coacoatzintla Mani Zoquitlan SanCiro de Acosta Tepetlan Tzucacab Ste. CatarinaTlalt. Rayon Chinconquiaco Tekax Ahuadan VillaJuarez Juchiquede Feraer Homun Coatzingo Rioverde Ixhuacandelos R. Kanasin Xochiltepec Ciudaddel Maiz Ayahualulco Izamal Ih; Cutyuca CiudadFernandez Cosautlan Huhi Psiebl SonLadis Noeld Tabasco ewcruz Yucatan SanMartin Totolwpec San NicolasTolendno Xico Oxkutzcab lTpi de RodriguP Cardenas Ixhuadancillo Tuxmeuac Zacaula Cerrilts Aquila Seye Axutla La Perla Chumayel San Miguelbtidan Calcahualco Tlhmek Tecomatlan Alpadahuac Tekalde Venegas Pedalcizgo Coscomatepec Muna San PabloAnicano MarianoEscobedo SantaElena Chinanda Chocaman Tbmax Guadupe Maltrata lbnkas Sanhse Chiapa Atzacan Teya San Nicohs BuenosAites Huatusco lxil GuadalupeVictoria Mixdade A. Mama SauJuan Atenco Atlahuilco Sanahcat Tepqahualco Tlaquilpa Ciza,a San AntonioC. SoledadAtz. Hocaba NiclasBravo Tehuipango Tepakan Vic:ee Guerrero Astancinga Cansahcab SanGabriel Chilac Tequila Mococha Alepexi Los Reyes Chapab Aialpan San AndresT. Cacalchen Zinacatepec Zongolica Tekanto Chapulco Texhbacan Dzan CK Zapotitlan Magdalena Baca San JoseMhahuatan Xoxocotla Acanceb Tiacotepecde B. JZ. Tezonapa Motul Atzitzintla Soteapan Conkal Palmarde Brmo Mecayapan Sacalum Quecholac Pajapan Tetiz CanadaMorelos Zaragoza Celestun Yehualtepec Hucyapande 0. Ucu Tepexco S. AndresTuxtla Kinchil San Diegode la MesaT. Santiagoluxtila Hunucma Tepemaxalco Catemaco Maxcanu Acteopan Soconusco Chochola Tlapanala Chinaineca Halacho Huehuetlanel Grande Oteapan Opichen Tepeojuma Samahil Athmluacan __.-v.._t
Q;0 -77 - ANNEX 7 INDIGENOUSPOPULATIONS INDIGENOUSPOPULATIONS AND EDUCATION
1. A recent WorldBank studyl' on indigenouspeople in Latin America showsthat indigenouspeople represent a large proportionof the populationof a few Latin American countries. The major indigenouspopulation centers are in Guatemala,Mexico, Bolivia, Ecuador and Perd. There are approximately400 differentindigenous languages throughout Latin America and individualcountries have from 7 to 200 languages. While many indigenouspeople are bilingual, others are monolingualin their native language.
2. The general situationof the indigenouspeople in the Latin Americanregion is as follows: (a) Povertyamong Latin America'sindigenous population is pervasiveand severe. Living conditionsare deficienteven when comparedwith those of other sectors of the poorest population; (b) Indigenouspeople have less educationthan non-indigenouspeople and there are strong correlationsbetween schooling attainment and indigenousorigins and between schoolingattainment and povertycategory. Indigenouschildren are more likely to repeat grades at the primary level and more likely to drop out of school altogether. Children of indigenousorigins are born with many socio-economicdisadvantages and are unable to keep up with their non-indigenouspeers; and (c) Indigenousworker earnings,on average,are less than two-thirdsthe salary of their non-indigenouscounterparts. Indigenousindividuals are more likely to have a second job and they generallytend to work more hours than their non-indigenous counterparts. Much of the earningsdisadvantage of indigenousworkers can be attributed to lowerhuman capital endowments.
3. Access to educationin indigenousareas will help amelic.ratepoverty and increase earnings. One of several frequentlynoted methodsof improvingaccess to educationamong indigenouspopulation is the implementationof bilingualeducation. Country analysisreveals that parents' skills and educationalattainment are reflectedin the schoolingand other human capital characteristicsof their children. Lawsthat will protect and promoteindigenous language,culture, customs, resources,and social organizationand that will also implement mechanismsto guaranteeequal accessto justice for indigenouspeople are needed. In recognitionof the importanceof addressingthe concernson the country's indigenous populations,the MexicanGovernment signed AgreementNumber 169 with the International Labor Office (ratifiedon September4, 1990)accepting a series of obligationsto support indigenouspeople in every aspect of their lives. This agreementforms the basis for supporting indigenouseducation programs in Mexico.
4. Mexico'sindigenous population accounts for about 14.2% of its population;other countries with a larger share are Bolivia(56.8%), Guatemala(43.8%), Peru (40.8%) and Belize(14.7%). The rest of the countries in Latin America register less than 10% of their
!' G. Pscacharopoulos and H. Patrinos, Indifenous Peonle in Latin America: An Emirincal Analvsis, Regional Studies Progmm, Report No. 50, Tbe World Bank, August 1993. -78 - ANNEX 7 INDIGENOUS POPULATIONS populations as indigenous, with most having about one percent. There are approximately 72 indigenous languages in Mexico;21this ranks behind Brazil (208), Peru (85), and Colombia (78), while other countries in Latin America register about ten indigenous languages on average. Table 1. Mexico - Languagesand Indigenous Primary Education by State
State Number Number Pbpulation (Languages) Of Centers of Teachers Attended
NationalTotal 7,361 24,555 564,698 Baja California 34 107 2,575 (Cochimi, Kmial, Mixteco,Pai-Pat) Canmpeche 45 160 1,283 (Maya) Chiapas 1,734 5,033 125,463 (Chol,-Kakchiquel, Mame= Tojolabal,Tzeltal, Tzotzil,Zque, Maya) Chihuahua 246 517 10,498 (Guarijio,Pima, Tarahumara, Tepehuano) Durango 120 249 4,033 (Hwuchol,Nahuatl, Tepehuano) Guerrero 686 3,012 61,767 (Amuzgo,Mixteco, Nahuatl, T7apaneco) Hidalgo 580 1,970 44,490 (Nahuatl, Otomi, Tepehua) Jalisco 62 136 2,309 (Huichol) Mexico 121 444 11.093 (Mazahua,Otomi) Michoacan 140 815 17,099 (Mazahua,Nahuawl, Otomi, Purepecha) Morelos 2 19 446 (Nahuatl) Nayarit 98 212 - 4,706 (Cora, Huichol, Nahuatl, Tepehuano) (continued)
' DGEI. 79- ANNEX 7 INDIGENOUS POPULATIONS
State Number Number Pbpulation (Languages) Of Centers of Teachers Attended
Oaxaca 1,326 4,969 129,273 (Amuzgo,Cuicateco, Chatino, Chinanteco,Chacho, Chontal, Huave, Mazateco,Mixe Mixeco, Nahuatl, Thqui Tzotzil,Zapoteco, Zoque) Puebla 580 1.836 45,483 (Mazateco,Mixteco, Nauwatl, Otonu, Popoloca, Totonaco) Queretaro 76 226 5,118 (Otomi) QuintanaRoo 82 202 3,323 (Maya) San Luis Pbtosf 244 944 16,303 (Huasteco,Nahuatl, Pame) Sinaloa 30 105 2,088 (Mayo) Sonora 89 295 3,900 (Huarijio,Mayo, Papago, Pima, Seri, Yaqw) Tabasco 91 300 6,623 (Chol, Chontal) Tlaxcala 7 49 982 (Nahuatl, Otoui) Veracruz 803 2,510 55,400 (Oiinanteco,Huasteco, Mazateco, Mixe, Nahuatl, Oton. Popoluca,Tepehua, Totonaco, Zapoteco,Zoque) Yucatan 165 445 10,143 (Maya)
Totals 7,361 24,555 564,698
Source: SEP, 1993. PARTCIPATING MUNICIPALlTIES & NUMBER OF BENEFICIARIES BY PROJECr STATE
|Schools in Total Primary Total Primary Total Super- Total Sector State No. of Selected No. of Project Primary School Primary School Super- visors in Sector Chiefs in Municip. Municip. Schools School Students in School Teachers visors Project Chiefs Project L______I______I Enroll. Project Teachers in Project _ _ Campeche 9 9 712 399 102,015 42,970 3,453 1,473 47 39 7 7 Durango 39 31 2,335 855 241,406 46,633 9,991 1,969 186 65 17 9 Guanajuato 46 12 4,393 890 766,797 72,469 23,902 2,597 264 33 22 5 Jalisco 124 83 5,337 2,141 979,070 154,801 30,360 5,599 210 163 25 33 Michoacan 113 78 4,501 2,360 689,681 341,971 23,492 11,686 223 155 31 29 Puebla 217 82 3,858 1,107 788,872 155,249 23,694 4,712 247 113 16 20 San Luis Potosi 56 45 3,074 1,750 362,331 125,822 13,508 6,130 213 114 16 18 Tabasco 17 12 1,949 1,205 297,246 178,957 9,024 5,338 104 73 12 9 Veracruz 207 79 8,870 2,483 1,101,767 260,006 40,101 9,454 344 150 34 14 0 Yucatan 106 80 1,257 668 243,647 122,766 7,921 3,901 95 80 13 13 Total 934 511 36,286 13,858 5S7,282 1,501,644 185,436 52,859 1,933 985 193 157 National 2,402 2,402 85,081 85,081 14,396,900 14,396,900 487,915 487,915 16,478 16,478 N.A. NMA. Total as a Percentageof 39% 21% 43% 16% 38% 10% 38% 11% 12% 6% N.A. N.A. m National . _ _ Z Source: SEP, 1993. N.A. - Not available. 04
0 C oz
'4- -81- ANNEX 9 FINANCIALIMPLICATIONS OF EXTENSIONOF BASICEDUCATION FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONSOF EXTENSIONOF BASIC EDUCATION
1. Some very preliminaryestimates of the financialimplications of implementingthe policy to extend mandatorybasic educationfrom 6 to 9 years, through the inclusionof the three-year lower secondarycycle, have been made by SEP but were not availablefor the preparationof the project. An initial but very rough estimateof the impactcan be made using the latest unit costs for lower secondaryschool educationand the unattendedstudent cohort. Currently, only 67% of the lower secondaryschool cohort or 4.1 million students are enrolled, leavingan unattendedpopulation of some 2.1 million students. Presently,86% of those students completingthe primary educationcycle continueto lower secondary(this is high by internationalstandards). Initially,implementation will focus on raisingthis index to closer to 100%, whilst programssuch as PAREand PAREBwill result in a larger percentageof studentscompleting their primary cycle.
2. The cost implicationsof extendingbasic educationare complicatedby a number of factors: (a) there are four main types of secondaryeducation (normal, vocational,distance and special)with varyingunit costs; (b) a significant,but highly variable,proportion of places in secondaryschool classroomsare vacant,thus a number of childrencould be absorbed at little increase in operatingcosts as the basic infrastructurealready exists; and (c) the location of unattendedchildren in relationto physicalinfrastructure is not fully knownat present, thus making it difficultto estimateconstruction requirements. There is thus the need for a detailedassessment of the cost implicationsof this policy,which will be supported under the project as part of the secondaryeducation study (Annex 14, Part B.5).
3. In the meantime,upper and lower cost estimatescan be calculatedas follows: (a) Lower Boundary- RaisingCoverage to 100% of Sixth Grade Completers. The lower cost boundarywould be that in 1994/95all sixth grade completerswould be accommodatedin lower secondary. Assumingthat 50% of these incremental660,000 students wouldbe accommodatedin existingclassrooms and 50% wouldrequire new classroomsand that due to cost savingsassumed in the fillingof vacant space in existingclassrooms (para. 2 above), incrementalunit costs wouldbe 50% of average unit costs, the incrementalcost for 1994/95would be US$121million in recurrent costs and US$204million in investmentcosts (for classroomconstruction). Combined,these costs wouldamount to an incrementof 5% of the 1993 basic educationbudget or 2.5 % of the total educationbudget. (b) Upper Boundary- RaisingCoverage to 100% of the Cohort in the First Year. In 1993 prices, this unattendedpopulation would entail incrementalrecurrent costs of about US$747million per anm. This would amount to an increase of 5.5% in the total education budget for 1993 of US$13.6 billion or 11.2% for the basic education budget of US$6.7 billion. In addition, there would be the need for the construction and furnishingof at least an additional42,000 classroomsat total cost of US$1.3 billion and for the trainingof an additional 105,000teachers costing a further US$880 million over the four-yeartraining cycle of implementationin one year. These costs would add up to US$2.9 billion or 21.2% of the total 1993 budget. -82 - ANNEX 9 FINANCIALIMPLICATIONS OF EXTENSIONOF BASICEDUCATION 4. Likely Scenario - Implementatonoe l Years. In reality,it will takeseveral years to implementthis policy as modalitiesto cover rual populationsstill have to be developed,additional teachers tained, and new classroomscreated - most likely over a period-of about ten years. On this basis, and assuminga constt rate of attendingthe unmet demand over a ten-year period and with anmialgrowth in cohort size of 1.0% per annum, the incrementalcosts for the five-yearperiod 1994/95to 1998/99(i.e., the PAREBperiod) in constant 1993 US$ wouldbe as follows:
Incremental Costs and Physical Targets of Expanding Basic Education - Uniform Rate of Implementation over 10 YeawsStarting in 1994/95 (US$ million, 1993 prices)
ITEM 1994/95 1995/96 196/97 1997/98 1998/99 A. Costs IncrementalRecrrent Costs 76.2 152.4 228.6 304.8 381.0 InvestmentCosts 128.5 131.1 133.7 136.4 139.1 TeacherTraining 89.8 89.8 89.8 89.8 89.8 Total Costs 294.5 374.3 452.1 531.0 609.9 B. Phyical AchevementIndicators PercentageEnrollment in Lower Secondary 70% 73% 76% 79% 82% Numberof NewClassrooms Completed(cumulative) 4,200 8,400 12,600 16,800 21,000 AdditionalTeachers Trained (cumulative) 10,500 21,000 31,500 42,000 52,500
5. Thus the incrementalcost for 1994/95would representabout 2.2% in the total educationbudget of 1993, rising to 4.5% by 1998/99. Whilst not excessivegiven an anticipatedgrowth rate in real per capita GDP of about 2% per annum over this period, such increases require that the Governmentallocate an increasedshare of GDP to education- an objectivethe Governmentis fully committedto. However,the opportmity cost of increasing enrollmentin lower secondaryeducation while there are so many deficienciesin primary educationshould be taken into account. While Mexicocurrently has an unfilledcapacity within the secondaryeducation system, resulting in small marginalcosts for expansion, it remains to be seen whether adequateinstitutional capacity exists or can be developedto properly managethis anticipatedgrowth. Under the project, studies wili be conductedto examinevarious elementsof the secondaryeducation system(Annex 14, Part B) and recommendreform and/or investmentprograms. -83 - ANNEX 10 TEACHERTRAINING TEACHER TRAINIG PROGRAM STRATEGY
1. Summary. The objectiveof the human resourcesdevelopment component is to contribute to more effectiveteaching through: (a) enhancingthe skills of teachers in the most critical areas of pedagogicalproblems typical of their school environment;and (b) developingeducational supervision more focusedon teachers' need for technical assistancein the classroom. A comprehensivein-service taining program will be implementedto improvethe educationalskills of teachers, school principalsand supervisors.A pedagogical network concept will be applied in the design of the taining courses and follow-upactivities. School principalsand supervisorswould be trained to provideguidance and technical support to teachers in the day-to-dayapplication of good educationalprinciples and techniquesto their classroom practice. Trainingwould take place throughone-week intensive courses during the summer recess, followedby seven one-day Saturdaytraining seminars, once a month throughoutthe school year. Approximately61,420 teachersare expectedto participate in the training program. Of these, 47,500 wouldbe generalprimary school teachers, 5,360 indigenousprimary school teachers, and 8,560 school principalsand supervisors. The componentwill also provide the rural teacherswith opportunitiesto meet some of the trainingrequirements for advancementin their teachingcareers.
Descriptionof the lfanng Program
2. The PedagogicalNetwork. The teacher and his work in the classroom is the main focus of the in-servicetraining program. Teachersin mral schools often work alone in one- room situationswhere professionalexchange with peers is not availableand the only technical support must come from sporadicsupervisor visits. Multigradeclasses are almost the rule in rural schools. Teachingliteracy and numeracybecomes more difficultwith children from homes with little or no educationalbackground. Disadvantagedsocioeconomic conditionsoften add to the learningdifficulties of children in rural communities. Teachers must learn how to deal with these situationson the job.
3. Teachers,principals, supervisors,and assistantsupervisors are consideredmembers of a pedagogicalnetwork, and will be chargedwith making the improvementof teachingtheir continuingconcem throughoutthe school year. Educationalsupervision would thus be given an added educationaldimension beyond its present emphasison administrativecontrols, to reinforce teacher training and encouragebetter teachingin the classroom. The training program has been designedto support and strengthenthe concept that good teaching performanceis dependentupon an effectiveoperation of this pedagogicalnetwork of teachers, principals, and supervisors. The trainingcourses and seminarsare built around all participantsworking together to developthe necessaryskills and followingup on practical experiencein the classroom.
4. The TrainingProgram. In-servicetraining for primary teachers and school managementstaff (schoolprincipals and supervisors)in the project schools is proposedas an activity directly focusedon improvingclassroom practice in some critical areas where teacher shortcomingshave long been recognizedas determinantfactors in poor student achievement, wastefulgrade repetitionand early abandonmentof school. - 84 - ANNEX 10 TEACHERTRAINING 5. Specificareas of teachingskills which are of special relevanceto the socioeconomic and educationalcharacteristics of the populationin the target areas are: (a) teachingclasses includingchildren of severalgrade levels(multigrade classes); (b) teachingand reinforcing literacy and numeracyto children of very low cultural and educationalbackgrounds; (c) teachingliteracy and numeracyto childrenwhose families speak a languagedifferent from the official;(d) utilizinga varietyof educationalresources to achieveresults in the classroom;and (e) recognizingproblems of slow learnersand using appropriatetechniques to help them. Specialpedagocial attention would be given to literacy-orientedneeds of first- and second-graders.
6. The contentof trainingcourses will be designedto fill in areas of expertise not coveredby the teacher educationcurriculum in collegesand Normal Schools, and which are critical to teacher performanceunder the specialcircumstances prevalent in the project schools. Trainingcourses will be coordinatedwith other existingteacher training programs such as the PAM, which is designedto introducenew curricular contents. Duplicationof training contentswith existingPAM courses will be avoided. At the same time, training courses in the project are also expectedto receiverecognition toward career advancement urder the TCP. Promotionpoints will be granted for participationin the training courses and workshops,and this is expectedto ensure teacher attendance.
7. The trainingprogram includes a five-day(40 hour) sumnmercourse followedby seven one-day (6 hour) workshops,approximately once a mnonthon Saturdays. Four courses (one each year) will be requiredfor all teachers, school prhicipals,supervisors and assistant supervisorsin the project area. They are: (a) MultigradeClass Teaching (b) EducationalResources (c) EducationalProblem Prevention (d) RemedialEducation All participantswill also take one or more of the following,depending on their concentration: (a) WrittenLanguage (b) Mathematics (c) State-specificcourse Emphasiswill be on the pedagogicalrequirements of the first and secondgrade of the primary school curriculum.
8. Teachersof indigenousprimary schools will have courses in: (a) Bilingualismin IndigenousEducation (b) Spanishas a Second Language (c) Use of IndigenousLanguage Texts and Materials
9. Printed training materialswill be specificallydeveloped for each course. They will include an anthologyof appropriatereadings, study guides, suggestedactivities, bibliography and glossary of terms, trainingmanuals, and evaluationinstruments. Posters and - 85 - ANNEX 10 TEACHERTRAENING promotionalmaterials will also be developedand distributedto encourageteacher participation in the trainingprogram. Most training materialsneeded for the project have already been developedand used in the teacher trainingcourses of the PAREproject in the states of Chiapas, Guerrero, Hidalgo,and Oaxaca. These materialswill be revised and updatedfor use in this project.
10. Selection of Trainers. Trainerswill be selected througha special 40-hour course in PedagogicalCounseling attended by school principals,supervisors, and assistantsupervisors. Supervisorswill be requiredto attend an additionalsix-day course on the PedagogicalRole of the Supervisor. Some trainers will also be selected from amongexperienced teachers who have earned the respect of their peers. All selected trainers will attend preliminaryintensive courses in the topics they are expectedto cover.
11. Location of Training. Trainingwill be conductedin trainingcenters especially equipped for the purpose with libraries and audio-visualresources. Twocenters, each housingbetween five and ten traininggroups, will be selected in each region. The center will be either an existingbranch of the NationalPedagogical University or a Normal School, or else a secondaryor technicalvocational school. No additionalphysical infrastructure will be required for the training centers,but an audio-visualroom will be set aside and provided with equipmentand materialsto be used by teachersin the area as additionallearning resourcesduring the school year, as well as for the Saturdayfollow-up workshops.
12. Saturdavworkshops will be held once each month during the school year for a total of seven. The workshopswill be six-hoursessions and will be attendedby the same group participatingin the intensivesummer course, togetherwith their school principals, supervisors,and assistantsupervisors. The topic of the workshopwill be the same as the summer course, and it will focus on a reviewof the conceptsand teachingtechniques learned and thwteachers' experiencewith actual classroompractice using those concepts and techniques. Problemsencountered and solutionsdevised by teachers will be discussed, plans to correct difficultiesduring the followingmonth will be proposedand analyzed, and needs for technical assistancefrom supervisorsor supplementaryreference materials will be reviewed.
13. The Saturdayworkshops are intendedto reinforceand expandon the subject matter of the intensivecourses, and relate it to the teacher's experiencerather than to teach additional topics. Trainingin the various topicswill be interrelatedthrough the commonlink of classroomexperience, and will involveteachers and supervisorystaff sharing the same interest and activity.Each new Summercourse will start with a reviewof the training activities of the previous year and will build upon them to csevelopthe new topic.
14. Organizationof the Trainig Program. A CentralTechnical Group attachedto each of the normativeunits of generalprimary educationand indigenousprimary education of SEP will be responsiblefor planningall trainingactivities, designing the courses and developingthe required trainingmaterials. These central TechnicalGroups will also be responsiblefor training similar technicalgroups at the state level, and for follow-upand evaluationof all project-relatedtmning activitiesconducted by the states. State Technical Groups will similarlybe organizedin each participatingstate for general primary and -86- ANNEX 10 TEACHERTRAINING indigenousprimary education,respectively, and will be responsiblefor organizingthe training courses for state trainers and for teachersand supervisorsas well as for evaluation of trainer performance.
15. Both the Central and State Itchnical Groupswill be made up of permanenttechnical staffmembers of SEP and the state educationalentity respectively.Each group will have a Coordinatorand the memberswill serve on a full-timebasis. The members of the STG, together with the state trainers, will form a pedagogicalnetwork to follow up on the monthly Saturdayworkshops and to encouragefuirter collegialself training activitiesby the teachers and continueduse of the libraries and other trainingresources. -87 - ANNEX 11 PHYSICALINFRASTRUCTURE AND DISTRIBUTIONNETWORK
PHYSICALINFRASTRUCTURE AND DISTRIBUTIONNETWORK
1. In order to meet both the current and expandingeducation needs, SEEs in each state conductedan analysis of their classroomand storage/distributioncapacities. The school portion of this subcomponentwas based on the need to improvedeteriorated facilities and expand existingor construct new facilitiesto meet rising enrollments. The distribution portion or this subcomponentwas based on the need to improveboth the storagecapacity and the logisticsof providingeducational textbooks and materialsto the schools in a timely manner.
A. School and ClassroomConstruction
2. Constructionof schools and classroomswill be undertakenunder one of two modalities: (a) through CAPFCE(for schools in less remote, easier access locations);and (b) through a community-basedmethod drawingfrom experienceunder the SOLIDARIDAD model. It is estimatedthat the project will apply both modalitiesmore or less in equal proportion. An OperationalManual has been drafted to cover both modalities. Technical staffat the SPCUs will coordinatethe constructionand supervisionprocedures for CAPFCE and communitysubprojects.
3. CAPFCEModel. CONAFE, in coordinationwith CAPFCE,will select the sites falling under the CAPFCEmodel. Funds will flow directly to CAPFCE,which will be responsiblefor planningand supervisingconstruction subprojects, which will be carried out by its state-levelbranch offices.
4. CommunityModel. SPCUs will discuss and agree upon subprojectproposals with SchoolCouncils and municipalauthorities. The communitywould contribute(in-kind and/or money) an averageof 10 percent (possiblyless for the poorest communities)of the work value. The constructionwill be implementedby SchoolCouncils according to the procedures set forth under the OperationalManual and supervisedby the municipality. Actual constructionwill be carried out by a combinationof communitymembers and local contractors,guided by a self-helphandbook to be designedand producedunder the project. The municipalitywill provide technicalassistance through its permanentemployees or ad hoc specialists. The OperationalManual will includethe administrativesteps for disbursing funds to the municipalities(ayuntamientos) as work progresses. This arrangemententrusts the municipalityto play the role of financialand administrativeintermediary and makes the SchoolCouncils responsiblefor construction. If a municipalityis unable to fulfill this task, state SOPEs would be an acceptablealternative. Table 1 below outlines the variousentities involvedin the communityconstruction model.
5. Out of three providedCAPFCE prototypes, School Councils (in coordinationwith SPCU and the municipality)will select the one best suitedto the local availabilityof land, materials, and resources. T-heprototypical project classroom (both for CAPFCEand communityschools) will b. 6x6 meters, large enoughto accommodateup to 36 students, or 30 studentsand extra space to provide for a ReadingCorner, multigradeinstruction, or more - 88 - ANNEX 11 PHYSICALINFRASTRUC1'URE AND DISTRIBUTIONNETWORK participatoryteaching/learning interaction. This size is consideredto be optimal, allowing for greater flexibilitythan the 6x5.3 used in PARE. In order to avoid or reduce technical errors in design and inconsistentbudget estimates (main causes for poor constructionquality, delays,and cost overrunsunder PARE), the Bank will approveprototype designs with blueprintsand reviewbudget esimates based on sndard regionalizedunit prices on a yearly basis. Constructionwill also include, as necessary,adequate sanitary conditions, including the constructionof toilets and latrines and the provisionof potablewater through sinks, central mater systemconnections, deep wells, and other appropriatemeans. Table 1: Procedures for Construction of Schools/Classrooms Community Construction Model
ILTask RRponsible Cordiateawdith 1. Elaboration of Subproject Proposal SEE Municipality 2. Approvalof SubprojectProposal SPCU SEE 3. Elaborationof PreliminaryBudget SPCU SOPE 4. Validationof the Proposal COPLADE SEE 5. NecessaryModifications SPCU SEE 6. Selectionof Prototype,and ContractModality SEE/SPCU Municipality& School Council 7. Technicaland BudgetaiyRevisions SOPE Municipality& School Council 8. Final Approvalof SubprojectProposal SEE NAFIN, DGPPP (for ex- CONAFE/BM(ex-post review) post review) 9. Elaborationof TechnicalRequements SOPE SchoolCouncil & SPCU 10. CommunityOrganization and Mobilization Municipality SEEtSPCU 11. Project ImplementationAgreement Municipality SPCU 12. Executionof Civil Works Community/SchoolCouncil SPCU 13. Supervisionand TechnicalAssistance Municipality SOPE 14. Final SubprojectAcceptance SchoolCouncil SPCU CONAFE(ex-post : ______review)
6. Furniture. Furniture for those schoolsbuilt by CAPFCEwill be put out to bid by CAPFCE, while furniture for those constructedby the communityor SOPE will be put out to bid by CONAFE.
7. Superviion and lchnical Assistance. To upgrade the quality of construction, five percent of the buildingcost would be allocatedfor supervisionand technicalassistance undertakenthrough CAPFCE or independentconsultants. In addition, two percent of the buildingvalue will be given to either CAPFCE,the municipality,or SOPE for managingthe project. For community-builtschools, technical assistance will be given by the municipality, or if local expertise is lacking, by SOPE. -89- ANNEX 11 PHYSICALINFRASTRUCrURE AND DISTRIBUTIONNETWORK B School Maintenance
8. The lack of maintenanceof school buildingsand furnishingsis now requiringmajor investnents in replacement. The traditionaland centralizedmaintenance system has been both expensiveand insufficient. Effectiveschool maintenancerequires community participationthrough hands-onschool-related responsibilities. All (whetherexisting or new) schools in the project areas will be included in the maintenancesubcomponent (see Table2). For both CAPFCE-and community-builtschools, maintenancefunds will be transferredto the municipalitiesas SchoolCouncils will set repair or maintenancepriorities. Given the lack of previousexperience w-th systematicmaintenance, guidance to SchoolCouncils for maintenanceactivities will be phased in to allow for adequatetraining, assistedby a handbook for maintenanceto be designedand producedunder the project. Bank financing for maintenancewill be given on a decliningbasis so that by the last year of the project, all maintenancewould be carried out with local resources.
9. Costs. Schoolmaintenance costs are estimatedto total N$1,000 (US$320)per classroomover the project's five-yearperiod, or an averageof $64 per classroom per year. A small number of existingclassrooms (about 5,500) will require more extensive maintenanceand/or minor rehabilitationto bring them up to standard. Table2: School Maintenance Costs (over five years)
i Type Classroms Cost(US$ mullions)!l A. ExistingSchools Maintenance 5,544 '.1 Major Maintenanceor Rehabilitation 63,761 4 B. New Classrooms Maintenance 8,560 2.7 Total | N/A 30.2
10. Procedures. A handbookdesigned under the project wouldguide SchoolCouncils and others involvedin maintenanceactivities. The SchoolCouncil's existence and full functioningare conditionsfor participationin the maintenanceprogram. The yearly schedude of schools to receive maintenancefunding will be done by supervisorsin coordinationwith the municipalgovernment, on the basis of buildingage, use, and SchoolCouncil commitmentto implementthe maintenanceprogram as described in the handbook.
C. SupervisionOffices
11. The role of supervisorswill be amplifiedunder the project to includepedagogical elements. To ensure that adequateand frequentsupervision is providedin all project areas, the proposed sites for supervisorand sector chief offizeswill providefor easy accessibilityto the project schools. The constructionof the officeswill be via competitivebidding coordinatedby CAPFCE. -90 - ANNEX 11 PHYSICALINFRASTRUCTURE AND DISTRIBUTIONNETWORK DI Warehouses
12. Transportationof textbooksand other instructionalmaterials from Mexico City to central warehousesin the states has been relativelyexpeditious and safe, but serious problems have occurred betweenthe state warehousesand the classroomsdue to storageand transportationdifficulties and overburdenedofficials, resulting in the loss of or damage to materials. The current system,based on rental of intermediaryfacilities or temporaryloan of public or private space, is neither a functionalor a long-termsolution. These problems will be addressedthrough investmentin an improveddistribution network, tailored to the conditin.nsprevailing in each state.
13. Design and Costs. The Governmenthas planned the constructionof 68 warehouses as a crucial link in state-widebooks and materialsdistribution networks. The project design will: (a) conformto agreed upon criteria and requirements;(b) be modular, to meet differingcapacity needs; and (c) take advantageof warehousemodels designedby CAPFCE for PARE, which have been revised and improved. The location of warehouseswill be deternined by individualstate studies of distributionneeds (see Part E below). Construction of warehouseswill be carried out by CAPFCE,at a total cost of US$4.1 million, as shown in Table 3 below: Mhble3: WarehouseConstruction by State
No. TotalCost TotalCost (N$ OOOs) (US$ OOOs)
Campeche 3 547.4 175.5 Durango 4 875.9 280.7 Guanajuato 3 656.9 210.6 Jalisco 10 1,532.8 491.3 Michoacan 11 1,970.8 631.7 Puebla 13 2,408.7 772.0 San Luis Pbtosi 6 1,532.8 491.3 Tabasco 6 1,094.9 350.9 Veracruz 9 1,204.4 386.0 Yucatan 3 985.4 315.8 Total 68 12,810.0 4,105.8
14. EconomicJustification. Under net present valuecalculations, the constructionof warehouseswould be viable if the annual cost of leasing a warehouseexceeded N$22,616 (US$7,415)per year (assumingit has a 25-year useful life). In fact, the averagecost of renting a substitutewarehouse is N$32,730 (US$10,730). Thus the constructionof the warehousesis justified. The prevailingjustification for warehouseconstruction, however, is more qualitativethan quantitative. In the beneficiarytiunicipalities, selectedon the basis of extreme poverty,no facilityis availablefor proper book storage. For over forty years now, several factors (poverty,isolation, weather conditions) have preventedbooks from reaching the poorest schools and classroomsin an acceptablecondition and in a timely manner. The constucton of strategicallylocated warehouseswill remedy this situation. -91- ANNEX 11 PHYSICALINFRASTRUCURE AND DISTRIBUTIONNETWORK E. Distribution of Materials
15. Each project state will draw up distributionplans, includingproposed location of warehouses,to make best use of existingroads and highwayswhile giving appropriate considerationto geographicalfeatures such as mountains,rivers, etc. The distributionplas will also take into account the location of and logisticssurrounding existing facilities, includingsectoral headquarters,warehouses, location of facilitiescurrently used as provisionalwarehouses, and the optimal part-timeuse of educationsupervisors for delivery of books and materials.
16. Distribution Plans. The distributionplans will be shown in a table which will containthe followinginformation: (a) Existing warehouses,regardless of type (b) Type of warehiouse(regular, temporary, loaned space, schoolhouse,etc.) (c) Local capacity in square meters (d) Problems, such as lack of security,flooding, etc. (e) Losses due to such problems(in % and N$) (f) Municipalitiesserved by each warehouse (g) Number of schools in municipality(in line with the municipalityin item 6). (h) Warehousecapacity required in m2 to meet peak demand (i) Maximumdistance between warehouse and furthest school served (j) Estimatedcost of transportbetween warehouse and schools (k) Annul cost of operation(warehouse staff salary,leases, etc.)
17. The proposeddistribution system will be presentedin a format which would inchlde the followinginformation: (a) Warehouseconcerned under the proposedplan; this will includeexistng ones which are the responsibilityof SEP that do not have too many problems (b) Work to be done: build, repair, lease, enlarge (c) Municipalitiesthat will be served by the warehouse (d) Warehousecapacity (mi 2) that will be requiredby each mumicipality;this should include anticipatedenrollment increasesldecreases, and where this is not possible to anticipate, it may be assumedthat the requirementswill be the same as the prior year (e) Totalwarehouse capacity (all warehouses) (f) Maximumdistance between warehouse and furthest school served (g) Estimatedcost of transport betweenwarehouse and schools (h) Annual operatingcosts; in cases where the warehouseis locatedat a regional officeor sectoral offlice,security costs for that warehousewill be zero (i) Cost of the investmentand value of the construction,repair, or modificationto be undertaken (j) Annual investmentamortization cost of the investment;either 17 or 25 years at an interest rate similarto that paid by PARE.
18. In order for the proposedsystem to be worth embarkingon, the amount investedwill need to be less than the savings. In other words, the annual recurrent costs of the current -92 - ANNEX 11 PHYSICALINFRASTRUCTURE AND DISTRIBUTIONNETWORK system(losses + transportation+ operatingcosts) less the recurrent costs of the proposed system(transportation + operatingcosts) should be greater than the annual amortizationof the investment. If in the first analysisthe comparisonis unfavorable,then it will be necessary to either reduce the investmentor find waysof increasingthe recurrent cost savings. This could possiblybe done by relocatingwarehouses closer to schools served.
L: ConstructionUnit Costs
19. Analytical Framework. The unit costs for each type of constructionwere established after assessingdifferent building methods and administrativeprocedures. The analysis started with the most representativetype of construction,the single room schoolhouse,and generalizedto other constructiontypes. Smaller,community-based civil works are less expensivethan larger ones put out for bidding. To identifythe square meter cost, the followingsteps were taken: (a) An analysis was performedon a sample of representativeconstruction budgets worth consideringbecause (i) their figuresconcurred with previousdata and (ii) standard models were used. The resultingcost per rn2 was N$913 for SOLIDARIDAD subprojects; (b) Under the 1991 Decentralizationand RegionalizationDevelopment Project (Loan 3310-ME), SOLIDARIDADwould award the municipalityan averageof 8 percent of the value of the civil works for project management. The proposed project will pay 7 percent, reducingthe averageN$913 per m2 to N$905 per m2 ; (c) The SOLIDARIDADbudgets, however, were only estimates,and if the allocated resourceswere insufficient,then the communityneeded to contributemore. This was confirmedby local officials,and is evidencedby half-finishedschools, waiting for more resourcesthe followingyear. Therefore,it will be necessaryto add a sufficiunt amount to cover the unpredictablebudget modifications. For this, CAPFCEdata was used, since the main causes of budgetoverruns are the same ones as for SOLIDARIDAD,nainely remoteness of the constructionsites, and constructionduring the rainy season. The differencein CAPFCE'scosts estimatesand final costs has been found to be an average47 percent. If this percentageis applied to N$905, the result will be N$1,330 per in2, which is the base cost of construction,including all the necessary work in a schoolhouse,such as site preparation,eaves and paving for walkways;and (d) School constructioncosts also include a 5 percent increaseto cover exterior work, such as courtyardenclosures, sidewalks, drainage for rinwater runoff, as applicable. Therefore,N$ 1,330 plus 5 percent equals N$1,397per in2; this last figurefonns the basic unit cost of classroomconstruction.
20. ConstructionBase Costs. A similarmethod was used to calculatethe unit costs for the various facilitiesto be built under the subcomponent,taking into considerationthe requirementsof individualunits. The costs (summarizedin Table 4) are listed as follows: -93- ANNEX 11 PIHYSICALINFRASTRUCTURE AND DISTRIBUTIONNETWORK
(a) Schools. Applyingthe estimatedcost of N$1,397/m2 to an averageschoolhouse of 36 rn2, results in a cost of N$50,300 or US$16,122. Approximately35 percent of CAPFCEcivil worksprojects in the stte of Cbiapas, for example,fall wit this cost estimate; (b) iblets. A moduleof 9 m2, consistingof 3 toilets,2 sinks and a urinal, will cost US$6,058; (c) Latrines. A module of 4 units with 4 m2, will cost US$2,147; (d) Warehous. A moduleof 96 m2 with toilet, will cost US$47,436; (e) Supervors' Office. A moduleof 36 rn2 with toilets would cost of US$17,756; (f) Classroom Furniture. Each classroomwill be furnishedwith 30 individual deskchairs,a teacher's table and chair,-a blackboardand a bookshelffor the Reading Corner and other insutional materials, costingUS$1,250; and (g) lbtable Water. The water solution cannot be as easily generalizeddepending on the conditionsexistg in each regionand even each school case. The averagecost of a ckisternwas estimatedat US$1,282.
Table 4: Construction Unit Coss
size costs Type (sM2) UnitCost Cost Cost __ ; ~~~~~~~~(N$/mi2)(N$) CommunityClsoms 36 1397 50,300 16,122 Toilts 9 2100 18,900 6,058 Latiri-s 4 1675 6,700 2,147 Warehouses 96 1542 148,000 47,436 Supervisor' Offices 36 1539 55,400 17,756 ClassroomFuniture N/A N/A 3,900 1,250 PotableWater N/A N/A 4,000 1,282 - 94 - ANNEX 11 PHYSICALINFRASTRUCTURE AND DISTRIBUTIONNETWORK Table5: Baseline Data for Calculation of Construction Unit Costs
Project E!KeIUtDr Cost VAT Sub-total Spo. &Admin. Total Project E'wcutor (N$ (?I) % Amu (N$) |(N$) % Amut $ ($ Hidalgo-l Contzactor 22,584 2,258 24.842 4 994 25,836 53 487 Hidalgo-2 SOLIDARIDAD 30,689 1,676 32,365 8 2,589 34,954 36 Hidalgo-3 SOLIDARIDAD 31,979 1,805 33,784 8 2,703 36,487 36 1,014 Hidalgo4 SOLIDARIAD 31,220 2,349 33,569 8 2,686 36,255 48 VeraCruz-1 Contractor 33,627 3,362 36,989 4 1,480 38,469 49 785 VeraCruz-2 Contractor 15,806 1,580 17,386 4 695 18,081 30 603 lhbasco Contractor 40,200 4,020 44,220 4 1,769 45,989 48 958 Guanajuato Contractor 45,554 4,555 50,109 4 2,004 52,113 49 1,064 [MUE BASEr CAPFCE 29.097 2.910 32,007 4 1.280 33.287 32 1.040 Chiapas-73 CAPFCE 27,750 2,775 30,525 4 1,221 31,146 32 992 Chiapas-74a CAPFCE 27,223 2,722 29,945 4 1,198 31,143 32 973 Chiapas-74b CAPFCE 30,814 3,081 33,895 4 1,356 35,251 32 1,102 Chiapas-83a CAPFCE 24,550 2,455 27,005 4 1,080 28,085 32 878 Chiapas-83b CAPFCE 25,814 2,581 28,395 4 1,136 29,531 32 923 Chiapas-90a CAPFCE 43,050 4,305 47,355 4 1,894 49,249 32 1,539 Chiapas-90b CAPFCE 45,314 4,531 49.845 4 1,994 51,839 32 1,620 Chiapas-92a CAPFCE 48,550 4,855 53,405 4 2,136 55,541 32 1,736 Chiapas-92b CAPFCE 54,814 5,481 60,295 4 2,412 62,707 32 1,960 Chiapas-93a CAPFCE 51,550 5,155 56,705 4 2,268 58,973 32 1,843 Chiapas-93b CAPFCE 44,814 4,481 49,295 4 1,972 51,267 32 1,602 Chiapas-94 CAPFCE 41,550 4,155 45,705 4 1,828 47,533 32 1,485 Chiapas-97 CAPFCE 42,814 4,281 47,095 4 1.884 48,979 32 1,531 Chiapas-98 CAPFCE 29,814 2,981 32,795 4 1,312 34,107 32 1,066 Chiapas-99a CAPFCE 35,909 3,591 39,500 4 1,580 41,080 32 1,284 Chiapas-99b CAPFCE 46,814 4,681 51,495 4 2,060 53,555 32 1,674 Chiapas-103 CAPFCE 26,146 2,615 28,761 4 1,150 29,911 32 935 Chiapas-104 CAPFCE 39,814 3,981 43,795 4 1,752 45,547 32 1,423 Chiapas-107a CAPFCE 50,550 5,055 55,605 4 2,224 57,829 32 1,807 Chiapas-107b CAPFCE 58,814 5,881 64,695 4 2,588 67,283 32 2,103 Chiapas-108a CAPFCE 51,050 5,105 56,155 4 2,246 58,401 32 1,825 Chiapas-108b CAPFCE 52,314 5,231 57,545 4 2,302 59,847 32 1,870 Chiapas-109 CAPFCE 44,314 4,431 48,745 4 1,950 50,695 32 1,584 Chiapas-IlOb CAPFCE 58,814 5,881 64,695 4 2,588 67,283 32 2,103 Chiapas-lI la CAPFCE 48,550 4,855 53,405 4 2,136 55,541 32 1,736 Cbiapas-112b CAPFCE 30,064 3,006 33,070 4 1,323 34,393 32 1,075 Chiapas-114a CAPFCE 50,550 5,055 55,605 4 2,224 57,829 32 1,807 Chiapas-1lSa CAPFCE 40,550 4,055 44,605 4 1,784 46,389 32 1,450 Chiapas-I15b CAPFCE 33,146 3,315 36,461 4 1,458 37,919 32 1,185 Chiapas-116a CAPFCE 52,550 5,255 57,805 4 2,312 60,117 32 1,879 Chiapas-I16b CAPFCE 50,314 5,031 55,345 4 2,214 57,559 32 1,799 Chiapas-1l9 CAPFCE 51,064 5,106 56,170 4 2,247 58,417 32 1,826 Chiapas-121a CAPFCE 49,550 4,955 54,505 4 2,180 56,685 32 1,771 Chiapas-121b CAPFCE 46,814 4,681 51,495 4 2,060 53,555 32 1,674 Chiapas-122a CAPFCE 46,550 4,655 51,205 4 2,048 53,253 32 1.664 Chiapas-122b CAPFCE 40,227 4,023 44,250 4 1,770 46,020 32 1,438 Chiapas-124a CAPFCE 43,550 4,355 47,905 4 1,916 49,821 32 1,557 Chiapas-124b CAPFCE 33,064 3,306 36,370 4 1,455 37,825 32 1,182 Chiapas-127 CAPFCE 46,550 4,655 51,205 4 2,048 53,253 32 1,664
CAPFCEAverag 1,527 July CAPFCEEstimate 1,040 Difference(%) 47 AverageCost per tn2 of 913 boxedarea -95 - ANNEX 12 STRENGTHENINGOF PLANNINGAND POUCY ANALYSIS
STRENGTHENINGOF PLANNINGAND POLICY ANALYSIS
Justification
1. The decentralizationprocess under way in Mexico presentsnew opportunitiesthat challengeeducational planners, policymakers,and administratorsboth at the central avndat the state level. Concretely,the major challengeis howto continueexpansion while quality is improved. The move to decentralizationcalls for the involvementof authoritiesat the local, regional, and central levelsof policymakingand representativesof the community. Increased participationand negotiationin all areas of decisionmakingare necessary at this particular time.
2. The main lessons learned from previouseducation projects in Mexico, LAC and other parts of the world should be made availablein accessiblestate-of-the-art to plannersand decisionmakers,so that they can study them to learn how to apply them in their local environments. An agreementwas reached with Mexicanauthorities on a series of workshops focused on a range of educationalissues such as increasingthe quality of education systems so that people leave school with the meansto apply knowledge,skij%s and valuesrequired for better living; achievingequity in the distributionof educationalresources and opportunitiesto extend educationto people of differentsocioeconomic backgrounds; and improvingthe efficiencyof the educationalsystem through cost-effective strategies.
3. The workshopsshould providean opporunity for reflection,discussion and leaming to high level state educationofficials to examinepolicy options to maximizeefficiency, quality, and equity in the provisionof education. The workshopswill also challengethese officialsto tink about the problemsthey face in new ways,consistent with the most up-to- date knowledge. About 470 staff-monthsof fellowship,90 for overseastraiing and 380 for local traiiing, will be providedfor these workshopsduring the five years of the project.
Content
4. An overseasworkshop on educationassessment will deal with state-of-the-art techniquesto properlymeasure educationachievement. The followingtopics will be included: (a) purpose of test and testingprograms; (b) the use of test-deriveddata to improveeducation; (c) type of test (non-referencedand criterion-referencedtests); (d) different test formats; (e) planningfor a test; (f) reliabilityand validity;(g) test equating; (h) standardization;(i) field work, data collection;(j) how to analyze and use test results effectively;and (k) how to present test results. This workshopwill be offered to central and state level officialsin charge of educationassessment. It will also cover aspectsrelated with how to establisha state assessmentcapacity and how to developand operate an assessment program. About 15 fellowshipmonths of stafftraining will be providedfor this workshop during the first two years of the project. -96 - ANNEX 12 STRENGTHENINGOF PLANNINGAND POUCY ANALYSIS 5. A local workshopon measurementissues in educationassessment will be offeredto state level staff in charge of technical issues. About 22.5 fellowshipmonths of staff training will be providedbor this workshopduring the first three years of the project.
6. A local workshopon researchmethodologies and techniquesfor evaluationof educationprojects, includingmethodological designs, survey and qualitativeanalysis, data collectioninstruments design, summativeand formativeevaluation, impact and process evaluation,and research and decisionmaking will be providedto central and state staff. About 20 fellowshipmonths of staff trainingwill be providedduring the first and the third year of the project.
7. Two local workshopson educationstatistics will be provided. The first one, on issues of the educationmanagement information system, will be offeredto central and state directorsfor a total of 10 fellowshipmonths during the first and t.ie third years of the project. The second, on educationindicators and educationstatistics data6ses, will be offeredto central and state technical stafffor a total of six fellowshipmonths of staff training durng the second and fourth years of the project.
8. An overseasworkshop on planningand policy analysiswill be offeredduring the first and secondyears of the project coveringthe followingtopics: planning and policy analysis in educationsystems, educational policy design,education information systems, conducting and using education surveyresearch and evaluationstudies, policy analysis tools and techniques,resource allocationmodeling, planning for implementation,education and labor market outputs, school governanceissues, and multicultur I education. About 54 fellowship months of staff training will be offered to central and state directors.
9. Several seminarswill be offeredon project administraton to PCU and SPCU staff. The first one, on managementand monitoring,will be offered the first, third and fifth years of the project for a total of 33 fellowshipmonths of staff training. The second, on cost account, will be offeredthe first and third years of the project for a total of 17 fellowship months of staff training. The third one will cover aspectson organizationdevelopment and will be offeredthe first and third years of the projectfor a total of 30 fellowshipmonths of stafftraining.
10. A series of visits to new and imnovativeeducation models on multigradeschools (Guatemala'sNueva Escuela Unitariaand IndigenousEducation Project, PRONEBI; Colombia'sEscuela Nueva; El Salvador'sEDUCO schools; Chile's 900 schools)and on the assessmentsystems of Chile and Colombia, will be financedduring the first four years of the project. A total of 16 fellowshipmonths of cental and local staff training will be provided.
11. Two kinds of workshopson educationmicroplanning will be provided. The frst one, on methodologicaland technicalaspects for local state planning units will provide for 35 fellowshipmonths of training the first three years of the project. The secondwill be directed to central and state directorson how to use microplanningfor educationaldecision making. A total of 25 fellowshipmonths for -stafftraining wi}lbe provided. - 97 - ANNEX 12 STRENGTHENINGOF PLANNINGAND POLICY ANALYSIS 12. Currently,a series of visits have been organizedto exchangeexperiences with PARE implementors. The visits have provedto be successfulto disseminategood lessons. The PAREBproject will provide for 70 staffmonths to support exchangevisits between participantsduring the five years of the project.
13. Beforethe decentralization,DGPPP was in charge of conductingthe annual progmming and budgetingexercise at the state level. Currently,DGPPP norms the exercisebut each SEE has the direct responsibilityof implementingthe annual programming and budgeting. Local seminarswill be offeredduring the first two years of the project, to train PCU and SPCU staff in programmingand budgetingstrategies, budget implementation and evaluation.,
14. To faiiliarize PCU and SPCU staffwith disbursementand procurementprocedures, the project will financeabout 21.1 fellowshipmonths of stafftraining to attend international and national seminarsand workshopson these topics during the five years of the project.
15. To improvethe capacity for statisticalanalysis and data manipulationamong staff involvedwith the project at the central and state levels, a workshopon the use statistical packages will be offeredeight times during the liif of the project for a total of 30 staff monthsof training. -98- ANNEX 13 TERMS OF REFERENCEFOR EVALUATION& PROJECTMIS TERMS OF REFERENCE
A. Process Evaluation
1. Objectives. The main objectiveof the process evaluationis to assess the quality and the short-termeffects of the project's main subcomponents,specifically: teacher training, teacher incentives,supervision, pedadogical network, book distribution,Reading Corners, books for indigenousschools, and communityparticipation. This will complementthe monitorirg evaluation(conducted directly by the PCU and the SPCUs) to assess whether the projects structure and strategiesare being adequatelyimplemented and how this strucure and the related activities should be changedor adjustedto meet the project's objectives.
2. Methodology. Process evaluaticnwill rely mainlyon systmatic observationsat participatingcommunities and schools and will be based mainly on a case study approach combiningquantitative as well as qualitativeresearch techniques.
3. "ne Frame. The observationswill be undertakenduring the whole implementation cycle of the project, but mainlyduring the first four years of project implementationto provide feedbackfor managementdecisions.
4. Elementsof Research Proposal for Process Evaluation. The process evaluation proposals should include: (a) Specificationof main research (processevaluation) questions; (b) Samplingframework; (c) Proposedmeasures and indicatorsas well as draft instruments; (d) Definitionof logisticsof field work; (e) Definitionof scheduleof field work; (f) Definitionof methodsfor data treatment, includingdata processingand analysis. Qualitativeevaluation methods will be required (direct observation, structured and semi-structuredinterviews, open-ended questionnaires, focus groups, etc); (g) Implementationschedule specifying the tasks to be undertakenand their respectivedurations; (h) Proposed staffing; (i) Detailedbudget includingcosts by activity and type of expenditures,i.e., direct (personneland others)and indirect costs for each process evaluated;and (j) Coordinationmechanisms with project administratorsshould be discussedwith CONAFE and state authoritiesand incorporatedinto the proposal.
5. Criteriafor Proposal Selection. The criteria for proposal selectioninclude the pertinencebetween the methodologicaland technical aspectsof the proposal and the specified elements; the pertinenceof the scheduleproposed (adequaterelation betweentasks and time proposed for implementation);and experienceof the researchersin educationresearch, particularly in process evWaluation. -9 - ANNEX 13 TERMS OF REFERENCEFOR EVALUATION& PROJECTMIS B ProjectManagement Information System
6. Genera!Objectives. To developan informationsystem based on simplifieddata collectionformaK; and analyticaland feedbackprocedures to improveproject planning, budgeting,and management. The project MIS will be designedto allow statistical informationto improvethe overallCONAFE-PCU management. The project would support the integrationof databases into an efficientinformation storage and retrievalsystem at the central and local levels (CONAFEand SPCUs), built aroundappropriate hardware and managementsoftware. The design of the systemwill reflectinformation needs idertified during a preparatorystudy, the results of which will be reviewedat negotiations.
7. InformationSystem Design (a) Objective. To design a systemto provide timely and valid informationfor follow-uppurposes and problem identificationduring project implementation; (b) TechnicalRequirements. The informationsystem is required to: (i) be based on portable hardwareand softwaresuch as standard microcomputers,Unix-like operating systems, and so called 4th generationprogramming languages to shorten the systemdevelopment time, preserveindependence from vendors,and alleviateproblems of high personnelturnover; and (ii) includethe following: specificationof the differentdatabases needed and their relationship;the informationstructure to identifysources and users of informationfor planningand managementpurposes; a system stucture to identify informationvolumes and the differentapplications; a technologystructure to specify the softwareand hardwareto be used; a trainingprogram for administratorsand operators;data collection instruments;data collectionand disseminationprocedures, including operationmanuals; and an implementationschedule, including specificationfor softwareand hardwareacquisition, and pilot testing and overallimplementation; and (c) Cnrteriafor Proposal Selection. The criteria for proposal selectionmust include the pertinencebetween the methodologicaland technicalaspects of the proposal and the specifiedsystem characteristics; the pertinenceof the scheduleproposed (adequate relation betweentasks and time proposedfor implementation);and researchers'experience with informationsystem design. -100- ANNEX 14 TERiMSGi REFERENCE FOR STUDIES TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR STUDIES
A. PreschoolEducation Study
1. Objectives. The study attemptsto generatethe necessaty infonmationto: (a) analyze the preschooleducation sector; (b) identifyand discussthe major issues and constraintspertaining to the sector; (c) describe the Governments'preschool education strategy; and (d) make recommendationsfor improvementsin the quality,efficierny and access to preschooleducation.
2. Specific Issues. The specificissues to be includedin the study are: (a) The extent to which the current structure of preschooleducation is adequately servingMexico's needs for human resourcesdevelopment, and evenally how such structure and the related strategiesshould be changedor adjustedto meet thosc;needs; (b) The extent to which preschooleducation quality is adequatein terms of learningachievement and students'psycho-social development; (c) The search for the most cost-effectivemodality(ies); and (d) The demands of preschooleducation expansion.
3. Methodology. The studywill be based on secondaryinformation analysis. The followingelements must be includedin the final report:
(a) An historicaloverview and documentationabout the significantimprovements of accessto preschooleducation in Mexico, includingenrollments, teahhing staff, and number of schools;a descriptionof differentforms of preschool education(formal and informalsystems); an eamminationof the public expenditures,by type of expenditureand unit costs, in preschooleducation; (b) A descriptionof the administrativestructure of the sector, stressingthe role of SEP and the states in the contextof the recent educationdecentralization; (c) A descriptionof the education strategyof the Govemmentfor the preschool sector as descrlbed in the 1992 ANAMand the 1993 LGE; (d) An analysis of the main issues in the preschooleducation sector, including equity and access; internal efficiency;quality of preschooleducation; characteristicsof the teachingstaff, includingquality of teaching, teachers' formationand inservicetraining; supervision system; infrastrucre; resources allocation;and communityparticipation; and (e) A list of recommendationsresponding to the issues discussedin part (d).
4. Time Frame. The study wouldbe undertakenduring the first year of the project by a researcheror a group of researchers,with high qualificationsand experiencein research and educationpolicy analysis,under the technicaldirection of the General Directoratefor PreschoolEducation. -101- ANNEX 14 TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR STUDIES 5. Elements of Researcb Proposal. The final researchproposal should include the followingelements: (a) Specificationof report contents; (b) Descriptionof informationthat will be used for each section; (c) Definitionof scheduleof data analysisand report writing. A final report should be producedand deliveredto CONAFE and the Bank; (d) Detailedbudget, includingdirect (personneland others) and indirect costs; and (e) Coordinationmechanisms with CONAFE.
6. Criteria for Proposal Selection. The criteria for proposal selectioninclude the pertinencebetween the proposedsources of informationand the report contents; the pertinenceof the scheduleproposed (adequate relation betweentasks and time proposedfor implementation);and experienceof the reseachers in educationpolicy analysisand education research.
D. Secondary Education Studies
7. Introduction. Accordingto the 1993 LGE, one of the most pressingpolicies of the educationsystem is to expand mandatorybasic educationto also inclu'X the first three years of secondaryeducation. The objectiveof the secondaryeducation stuaies would be to help establish Governmentpolicies to improvecoverage at the same time that the quality, relevance,and cost-effectivenessof secondaryeducation are improved. Besides the assessmentof internal and externalefficiency to see the extent to which the current secondary educationcurriculum is adequatelyserving Mexico's needs for human resources development,it is necessaryto analyze the followingaspects: management,curriculum, teacher training, finance, and fcilites Five studieswill be supportedunder the project to examine: (a) SecondaryEducation Assessment; (b) SocioeconomicAnalysis of Secondary Education Dropouts; (c) Teacher'and Supervisors'Working Conditions and Attitudes;(d) EffectiveSecondary Education Schools; and (e) FinancialImplication of Basic Education Expansion.
Rl. SecondaryEducation Assessment
8. Objectives. The diagnosticstudy on secondaryeducation attemnpts to generatethe necesay informationto: (a) analyze the secondaryeducation sector; (b) identifyand discuss the major issues and constraintspertining to the sector; (c) describe the Governmenfs secondary educationstrategy; and (d) make recommendationsfor improvementsin the quaity, efficiencyand accessto secondaryeducation.
9. SpecificIssues. The specificissues to be included in the study are: (a) The extent to which the curret stmcture of seondary educationis adequately serving Mexico'sneeds for human resourcedevelopment, and eventuallyhow such structureand the related strategiesshould be changedor adjustedto meet those needs; - 102 - ANNEX 14 TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR STUDIES (b) The extent to which secondaryeducation quality is adequatein terms of learningachievement; (c) The search for the most cost-effectivemodality(ies); and (d) The nature and costs of secondaryeducation expansion.
10. Methodology. The study will be based on secondaryinformation analysis. The followingelements must be included in the final report: (a) An historicaloverview and documentationabout the coverageand access to secondaryeducation in Mexico, includingenrolhnents, teaching staff, and number of schools; a descriptionof differentmodalities of secondary education, by privateand- public sub-systems;and an examinationof the public expenditures,by type of expenditureand unit costs; percentageof GNP and of governmentspending; -(b) A descriptionof the administrativestructure of the sector, stressingthe role of SEP and the states in the context of the recent educationdecentralization. Particular attentionshould be given to whether the decentralizedsystem of managig, organizingand financingthe secondarysystem is adequate,and how financingand managementshould be changedto meet future needs, includingto what extent decisionmaking should be decentralizedto individual schools and directors. (c) A descriptionof the educationstrategy of the Governmentfor the secondary education sectoras described in the ANAM and LGE; (d) An analysisof the main issues in the secondaryeducation sector, including equity and access; internal efficiency,including transition rates from prinary to secondary,dropout and repetitionrates, student-teacherratios, completion rates; characteristicsof the teacher's body, includingquality of teaching(if available,quality of inputs, includingtextbooks, teaching and learning materials, supervision,school constructionand maintenance,laboratories and workshops;and quality of output as definedby learning and achievement, includingresults of standardizedtests in subject areas), teachers' formationand inservice training; supervisionsystem; infastructure; resourcesallocation; and communityparticipation; and, (e) A list of recommendationsresponding to the issues discussed in part (d).
11. lTne Frame. The study would be undertakenduring the first year of the project by a researcheror a group of researchers,with high qualificationsand experiencein research and educationpolicy analysis,under the technicaldirection of the Subsecretariatfor SecondaryEducation.
12. Elments of Research Proposal. The final researchproposal should include the followingelements:
(a) Specificationof report contents; (b) Descriptionof informationthat will be used for each section; -103- ANNEX 14 TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR STUDIES
(c) Definitionof scheduleof data analysis and report writing. A final report should be producedand deliveredto CONAFE and the Bank; (d) Detailedbudget, includingdirect (personneland others) and indirectcosts; and (e) Coordinationmechanisms with CONAFE.
13. Criteriafor ProposalSelection. The criteria for proposalselection include the pertinencebetween the proposedsources of information,and the report contents;the pertinenceof the scheduleproposed (adequate relation between tasks and time proposed for implementation);and experienceof the researchersin edscationpolicy analysis,and education research.
B.2. SocioeconomicAnalysis of Secondary Education Dropouts
14. Objectives. The study aims at identifyingthe socioeconomicand demographic characteristicsof secondaryeducation dropouts as well as the geographicallocation of the dropouts to proposeways to increase access to secondaryeducation by underprivileged groups.
15. Methodology. The study will be based on secondaryinfbrmation analysis. Two sets of informationwill be analyzed: (a) SEP aggregatedata (municipalityand state level) about secondaryeducation coverageand internalefficiency indicators (absorption rate, repetition, dropout, and efficiencyrate), and CONAPOpoverty indicators; and (b) individualdata (individualsand families)from the INEGIhousehold surveys on labor and employment. The first set will be analyzedto identifythe geographicallocation of secondaryeducation backwardness(rezago) and its correlateswith povertyindicators. The second set will be analyzedto identifythe socioeconomiccharacteristics of secondaryeducation dropouts.
16. TIme Frme. The study would be undertakenunder contractualarrangements with CONAFE over the first year of the projectby a researcheror a group of fesearchers,with high q. ilificationsand experiencein researchand educationpolicy analysis,under the technical directionof the Subsecretariatfor SecondaryEducation.
17. Elements of ResearchProposal. The final researchproposal should includeboth type of analysis, ad should specify the followingelements: (a) Report contents; (b) Descriptionof informadonthat will be used for each type of analysis, includingthe models to be analyzed, includingcomparison by socioeconomic groups -including gender, geographicalregion, income, ethnicity, rural/urban/urbanmarginal. Multivariateanalysis must be used; (c) Definitionof scheduleof data analysis and report writing. A final report should be producedand deliveredto CONAFE and the Bank; (d) Detailedbudget, includingdirect (personneland others) and indirectcosts; and (e) Coordinationmechanisms with CONAFE. -104- ANNEX 14 TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR STUDIES 18. Criteriafor ProposalSelection. The criteria for proposal selectioninclude the pertinencebetween the proposed sources of information,the methodologicaland technical aspects, and the specificresearch elements; the pertinenceof the scheduleproposed (adequate relation between tasks and time proposedfor implementation);and experienceof the researchersin survey research and statisticalanalysis.
B.3. Teachers'and Supervisors'Working Conditions and Atitudes
19. Objectives. The study aims at collectingand analyzing,for the first time in the country, informationabout secondaryeducation teachers, school principals,and supervisors. The informationwill include: (a) socioeconomicand family backgroundcharacteristics; (b) experiencein the sector; (c) workingconditions; (d) pedagogicalpractices; (e) attitudes towardthe secondaryeducation curriculum, and problemsfacing secondaryeducation; and (t) self-reportedtraining needs.
20. Methodology. The study requires survey informationfrom a national sample of secondaryeducation teachers, school principals,and supervisors.
21. ISmeVrame. The study would be undertakenduring the secondyear of the project by a researcher or a group of researchers,with high qualificationsand experiencein survey researchand educationpolicy analysis,under the technicaldirection of the Subsecretariatfor SecondaryEducation.
22. Elementsof Research Proposal. The final researchproposal should includethe followingelements: (a) Specificationof main researchquestions; (b) Samplingframework; (c) Proposedmeasures and indicatorsas well as draft instrumentsfor data collection; (d) Definitionof logisticsof field work; (e) Definitionof scheduleof field work; (f) Definitionof methodsfor data treatment,including data processing,and analysis. (g) Implementationschedule specifying the tasks to be undertakenand their respectivedurations. This element should also includereport schedule; (h) Proposedstaffing; (i) Detailedbudget includingcosts by activity and type of expenditures,i.e. direct (personneland others) and indirectcosts for each process evaluated;and (.i) Coordinationmechanisms with projectadministrators should be discussed with CONAFE and state authoritiesand incorporatedinto the proposal.
23. Criteria for Proposal Selection. The criteria for proposalselection include the pertnence betweenthe methodologicaland technicalaspects of the proposaland the specific researchelements; the pertinenceof the scheduleproposed (adequaterelation betweentasks -105 - ANNEX 14 TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR STUDIES and time proposed for implementation);and experienceof the researchersin survey research and statisticalanalysis.
B.4. Effective Secondary Education Schools
24. Objectives. Identify the educationalcharacteristics of effectivesecondary education schools. Effectiveschools are those with high internal efficiencyindicators, including educationalachievement.
25. Specific Issues. Describewhat educationinputs effectiveschool use and how they use them. What process factorsdistinguish these schools from others in their same education districts. Attentionshould be given, among others, to the school environment,school goals and expectations,school sense of community,and school instructionalleadership. Teachers and principals' attitudes,and behaviorneed to be includedin the analysis.
26. Methodology. A case study approach(combining qualitative and quantitative methodologies)should be used to study a selectedcontrolled sample of 6 to 8 schools where studentsget high scores in cognitivetest (DGEIRcould be used as a source of information).
27. T1meFrame. The study wouldbe undertakenduring the first year of the project by a researcher or a group of researchers,with high qualificationsand experiencein research and educationpolicy analysis,under the technical directionof the Subsecretariatfor SecondaryEducation.
28. Elements of Research Proposal. The final researchproposal should includethe followingelements: (a) Specificationof main researchquestions; (b) Samplingframework; (c) Proposedmeasures and indicatorsas well as draft instrumentsfor data collection(at district --supervisorlevel; school --school principal and teachers; and classroomand student level); (d) Definitionof logisticsof field work; (e) Definitionof scheduleof field work; (f) Definitionof methodsfor data treatment, includingdata processing,and analysis. (g) Implementationschedule specifying the tasks to be undertakenand their respectivedurations. This element should also includereport schedule; (h) Proposed staffing; (i) Detailedbudget includingcosts by activity and type of expenditures,i.e. direct (personneland others) and indirect costs for each process evaluated;and (j) Coordinationmechanisms with project administrs should be discussedwith CONAFE and state authoritiesand incorporatedinto the proposal.
29. Criteria for Proposal Selection. The critera for proposal selectioninclude the pertinencebetween the methodologicaland technicalaspects of the proposal and the specific -106 - ANNEX 14 TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR STUDIES researchelements; the pertinenceof the schedule proposed(adequate relation betweentasks and time proposedfor implementation);and experienceof the researchersin qualitative analysis and survey researchanalysis.
B.5. FinancialImplications of Basic EducationExpansion
30. Objectives. One implicationof the GeneralLaw of Educationis the mandatory expansionof basic educationto includethe three grades of lower secondaryeducation. This is based on two assumptions: (a) that educationis a public good, and without public subsidy people would investin less than the sociallyoptimal amount of education;and (b) the expansion, through public subsidy, will promoteequity by removingthe ability to pay as a conditionfor access. Given scarce public resources, it is critical that a detailedassessment be made of the costs and timetablefor full implementation.The study should yield reliable and detailedcost estimates, along with a recommendationof a strategyand timetablefor its implementation.
31. SpecificIssues. The cost implicationsof extendingbasic educationare complicated by a number of factors: (a) there are four main types of secondaryeducation (normal, vocational,distance, and special)with varyingunit costs; (b) a significant,but highly variable,proportion of places in secondaryschool classroomsare vacant, thus a number of children could be absorbed at little increase in operatingcosts as the basic infrastructure already exists; but (c) the location of unattendedchildren in relation to physical infrastructure is not fullly known at present, thus making it difficultto estimateconstruction requirements.
32. The study will look at each of these issues in detail, and take these issues into account. Estimateswill be made of the followingincremental costs: (a) Capital - costs of constructingadditional schools and classrooms;costs of training additionalteachers; other investmentcosts. (b) Recurrent- costs of additionalteachers' salaries; didactic materials;student materials; and other operatingcosts.
33. It is also necessaryto study the available,but unused capacity, which apparently is large and could absorb a significantproportion of the increase in most urban areas with minimalcost increases. The rural scenario,in which the Governmentis planningto expand distance educationmodality ("TV Secundaria"),needs to be studiedseparately.
34. In the 1993-1994academic year, no increasewas observedin the enrollmentsin secondaryeducation. The Govermmentis designinga campaignto stimulateenrollment. The cost associatedwith these campaignswill need to be includedin the study.
35. Methodology. In order to assess alternativepolicies for expandingsecondary education, two factors need to be taken into account: public resourcesand demographic pressure. Regardingpublic resourcesavailable for public education, it is necessary to analyze the trend in public spendingon educationas a share of the total educationbudget and in the governmentbudget as a share of GNP. The expectationof the economicgrowth in the - 107 - ANNEX 14 TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR STUDIES future needs to be analyzedto see if there is the potentialfor increasinggovernment spending. Regardingdemographic conditions, it is necessaryto analyzetie changes and shift in populationtrends, specificallythe grwth of secondaryschool-age population. A comparisonbetween the growth of public spendingon educationand the growth of the school-agepopulation will indicateif enrollmentmight increase. To completethis analysis, it is necessaryto project the resourcesavailable for expandingsecondary education starting from initial conditionsincluding: current GDP, annual growth rate (economyand school-age population),government budget (total and for the sector), share of governmentbudget in GDP and share of educationbudget in the governmentbudget. Then, differentscenarios need to be studied dependingon the assumptionsrelated to changesin share of government budget in GDP and of educationin governmentbudget, includingaltemative strategies and timetablesfor the full implementationof their policy.
36. Tlme Frame. The study wouldbe undertakenduring the first year of the project by a researcheror group of researchers,with appropriatequalifications and experiencein economic research. The study should be completedby August, 1995 and will be subject to joint reviewby the Governmentand the Bank.
37. Elements of Research Proposal. The final researchproposal should include the followingelements: (a) methodsfor estimatingand analyzingthe cost of expandingsecondary educationenrollments, including measurig unit and marginalcosts; (b) sources of infbrmation; (c) critena for defnition of differentscenanos (combiningmodalities, expansion of existingschools, etc); (d) Implementationschedule specifying tasks to be undertakenand their respective durations; (e) Proposedstaffing; and (f) Detailedbudget includingcosts by activityand type of expenditures,i.e. direct (personneland others) and indirectcosts for each process evaluated.
38. Criteria for Proposal Slection. The criteria for proposalselection include the pertinence betweenthe methodologicaland technicalaspects of the proposaland the specific research elements;the pertinenceof the scheduleproposed (adequaterelation betweentasks .ndtime proposed for implementation);and experienceof the researchersin economicand financialanalysis.
C Study on Environment and Educaton
39. Objectives. The main objectiveof the study is to improveenvironmental education at basic levels of Mexican schoolson the basis of a reviewof the state of the current state of the literature and experienceon educationand environmentin Mexico, includingcontents of educaton programsat differenteducation levels, institutions(public and private)providing educationalservices, and resourcesinvested in environmentaleducation. -108 - ANNEX 14 TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR STUDIES 40. Specific kisues. The specificissues to be includedin the study are: (a) To identifythe policy frmneworkon enviromnentaleducation and the extent to which the current programsare adequatelyserving the national policy on scienceand technology; (b) To assess how the curriculum,at differenteducation levels in both formal and non-formalsystems, has incorporatedenvironmental concerns into the school culture and the overallteaching and learmingprocess, and how it has possibly affectedstudents' attitudesand behaviortoward natural resources,their use and conservation; (c) To describe the contentsof environmentaleducation in teacher training programs,textbooks, teacher guides, ReadingCorners, and other teachingand learning materials; (d) To analyzehow environmentaleducation has been disseminatedor supported through mass-mediamechanisms; (e) To specify the impact of naturalhazards (earthquakes,floods, etc.) on educationalfcilides, school readiness, and teacher and student training;and (f) To identifythe resourcesinvested in environmentaleducation.
41. Methodology. The study will be based on secondaryinformation analysis applied with a historicalperspective. The data-gatheringprocess would includenot only the identificationof the correspondingand updatedbibliography but also visits to authorities and scholars, specializedsectors at SEP and other institutions,and a representativegroup of schools. A list of conclusionsand reconmendationsresponding to the specificissues would be included in the final report.
42. Tlie Frame. The study wouldbe undertakenunder administrativearrangements with CONAFE over four months of the first year of the project by a researcherwith high qualificationsand experiencein environmentaleducation in Mexico. The researcherwould be requiredto submit a researchproposal prior to the study.
43. Elements of ResearchProposal. The final researchproposal should includethe followingelements: (a) Specificationof report contents; 0b) Descriptionof informationthat will be used for each section; (c) Definitionof schedulefor informationgathering and analysis,and report writing. A final report would be deliveredto CONAFE and the Bank; (d) Detailedbudget, includingdirct (personneland others) and ndirect costs; and (e) Coordinationmechanisms with CONAFE.
44. Criteriafor Proposal Selection. The criteria for proposal selectioninclude the consistencybetween the proposedsources of informationand the report contents; the adequacyof the scheduleproposed (adequate relation betweentasks and time proposed for inplementation); and experienceof the researchersin environmentaleducation. - 109- ANNEX 14 TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR STUDIES DI Teaching Science at Primary Schools
45. Objectives. To evaluateand select an innovativeand cost effectiveapproach to teach primary school children of Mexico the basic scientificfoundations of everya life and environment,and raise their awarenessof the scientificunderstanding of technology. The selected approachwould be recommendedto be adoptedas a national strategyfor science educationat the prunary educationlevel in Mexico.
46. Specific Issues. Two models of scienceteaching in primary rural schools will be evaluatedin order to generatethe necessaryempirical data to establishtheir comparative cost-effectiveness.The specificissues to be evaluatedare: (a) The impact of the models on students' cognidveachievement in sciences, problem solving, and attitdes towardself, school, and society; (b) The administrativefeasibility of each model implementation;and (c) The search for the most cost-effectivemodality.
47. Structure of the Study. The study will be based on a teachingexperiment developed (under the Second Primary EducationProject) in about 270 classrooms(approximately 120 primary schools ) of Mexicoduring two school years. The study wouldbe undertakenover a three-yearperiod by a group with high qualificationsand experiencein research and educationpolicy analysis. A final report on the experimentis due in October 1997.
48. Research Methodology. To assess the impactof differentmodels of science education, a cost-effectivenessanalytic framework wiUl be applied. To the extent that cognitiveachievement, problem solving, and students' attitudescan be measured, a cost- benefitapproach wil be implemented. The cost analysisshould focus on differencesin the cost betweenthe differentmodalities of scienceeducation. The examinationof model effecfivenesswill use the educationalproduction function tools.
49. The fllowing elementsmust be includedin the evaluationproposal: (a) The evaluationwould look for the followingthree possible effectsof different models on the student: (i) Changes in cognitiveachievement; (ii) Changes in problemsolving skills; and (iii) Changes in attitudestoward science and technology,self, school, and society. (b) The evaluationwould contemplatethree testing points in time for assessingthe possibledifferential effects of differentmodels: (i) A base line, at the beginningof an academicyear, measuringattitudes, problem-solvingslklls, and knowledgeabout the learnImgobjectves of the science curriculum; (ii) Effects observableat the end of an academicyear, after the students have experiencedthe models; and (iii) Effects observableat the end of the folowing year. This requires a longitudinl panel data gatheredfrom the same cohort of students. -110 - ANNEX 14 TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR STUDIES (c) The sample design should take into accountthe different types of primary schools in the states of the project. Studentsfrom schools not participatingin any of the two models will serve as the first control group, but students in each model will form a control group when comparedwith students in other models; (d) The unit of observationwill be the student. Becausestudents from the same school will have many characteristicsin common, a more aggregateexercise using the school as a unit of analysis will fail to test the hypothesiswe are interestedin, becauseof maskingof individualdifferences through averaging; (e) The dependentvariables to be includedshould be as follows: (i) Continuouscognitive and problemsolving skills measures; and (ii) attitude measures. (f) The independentvariables will includemeasures of parents' socioeconomic background;student gender and age; communitysocioeconomic characteristics; school/teacherscharacteristics, such as school nature and modality,school - expenditureper student, teacher quality,school quality,through and index of quality of school inputs; and (g) Hypothesistesting. Crosstabulationand regressionanalysis will be used in order to attempt to detectany significanteffects of particular models on students' achievementand attitudes,as follows: (i) The regressionwill be of the general type: Y = f(Model, region, background,individual, and school characteristics),where Y is one of the dependentvariables discussed above; and (ii) To measure the cost-effectivenessof each model, the study will require identificationof the costs of each model, includingsupervision of imnplementation,teacher training, materials, etc.
50. Elementsof Research Proposal. The final researchproposals should include the followingelements: (a) Specificationof main research(evaluation) questions; (b) Design of sample; (c) Design of informationgathering instruments; (d) Definitionof logisticof field work, includingmechanisms to reduce the attrition rate; (e) Definitionof scheduleof field work; (f) Definitionof data processing; (g) Definitionof statistcal models and methodsof analysisto be used. (h) Implementationschedule specifying the tasks to be done and their respective durations. This element should also include report schedule. A report should be producedand deliveredto CONAFE and the Bank after the first two measures. The final report should includethe results from all measures and the cost-effectiveanalysis; and (i) Detailedbudget, includingcosts by activity and type of expenditures,i.e., direct (personneland others) and indirect costs. The implementationschedule -11 1- ANNEX 14 TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR STUDIES and the budgetwould allow the contractto be divided into several phases and paymentsto allow Bank reviewand approvalon intermediarysteps (e.g., questionnaireand test design, sample selection,review of first report).
51. Criteria for Proposal Selection. The criteria for proposalselection includethe pertinencebetween the methodologicala id technicalaspects of the proposal and the specified researchelements; the pertinenceof the scheduleproposed (adequaterelation betweentasks and time proposed for implemenation);and experienceof the researchersin education research, particularly in educationevaluation.
52. Study Coordinationand Preparation. CONAFE,as the agencyresponsible for the proposed project, will coordinatethe experiment/studyin conjunctionwith SEB and SEEs, which will be responsibleof the substantivematters.
53. A specialistwill be hired to serve as study/experimentcoordinator at CONAFE under terms of refrence agreed upon with the Bank. Resourcesmust be availablefor easy mobilizationand frequent visits to the study-relatedactivities in the project states and schools. In the SEEs and SPCUs, liaison personnelmust be selected and trained in a timely manner, in order to cooperatewith the coordinatorin the experimentmonitoring process. The coordinators contract would start in March, 1995 and end with the final report delivery.
54. A consultantwould be hired in February,1995 for four months (under terms of referenceagreed upon with the Bank) to lead the preparationprocess, includingcurriculum, materials and teacher training design. The consultant'sactivities would be based on a close dialogue with the Mexicanauthorities and other information-gatheringstrategies.
55. The followingactivities would be developedby these consultants: (a) TeachingExperiment. The study will be conductedas a step-by-step assessmentof an actual teachingexperiment taking place in project schools and classroomsduring the school years of 1995-96and 1996-97. A curriculum will be designed,teachers will be trainedon the selectedmethodologies, and instructiomnalmaterials have to be developed,as follows: (i) CurriculumDesign a. A curriculumwill be developedby SEB and CONAFE for the first, third, and sixth grades, and the necessary equipment purchasedor made. Referencehas to be made to the best examplesof modem or hands-onscience teachingmethods available. b. To help SEB design such curriculum, it is recessary to gather informationon the best experiencescarried out (mainly in Latin America)in scienceteaching at prinmryeducation level. C. Tvo differentapproaches to scienceteaching at this level would be selectedto be tested in the schools. The final report would recommend(with justificationbased on cost-effectiveness)the best one to be applied to the Mexicanschools. -112 - ANNEX 14 TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR STUDIES (ii) TeacherTraining a. Current teachers in differenttypes of project schools will be selectedto be adequatelyand timelytrained to play their roles as expectedin their respectiveschools and classrooms. b. Twotwo-week (80 hours each) training sessions will take place in August, 1995; and August, 1996. A detailed programfor the teacher trainingprograms must be agreed upon with the Bank. c. Trainingmust be given by experiencedtrainers (acceptableto the Bank) in terns of content and methodology. Each trainer specializesin one of the two approaches. (iii) InstructionalMaterials and Guides. Grade-relatedmaterials (according to the curriculum)must be developed(made, printed, purchased). Concrete experienceand local experimentsmust be emphasizedover "bookish"description and formulation.Simple kits must be bought or locally developed. (b) SchoolSelecidon. A random sample of 270 (180 experiment + 90 control) classroomswill be selected (and confirmedby an agreement)to participatein the study, along the followinglines: (i) In each of the selected states (about 4) a set of representative(first, third and six-graders;peri-urban, rural, indigenousschools, etc.) classroomswould be selected in order to achievea total four-state figure of 180 experimentclassrooms; (ii) The 90 control classroomsshould be locatedeither in the same school as a correspondingexperiment classroom or in a comparableschool of the same municipalityor state; (ii) Each study school and classroomneeds to be monitoredeither by the national coordinatoror the state coordinator. An early visit should be paid to each selectedschool to recommendthe experimentand support the science teacher; (iv) Supervisorsand school principalsmust be oriented (during their training programsor during visits to their schools)on the objectives and strategiesof the experiment. Their support is extremely important for the success of the study in the schools; (v) Some occasionalvisitors would be invited (possiblyfor a three-day seminar with educationauthorities and the consultant)to: discuss the strategiesand results of their curricular, methodologicaland teacher tning experiences;make specificrecommendations on these topics; and identifya basic bibliographyon the subject; and (vi) A mid-termevaluation would be undertakenin June 1996 to assess the experimentdevelopment and make recommendations. CONAFE, other SEP sectors, three externalconsultants, representatives of the ten state SPCUs, and approximatelyten project teacherswould take part in this evaluation. (c) Calendar (i) Consultant,and Mexicancounterparts selected: January 1995 (ii) Consultantstarts preparation:February 1995 -113 - ANNEX 14 TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR STUDIES (iii) International(Latin Amer.) experiencesdiscussed: February 1995 (iv) Coordinatorhired (CONAFE):March 1995 - October 1997 (v) Seminar for experiencereporting: March 1995 (vi) Study schools selected: April 1995 (vii) Trainersselected: May 1995 (viii) Curriculumdesigned and equipmentselected: Ju 1995 (ix) Teachersselected to be trained: June 1995 (x) Trainingstrategies developed: July 1995 (xi) First teacher training session:August 1995 (xii) Experimenttakes place from September1995 throughJune 1997; Second teacher trainingsession: August 1996 (xiii) Progress reportsdue: 1995 - June, October; 1996 - February,June, October; 1997-February, June (xiv) Final report due: October 1997 (xv) Actionplan developedby SEP: June 1998 -114 - ANNEX 15 TEACHERINCENTIVES PROGRAM TEACHERINCENTIVES PROGRAM
1. Objectives. The program seeks to promoteregular attendanceby teachers, so that through their regular presence in the classroom,quality teaching will be fostered. This is particularly targetedto isolatedschools in rural and indigenouscommunities, which have identifiedproblems of teacher -bsenteeismor frequentturnover.
2. Goals. The subcomponentintends to provideapproximately 21,100 teacher/years worth of incentivesto approximately7,000 teachers in the project states over the course of the project life, as illustratedin TAble1:
Tbble1: Teacher/YearsSelected by State and ProjectYear
94195 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 Ibtal Caampeche 67 134 201 268 335 1,005 Durango 63 126 188 251 314 942 Guanajuato 97 195 292 390 488 1,462 Jalisco 238 476 713 951 1,189 3,567 Michoacan 320 640 961 1,281 1,601 4,803 Puebla 147 293 440 586 733 2,199 SanLuis Potosi 42 84 127 169 211 633 TIabasco 74 148 221 295 369 1,107 Veracruz 333 665 998 1,330 1,663 4,989 Yucatan 28 56 84 112 140 420 Total 1,409 2,817 4,225 5,633 7,043 21,127
3. Desciption. For incentivegranting purposes, "isolatedcommuunities" means those: (a) located beyondat least one-hour walkingdistance off the man roads or two- hour vehicle ride on secondaryroads; and (b) marked bylow incomelevels and lack of basic services.
4. Theincentives can be given to teachers in anytype or levelof teachingposition, with the exceptionof teacherswho alreadyhave another SEP compensationfor workingin small and dispersedcommunities.
5. A bilingualteacher withno formal teachingtitle or licenciatura can be granted the incentives,if the directorof the respectiveNormal Schoolapproves of the grant, and the -115 - ANNEX 15 TEACHERINCENTIVES PROGRAM teacher is committedto continuingthe formal teacher trainingstudies and is willing to submit a progressreport every six months.
6. The incentivewill be linked to the school and not to the teacher. Therefore: (a) more than one teacher per school can be grnted the incentives;and (b) if the teacher leaves that school, he/she will not carry that incentivewith him/her.
7. As soon as they are selected for the program,the teacher is informedand receives complete informationon the programand obligationsimplied.
8. Criteria,for School Seleton. The schools were selected in accordancewith the followingcriteria: (a) General Primary Schools: (i) Schoolsclosed for extremeisolation and the lack of teachers and which are committedto be reopenedupon receivingthe incentive; (ii) Unitary schools in generallocated far awayfrom main roads; (iii) Two-teacherschools in zones of averagemarginality and extremely difficultaccess; and (iv) Three-teacherschools in zones of extreme povertyand difficultaccess with frequentteacher turnover;and (b) IndigenousPrimary Schools: (i) All primary schools; and (ii) The incentiveprogamm can support the creation of new indigenous schools whenjustified by the demand.
9. Role of the School Council. The incentiveswill be grantedto teachers with previous endorsementby the SchoolCoucil of the recipientschool. The SchoolCouncil will monitor and verifythe teacher's attendance. If the Councilagrees, teachers can compensatefor school absencesby givingclasses on weekendsor by extendingthe school year so that the studentscan havethe 200 school days requiredby law.
10. Costs. The monthlyincentive corresponds to N$950 (=US$305) per month or N$11,400 (US$3,650)a year, and the projecteddisbursement is three times per year based on actual teacher attendance. In order to keep up with inflation,the programwill add 10 percent per year to the establishedteacher salary. The incentiveamount will be revised every July by SEP/DGPPP.
11. Startingwith the school year of 1994/1995,the programwill cover 20 percent of the projected number of eligible teachers, so that it can reach all the estimatedeligible teachers by the fifth project year, as outlined in Table2. -116- ANNEX 15 TEACHERINCENTIVES PROGRAM abble2: ¶UacherIncentives by State
BaseCosts (thousands of N$) 1994/95 1995196 1996/97 1997/98 1998/99 Total Unit Cost 11.4 12.6 13.8 15.24 16.8 Campeche 763.8 1,688.4 2,773.8 4,084.32 5,628.0 14,938.3 Duango 718.2 1,582.6 2,599.9 3,825.24 5,275.2 14,001.1 Guanajuato 1,105.8 2,457.0 4,029.6 5,943.60 8,198.4 21,734.4 Jalisco 2,713.2 5,992.6 9,844.9 14,493.24 19,975.2 53,019.1 Michoacan 3,648.0 8,069.0 13,256.3 19,522.44 26,896.8 71,392.6 Puebla 1,675.8 3,694.3 6,069.2 8,930.64 12,314.4 32,684.4 San Luis Potosi 478.8 1,063.4 1,747.1 2,575.56 3,544.8 9,409.7 a'hasco 843.6 1,859.8 3,055.3 4,495.80 6,199.2 16,453.7 Veacruz 3,796.2 8,381.5 13,769.6 20,269.20 27,938.4 74,155.0 Yucatin 319.2 705.6 1,159.2 1,706.88 2,352.0 6,242.9 ToWa 16,062.60 35,494.20 58,305.00 85,846.92 118,322.40 314,031.12 PROJECI AUTHORITYMATRIX
Direction/ Central Central State State-level Local Component Subcomponent Activity Planningj Irmplementation Technical Implementa- Tebhnical Participation Beneficiaries .______I Assistance tion Assistance Huma; ResnarcesDevelopment Trainingof SEP CONAFE, Central SEEs State N/A Teachers& lachers & DGEP & DGEI Technical Technical Principals Administrators Gmup,PAM, Groups Consultants Trainingof SEP CONAFE, Consultants SEEs N/A N/A Supervisors Supervisors DGPPP,DGPRL & DGEP Educational TeachingMaterials & Student SEP CONAFE DGEP,DGEI SEEs N/A Community Teachers& Material Packages & Consultants (distribution) Students Resources Reading Corners SEP & UPE CONAFE DGEP, DGPPP SEEs N/A N/A Teachers& & Consultants Students IndigenousTexts & Materials DGEI CONAPE Consultants SEES N/A Community Indigenous (input) Students astructure Construction- SEP & CAPPCE& N/A State-level N/A N/A Students& Improvement CAPFCE NAFIN CONAFE CAPFCE& Teachers SEES Construction- SEP & N/A N/A SEEs & SOPE & Communities Students& Community SEEs Munici- Statelevel & School Teacbers .______palities CAPFCE Councils Maintenance SEEs N/A N/A Munici- SOPE Communities, Students& palities Supervisors& Teachers School Councils Istitutional Managemt Planning& SEP CONAFE DGPPP, SEEs N/A N/A High-level 0 Strengthening Capacity PolicyAnalysis DGEIR& officialsat P i Consultants central & sa ______~~~~~~~levels ProjectMIS SEP CONAFE DGPPP, SEES Consultants N/A PCU & DOEIR & SPCUs 0 Consultants Direction/ I Central Central State State-level Local Component Subcomponent Activity Planning lImplementation Technical Implementa- Technical Participation Beneficiaries Assistance tion Assistance Education SEB CONAFE Consultants SEEs (liaison N/A Teachers(for SEP Studies for science sciencestudy) study) Project SEP CONAFE Consultants SEES N/A Municilalities Education Promotion Authorities. Students& .______Parents TeacherIncentives SEP CONAFE DGPPP, SEES N/A School Teachers DGPRL& Councils DGEP improvement Supervision SEP CONAFE& N/A SEEs & N/A N/A Supervisors of Supervision Offices CAPPCE State-level System CAPFCE [ravel SEP CONAFE N/A SEEs N/A N/A Supervisors .______lIncentives Books& MaterialsDistribution SEP & CAPFCE& CONALITEG State-level N/A N/A Teachers& NAFIN CONAFE & Consultants CAPFCE& Students
______SEEs ______ProjectAdministraion CONAFE PCU Consultants SPCUs Consultants N/A Project Note: Implementationat the central (CONAFE)and state(SEEs) levels will be carriedout/coordinated by the PCU and SPCUs,respectively.
0 .t illYffI! ORGANIZATIONALSTRUCTURE OF THE PROJECT COORDINATINGUNIT
| &UEOeaeal Director
TechicalAdisor,. Comitteel PCUGeneral fIDordinator
r I -. I .~~~~~~b II _ .tIo.t
Traiming Di4aci Material Inceetives Infrastructawe sdiistrais
-o d41 sti, 4 amdu-Ii
cen :-1~~~~~~~~~~mo~ce~ 2Xt1 4446Xa=:1 ' '''I . ~ 2-
~oduto 'rcimIc4nt . AB3 ; it~~~~Mz ORGANIZATIONALSTRUCTURE OF STATEPROJECr COORDINATION UNITS
| E GeseralDirector
TechnicalAdvisory 1...... Cnittee E
l 5P~~~~~WOeiteral Director
TechniSc Su1 rt
Taierits!as Didactic hterials I rastructure Uo4stration
GeneralPrizary Inceatives DidacticMaterials Og ztion AMo1atingI
I|disenoDs im y superisio ReaditgOrners Procure|Prt Pocuesentc
CAi -121- ANNEX 16 PROJECTMANAGEMENT & FLOW OF FUNDS
0 1~~~~~~
WI!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~aW
X 1 ~~~~a dg if>ut -122- ANNEX 16 PROJECTMANAGEMENT & FLOW OF FUNDS
TERMSOF REFERENCEFOR PCU AND SPCUS
General Principles
1. The organizationof the PCU under PAREBdraws from the experienceaccumulated by the PCU of PARE, particularlyhighlighting the need for: (a) a more horizontal organizationalstructure that promotesempowerment and initiativeat the lower levels; (b) strong emphasison analyticaland qualitativemeasures as opposedto the meeting of rigid preset targets; (c) a higher role for SPCUs given the decentralizationand greater autonomy of SEEs; (d) an improvedmonitoring and evaluationsystem with easily appreciablebenefits, which would prompt usage on a regular basis; and (e) institutionalstrengthening, particularly of financialfunctions (e.g., procurement,accounding, cost control).
2. The proposed organizationalstruture rests on two generalprinciples: (a) small, dynamic units composedof experiencedindividuals of high quality; and (b) an integrationof central- and state-levelactivities along technicaland administrativefunctions, which would facilitateboth a more integratedperspective and faster and more informedaction. The first principle is reflectedis the number of personnelprogrammed at the central level: whereas for PARE(which comprisesfour states)the PCU staff numbered37, the combinedPARE- PAREBunit (which now comprises fourteenstates) only requires68. The costs savings would be passed on to the SPCUs in the form of high salaries to attract high-quality professionals.
3. Specificobjectives of the new structure include: (a) strengtheningof policy and strategicanalysis in support of more informeddecision-making; (b) raising the standardfor operationalexpertise and capabilityof all PCU and SPCU personnel;(c) developingand implementinga project MIS to assist the PCU and SPCUs in the collectionand analysis of data; (d) consolidatingand strengtheningadministrative and financialfunctions; and (e) developingand implementingan integratedprocess monitoringand evaluationsystem to regularly monitorproject activities and results and suggestimprovements therein.
SpecificTerms of Reference
4. The PCU's main duties wouldbe to: (a) manageproject resources,monitor expendituresand arrange for audit accounts;(b) consolidatethe yearly work review and plan of project execution;(c) prepare requiredinformation for the annual and mid-term implementationreviews; (d) liaise with state projectoffices and throughNAFIN with the Bank; (e) managecontracts for technicalassistance and studies; and (f) monitor project objectives,goals, processes,and deadlines. The PCU wouldalso handle, through CONAFE administrativeand technicaldepartments and in collaborationwith the SEEs, planning for procurementof buildings,equipment and materials, includingpreparation of itemizedlists with specificationand tender documents,tender procedures,supervision, quality control and distribution. - 123 - ANNEX 16 PROJECTMANAGEMENT & FLOW OF FUNDS 5. SPCUs would be responsiblefor coordinatingactivities of all participatingagencies and monitoringproject implementationat the state level, with specialemphasis on: (a) implementationof civil works programsincluding contracting; (b) timely acquisitionand distribution of educationalmaterials; (c) implementationand monitoringof the teacher incentivesprogram; and (d) proper functioningof the supervisionsystem. The SPCU Coordinator should come from the respectiveSEE to enhancestate ownershipand participationin the project; whereverpossible, officialspreviously involved in the preparationof the project would be retained in the SPCU so that their experiencecan be easily transferred. At the operationallevel, select state employeeswould be transferredto the SPCUs but would remain on the state payroll. -124- ANNEX 17 PROJECT COSTS
PROJECT COST SUMMARY (US$ muillion)
Local Foreign Total % FE %9,soBase
Human ResourcesDevelopment 99.8 2.6 102.4 2.5% 17.7% Education& MaterialResources Teacher& StudentMaterials 85.6 85.6 171.2 50.0% 29.7% ReadingComners 4.8 2.1 6.9 30.4% 1.2% IndigenousEducation Materials 3.9 2.0 5.9 33.9% 1.0% InfrastructureImprovement 93.8 24.7 118.5 20.8% 20.5% Institutional Strengthening . ManagementCapacity 11.6 5.3 16.9 31.4% 2.9% TeacherIncentives 97.5 0.0 97.5 0.0% 16.9% SupervisionSystem Improvement 16.6 3.4 20.0 17.0% 3.5% DistributionSystem 7.6 2.8 10.4 26.9% 1.8% ProjectAdministration 26.6 1.0 27.6 3.6% 4.8% Base Costs 447.8 129.5 577.3 22.4% 100.0% PhysicalContingencies 5.0 1.4 6.4 21.9% 1.1% Price Contingencies 26.3 6.7 33.0 20.3% 5.7% TotalProject Costs 479.1 137.6 616.7 22.3% 106.8%
Note: Figures may not add up due to rounding. SUMMARYACCOUN1n BY PROJECTCOMPONENT (US$ million) ______[HREduc. ReadingIndg InaSt. Mgmt. Teacher Supn. Distr. Admin- Phys. Phys. Price Price Devel.I Mat'ls. ComersMalsj Improy. Cpcty. Incent. System Systemj istration Total Cont % Cont. [Cont. % Cont. INVESTMENTCOSTS1 Civil Works-1- -- Classrooms& Schools 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 95.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 95.1 1 5.0 14.8 6.7 20.0 Warehouses& Spn Ofcs 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 I 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.3 7.6 0.0 17.9 1 5.0 2.8 6.8 3.8 Equipment& Furniture 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.3 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.6 0.9 12.1 5.0 1.9 5.9 2.2 Vehicles 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 I 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 1.3 0.3 2.8 5.0 0.4 6.1 0.5 Didactic Materials 0.0 70.7 6.9 4.1 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 82.1 0.0 0.0 3.8 9.8 Training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Teacher& AdmnTrainitng 99.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 99.1 0.0 0.0 5.4 16.7 Manaement Training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.2 TrainingMaterials 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 1 3 6 0.2 Promotion 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 I 0.0 10.3 0.0O 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.3 0.0 0.0 5.2 1.7 TechnicalAssistance 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -0.0- -- LocalConsultants 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 3.3 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.3 Int'l Consultants 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 Studies 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.4 TotalINVESTMENT COSTS 100.7 70'.7 6.9 5.9 104.4 16.9 0.0. 12.7 9.5 1.3 329.1 1.9 19.9 5.4 55.8 RECURRENTCOST 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0I StudentPackages 0.0 100.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ~100.5 0.0 0.0 5.2 16.5 IncrementalSalaries 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.5 23.5 1 0.0 0.0 5.5 4.0 TeacherIncentives 0.0 0.0 0.0. 0.0 0.0 0.0 97.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 97.5 1 0.0 0.0 6.9 21.0 Supportto Supervisoms 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.3 0.0 0.0 6.3 1 0.0 0.0 5.8 1.2 TravelAllowances 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 0.0 0.0 5.3 0.3 Operaion & Maintenance 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Civil Works 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.0 13.7 0.0 0.0 7.8 3.3 Vehicles 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.8 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 7.6 0.3 Equipment& Furniur 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 7.9 0.24 Odier OperatingCosts 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 2.8 0.0 0.0 5 3 0.5 7btalRECURRENT COSTS 1.7 100.5 0.0 0.0 14.0 0.0 975 7. 0.9 26.3 248.2 0.0 0.0 6.1 47.2 lbtal BASELINECOST 102.4 171.2 6.9 5.9 118.4 16.9 97.5 20.0 10.4 27.6 577.3 1.1 0.0 5.7 103.0- PhysicalContinencies 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.2 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.5 0.1 6.4-- -- - Price Contingencies 5.5 1 7.9 0.1 0.3 8.1 0.8 6.7 1.3 0.7 1.5 33.0 1.2 1.3- TobtalPROJECr COSTS 107.9 179.2 7.1 66.2 131.7 117.6 10. 219 1. 2.2 6.7 .1 12 54 130 lhxes 00 17.9 0.7 0.6 113.2 1.13 5. . . . 4. . . Ibreign Exchange 28 89.6 2.1 2.>74 55 00 38 3. . 3. . . Note: Figuresmay not add up dueto rounding. z -126- ANNEX 17 PROJECTCOSTS
SUMMARYACCOUNTS BY YEAR (US$ million, contingenciesincluded)
11994/95 1995/96 1996/97 1997/98 1998/991 Total INVESTMENTCOSTS Civil Workcs . Classrooms& Schools 0.0 25.7 26.3 26.9 27.4 106.3 Warehouses& Spn Ofcs 0.0 4.6 5.0 5.0 5.3 19.9 Equipment& Furniture 1.8 2.8 2.9 3.0 2.9 13.4 Vehicles 0.0 1.0 0.8 0.7 0.6 3.1 DidacticMaterials 3.9 38.8 39.6 1.7 1.3 85.3 Training Teacher& Admn Training 22.6 13.6 22.9 21.3 23.9 104.3 ManagementTraining 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.1 1.8 TrainingMaterials 0.0 1.1 0.2 0.2 0.0 1.5 Promotion 1.2 3.1 2.6 1.9 2.0 10.8 TechnicalAssistance Local Consultants 1.1 0.9 1.2 0.2 0.1 3.5 Int'l Consultants 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Studies 0.5 0.7 2.0 0.0 0.0 3.2 TotalINVESTMENT COSTS 31.8 92.8 103.9 61.0 63.6 353.1 RECURRENTCOSTS . Student Packages 18.1 23.8 18.9 25.0 19.9 105.7 IncrementalSalaries 4.3 4.3 5.3 5.4 5.5 24.8 Teacher Incentives 6.5 13.3 20.5 28.0 35.9 104.2 Supportto Supervisors 0.6 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.6 6.7 TravelAllowances 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 1.9 Operation-&Maintenance ______Civil Works 0.0 1.4 2.9 4.5 6.1 14.9 Vehicles 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.6 1.6 Equipment& Furniture 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.7 Other OperatingCosts 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 3.0 TotalRECURRENT COSTS 30.4 45.6 50.5 66.1 70.9 263.5 TotalPROJECT COSTS 62.2 138.4 154.4 127.1 134.5 616.7
Note: Figuresmay not add up due to rounding. -127 - ANNEX 17 PROJECT COSIS
SUMMARY ACCOUNTS COST SUMMARY (US$million)
LOCal Foreipn Total % FE % Total
INVESTMENT COSTS Civil Works _ Classrooms& Schools 76.1 19.0 95.1 20.0% 16.5% Warehouses& Spn Ofcs 14.3 3.6 17.9 20.1% 3.1% Equipment& Furniture 8.4 3.6 12.0 30.0% 2.1% Vehicles 1.4 1.4 2.8 50.0% 0.5% DidacticMaterials 42.5 39.6 82.1 48.2% 14.2% Trainiug I Teacher & Admn Training 97.2 2.0 99.2 -2.0% 17.2% ManagementTrining 1.4 0.3 1.7 17.6% 0.3% TrainingMaterials 1.3 0.3 1.6 18.8% 0.3% Promotion 6.2 4.1 10.3 39.8% 1.8%
Technical Assistance ______Local Consultants 3.3 0.0 3.3 0.0% 0.6% Int'l Consultants 0.0 0.0 0.0 ERR 0.0% Studies 2.5 0.6 3.1 1i.4.- 0.5% TotalINVESTMENT COSTS 254.6 74.6 329.2 22.7% 57.0% RECURRENT COSTS StudentPackages 50.2 50.2 100.4 50.0% 17.4% IncrementalSalaries 23.4 0.0 23.4 0.0% 4.1 % TeacherIncentives 97.5 0.0 97.5 0.0% 16.9% Supportto Supervisors 6.4 0.0 6.4 0.0% 1.1% TravelAllowances 1.4 0.3 1.7 17.6% 0.3% Operation & Maintenance Civil Works 11.0 2.7 13.7 19.7% 2.4% Vehicles 0.7 0.7 1.4 50.0% 0.2% Equipment& Furniture 0.5 0.2 0.7 28.6% 0.1% Other OperatingCosts 2.2 0.6 2.8 21.4% 0.5% Total RECURRENTCOSTS 193.3 54.7 248.0 22.1% 43.0% Total BASELINECOSTS 447.9 129.3 577.2 22.4% 100.0% PhysicalContingencies 5.0 1.4 6.4 21.9% 1.1% Price Contingencies 26.3 6.7 33.0 20.3% 5.7% TotalPROJECT COSTS 479.2 137.5 616.7 22.3% 106.8%
Note: Figuresmay not add up due to rounding. -128- ANNEX 17 PROJECTCOSTS
COMPONNENSBY YEAR .1994/9519S/96 1996/971997/981 1998/99 Total Total l____I I II N$ US$ HuimanResources Development 71.4 46.0 69.9 63.6 68.7 319.6 102.4 Education& Material Resources Teacher& Student Materials 56.2 182.7 166.7 72.4 56.2 534.2 171.2 ReadingCorners 11.6 5.9 4.1 0.0 0.0 21.6 6.9 IndigenousEducation Materials 2.3 3.7 4.8 3.8 3.8 18.4 5.9 InfrastructureImprovement 2.5 85.4 89.7 94.1 97.8 369.5 118.4 InstitutionalStrengthening ManagementCapacity 9.0 13.9 16.2 7.4 6.1 52.6 16.9 TeacherIncentives 20.3 40.6 60.8 81.1 101.4 304.2 97.5 SupervisionSystem Improvement 2.0 14.0 15,5 15.5 15.3 62.3 20.0 DistributionSystem 0.0 7.7 8.0 8.2 8.7 32.6 10.4 Project Administration 17.8 16.1 17.4 17.4 17.4 86.1 27.6 Base Costs 193.1 416.0 453.1 363.5 375.4 1801.1 577.3
PhysicalContingencies 0.3 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 19.9 6.4 Price Contingencies 1.2 10.6 23.3 28.4 39.5 103.0 33.0 TotalProject Costs 194.6 431.5 481.3 396.8 419.8 1924.0 616.7
Note: Figuresmay not add up due to rounding. 129- ANNEX 18 PROJECT DISBURSEMENTS
WITHDRAWALSOF THE PROCEEDSOF THE LOAN
Amount of the Category Loan Allocated Percent of Expenditures (expressedin US$ to be financed million equivalent) I. Civil Works CAPFCE 32.0 50% Community Model 24.0 50% 2. Equipmentand Furniture 8.0 100% of foreign expendituresand 90% of local expenditures
'. Educational Books & Didactic 70.0 90% Materials 4. Student Educational Packages 50.0 75% of expendituresto an aggregate of US$25 (non-durable goods) million; 50% of expendituresto an aggregate of US$45 million; and 25% for the remainder 5. Training Teacher Training 95.0 100% ManagementTraining 1.8 100% Training Materials 1.7 100% 6. TechnicalAssistance & Studies 6.7 100% 7. Teacher Incentives& Support 55.3 75% of expendituresto an aggregate of US$20 to Supervisors million; 50% of expendituresto an aggregate of US$50 million; and 25% for the remainder 8. incremental Operating Costs 27.5 75% of expendituresto an aggregateof US$15 (salaries, travel allowances, million: 50% of expendituresto an aggregate of operation & maintenance. US$25 million; and 25% for the remainder office supplies & materials) 9. Unallocated 40.0 Total 412.0 -130- ANNEX 18 PROJECTDISBURSEMENTS
ESIIMATED SCHEDULE OF DISBURSEMENtI (in US$ million)
BankFiscal| Quarter Enig| Disbursed Cumulative Dish.as % Balanceof t _Year DuringQuarter Amount of Total Loan 94 June 30, 1994 30.0 30.0 7 382.0 Sept. 30, 1994 J 11.5 41.5 370.5 95 Dec. 31, 1994 13.5 55.0 357.0 March 31, 1995 13.5 68.5 343.5 June 30, 1995 13.5 82.0 20 330.0 Sept. 30, 1995 22.0 104.0 308.0 Dec. 31, 1995 22.0 126.0 286.0 96 March 31, 1996 22.0 148.0 264.0 June 30, 1996 22.0 170.0 41 242.0 Sept. 30, 1997 28.0 198.0 214.0 Dec. 31, 1997 28.0 226.0 186.0 March 31, 1998 28.0 254.0 158.0 June 30, 1998 28.0 282.0 68 130.0 Sept. 30, 1998 20.0 302.0 110.0 Dec. 31, 1998 20.0 322.0 90.0 98 March 31, 1999 20.0 342.0 70.0 June 30, 1999 20.0 362.0 88 50.0 Sept. 30, 1999 20.0 382.0 30.0 99 Dec. 31, 1999 20.0 402.0 10.0 March 31, 2000 10.0 412.0 100.0 0.0 al Includes SpecialAccount deposit of US$25.0million and retroactivefinancing of up to US$6.0 million for eligible expendituresincurred on or after October31, 1993. PROJECT MONITORING INDICATORS
A. PROJECT-SPECIFICPROCESS INDICATORS
Componenti Sub- Activity | Sub-Activity Unit | YearI Year2 Year3 Year4 Year5 I Component 7794-6/95 7/95-6/96196 -6/97 7197-6/98 7198-6199 HumanRisources Trainingof Teachers particip. 57,550 29,337 57,550 57,550 57.550 Developmxent Teachers & Administmtors particip. 7,784 945 N/A IndigenousSchool Teachers particip. 6,448 9,168 8,029 1,455 6,448 :______Indigenous School Administrators particip. 1,081 220 N/A Educational Teaing Materials& Student Distributeteaching materials (one- Material EducationalPackages time investmentper school) Resources Campeche package- N/A 199 200 N/A Durango school 427 428 Guanajuato 445 445 Jalisco 1,056 1,057 Michoacan 1,180 1,180 Puebla 554 555 San Luis Potosi 873 874 TIbasco 602 603 Veracruz 1,278 1280 Yucatan 333 335 Distributeteaching materials (one- time investmentper 2-grade cycle; multigradeis one cycle) Campeche package- N/A 855 855 N/A Durango cycle 2,355 2,353 O Guanajuato 2,353 2,352 Z Jalisco 3,069 3,066 Michoacan 5,429 5,428 Puebla 2,753 2,751 z San Luis Potosi 2,258 2,256 Cl Tabasco 3,227 *3,226 Z Veracruz 5,413 5,411 Z Yucatan _ 2,112 2,112 . _ g __ _ >t-X
Notes: 1. Percentagesindicate degree of fulfillmentof requiredfall complement(e.g., percenrageof staffinggoals) unless specificallyindicated in the unit cohlmnthat they are cumulative(i.e., add up to 100% overthe life of the project). 2. Datesin parenthesesindicate anticipated dates. 1 Component Sub- Activity SubActivity Unit YrYear 2 Year3 Year4 YearS Component 7/94-6/95 | 7/95-6196 7I96-6/97 77/97-6/98 7/98-6/99 Distributestudent packages Campeche package 42,970 42,970 42,970 42,970 42,970 Durango 46,633 46,633 46,633 46,633 46,633 Guanajuato 72,469 72,469 72,469 72,469 72,469 Jalisco 155,491 155,491 155,491 155,491 155,491 Michoacan 341,971 341,971 341,971 341,971 341,971 Puebla 157,898 157,898 157,898 157,898 157,898 San Luis Potosi 125,822 125,822 125,822 125,822 125,822 Tabasco 178,957 178,957 178,957 178,957 178,957 Veracruz 275,706 275,706 275,706 275,706 275,706 Yucatan 122,766 122,766 122,766 122,766 122,766 ReadingCorners (RC) DistributeRC packages(combined) Campeche package 167 414 294 Durango 43 1,234 236 N/A Guanajuato 62 1,124 654 Jalisco 410 2,460 1,640 Michoacan 1,242 2,598 1,894 Puebla 560 806 752 San Luis Potosi 505 1,756 1,198 Tabasco 520 1,354 1,000 Veracruz 835 1,842 1,976 Yucatan 292 314 698 IndigenousTexts & Materials Design& test materials Grades 1-2 end dates 6/30/95 Grades3-4 6/30/96 Grades5-6 6/30/97 Produce& distributematerials nbe Grades 1-2 numbr NIA 55,045 55,045 55,045 55,045 0 Grades 3-4 Of41234 41,234 41,234 Grades 5-6 textbooks 41282066 281 066 Infrastructure Operational FinalizeOperational Manual & Conditionof Z Improvement Manual& handbooksfor self-help end date effectiveness handbooks construction& maintenance
X
Notes: 1. Percentagesindicate degree of fulfillmentof requiredfull complement(e.g., percentageof staffinggoals) unlessspecifically indicated in the unit columnthat they are cumulative(i.e., add up to 100%over the life of the project). 2. Datesin parenthesesindicate anticipated dates. .Component Sub- Activity Sub-Activity Unit Year1 Year2 Year3 Year4 Year 5 Component 7/94-6/95 7/95-6/96 7196-6/97 7/97-6/98 7/98-6/99 Construction/ Discussfinal construction/ 8/31/94 Annual Mid-Term Annual Annual Rehabilitation rehabilitationmodalities & list of end date 10/31/94 Review Review Review Review subprojects for the coming year Build & equip new classrooms Campeche number 39 39 39 39 Durango of class- 40 81 81 81 41 Guanajuato rooms 76 76 76 76 Jalisco 92 92 92 89 Michoacan 145 145 145 145 Puebla 75 120 120 120 39 San Luis Potosi 43 43 43 43 Tabasco 47 49 48 49 Veracruz 76 145 145 145 69 Yucatan 37 37 37 38 Replace& equip classrooms Jalisco number N/A 75 75 75 75 Michoacan of class- 82 82 82 82 Puebla rooms 11 11 11 9 San Luis Potosi 37 37 37 39 Tabasco 47 47 47 46 Rehabilitate& equipclassrooms Campeche number 69 69 69 70 Jalisco of class- 60 60 60 60 Puebla rooms 42 84 84 84 38 Tabasco 35 70 70 70 35 Yucatan _ 120 120 120 120 O
Maintenance Design maintenance program end date 8/31/94 _ Implementcommunity maintenance % of I I program schools N/A 25% 50% 75% 100% z ._ (cumul..)_ J _ 7 Ci>
X
Notes: 1. Percentagesindicate degree of fulfillmentof requiredfull complement(e.g., percentageof staffinggoals) unlessspecifically indicated in the unit columnnthat they are cumulative(i.e., add up to 100%over the life of the project). 2. Datesin parenthesesindicate anticipated dates. Component Sub-' Activity | Sub-Activity | Unit Year1 Year2 Year3 7 Year 4 Year 5 ______Component ______1____ 7/94-6/95 J7195-6/96j7/96-6/97 7/97-6/98 j7/98-6/99 Planning& Carry out training courses 50 42 44 |I 6 PolicyAnalysis X Project MIS & Installproject MIS end date 12/31/94 ProjectMIS fully operational praoess Designprocess evaluationsystem end date 9/30/94 system Implementprocess eval. system start date 12/31/94 Processevaluation system fully operational Conductsample testing miestone Samnpletest Test in 6/96
Conduct IEAP test milestDne Conduct ts date Education PreschoolEducation start/end 9/94-8/95 Studies dates SecondaryEducation Assessment start/end 9/94-8/95 Dropout dates 9/94-8/95 FinancialImplications 9/94-8/95 Teacler Attitudes 7/95-6/96 EffectiveSchools 7/95-6/96 EnvironmentalEducation start/end 7/94-6/95 dates ScienceEducation start/end 2/95-12/97 dates Discussstudy results & agree on follow-upaction plans w/Bank PreschoolEducation end dates N/A Ann. Review Z SecondaryEducation (5) Ann. Review M-T Review Z EnvironmentalEducation M-T Review ScienceEducation Ann. Review M-T Review Ann. Review Ann. Rev. Z Project Implementpromotional campaign 100% 100% 100% 100% 1% C) Promotion Z
Notes: 1. Percentagesindicate degree of fulfillmentof requiredfull complement(e.g., percentageof staffinggoals) unlessspecifically indicated in the unit columnthat they are cumulative(i.e., add up to 100%over the life of the project). 2. Datesin parenthesesindicate anticipated dates. Component Sub- Activity Sub-Activity Unit Year I Year 2 | Year 3 Year 4 Year S Component J 7/94-6/95 | 7/95-6/96 7196-6/97 7/97 6/98 7/98-6/99 Teacher Incentives Implement incentives program Campeche number 67 134 201 268 335 Durango of 63 126 188 251 314 Guanajuato teachers 97 195 292 390 488 Jalisco receiving 238 476 713 951 1,189 Michoacan incentives 320 640 961 1,281 1,601 Puebla 147 293 440 586 733 San Luis Potosi 42 84 127 169 211 Tabasco 74 148 221 295 369 Veracruz 333 665 998 1,330 1,663 Yucatan 28 56 84 112 140 Improvement Supervision Build & equip supervision offices of Supervision Offices Campeche number 6 5 5 5 System Durango 5 9 9 9 3 Guanajuato 4 5 5 4 Jalisco 20 21 21 20 Michoacan 22 22 22 22 Puebla 15 15 15 15 San Luis Potosi 15 15 15 15 Tabasco 10 10 10 9 Veracruz 18 19 19 19 Yucatan 11 10 10 10 Build & equip sector chiefs' offices Campeche number N/A 1 2 1 1 Durango 1 2 2 1 Guanajuato 1 I 1 0 0 Jalisco 4 4 4{ 2 Michoacan 3 4 . 3 Puebla 3 2 2 San Luis Potosi 2 3 2 2 Tabasco 1 2 1 1 Veracruz 2 2 2 2 Yucatan I 2 2 2 - Z
Notes: 1. Percentages indicate degree of fulfillment of required full complemert (e.g., percentage of staffinggoals) unless specifically indicated in the unit colunm that they are cumnulative(i.e., add up to 100% over the life of the project). 2. Dates in parentheses indicate anticipated dates. Component Sub- Activity Sub-Activity Unit Year1 Year2 Year3 J Year4 Year5 Component I|I__ 7/94-6/95 7/95-6/96 7/96-6/97 7/97-6/98 7/98-6199 Travel Grant incentivesto supervisors Incentives Campeche person- 15 39 39 39 39 Durango years 32 68 68 68 68 Guanajuato 17 36 36 36 36 Jalisco 68 152 152 152 152 Michoacan 70 155 155 155 155 Puebla 26 57 57 57 57 San Luis Potosi S0 113 113 113 113 Tabasco 34 76 76 76 76 Veracruz 67 150 150 150 150 Yucatan 35 80 80 80 80 Grant incentivesto sectorchiefs Campeche person- 5 10 10 10 10 Durango years 6 13 13 13 13 Guanajuato 2 5 5 5 5 Jalisco 17 33 33 33 33 Michoacan 13 30 30 30 30 Puebla 6 14 14 14 14 San Luis Potosi 7 18 18 18 18 Tabasco 4 10 10 10 10 Veracruz 6 14 14 14 14 Yucatan 6 13 13 13 13 Books& MaterialsDistribution Finalizedistribution and inventory end date 8/31/94 systemsfor all states Build & equip warehouses& number distributionsystems (warehouses of 2 30 29 29 27 : are made up of severalmodules, modules for a total of 68 warehouses) O Implement distribution of materials % N/A 100% 100% 100% 100% _ ProjectAdministration StaffPCU Conditionof PCU fully staffedand TACestablished end date effectiveness 3 StaffSPCUs in states who have Conditionof Q Z signed participationagreements end date effectiveness SPCUs fully staffedand state TACsestablished
Notes: 1. Percentagesindicate degree of fulfillmentof requiredfull complement(e.g., percentageof staffinggoals) unlessspecifically indicated in the unit colunmthat they are cumulative(i.e., add up to 100%over the life of the project). 2. Datesin parenthesesindicate andcipated dates. Componenti Sub- I.Aivity Sub-Activity Unit Year I Year 2 Year3 Year4 Year 5 Component _94-61957__ f7195-6196 7196-6197 7197-6198 7198 699l Sign participation agreements Condition of number effectiveness of states signed w/ at (mile- least 4 states stone (6/30/94) dates) Signed for all states (9/30/94) Conduct project launch seminar Within 2 milestone mos. of date effectiveness (8/31194) Conduct annual reviews end dates N/A 10/31f95 N/A 10/31/97 10/31/98 Conduct mid-term review milestone N/A N/A 10/31196 date _ _ _
3
0 z
0- z c:i
Notes: 1. Percentages indicate degree of fulfillment of required full complement (e.g., percentage of staffing goals) unless specificallyindicated in the unit column that they are cumulative (i.e., add up to 100% over the life of tie project). 2. Dates in parentheses indicate anticipated dates. B. OTHERINPUTS AND QUALITY/OUTCOMEPROXY INDICATORS
Indicator | Unit Year Year2 Year 3 Year4 Year5 Reviewand agreementw/Bank on federaland state budgetary end dates 10/31194 |Annual Mid-Term Annual Annual allocations for the project and for primary education in general |Review Review Review Revie Increasein total federaleducation budget allocatedto primary education Nationwide increasein Campeche allocationto To be reviewedwith the Bank during Octoberof each year, Durango primary starting in 1994 Guanajuato educationin (Annualand Mid-TermReviews) Jalisco real terms Michoacan Puebla San Luis Potosi Tabasco Veracruz Yucatan Increasein state educationbudgets allocated to primary education Campeche increasein Durango allocationto To be reviewedwith the Bank during Octoberof each year, Guanajuato primary starting in 1994 Jalisco educationin (Annualand Mid-TermReviews) Michoacan real terms Puebla San Luis Potosi Tabasco Veracruz Yucatan O Numberof newteachers hired (combinedproject areas) z Of which in multigradeschools number Tobe recordedand reviewedannually i Of which in indigenousschools I . . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~z Numberof new studentsenrolled (combined project areas) Q Of which in multigradeschools number To be recordedand reviewedannually Of which in indigenousschools >
>
Notes: 1. Percentagesindicate degree of fulfillsent of requiredfull complement(e.g., percertageof saffinggoals) unless specificallyindicated in the unit columnthat they are cumuladve(i.e., add up to 100%over the life of the project). 2. Datesin parenthesesindicate anticipated dates. I Indicator Unit Year 1 Year 2 Yar3 Year4 Year5 l Reductionin dropoutrate (combinedproject areas) % decrease In multigradeschools from 1993/94 N/A N/A 1% N/A 2% In indigenous schools baseline Reductionin repetitionrate (combinedproject areas) % decrease In multigradeschools from 1993/94 N/A N/A 2% N/A 3% In indigenous schools baseline _ Percentageof teacherswith at least 3 yearsexperience assigned to lst & % N/A 15% 25% 35% 45% 2nd grdes (combined project areas) Thacherswho stay in assignedschools (combinedproject areas) % N/A 50% 65% 75% 85% Prcentagc of SchoolCouncils established and operationalin % of project 75% 100% 100% 100% 100% communitiesreceiving infrastructure improvement (combined project communities areas) Usageof warehouses % N/A 70% 75% 80% 85% Averagelength of storagein warehouses changefrom N/A decrease decrease decrease decrease previous year _ Wastageof booksand materialsin warehouses % N/A N/A < 7% < 5% < 2%
0 z z
Notes: 1. Percentagesindicate degree of fulfilmentof requiredfull complement(e.g., percentageof staMnggoals) unless speifically indicatedin the unit columnthat they are cumulative(i.e., add up to 100%over the life of the project). 2. Dates in parentheses indicate anticipated dates. -140- ANNEX 20 ANNUAL& MID-TERMREVIEWS ANNUALAND MID-TERMREVIEWS
1. Annual ImplementationReviews. The annual reviewswould be organizedby SEP/CONAFEand the SEEs and would take place in October of each year, starting in 1995, with the participationof SEP/CONAFEand SEEs senior staff, authorities from SHCP and NAFIN, and Bank staff. The purpose of the annual implementationreviews would be to evaluateproject performanceagainst implementationplans and agreed monitoringindicators; provide managementwith feedbackon project achievements,and issues and areas needing improvement. Each reviewwould include: (a) implementationof sector policies as expressedin the Govermnent'sletter of sectorpolicies; (b) reviewof federaland state budgetaryallocations for public educationas per the project implementationindicators; (c) analysis of the previous year's performance(i.e., targets, budgetaryallocations, functioning of implementationarrangements, main issues, and remedialactions to overcomethe constraints);(d) reviewof work plan and budget for the followingyear; (e) modificationsin project design, if needed, to adjust to changingcircumstances; and (f) state-levelmanagement and operationof the decentralizededucation system, i.icluding budgetary allocations. Thus the annual reviewswould providefor on-goingrefinements in project strategiesand plans, consistentwith the overallobjectives of the project.
2. In Augustand October 1994, CONAFE would reviewwith the Bank the proposal for civil works to be carried out under the projectfor 1994 and 1995, respectively;this review process would be repeatedduring each annual review,starting in 1995, and examineall proposals for civil works subprojectsex-ante. Reviewcriteria for constructionand/or rehabilitationof schools and classroomswould be included in an OperationalManual and cover: (a) appropriatelocation as identifiedthrough the agreed targetingcriteria; (b) constructionmodality (CAPFCE or community);(c) meeting of prior requirements(i.e., availabilityof land and of teachersand correspondingbudget allocationsand existenceof School Councils);(d) choice of buildingprototype according to local needs; (e) availabilityof a maintenanceprogram; and (f) in the case of communityconstruction, (i) ability and willingnessof the communityand/or local contractorsto carry out the work and (ii) readiness of municipalitiesto enter into contractualobligations with SEEs and the communityto supervisethe civil works. A further reviewcriteria wouldensure that the share of CAPFCE constructionsubprojects falls within50 percent of all infrastructureimprovement subprojects. For constructionof warehouses,the reviewwould confirm that state-specificdistribution systems,satisfactory to tie Bank, will be implementedin such a way as to ensure a consistentflow of textbooksand educationalmaterials from the new or existingwarehouses to the schools; in addition, the reviewwill assess the states' proposals for maximizinguse of warehousespace, includingoptions for other uses. The August 1994 reviewwould includea specificexamination of the distributionand inventorycontrol systemto ensure that the states' proposalshave been adequatelyintegrated to providea consistentsystem for monitoringand controllingthe flow of materials.
3. The Mid-Term Reviewto be conductedin October, 1996 would followthe same format as the annual implementationreview meetings, but the analysisof project achievements would be expandedwith additionalemphasis on the implementationof: (a) sectoralpolicies, regulatoryframework, and progressof decentralization;(b) results (finalor preliminary)of studies and their recommendations;(c) preliminaryresults of the monitoringand evaluation -141- ANNEX 20 ANNUAL & MID-TERM REVIEWS system; and (d) workingsof the TechnicalAdvisory Committee and effectivenessof inter- institutionalcooperative arrangements. In addition, the mid-termreview would result in an agreed updatedset of targets and actions for the subsequentyears of project implementation. Final terms of referencefor the mid-termreview would be developedand presentedto the Bank for reviewby March 31, 1996. 142- ANNEX 21 SUPERVISION PLAN
PROJECTSUPERVISION PLAN
1. To familiarizePCU and SPCU staff and other concernedauthorities with Bank procedures, a project launch seminarwill be conductedwithin two monthsof loan effectiveness,stressing, inter alia, the Bank's guidelineson procurement,disbursement, and auditing requirements. A computerizedinstructional guide on Bank procedures,currently being developed,will be introduced. This computerizedguide will be further developedby the PCU to include instructionson specificproject componentsand proceduresfor staff use.
2. Due to the large number of project activitiesand areas, there will be two supervision missions each year. The annual and mid-termreviews (Annex 20) would constitutethe main missions; this will occur in October of each year, once federaland state budget allocationshave been made. These reviewswill concentrateon the managerialand institutionalaspects of the project, quantifyingproject progressagainst monitoringindicators (Annex 20), resolvingadministrative bottlenecks, and setting a clear directionfor project activities in the coming year, particularlyas concernsbudgetary and programallocations. Anmnalreviews will have a forward-lookingcharacter, with specialattention paid to civil works and the warehouseand book distributionsystems. The mid-termreview in October 1996 would be more comprehensiveto include in-depthdiscussion of sector policies and other institutionalissues affectingthe implementationof the project. Annualand mid-term reviewswill last two weeks, includingfield visits in the participatingstates for a better assessmentof project progress.
3. Whereas the annual and mid-termreviews will have a strong managementand administrativefocus, supervisionmissions scheduled for April of each year, starting in 1995, would be geared to assess the pedagogicaland communityparticipation elements of the project. Field visits will be scheduled to assess, inter alia: (a) the benefits of the project's training programsfor both teachers and administrators;(b) the qualityand use of textbooks and educationalmaterials (includingReading Corners and textbooksdesigned for indigenous schools); (c) the quality of infrastructuresubprojects (including maintenance); (d) the degree of School Council and communityparticipation; (e) the extent to which parents and influentialcommunity members are awareof the project and are contributingthereto; (f) the effectivenessof the incentivesprograms; and (g) the expandedrole of supervisorsand the effectivenessof the pedagogicalnetwork. Implementationstrategies to improveproject performancewould be discussedwith SPCU staff and local officials. Due to the large number of project areas involved,the projectwould also employ local consultantsto perform periodic field visits and provide technicalassistance to SPCUs, municipalities,School Councils and others as required. Supervisionreports from field visits will be discussed during the annual and mid-termreviews.
4. The mid-termreview in October 1996 will provide an opportunityto update an agreed set of targets and activities in fution of the experiencegathered since project start-up. It is expectedthat by this time, the project MIS and process evaluationsystems will have providedvaluable observations on project performanceas well as recommendationson where improvementsmight be sought. At that time, a new supervisionstrategy may also be devised and implementedas required. - 143 - ANNEX 21 SUPERVISIONPLAN SupervisionSchedule (HeadquartersStaff & InternationalConsultants) mt V1994 199 _ 1996 197-19997 April NIA TaskManager I SW TaskManager I SW Educators(2) 2 SW Educators(2) 2 SW
- o_ectlAunch Archiect I SW Architect I SW August Task Manager 1 SW ImplementationSpec. 1 SW Educator I SW To be ProcurementSpec. I SW Determined DisbursementSpec. I SW Implementation Spec. I SW task Manager 1 SW First AnnualReview Mid-TnrmReview October Educator I SW TaskManager 2 SW TaskManager 2 SW EducationEcon. I SW EducationEcon. 2 SW EducationEcon. 2 SW Architect I SW Educators(2) 4 SW Educators(2) 4 SW FinancialAnal. 1 SW ProcurementSpec. 2 SW Architect 2 SW FinancialAnal. 2 SW ProcurementSpec. 2 SW ImplementationSpec. 2 SW FinancialAnal. 2 SW l______ImplementationSpec. 2 SW Total 1OSW 19SW 20 SW SW______1__ -144 - ANNEX 22 IMPLEMENTATIONSCHEDULE
Task Name ~~~~~19941995 1996 11997 1998 I 999 Task Name OW31_ _4_ 10 31C~IQZQ3Ql4QlU2ZQ3Q4'CllZ3Q0 QiO2 A. HUMANRESOURCES DEVELOPMENTU K Developselection criteria I Implementtrainin program B. EDUCATIONALMATERIAL RESOURCES B.1. Purchase& distributeteachina materials 8.1. Purchase& distributestudentpackages 8.2. ReadingCorners (RC) Selectbooks for RC iI Purchase& distributeRC books -- Developspecial RC books Produce/purchase& distribute special RtC booksT 8.3. IndigenousBooks & Materials** U DevelopInd. material/Grades1 & 2j Test ind. materials/Grades;1 & 2I Produce& distributeIn. materials/GradesI & 2 Developind. material/Grades 3 & 4 Test ind.materials/Grades 3 & 4 I I Produce& distributeind. materials/Grades3 & 4 t Developind. material/Grades5 & 6i II Testind. materials/Grades5 &6 Produce& distributeind. materials/Grades5 & 6II I Ii~ 5.4.infrastructure Improvements lEU lm i miin ii Ei Developschool prototypes I I Develop0perational Manual &handbooks I I 11 Finalize0perational Manual & Handbooks j I i i l! L FormnSchool Councils- Reviewof schoolconstruction/rehabilitation for 1994 FI Reviewof schoolconstruction/rehabilitation for 1995 Constructionlrehabilitation Establishmaintenance programs C. INSTITUTIONALSTRENGTHENING C.1. ManagementCapacity C.1.(a) ManagementTraining Developtraining programI ItI Devetopselection crieriaI Conduct training . _I___ C.1.(b) ProjectMIS Conduictinformation needs study EmnplementMIS MISfully operationalj j C.l db) Monitoring& Evaluation(ME) System UUU*J m Developproposal for M&E system EstablishM&E system M&Esystem fully operational I I ImplementM&E system C.1.(c) EducationStudies Finalizeconsultant proposals Condc pecolstudy II Reviewof results& recommendations Conductsecondary education studies liii As-sessmentof currentstate I i Reviewof results&recommendations I Socioeconomicanalysis of dropouts Reviewof results& recommendations II I
Financialimplications of 9-yearprogram I Reviewof results& recommendations Workingconditions of teachers& supevsr Reviewof results&recommendations I I EffectiveschoolsI - 145 - ANNEX 22 IMPLEMENTATIONSCHEDULE
Effective schools Review of results & recommendations Conductenvironmental education study Reviewof results & recommendations Review of results & recommendations- C.1 Ad)Project PromotionEM UK Designpromotional program Conductpromoltion C.2. TeacherIncentives U Identify incentives schools Grant incentives C.3. Improvementof Supervision C.3.fa) RedefineSupervisors! Role C.3.(b)Supervision Offices m E Un U E E E *UU Review supervisionoffices constructionfor 1994 A Review supervisionoffices constructionfor 1995 A Build & equip superv4sionoffices 1-T C.3.(c) GrantTravel Incentives C.3.fd) PurchaseVehicles C.4. Books & MaterialsDistribution System Determinewarehouse locations Review warehouseconstruction for 1994 A Review warehouseconstruction for 1995 A Build & equifpwarehouses Purchasevehicles C.5.Project Adminirstration U Establishcentral PCU Finalizeparticipaton agreements Have participationagreements signed In 4 states Establishstate SPCUsin participatingstates Meet conditionsof effectiveness Review of infrastructure& distributon SystemsA Annual Review Year 1I Mid-TernmReviewA Annual Review Year 3A Annual Review Year4 A
Milestone A Summary -146 - ANNEX 23 LIST OF DOCUMENTS IN PROJECTFILE
LIST OF DOCUMENS IN PROJECTFILE
A. Studies and Reportson the Project Arango, M., 1993. Estudio Diagn6stico Sobre Participacion Social en Escuelas Pimarias. Perspectivas para el Programa PAREB, CONAFE-World Bank, Mexico. Behrnan, Jere R., 1990. The Action of Human Resourcesand Povertyon One Another, The World Bank, Washington,D.C.
Estados Unidos Mexicanos, 1992. Acuerdo Nacional piara la Modernizacion de la Educaci6n Bdsica. Mexico, May 18, 1992. Ezpeleta, Justa, 1993. Programa para Abatir el Rezago Educativo. Evaluaci6n Cualitativa del Impacto. Centro de Investigaci6n y de Estudios Avanzados del Instituto Politecnico Nacional, Mexico City. Gardu8lo, Le6n, 1993. Reporte de Evaluaci6n del Programa Para Abatir el Rezago Educativo - Estado de Guerrero, CONAFE-World Bank, (Vols. 1 & 2), Mexico. Gonzalez, Guillermo, 1993. Diagn6stico Sobre Refetici6n y Deserci6n. Estudio de Caso en SeisEscuelas de Oaxaca, CONAFE-World Bank, Mexico. Hicks, E., 1993. Estudio Evaluativo Sobre Actualizaci6n de Maestros e Incentivos al Docente del Programa Para Abatir el Rezago Educativo. PARE, CONAFE-World Bank, Mexico. Molina, Z., 1993. Andlisis de la Situaci6n Actual del Desarrollo del Pogranma Para Abatir el Rezago Educativo (PARE) en el Estado de Oaxaca, CONAFE-World Bank, Mexico. Myers, R. G., 1993. School ftgetition and Dropout. Case Studiesof iWo Rural Schools in the State of Oaxaca. Mexico. Report preparedfor the WorldBank. Pscharopoulos, G. and Ng. Y., 1992. Earnings and Education in Latin America. Assessg Priorities for School Investment.World Bank ResearchWorking Paper 1056. Rumbaitis, M. and F. Rojas, 1993. Estudio Diagnostico Sobre Repeticion y Desercion en Escuelas Marginadas de Oaxaca CONAFE-World Bank. Schiefelbein,E., 1991. Outputof the SMMG Model with Data from the GDPPB. UNESCO-OREALC,Siri System, Santiago,Chile, June 1991. SEP, 1993. La General de Educaci6n, SEP, Diaio Oficial de la Federaci6n, Distrfito Federal, Mexico, July 13, 1993. SEP, 1993. Sistematizacion de a Evaluacion Educativa para Elevar la Calidad de la Educaci6n en los Estados GSECED)(Propuesta). DGEIR. SEP, 1993. Propuesta de Investigaci6n - Meaoramiento v Desarrollo de la Educaci6n Secundaria. SEP, 1993. Investigaci6n. Atenci6n a la Demanda de Educacion Preescolar v Secundaria £1971-72. 1981-82 a 1992-93 - 147 - ANNEX 23 LIST OF DOCUMENTS IN PROJECTFILE
SEP, 1992. CompendioEstadistico del GastoEducaivo. 199. DGPPP. SEP, 1992. CompendioEstadistico por EntidadFederativa. 1992. DGPPP. SEP, 1992. EstadisticaBdsica del SistemaEducativo Nacional. Inicio de Cursos 1991-1992. DGPPP. SEP, 1990. ftntuario de EstadisticaEducativa-Indiena DGEI. SEP, 1989. PraEramapara la Modernizaci6nEducativa 1989-1994. V 1. Mexico, Poder EjecutivoFederal.
B. General Studies and Reports Carison, S., 1991. Transformingthe ViCiOUSCircle: The Costs and Savingsof School Inefficiencyin Mexico - A Viewfrom LATHR,No. 8, The WorldBank. INEGI, 1992. Censo de Poblaci6nde 1990, Mexico. Levy, S., 1991. PovertyAlleviation in Mexico, WorldBank SWP No. 679, 1991. Palafox, J.C., J. Prawda,and E. Velez, 1992. Primary School Quality in Mexico - A View from LATHR, No. 33, The World Bank. WorldBank, 1992. Social Indicatorsof Development,1991-92. WorldBank, 1991. Basic Educationin Mexico: Trends.Issues and Policy Reconmmendations.Report No. 8930-ME, 1991. World Bank, 1991. Mexico in Transition:Towards a New Role for the Public Sector. ReportNo. 8770-ME,1991. WorldBank, 1993. WorldDevelopment Report - 1993. UNESCO,1991. WorldPopulation Projections - 1992-93.
C. OtherDocuments Govermnentof Mexico- Letterof SectorPolicies, March 4, 1994. CONAFE, 1993. Centrode Trabajocon Incentivoa Docentes- CicloEscolar 1994-1995, Programapara Abatirel Rezagoin Educaci6nBdsica, Noviemfbre 30, 1993. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA MEXICO SECONDPRIMARY
t;-. ,,,,,,,,,,p,s r ,8,< EDUCATIONPROJECT
h. Pt& ,:COMPONETSAL 94TfUflONt SW~TI0HENHGCOMPOE ONL J11, (~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FRSPMARAYEDUCATION FOJSCa STATEUI
''- '' ' SEA!CAPifALZ - -+ t ^ tm@Rb O , 0 MPA ACSMSOR TOWNS
~~~~~~~~\ ± ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~PR*NOMAIRPOUS
0 '''- ' , TM-.&, S I 14\ MINIfO.IONAI. BO(J° ARN
X -~~L ~~o ip,is-' ' " - Mw5 saq GUlf of M4ex,- -
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~d ,. . Va. 2V~ ~ ~ ~ vcf> X - S°> OCEAN
2r Prb Lbb$
|~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~. or . C-npeche
_~~~~~~~O. - ,)td e CA-r - Chw
)~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~J ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~B~ELIZE
iqe 2q0 ago A" UQWOMEIS
flu bow.dgvfe.. / ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~GUATEMALAi ' jpdg~.s,t.pxe s\* I. .ndemm..9HN
- 110n' ' 1t X v A; DECEN~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~EE