Early Childhood Development in Samoa Baseline Results from the Samoan Early Human Capability Index

Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized

Public Disclosure Authorized Early Childhood Development in Samoa Baseline results from the Samoan Early Human Capability Index

Sally Brinkman Alanna Sincovich

Public Disclosure Authorized Binh Thanh Vu

2017

Early Childhood Development in Samoa

Baseline results from the Samoan Early Human Capability Index

Sally Brinkman Alanna Sincovich Binh Thanh Vu

2017 Report No: AUS0000129

1818 H Street NW, Washington DC 20433

Telephone: 202-473-1000; Internet: www.worldbank.org

Some rights reserved

This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of the Executive Directors of The World Bank or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries.

Rights and Permissions

The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given.

Attribution—Please cite the work as follows: “World Bank. 2017. Early Childhood Development in Samoa: Baseline results from the Samoan Early Human Capability Index. © World Bank.”

All queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: [email protected].

Source: The World Bank Contents

ABBREVIATIONS �� 6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS �� 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY �� 8 PART ONE: INTRODUCTION �� 10 Country Context 10 The Pacific Early Age Readiness and Learning Program 11 Samoa PEARL 12 PART TWO: THE IMPORTANCE OF MEASURING EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT �� 13 Early Childhood Development 13 The Importance of Measuring Early Childhood Development 13 The Early Human Capability Index 14 Development of the Samoan Early Human Capability Index 15 PART THREE: IMPLEMENTING THE SAMOAN EARLY HUMAN CAPABILITY INDEX � 18 Enumerator training 18 Data collection processes 18 Data quality control 19 PART FOUR: THE STATUS OF EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT �� 21 Sample Characteristics 21 SEHCI Descriptive Results 21 The influence of social and demographic factors on child development 23 Child development by gender 23 Child development by age 24 Child development by caregiver’s education 25 Child development by geographical location 25 The influence of stimulation in the home environment on child development 26 The influence of preschool attendance on child development 31 Which factors have the strongest relationship with child development? 35 PART FIVE: DATA DISSEMINATION �� 36 Geographical Mapping 36 Data dissemination 36 PART SIX: CONCLUSIONS �� 39 APPENDIX A - Back-Translated Samoan Versions (teacher and parent completed) of the EHCI �� 40 APPENDIX B - Geographically Mapped Results of SEHCI Domains �� 53 REFERENCES �� 79

2 Tables

Table 2 Sample characteristics �� 21 Table 3 Developmental domains descriptive results �� 22 Table 4 Child development by gender �� 24 Table 5 Child development by age �� 24 Table 6 Child development by caregiver’s education �� 25 Table 7 Child development by island �� 25 Table 8 Relationship between reading in the home environment and child development 29 Table 9 Relationship between telling stories in the home environment and child development �� 30 Table 10 Relationship between singing songs in the home environment and child development �� 30 Table 11 Relationship between taking the child outside the home and child development �� 30 Table 12 Relationship between playing in the home environment and child development �� 31 Table 13 Relationship between naming, counting and drawing in the home environment and child development �� 31 Table 14 Relationship between preschool attendance and child development outcomes �� 35 Table 15 Strongest predictors of child development �� 35

3 Figures

Table 1 Samoan early Human Capability Index Questionnaire Items �� 16 Figure 1 Average child development scores for all children �� 22 Figure 2 Children’s overall development by age, gender, geography and caregiver’s education �� 23 Figure 3 Caregiver education by island �� 26 Figure 4 Caregiver’s participation in home learning activities over the last 3 days �� 26 Figure 5 Caregiver’s total participation in home learning activities over the last 3 days � 27 Figure 6 Home learning activities by caregiver’s education �� 27 Figure 7 Home learning activities by island �� 28 Figure 8 Relationship between home learning activities and overall child development � 29 Figure 9 Preschool attendance by child’s gender and age �� 32 Figure 10 Preschool attendance by island �� 32 Figure 11 Preschool attendance by child caregiver’s education �� 33 Figure 12 Relationship between preschool attendance and child development outcomes �� 34

Photos

Photo 1 Enumerators headed to collect data in Savai’i �� 19 Photo 2 Children waiting to be weighed and measured in Savai’i �� 19 Photo 3 Community meetings in Upolu �� 37 Photo 4 Community meetings in Savai’i �� 38

4 Maps

Savai’i Overall Development �� 53 Upolu Overall Development �� 54 Overall development by village and percentage in stimulating home by district (Apia) �� 55 Overall development by village and percentage in stimulating home by district (Savai’i Island) �� 56 Overall development by village and percentage in stimulating home by district (Savai’i Urban Island) �� 57 Overall development by village and percentage in stimulating home by district (Upolu Island) �� 58 Overall development by village and percentage in stimulating home by district (Upolu Rural Island) �� 59 Overall development by village and percentage of children by districts (Apia) �� 60 Overall development by village and percentage of children by districts (Savai’i Island) �� 61 Overall development by village and percentage of children by districts (Savai’i Urban Island) �� 62 Overall development by village and percentage of children by districts (Upolu Island) �� 63 Overall development by village and percentage of children by districts (Upolu Rural Island) �� 64 Savai’i Approaches �� 65 Savai’i Cultural_spiritual �� 66 Savai’i Literacy �� 67 Savai’i Numeracy concepts �� 68 Savai’i Perserverance �� 69 Savai’i Physical �� 70 Savai’i Social Emotional �� 71 Upolu Approaches �� 72 Upolu Cultural Spiritual �� 73 Upolu Literacy �� 74 Upolu Numeracy Concepts �� 75 Upolu Perserverance �� 76 Upolu Physical �� 77 Upolu Social Emotional �� 78

5 ABBREVIATIONS

ANOVA Analysis of Variance

ECE Early Childhood Education

EHCI Early Human Capability Index

GPE Global Partnership for Education

MESC Ministry of Education, Sport and Culture

PEARL Pacific Early Age Readiness and Learning

SDG Sustainable Development Goal

SEHCI Samoan early Human Capability Index

TEHCI Tongan early Human Capability Index

6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The production of this report was funded through the Global Partnership for Education (GPE) and technical assistance provided by the World Bank.

The development and adaptation of the instruments Samoan early Human Capability Index (SEHCI) was led by Sally Brinkman in consultation with the Ministry of Education, Sports and Culture. Sincere thanks are given especially to Afamasaga Dr. Karoline Afamasaga- Fuata’i, Leota Valma Galuvao, Ma’ina Ma’aola Field, and Manutulila Werner Kappus, Inipene Simanu, Utumoa S. F. Olo’apu.

Thanks to the World Bank team and peer reviewer Amanda Epstein Devercelli who provided valuable comments for improving the report.

The authors would also like to thank Sanigest for the data collection, as well as all the teachers and parents who helped support that data collection, without whom this would not be possible.

7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Pacific Early Age Readiness and Learning (PEARL) Program aims to support Pacific Island countries and their development partners in building capacity to design, implement, and monitor evidence-based integrated policies and programs that prepare children and their families for primary school. PEARL’s two focus areas are reflected in its two visions: (1) that all children in the Pacific have access to and benefit from programs in their communities that promote healthy, stimulating, and culturally relevant experiences that prepare them for pre-primary, primary schooling, and life; and (2) all classrooms in the early grades of primary education are equipped with the knowledge and the resources to ensure children become literate in a language they are familiar with, and that they are able to use these skills and knowledge to engage in lifelong learning.

Samoa PEARL will work to strengthen the regional evidence-base the PEARL Program is creating to better inform policy decisions and program development, implementation and monitoring, with the goal of promoting positive development and learning outcomes for all children. As such, the key intermediate outcome of Samoa PEARL was to produce a population wide baseline of children’s development and school readiness. From June to August 2016, a census of children ages 3 to 5 in the country was conducted utilising the Samoan version of the early Human Capability Index (SEHCI). The SEHCI measures children’s development across 8 domains: physical, verbal, cultural/spiritual, social/ emotional, perseverance, approaches to learning, numeracy/concepts, and literacy (reading and writing). Rather than assessing pathology or developmental delay as do most other early childhood development measures, the SEHCI takes a holistic approach to child development, measuring children’s strengths and weaknesses and placing them on a continuum of development, relative to their peers.

This report provides a comprehensive picture of the current status of children’s early development in Samoa, the environments in which children in Samoa are growing up, and how these environments are having an impact on children’s early developmental outcomes. Results produced some expected findings reflecting international evidence, as well as some surprising ones, providing the country with a valuable evidence base on which policy makers and service providers can base their planning around, and policy monitoring and program evaluation can be measured against.

Key findings include:

- Girls outperform boys. Consistent with the international research, girls did better than boys across all developmental domains except for perseverance and knowledge of numeracy and concepts, for which no difference between boys and girls was found.

- Inconsistent developmental differences across islands. It was expected children living on the main island, Upolu, would be developing better than others that lack access to services to the extent of those available in Upolu. Generally speaking, children in Savai’i had better development, though results across domains were inconsistent, supporting the need for universal program coverage across Samoa.

- The influence of caregiver education is not as strongly reflected in Samoain comparison to other Pacific countries.Generally, we would expect to see a stronger relationship between caregiver’s education and children’s development, as well as between caregiver’s education and preschool attendance, and caregiver’s education and interactions with their child at home than was found in SEHCI results. While this pattern holds true in some instances, results demonstrate that in Samoa, other factors are having a stronger influence on children’s development.

- Preschool attendance makes a difference.Participation in preschool has a statistically significant positive relationship with all domains of children’s development, especially so for children’s reading and writing skills. Results also show that most children in Samoa

8 are starting school without any exposure to early childhood education. Global evidence suggests these children will find the transition to a school environment challenging due to a lack of school readiness, and are at an increased risk of dropping out of school early and failing.

- Caregiver interactions with children in the home are the strongest predictor of child development in Samoa. Children, whose caregivers engaged in simple yet stimulating activities with them in the home environment, such as reading, storytelling, naming, counting and drawing, were developing better than children whose caregivers had not been interacting with them in this way at home. Indeed these activities had the strongest relationship with children’s development and likely reflect nurturing, stimulating home environments supportive of their learning.

In order to aid data dissemination, the SEHCI data were geographically mapped to provide data in a pictorial format that are easy to understand. This provided a visual representation of how children in one community were developing compared to children in other communities across different domains of development. Beginning in January 2017, results were disseminated across the country through a series of meetings with stakeholders as well as the public in communities across Samoa. Local capacities were built throughout the instrument adaptation process, the data collection process as well as through the dissemination of results. Samoa is now one of the very few countries in the world to have undertaken a census of children’s development across its entire population. As a result, the country now has comprehensive local-level data that captures the development of children across the entire country. It is hoped that the country will drive repeat SEHCI collections, because only with repeat data will communities know if their work to support the children in their community are making a difference.

9 PART ONE: INTRODUCTION

Country Context The Independent State of Samoa, located in the Polynesian region of the Pacific Ocean, is made up of nine volcanic islands, two of which – Savai’i and Upolu – make up more than 99 percent of the country’s total land mass. Samoa has a population of almost 200,000, most which live in Upolu, and is the world’s second largest Polynesian group after the Maori. Samoa was the first country in the Pacific to gain its independence, governed by New Zealand until it’s people voted for independence in 1961. Samoa has a conservative, Christian society centred on the extended family, which is headed by an elected chief who leads the family’s social, economic and political affairs, and the church, which is a focus of recreational and social life.

Samoa is a middle-income country, graduating from least developed country status in 2014. It has one of the fastest growing economies amongst Pacific island countries with economic growth averaging 1.7 percent per annum(Samoa Ministry of Education Sports and Culture, 2013). The economy of Samoa has traditionally been dependent on fishing, agriculture, tourism, development aid, and remittances from overseas. Less than a quarter of Samoa’s population are engaged in paid employment, with the majority occupied by subsistence village agriculture. The country is vulnerable to natural disasters and has experienced a series of devastating storms over the past decade causing serious displacement as well as loss of homes and lives. Over a quarter of the population live in poverty which is most prevalent in rural and remote areas. Despite experiences of adversity, encouragingly life expectancy in Samoa continues to increase (70 years for men, 76 years for women), and rates of infant mortality continue to decrease (18 per 1,000 live births) (World Bank, 2017).

More than half of Samoa’s population are less than 25 years of age, with 35 percent under 15 years old (Samoa Ministry of Education Sports and Culture, 2016). This constitutes a significant pressure on the country’s education system and indeed, education is a key focus for the government of Samoa. In conjunction with countries across the world, Samoa committed to adopt the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which includes 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to end poverty, fight inequality and injustice, ensure inclusive and quality education and tackle climate change by 2030. Expanding the coverage of and access to education for all is an important goal and strategy of the government. This is demonstrated in the country’s Education Sector Plan 2013-2018(Samoa Ministry of Education Sports and Culture, 2013), with a key vision being “Improved Focus on Access for Education, Training and Learning Outcomes”. The Samoa Government also clearly sets out its vision to ensure “All people of Samoa are educated and productively engaged”, with its mission “To promote the achievement of high quality education and training to meet the national, economic, social and cultural goals of Samoa”. It is envisaged that the successful implementation of the Education Sector Plan will broaden access to education, ranging from Early Childhood Education (ECE) to Post School Education and Training. In doing so, it will monitor and evaluate progress not only at a national level but also against international commitments such as the SDGs.

Because of significant investment in education to date, primary and secondary enrolment rates in Samoa are high relative to comparable countries. Primary education is compulsory for children aged 5-14 years in accordance with the country’s commitment to universal completion of primary education. As such Samoa has achieved an enrolment rate of 100 percent with minimal drop out (Samoa Ministry of Education Sports and Culture, 2016). Secondary education caters for children aged 15-19 years old, with enrolment rates currently sitting at approximately 70 percent (Samoa Ministry of Education Sports and Culture, 2016). Although increasing, participation in ECE is considerably lower with a current enrolment rate of less than 40 percent for children aged 2-4 years (Samoa Ministry of Education Sports and Culture, 2016). Many children do not have the opportunity to

10 attend ECE due to financial or geographical constraints, or because of caregivers’ lack of knowledge regarding early childhood development and the value of ECE experiences. Moreover, little is known about the program quality offered to those who do attend ECE. Together these factors constitute significant barriers to ECE participation in Samoa, and thus the majority of young children are not afforded the learning and developmental benefits of ECE.

The Pacific Early Age Readiness and Learning Program The Pacific Early Age Readiness and Learning (PEARL) Program is funded through the Global Partnership for Education (GPE). The GPE has granted USD 8.5million to the PEARL program, for which the trust fund is being executed by the World Bank Group. The key focus areas of PEARL are reflected in its two key visions; i) that all young children in the Pacific have access in their communities and benefit from programs that promote healthy, stimulating and culturally-relevant experiences that prepare them for pre-primary, primary schooling and life; and ii) that all classrooms in the early grades of primary education are equipped with the knowledge and the resources to ensure young children become literate in a language they are familiar with, and are able to use these skills and knowledge to engage in lifelong learning.

Overall, PEARL’s mission is to support Pacific island countries and their development partners to build capacity in Ministries of Education across the region to design, implement and monitor evidence-based, integrated policies and programs that (a) prepare children and their families to cope with the task and demands of primary schooling and lifelong learning; and (b) prepare primary schools and teaching professionals to deliver teaching and learning activities that help students become effective, independent readers. Against this background, PEARL focuses primarily on developing capacity within the Ministries of Education to lead policies and programs in partnership with relevant local stakeholders and private and non-government service providers.

The key objectives of the PEARL Program are:

- To inform policy dialogues on key areas of education investment in the early years through the production of diagnostic analytical work on ECE services and student learning outcomes, with a focus on school readiness and early grade literacy.

- To identify and pilot evidence-based policy options to improve the efficiency of ECE services and early grade literacy, based on global innovations, best practice and data generated in the diagnostic analyses.

- To build capacity in Ministries of Education to design pilot interventions in these areas to address national education priorities, as identified by governments and development partners.

- To support greater access to global innovations and best practice to the region’s growing community of practice.

There are three pillars of all activities under PEARL Programs:

Pillar I: Pilot interventions on school readiness and early grade reading – this includes implementation of a full cycle of activities, from diagnostic assessment of school readiness and early reading levels to design of interventions and the piloting of interventions on school readiness and early grade literacy (Tonga PEARL).

Pillar II: Regional knowledge generation activities – this includes discrete pieces of technical assistance and analytical advisory activities to improve the country’s evidence base to inform short and medium-term policy agendas to increase the school readiness of young

11 children and early grade literacy levels (Tuvalu PEARL, Samoa PEARL, Vanuatu, and Papua New Guinea).

Pillar III: Regional knowledge exchange events – this includes a series of regional workshops and conferences as well as the twining of government staff across participating Pacific island countries to exchange knowledge and experiences at a practical level in the area of school readiness and early grade literacy.

The PEARL Program is playing a crucial role in addressing issues of school readiness and reading comprehension in the early years of child development and primary school across the Pacific. Despite the challenges created by limited resources and capacity, activities under the PEARL program have progressed well and show positive results since the program’s commencement in 2014.

As part of Pillar III, regional knowledge sharing and capacity building workshops have been delivered, generating enthusiasm for PEARL and its principles amongst participating countries. Specifically, the first PEARL regional training workshop, held in Fiji inMay 2016 involving 11 countries and international organisations, presented delegates with an overview of the importance of measuring early childhood development outcomes, school readiness and early grade reading; the trade-offs involved in choosing different measures; and their usefulness for population monitoring purposes. Discussions around understanding measurement tools, their objectives and the key elements in their processes of development aroused the interest of delegates, and the event led to the identification of Pillar II PEARL activities in Samoa, Tuvalu and Kiribati.

Samoa PEARL Samoa PEARL activities fall under Pillar II, with the overall objective of improving the country’s evidence base and thus informing policy agendas to promote the school readiness and early grade literacy levels of young children. Before the implementation of the PEARL Program, data regarding children’s early development and learning outcomes in Samoa, and indeed across the Pacific, were scarce to non-existent. As such, Samoa PEARL will work to strengthen the regional evidence-base the PEARL Program is creating to better inform policy decisions, and program development, implementation and monitoring, with the ultimate goal of promoting development and positive learning outcomes for all children.

Against this background, the key intermediate outcome of Samoa PEARL was to produce a comprehensive, population wide baseline of child development and school readiness, and explore any disparities in children’s development across the country. Data collection also aimed to collect information regarding the home learning environments children in Samoa are being provided – as indicated by caregivers’ engagement with children in learning activities such as singing, reading books, telling stories and playing games in the home – and the reasons for either engaging or not engaging with existing ECE services. Herein these data are presented, providing a comprehensive picture of the current status of children’s development, the contexts in which children in Samoa are growing up, and how these environments are having an impact on children’s early developmental outcomes. Findings will enable the government to identify areas of strength and areas of need, and at a country level, this evidence will help strengthen the ECE system to better support positive early child development for all across the country.

12 PART TWO: THE IMPORTANCE OF MEASURING EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT

Early Childhood Development Early childhood development is generally defined as the period of human development from conception. Development occurs as children learn to master more complex levels of moving, feeling, thinking and interacting with people and objects in their environment. There are a range of different aspects or domains of development including physical, social and emotional, language, and cognitive development. Early childhood development is the greatest enabler of human capability formation, indeed it is considered to be the most important phase in life as it lays the foundation for later health, wellbeing, learning, and achievement throughout the life course (Hertzman & Boyce, 2010; Irwin, Siddiqi, & Hertzman, 2007; Lynch & Davey-Smith, 2005). It is a time of both opportunity and vulnerability and each child’s development is dependent on a combination of biological and environmental factors.

When children thrive in their early years, they are able to reach their full developmental potential as adults and successfully participate in economic, social and civic life (Heckman, 2006). Adversity and negative experiences throughout early childhood on the other hand, can disrupt brain development and early learning, leading to poor long-term outcomes throughout the life course (Bradley & Corwyn, 2002; Feinstein & Duckwork, 2006; Hertzman & Wiens, 1996). Further, poor development places considerable drain on a country’s resources and contributes to the cycle of poverty and inequality that affects all countries (Britto et al., 2016).

Closely aligned to early childhood development is the concept of school readiness. While the former encompasses a wider age range (generally from conception to age 8), in contrast school readiness focuses on a particular time in a child’s life; depending on the local education systems, generally around the age of 5 years. School readiness is required so that children are entering the education system with the skills, capabilities, health, and development required to successfully transition into a school learning environment (Sandraluz, Pebley, Vaiana, & Maggio, 2004). Success in school is determined by a range of behaviours and abilities, including literacy and numeracy skills, as well as the ability to follow directions and work well with other children (Brooks-Gunn, Rouse, & McLanahan, 2007). The skills and capabilities that constitute school readiness develop cumulatively; that is, children entering primary school, for example, need a working vocabulary to master reading skills. As such, learning achievement in school is the product of a process of acquiring skills from birth and building advanced skills based upon the mastery of former, more basic skills.

School readiness has been linked with positive long-term social and behavioural outcomes, as well as improved academic outcomes in primary and secondary school (Brinkman et al., 2013). Internationally, the concept of school readiness is gaining increasing attention and has been posed as a means by which learning gaps can be closed and equity in lifelong learning achieved. Further, school readiness is gaining attention as a strategy for economic development. Approaches to economic growth and development consider human capital as a key conduit for sustained and viable development, the inception of which begins in the early years.

The Importance of Measuring Early Childhood Development Research from across the world has demonstrated that with appropriate policies, programs, and supports, children’s development and readiness for school can be improved

13 (Britto et al., 2016). Despite such evidence however, the absence of comprehensive child development data highlighting a need for action constitutes a significant barrier to government investment in early childhood. Traditionally, countries have routinely collected data on rates of infant and child mortality, breastfeeding, and immunisation. Despite the importance of these indicators, we must seek not only to determine if children are surviving, but also measure if they are thriving.

The drive to monitor children’s development has, in recent years, been enhanced by both the United Nations Conventions on the Rights of the Child whereby countries ratifying the convention are required to monitor how well children are developing within and across their populations (Status of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Report of the Secretary- General, 2010), and more recently the world’s endorsement of the United Nations SDGs (Guhn, Gadermann, Almas, Schonert-Reichl, & Hertzman, 2016). SDG 4.2 states that, by 2030, countries will need to ensure that all girls and boys have access to quality early childhood development, care and pre-primary education so that they are ready for primary education. In order to track progress against this target, countries are required to monitor (i) the percentage of children less than 5 years of age who are developmentally on track in health, learning and psychosocial wellbeing, and (ii) national participation rates in early childhood education.

At the same time, increasingly governments are beginning to understand the importance of developing systems to enable population monitoring and program evaluation. Together with quality child development data, such systems can help to identify patterns across populations and inform decision making to achieve positive change for communities requiring support (Young, 2007). For countries to successfully support their children, the collection of relevant and timely data is required. Quick access and more efficient use of these data make it possible to identify education opportunities and challenges, and develop relevant strategies in response.

The Early Human Capability Index The measurement of child development is complex as it is influenced by culture, language, and theory, and thus the concept of good child development can vary (Hambleton, Merenda, & Speilberger, 2005). This makes regional and international comparison difficult, and indeed, there are no internationally accepted measures of early childhood development. This is not to say that there are not existing measures; many are used across the globe. Various characteristics of these instruments however, including their cost, the level of training required prior to administration, the time they take to administer and how they are administered, all constitute a considerable barrier to their use in countries whereby resources and capacity are limited. Further, many measures of child development are deficit focused or are based on developmental milestones with a pass or fail outcome, thus lacking the sensitivity required to detect changes in development over time.

The dimension of child development, as opposed to developmental pathology, allows for the measurement of both positive and negative aspects of how a child is developing as well as allowing for a holistic approach to the child. Healthy child development must be reflected through various domains: physical, social and emotional, and cognitive. It has been demonstrated that each of these domains can be measured reliably at the time of transition to school, and further, are reflective of children’s readiness for school which in turn is predictive of subsequent school success and outcomes for children. Child development measures that have the potential to place a child on a developmental trajectory rather than simply a bimodal pass/fail outcome are the most useful for country wide monitoring and evaluation systems.

The early Human Capability Index (EHCI) is a population measure designed to capture key aspects of holistic development in children aged 3-5 years that predict human capability formation. By measuring both strengths and weaknesses, the instrument aims to determine if a child is thriving or developing poorly. Specifically, the EHCI measures children’s physical health, verbal communication skills, perseverance and approaches to learning,

14 early literacy and numeracy skills, cultural knowledge, and social and emotional skills. The tool includes approximately 70 items, and can be completed by a child’s teacher or primary caregiver in less than 10 minutes. Unlike most child development measures, the EHCI is free of charge to use. The instrument was designed so that it can be used for: population monitoring and surveillance; impact evaluations of interventions aimed at improving child health and development; and longitudinal cohort studies seeking to predict children’s future capabilities.

The EHCI offers a pragmatic, efficient, and affordable solution to measuring child development within and across countries, and since its inception in 2013, governments and researchers across the world are beginning to recognise the utility of the tool and the value of the data is produces. As part of the Tonga PEARL Program, the Tongan version of the EHCI was created and utilised to conduct a census of children’s development across the entire country in 2014 (Brinkman & Than Vu, 2017). Following success and learnings from Tonga, Samoa PEARL committed to adapting and implementing the EHCI for use in Samoa, to collect a baseline of children’s development across the country.

Development of the Samoan Early Human Capability Index In order to measure children’s development in Samoa, the EHCI was translated and adapted for use in the Samoan context. The Samoan EHCI (SEHCI) was based on the Tongan version of the EHCI (TEHCI) (Brinkman & Than Vu, 2017) due to similarities in culture and language between Tonga and Samoa. First, MESC staff together with the creator of the EHCI, Sally Brinkman, used both Tongan and English versions of the EHCI to translate the instrument to Samoan language and ensure the translations were capturing the true essence and intent of each item.

Next, the instrument was piloted to ensure respondents understood the questions being asked of them, and could respond to each item as intended. Teachers from 12 preschools agreed to volunteer their time to participate in the pilot. Teachers were trained in how to complete the instrument via the traditional pen and paper method, and a number of revisions were made to the instrument on the basis of learnings from the teacher training. Teachers were then asked to return completed SEHCI forms for the children in their class. Approximately 200 responses were returned to the research team, and data entry and analyses were completed by World Bank staff. Analyses tested to ensure that the SEHCI was not too easy or too hard, but instead was able to capture children’s development along a continuum, discriminating by children’s age, gender and caregiver’s level of education. The tool was then further revised based on the teachers’ experiences and data collected from the pilot.

The SEHCI includes approximately 80 items designed to measure 8 different aspects of child development: physical, verbal, cultural/spiritual, social/emotional, perseverance, approaches to learning, numeracy/concepts, and literacy. Together, these aspects of development have been shown to be highly predictive of children’s later learning and educational achievement. The index provides a score for each child on these developmental domains. Scores for each of the domains range from 0 to 1, with1 being the best score and 0 being the worst. This score is derived from taking the average of all items in that domain. The data are not weighted or age standardised, so older children should receive higher scores in each of the domains to reflect more advanced development. From these 8 domains an overall development score is derived, also ranging from 0 to 1; with 1 being the best score. In addition to the questions on child development, the SEHCI captures basic background characteristics on the child, their primary caregiver’s educational level, and includes some questions regarding children’s early childhood education attendance and the home environment. The full list of SEHCI items is presented in Table 1 below, and both parent-completed and teacher-completed back translated English versions of the instrument are presented in Appendix A.

15 Table 1 Samoan early Human Capability Index Questionnaire Items

Background information Child’s name Child’s date of birth Child’s gender Education level of child’s primary caregiver Village where child lives

Physical health Child’s height Child’s weight Is this child often sickly? Does this child have any disabilities/special needs? What disabilities? Does this child have good hygiene; that is, always washes his/her hands after toileting? Is this child independent; that is, does not need help getting dressed? Does this child know good foods from bad foods?

General verbal communication Can this child use a group of words in conversation? Can this child use sentences when they talk? Can this child steer conversations and talk about what they want to talk about? Can this child describe things in detail with good Samoan words? Can this child hold an adult-like conversation (for example, talkative, always questioning)?

Cultural identity and spirituality Does this child show respect and compassion to others? Can this child name two Samoan foods? Can this child identify two local plants that provide foods/fruits? Can this child show the Samoan cultural values of humility? Can you trust this child to follow instruction? Can this child show reciprocity in relationships? Does the child participate in community cultural routines (e.g. sports and entertainment)? Can this child say a short prayer?

Social and emotional well-being and skills Is the child happy to share his/her toys and belongings? Does this child take care of his/her own belongings? Does this child demonstrate respect for adults? Does this child demonstrate respect for other children? Does this child accept responsibility for his/her actions? Is this child considerate of other people’s feelings? Does this child repeatedly do something wrong even though he/she has been told to stop? Is this child always helpful? Is this child friendly to other children? Does this child kick, bite, or hit adults or other children? Is this child impatient? Does this child always understand the difference between right and wrong? Does this child follow simple directions on how to do something?

Perseverance Can this child perform tasks independently? Does this child always keep at a task until it is finished? Does this child need constant reminding to finish something off?

16 Does this child get easily distracted from a task?

Approaches to learning Does this child show more curiosity about something new in comparison to something familiar? Does this child investigate/explore the function of a new toy/game/puzzle or object? Is this child always wanting to learn new things? When in an unfamiliar environment with a familiar person, does this child feel free to explore? Is this child always diligent in his/her approach to a new job or task?

Numeracy and concepts Can this child recognize geometric shapes (for example, triangle, circle, square)? Can this child name and identify at least three colors? Can this child sort and classify objects by common characteristics (for example, shape, color, size)? Can this child name and recognize the symbol of all numbers from 1 to 10? Can this child count to 10? Can this child count to 20? Can this child count to 100? Does this child know that a dog is taller than a cat? Does this child know the order of the day (for example, morning, then afternoon, and then evening)? Does this child understand the concepts of yesterday, today, and tomorrow? Does this child know that a vehicle weighs more than a lawn mower? Does the child know that the number 8 is bigger than the number 2?

Formal literacy: reading Does this child know the sounds of three letters of the Samoan alphabet (phonics)? Can this child identify at least 3 letters of the Samoan alphabet? Can this child identify at least 10 letters of the Samoan alphabet? Are there any reading materials in the child’s home (for example, picture books, magazines)? Can this child hold a book and turn the pages in the right way? Can this child follow reading directions (that is, left to right, top to bottom)? Can this child read simple, popular words?

Formal literacy: writing Can this child draw something identifiable (for example, a person)? Can this child copy (trace) the shape of a letter (for example, A, B, C…)? Can this child write 3 letters (for example, A, E, I…)? Can this child write his/her own name? Can this child write short and simple words?

General questions: early childhood education participation Does/did this child attend preschool? If yes, what year did he/she start? If yes, how long did he/she go for? If yes, give the name of the preschool and why you sent them there If no, why didn’t this child go to preschool?

General questions: home environment In the past three days did you or any family member over the age of 15 engage in the following activities with your child? Read books or looked at picture books with Told stories to Sang songs to/or with Took outside of the home/yard Played with Named, counted, or drew things to/with

17 PART THREE: IMPLEMENTING THE SAMOAN EARLY HUMAN CAPABILITY INDEX

Enumerator training An experienced international consultancy firm, Sanigest Internacional, was engaged to carry out SEHCI data collection across Samoa. Initial training of potential enumerators in Savai’i and Upolu occurred in March 2016. Follow up training sessions were conducted throughout June and July 2016 at which point enumerators also received their field manuals with detailed protocols on how to proceed with data collection in the field. Enumerator training aimed to ensure that standardised data collection procedures were employed and that data collected were of high quality. Training included the discussion of data collection objectives and the fieldwork and logistic plan, thorough discussion and explanation of each item in the questionnaire, how to administer the questionnaire and how to accurately fill in item responses, how to operate the tablets, as well as practice trials of administering the questionnaire using both a traditional pen and paper method, as well as in tablet form.

Data collection processes The objective of the data collection was to conduct a census of child development across Samoa; that is, to utilise the SEHCI in order to collect data on all children aged 3-5 years across the country. Fieldwork teams consisted of supervisors; responsible for overseeing data collection, supporting enumerators, monitoring the progress and quality of data collected, coordination of fieldwork logistics, uploading data to the server, as well as the preparation of reports; and enumerators; responsible for the administration of questionnaires with children’s caregivers and teachers. In Savai’i, 5 supervisors oversaw 45 enumerators, while in Upolu 13 Supervisors oversaw data collection by 56 enumerators.

Field work took place first from June to August 2016. For children attending anECE center, data were collected via interview with the child’s ECE teacher. For children not attending ECE, data were collected via two different methods. First, a series of meetings were held in villages (most often in villages without a preschool), intending to capture the majority of children and their caregivers not attending ECE. Meetings were coordinated with the assistance of MESC who liaised at the district level and with Community School Communities who in turn liaised with members of the Ministry of Women as well as village mayors in order to get the necessary support for the convening of the village meetings. Meetings were then advertised on radio and television to encourage attendance, however attendance across villages varied. After the conclusion of village meetings and in the case where the target number of children had not yet been achieved, the fieldwork team then visited caregiver’s and children in their households in order to collect data.

18 Photo 1 Enumerators headed to collect data in Savai’i

Source: Sanigest Internacional

Photo 2 Children waiting to be weighed and measured in Savai’i

Source: Sanigest Internacional

Data quality control The quality control of data was carried out by the fieldwork team as well as World Bank staff. World Bank staff with expertise in the measurement of children’s development assisted in conducting enumerator training in order to ensure that the administration of the SEHCI was being taught correctly, to clarify instrument content, and to address any questions that arose regarding data collection. The same staff were also available throughout the data collection period to assist in addressing any issues that had arisen during collection.

Each enumerator was required to fill out a log book including the details of all children for which they collected data. Log books were audited, which involved phone calls to caregivers of children to determine if (i) there was a child by the name indicated, (ii) that the data collection session had taken place, and (iii) the correct responses were recorded. These audits were conducted randomly in two rounds by two different Sanigest staff members and allowed for the identification and correction of any inconsistencies in the data (<2 percent records).

19 As a result of the data collection methodology employed (i.e. data was collected from preschool teachers, parents at village meetings, and parents at home), data cleaning was required so as to remove any duplicate records. For example, if in the case where data was gathered for a child from their preschool teacher, but the child’s caregiver was unaware that this had happened, and so data was collected for the same child on the following day. In order to identify potential duplicates, all data records within the same cluster were initially analysed based on having the same date of birth. All potential duplicates were identified and then further inspected for being a duplication based on the name of the child. These steps were repeated for all data records within the same cluster with the same child name, and same heights and weights. Overall, these measures ensured data collected was valid and reliable.

20 PART FOUR: THE STATUS OF EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT

Sample Characteristics The SEHCI census achieved a sample of 12,286 children from all villages across islands Savai’i, Upolu, Manono, and Apolima. Characteristics of the sample are presented below in Table 2. Although the census aimed to collect data on children aged 3-5 years, a number of children that fell outside of this age range were included in data collection through teacher- completed instruments at preschool. This was because, although preschool in Samoa primarily caters for children aged 3-4 years, both younger and older children are also able to intend. As a result, children outside of the target age range participated in data collection. Due to the considerable number of 2-year-olds for which data were collected, the analysis age range was amended to include children aged 2-5 years. Children falling outside of this age range (n=63), and those with missing age data (n=30) were excluded from any further analyses. After these exclusions, the final analysis sample included 12,193 children.

Table 2 Sample characteristics

Characteristic Number (%) Gender Male 6,350 (51.7) Female 5,936 (48.3) Age 1 year 27 (0.2) 2 years 1,117 (9.1) 3 years 4,372 (35.6) 4 years 4,612 (37.5) 5 years 2,092 (17.0) 6 years 36 (0.3) Missing 30 (0.2) Special needs Identified by respondent 12,174 (99.1) Not identified by respondent 112 (0.9) Primary caregiver’s education Primary school 224 (1.8) Started high school 606 (4.9) Completed high school 10,115 (82.3) Tertiary 1,341 (10.9)

SEHCI Descriptive Results As discussed, the SEHCI measures 8 different aspects of child development: physical, verbal, cultural/spiritual, social/emotional, perseverance, approaches to learning, numeracy/ concepts, and literacy. Scores for each of the domains range from 0 to 1, with1 being the best score and 0 being the worst. From these 8 domains an overall development score is derived, also ranging from 0 to 1; with 0 indicating poor development and 1 signifying good development. For each domain, Table 3 presents the highest and lowest score (scale range), the 25th and 75th percentile (interquartile range), the mean (average score), and the standard deviation (SD) around the mean. Valid scores were available for all 12,193 children on all domains.

21 Results indicate that the physical scale is skewed to the right, indicating that most children are developing very well physically. This is to be expected considering the age range of the children and the items assessed within this domain (for example, we would expect most children aged between 2-5 years to have good hygiene). Despite the skew however, room for improvement remains. In contrast, the literacy scale is relatively skewed to the left, indicating that overall the majority of children performed poorly on this domain.

Throughout the development of the EHCI and then again when adapting the tool for use in Samoa, great effort was put into ensuring the tool captures the wide range of development that children can show in this age range. Encouragingly, results in Table 3 demonstrate good interquartile range on remaining domains. Further, results presented throughout this report indicate that the SEHCI was able to capture a wide range of development and that the tool is able to discriminate development by children’s age, gender, and caregiver’s education.

Table 3 Developmental domains descriptive results

25th 75th Domain Min Mean SD Max percentile percentile Physical 0.00 0.67 0.69 0.27 1.00 1.00 Verbal 0.00 0.25 0.56 0.38 1.00 1.00 Cultural/spiritual 0.00 0.13 0.42 0.37 0.75 1.00 Social/emotional 0.00 0.23 0.49 0.28 0.85 1.00 Perseverance 0.00 0.25 0.40 0.25 0.50 1.00 Approaches 0.00 0.20 0.60 0.38 1.00 1.00 Numeracy/concepts 0.00 0.42 0.48 0.12 0.58 1.00 Literacy 0.00 0.00 0.39 0.36 0.75 1.00

Figure 1 below presents average scores for each developmental domain for all children, as well as an average overall development score. Overall, the data reveal that children in Samoa appear to developing well in terms of their physical development, verbal communication, and approaches to learning. In contrast, on average children’s reading and writing skills, as well as their perseverance and cultural and spiritual knowledge appear to be developing somewhat less positively. Below we examine these scores in greater detail and explore the key factors that are influencing children’s early development in Samoa.

Figure 1 Average child development scores for all children

22 The influence of social and demographic factors on child development Figure 2 and Tables 4-7 below explore disparities in children’s development by children’s age, gender, geographical location, and family background – specifically, their caregiver’s level of education. When examining overall development, results demonstrate small differences in development between boys and girls, with girls slightly outperforming boys. Next, as expected child development improves considerably as children grow older. When examining development across islands, children from Savai’i are developing better when compared to those living in Upolu, Manono, and Apolima. Finally, children of caregivers with a higher level of education – having completed high school or above – were found to be developing better than those of caregivers with a lower level of education. Overall, these results are consistent with the international literature on child development and indicate that the SEHCI is performing well in terms of having the sensitivity required to discriminate between development of children across these demographic characteristics.

Figure 2 Children’s overall development by age, gender, geography and caregiver’s education

Child development by gender Table 4 further explores children’s developmental scores across SEHCI domains by gender. Analyses of variance statistics were used to compare means, and F values and significance figures are provided. As expected, results indicate small yet statistically significant differences favouring girls on all domains except in the case of perseverance and knowledge of numeracy and concepts, for which no real difference between boys and girls was found.

23 Child development by age When examining children’s scores across developmental domains by their age, as expected results demonstrate that in Samoa child development improves as children age – increased scores can be seen across all SEHCI domains as children get older. Analyses of variance statistics were used to compare means, with results indicating these developmental improvements with age are highly statistically significant (F values and significance are provided in Table 5). We see particularly large differences between older children and younger children on the literacy domain, indicating that 5 year old children had significantly better reading and writing skills when compared to 2 year old children. This is to be expected considering these skills develop in a cumulative nature once children have first established a solid foundation of communication and language skills.

Table 4 Child development by gender

Male Female ANOVA Mean (SD) Mean (SD) F Sig Physical 0.69 (0.26) 0.70 (0.27) 3.94 0.047

Verbal 0.56 (0.38) 0.57 (0.38) 4.13 0.042

Cultural/spiritual 0.41 (0.37) 0.43 (0.37) 4.13 0.042

Social/emotional 0.49 (0.28) 0.50 (0.28) 8.92 0.003

Perseverance 0.40 (0.25) 0.41 (0.25) 0.47 0.491

Approaches 0.60 (0.38) 0.61 (0.38) 5.98 0.014

Numeracy/concepts 0.48 (0.12) 0.48 (0.12) 1.30 0.254

Literacy 0.38 (0.36) 0.39 (0.39) 5.79 0.016

Table 5 Child development by age

2 years 3 years 4 years 5 years ANOVA Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Mean (SD) F Sig Physical 0.62 (0.25) 0.67 (0.26) 0.72 (0.27) 0.73 (0.27) 81.23 0.000 Verbal 0.44 (0.37) 0.50 (0.38) 0.62 (0.36) 0.64 (0.36) 139.00 0.000 Cultural/spiritual 0.31 (0.33) 0.36 (0.35) 0.47 (0.37) 0.48 (0.38) 123.32 0.000 Social/emotional 0.41 (0.26) 0.45 (0.27) 0.54 (0.28) 0.54 (0.28) 122.32 0.000 Perseverance 0.36 (0.23) 0.38 (0.24) 0.43 (0.25) 0.43 (0.26) 54.59 0.000 Approaches 0.50 (0.38) 0.57 (0.38) 0.65 (0.37) 0.64 (0.37) 69.97 0.000 Numeracy/ 0.47 (0.11) 0.48 (0.11) 0.49 (0.12) 0.48 (0.13) 6.39 0.000 concepts Literacy 0.27 (0.32) 0.31 (0.34) 0.45 (0.36) 0.47 (0.36) 191.51 0.000

24 Child development by caregiver’s education Results demonstrate that in Samoa, generally speaking a child is likely to be performing better in all areas of development if their primary caregiver has a higher level of education. Across all domains, children with a caregiver who has a tertiary education had higher scores than children whose caregiver had a lower level of education, and these results were highly statistically significant as determined by analyses of variance statistics (see Table 6 for F values and significance). Again, these results are consistent with the international evidence; indeed this relationship is the reason behind efforts to improve educational outcomes for women globally. Once more, these developmental differences were most marked when looking at children’s literacy development. This too, is consistent with the child development literature, which argues that caregivers who are able to read and write are more likely to try to foster and encourage these skills in their children; while in contrast, it is very difficult for illiterate caregivers to teach their children literacy skills that they do not have themselves.

Table 6 Child development by caregiver’s education

Started Completed Primary Tertiary high high ANOVA school education school school Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Mean (SD) F Sig Physical 0.57 (0.33) 0.63 (0.26) 0.69 (0.26) 0.75 (0.25) 48.17 0.000 Verbal 0.55 (0.36) 0.56 (0.36) 0.56 (0.38) 0.59 (0.38) 2.91 0.033 Cultural/spiritual 0.38 (0.35) 0.33 (0.30) 0.41 (0.37) 0.54 (0.36) 61.35 0.000 Social/emotional 0.46 (0.26) 0.43 (0.26) 0.49 (0.28) 0.58 (0.27) 57.82 0.000 Perseverance 0.41 (0.21) 0.35 (0.21) 0.40 (0.25) 0.42 (0.24) 10.93 0.000 Approaches 0.57 (0.38) 0.54 (0.34) 0.60 (0.38) 0.67 (0.37) 18.27 0.000 Numeracy/concepts 0.50 (0.15) 0.45 (0.11) 0.48 (0.12) 0.50 (0.13) 29.00 0.000 Literacy 0.39 (0.36) 0.28 (0.31) 0.37 (0.36) 0.53 (0.35) 90.48 0.000

Table 7 Child development by island

Savai’i Upolu Manono Apolima ANOVA Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Mean (SD) F Sig Physical 0.75 (0.25) 0.68 (0.27) 0.66 (0.25) 0.67 (0.25) 23.20 0.000 Verbal 0.59 (0.38) 0.53 (0.38) 0.41 (0.32) 0.47 (0.41) 93.73 0.000 Cultural/spiritual 0.54 (0.36) 0.40 (0.37) 0.34 (0.31) 0.34 (0.43) 38.85 0.000 Social/emotional 0.58 (0.27) 0.48 (0.29) 0.40 (0.24) 0.46 (0.32) 47.57 0.000 Perseverance 0.42 (0.24) 0.40 (0.25) 0.37 (0.20) 0.46 (0.18) 1.81 0.000

Approaches 0.67 (0.37) 0.58 (0.38) 0.63 (0.33) 0.44 (0.49) 40.17 0.000

Numeracy/concepts 0.50 (0.13) 0.48 (0.12) 0.49 (0.09) 0.52 (0.14) 8.02 0.000 Literacy 0.53 (0.35) 0.37 (0.36) 0.26 (0.24) 0.33 (0.28) 43.94 0.000

Child development by geographical location Next we explore differences in children’s development across the 4 inhabited Samoan islands. Table 7 presents F values and significance figures from analyses of variance used to compare mean results. Generally speaking, children who live on Savai’i had better development relative to their peers from Upolu, Manono or Apolima. However, results are

25 somewhat inconsistent. For example, while children from Apolima had the lowest scores on the approaches to learning domain when compared to children from the other 3 islands, the same children from Apolima had the highest scores on the perseverance domain relative to children from all other islands. These results indicate that programs with universal coverage, supporting the learning and development of children across all islands, are required, rather than the implementation of programs that are targeted at specific geographical areas only.

Considering results above demonstrating that caregiver’s education influences children’s developmental outcomes, we explored whether levels of caregiver education differed across islands in order to better understand the inconsistent geographical pattern of child development found. Figure 3 below demonstrates that more caregivers from both Savai’i and Upolu had tertiary degrees relative to those from Manono and Apolima, and this may help to explain why, generally speaking, children from these islands had better development scores. Nonetheless inconsistent results in children’s outcomes across islands suggest a universal approach to supporting children across all geographical areas is needed.

Figure 3 Caregiver education by island

The influence of stimulation in the home environment on child development A nurturing home environment that provides safety, love and opportunities to learn, explore and play is essential for good child development. As such, the SEHCI also collects information regarding learning activities caregivers’ engage in with their children at home. Specifically, caregivers are asked if they or any family member aged over the age of 15 had undertaken various activities with the child over the last 3 days. Specifically, if they had read books to/with the child, told stories to/with the child, sang songs with/to the child, taken the child outside the home or yard, played with the child, or named, counted, or drew things to/with the child. These questions provide an indication of the level of interaction that families have with their children, and the level of stimulation children are receiving in the home in order to support their learning.

Figure 4 below represents the percentage of children for which their caregivers had engaged in these learning activities with them in the last 3 days. This figure is based on the 8,721 children for whom their caregiver completed the SEHCI. Preschool teachers were not asked to provide this information as they were unlikely to have detailed knowledge of children’s activities at home with their families. The most common activities caregivers engaged in with their children were singing, playing, and being taken outside of the home. Few caregivers’ were found to have recently read books to/with their children, and this is likely to be contributing to the overall low literacy skills found amongst children in Samoa.

26 Figure 4 Caregiver’s participation in home learning activities over the last 3 days

Figure 5 sums these activities and presents the proportion of children who had participated in all, some, or none of these activities. Almost 30 percent of children had not participated in any of these activities with their caregiver in the last 3 days – that is, they hadn’t been played with, read or sang to, or taken outside by an adult at all in the last 3 days. Overall, relative to other countries, these levels of learning activities are quite low and indicate that children in Samoa are receiving low levels of support for their development at home.

Figure 5 Caregiver’s total participation in home learning activities over the last 3 days

Examining patterns of learning activities in the home by caregiver’s educational levels produces somewhat inconsistent results, and this is possibly due to the uneven spread of caregivers across each of the four education level groups (i.e. <2 percent had completed primary school while >80 percent had completed high school). Generally, we would expect to see higher levels of caregiver interaction paired with higher caregiver education, and this is true when examining patterns of interaction across caregivers who started high school, completed high school, and completed tertiary education (i.e. not the primary school sample).

27 Figure 6 Home learning activities by caregiver’s education

Below we explore home learning activities across islands. Figure 7 below demonstrates that while the majority of caregivers in Apolima did not engage in any home learning activities with their children in the last three days, the majority of caregivers in Savai’i had engaged in five home learning activities with their children in this time. Evidently, children in Savai’i are receiving much more stimulation in their home environments relative to children living on other islands, and this is also likely to be influencing patterns of children’s developmental outcomes across islands.

Figure 7 Home learning activities by island

28 Next, we explore the relationship between these caregiver-child interactions and children’s development. Figure 8 demonstrates that all 6 home learning activities are highly positively related to children’s overall development. Tables 9-14 examine this relationship individually for each activity across each SEHCI domain. Analyses of variance models were applied to compare mean results; and F values and significance figures are provided in all tables. We see the same trend consistently across all activities and domains; interactive home environments are supporting children’s development and these results are all highly statistically significant. Particularly, as expected, children’s literacy skills are developing better if they come from households in which they are read to. Overall, the activities that have the strongest relationship with children’s development are reading to/with the child, telling stories to/with the child, and naming, counting or drawing to/with the child. These results provide a strong indication that across the Pacific, improvements in child development will be observed if the PEARL Program is able to enhance the capacity of caregivers to interact with and stimulate children through such activities in the home environment.

Figure 8 Relationship between home learning activities and overall child development

Table 8 Relationship between reading in the home environment and child development

Did not do Did do ANOVA Mean (SD) Mean (SD) F Sig Physical 0.60 (0.25) 0.76 (0.25) 722.74 0.000 Verbal 0.43 (0.37) 0.68 (0.34) 803.40 0.000 Cultural/spiritual 0.28 (0.32) 0.53 (0.37) 997.85 0.000 Social/emotional 0.37 (0.24) 0.59 (0.27) 1271.55 0.000 Perseverance 0.34 (0.23) 0.48 (0.25) 636.85 0.000 Approaches 0.45 (0.37) 0.77 (0.31) 1437.43 0.000 Numeracy/concepts 0.47 (0.11) 0.49 (0.13) 93.06 0.000 Literacy 0.23 (0.28) 0.49 (0.36) 1278.24 0.000

29 Table 9 Relationship between telling stories in the home environment and child development

Did not do Did do ANOVA Mean (SD) Mean (SD) F Sig Physical 0.59 (0.25) 0.75 (.25) 770.49 0.000 Verbal 0.42 (0.37) 0.67 (0.34) 916.02 0.000 Cultural/spiritual 0.27 (0.32) 0.51 (0.36) 938.46 0.000 Social/emotional 0.37 (0.24) 0.57 (0.27) 1264.78 0.000 Perseverance 0.34 (0.23) 0.47 (0.26) 526.94 0.000 Approaches 0.43 (0.37) 0.75 (0.32) 1481.03 0.000 Numeracy/concepts 0.47 (0.11) 0.48 (0.12) 28.41 0.000 Literacy 0.23 (0.28) 0.44 (0.37) 884.00 0.000

Table 10 Relationship between singing songs in the home environment and child development

Did not do Did do ANOVA Mean (SD) Mean (SD) F Sig Physical 0.59 (0.26) 0.68 (0.25) 294.83 0.000 Verbal 0.42 (0.38) 0.57 (0.36) 359.91 0.000 Cultural/spiritual 0.31 (0.35) 0.38 (0.35) 83.39 0.000 Social/emotional 0.38 (0.25) 0.48 (0.27) 273.20 0.000 Perseverance 0.38 (0.23) 0.38 (0.25) 1.09 0.000 Approaches 0.40 (0.38) 0.63 (0.36) 841.65 0.000 Numeracy/concepts 0.48 (0.38) 0.47 (0.11) 36.35 0.000 Literacy 0.24 (0.31) 0.35 (0.34) 229.01 0.000

Table 11 Relationship between taking the child outside the home and child development

Did not do Did do ANOVA Mean (SD) Mean (SD) F Sig Physical 0.60 (0.27) 0.69 (0.25) 260.47 0.000 Verbal 0.44 (0.38) 0.56 (0.37) 243.28 0.000 Cultural/spiritual 0.33 (0.34) 0.37 (0.36) 33.40 0.000 Social/emotional 0.40 (.26) 0.47 (0.27) 129.80 0.000 Perseverance 0.38 (0.23) 0.39 (0.25) 3.19 0.000 Approaches 0.43 (0.38) 0.63 (0.36) 608.42 0.000 Numeracy/concepts 0.48 (0.12) 0.47 (0.11) 38.57 0.000 Literacy 0.25 (0.31) 0.34 (0.34) 184.40 0.000

30 Table 12 Relationship between playing in the home environment and child development

Did not do Did do ANOVA Mean (SD) Mean (SD) F Sig Physical 0.59 (0.26) 0.69 (0.25) 369.23 0.000 Verbal 0.40 (0.38) 0.59 (0.36) 589.61 0.000 Cultural/spiritual 0.29 (0.34) 0.40 (0.35) 225.77 0.000 Social/emotional 0.37 (0.25) 0.49 (0.27) 446.65 0.000 Perseverance 0.37 (0.24) 0.39 (0.25) 24.55 0.000 Approaches 0.39 (0.37) 0.65 (0.35) 1112.70 0.000 Numeracy/concepts 0.78 (0.11) 0.47 (0.11) 4.823 0.000 Literacy 0.22 (0.30) 0.36 (0.34) 402.34 0.000

Table 13 Relationship between naming, counting and drawing in the home environment and child development

Did not do Did do ANOVA Mean (SD) Mean (SD) F Sig Physical 0.60 (0.25) 0.75 (0.25) 727.85 0.000 Verbal 0.43 (0.37) 0.68 (0.34) 872.53 0.000 Cultural/spiritual 0.28 (0.32) 0.50 (0.38) 820.95 0.000 Social/emotional 0.38 (0.24) 0.57 (0.28) 1060.13 0.000 Perseverance 0.34 (0.23) 0.48 (0.25) 656.47 0.000 Approaches 0.44 (0.37) 0.75 (0.32) 1399.70 0.000 Numeracy/concepts 0.46 (0.11) 0.49 (0.12) 113.14 0.000 Literacy 0.22 (0.27) 0.48 (0.37) 1342.61 0.000

The influence of preschool attendance on child development Research conducted across the world shows that ECE – playgroup, kindergarten, preschool and the like – is one of the most cost-effective and equitable interventions in promoting human development. In Samoa, 38 percent of children aged 2-5 years old had attended preschool (either currently or in the past). For the 62% of children who had not attended preschool, the majority of parents reported that this was because they had not considered it (33%) or because there was no preschool available nearby (30%). The remainder explained that their child had not attended preschool because it was too expensive, the hours of operation were inconvenient, or because there was someone at home to care for the child (10% each). Few parents had not sent their child to preschool because they believed teachers were not qualified, it was not worth the money, it had no benefits or no regulations (all <1%).

Figure 9 demonstrates that attendance varies by children’s age and gender; increasing as children grow older and get closer to school age, with participation rates higher for girls than boys. Importantly however, these results indicate that the majority of children in Samoa begin school without having any previous exposure to ECE, and are unlikely to be “school ready”. International evidence tells us that these children may find the transition to the school environment challenging, and are at a higher risk of early school drop-out and school failure.

31 Figure 9 Preschool attendance by child’s gender and age

Figure 10 Preschool attendance by island

Preschool participation is also influenced by which island a child lives on, as demonstrated by Figure 10. Readers should be cognisant that this figure is based on 2,836 children from Savai’i, 9,237 children from Upolu, 105 children from Manono, and 15 children from Apolima. Preschool attendance is likely a reflection of both service availability, as well as caregiver’s desire to send children to preschool. Attendance rates in Manono are highest, with more than 90 percent of all children aged 2-5 years having attended (either currently or in the past). After Apolima, preschool attendance on the main island, Upolu, is lowest.

32 Again, when examining patterns of preschool attendance by caregiver’s educational levels, we see somewhat inconsistent results, and this is possibly due to the uneven spread of caregivers across each of the four education level groups (i.e. <2 percent had completed primary school while >80 percent had completed high school). Generally, we would expect to see increased ECE attendance with higher caregiver education, and this is true when examining patterns of interaction across caregivers who started high school, completed high school, and completed tertiary education (i.e. not the primary school sample). Caregiver’s with a tertiary education were much more likely to send their children to preschool relative to caregivers who had only been to high school. Overall, results looking at the influences of preschool attendance in Samoa indicate that increased opportunities for participation in ECE, and increased caregiver awareness of the importance of ECE for children’s healthy development are needed.

Figure 11 Preschool attendance by child caregiver’s education

Although ECE attendance across Samoa is low overall, Figure 12 and Table 17 demonstrate that those children who have attended have significantly higher levels of development across all SEHCI domains when compared to children who had not attended preschool. Analyses of variance models were applied to compare mean results; and F values and significance figures are provided in Table 17. Not surprisingly, the relationship between preschool attendance and child development was strongest for children’s literacy outcomes; the reading and writing skills of children who had attended preschool was greater than twice as good than the literacy skills of those who had not preschool. These results demonstrate the invaluable benefits ECE can have on children’s early development and readiness for

33 school. Attending preschool can help children develop the early language and literacy skills needed for them to transition successfully into the school environment and then further develop their skills.

Figure 12 Relationship between preschool attendance and child development outcomes

34 Table 14 Relationship between preschool attendance and child development outcomes

Currently Attended in Has not ANOVA attends past attended Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Mean (SD) F Sig Physical 0.81 (0.24) 0.73 (0.27) 0.63 (0.25) 696.26 0.000 Verbal 0.70 (0.34) 0.63 (0.31) 0.48 (0.37) 531.86 0.000 Cultural/spiritual 0.61 (0.35) 0.63 (0.35) 0.31 (0.33) 1028.17 0.000 Social/emotional 0.64 (0.26) 0.55 (0.30) 0.41 (0.26) 1084.50 0.000 Perseverance 0.46 (0.24) 0.42 (0.26) 0.37 (0.24) 177.10 0.000 Approaches 0.78 (0.30) 0.68 (0.36) 0.50 (0.38) 839.37 0.000 Numeracy/concepts 0.51 (0.12) 0.50 (0.13) 0.47 (0.11) 178.12 0.000 Literacy 0.61 (0.33) 0.50 (0.37) 0.25 (0.25) 1752.83 0.000

Which factors have the strongest relationship with child development? Findings throughout this report have highlighted a range of factors that are influencing children’s early development in Samoa. A series of multiple regression analyses were conducted in order to determine which of these factors have the strongest relationship with child development. Table 15 below presents the range of variables shown to best predict overall child development scores, all of which are highly statistically significant.

Table 15 Strongest predictors of child development

Overall development Variables B SE B β Caregiver’s education 0.014 0.004 0.029** Attended preschool 0.096 0.006 0.159** Read books at home 0.082 0.006 0.175** Told stories at home 0.079 0.005 0.177** Counted/named/drew at home 0.078 0.006 0.172** Child’s age 0.033 0.002 0.141** R2 0.542 F 604.255**

Note: *p < .05, **p < .01

While a child’s age and their caregiver’s education are important in influencing their developmental outcomes, results show that preschool attendance has a stronger relationship with children’s overall development. Further, while the influence of preschool is strong, it is interactions in the home environment – caregivers reading, telling stories, and naming, counting or drawing to/with their children – that have the strongest relationship with children’s development. Encouragingly, both of these factors are modifiable, and can be improved in order to better support children’s development and readiness for school. With only 38percent of children aged 2-5 having attended preschool there is considerable room to increase attendance. Results demonstrate that this, combined with efforts to enhance the capacity of caregivers to support their children’s development in the home environment will positively impact the development of future generations in Samoa.

35 PART FIVE: DATA DISSEMINATION

Geographical Mapping In order to aid data dissemination, the SEHCI data were geographically mapped so as to provide data in a pictorial format that are easy to understand. Data were aggregated by village, and each village was provided with a colour based on their SEHCI results. Local consultation deemed the presentation of data by “traffic light colours” appropriate to represent how children were developing in each community, relative to all other communities. SEHCI results at a village aggregate level were ranked from lowest to highest; the bottom third of communities were colored red, the middle third were colored orange, and the top third were colored green. These colors provide a simple indication of how children are developing across communities relative to one another.

SEHCI results maps were created for each Savai’i Island, Savai’i Urban Island, Apia, Upolu Island, and Upolu Rural Island (see Appendix B). Maps presenting overall child development across each of these areas were developed, as well as individual maps presenting results on the numeracy and concepts and the literacy SEHCI developmental domains. In addition to these, further maps were developed for each area presenting both the overall development of children across villages as well as data regarding ECE attendance and stimulating home environments. These maps in particular demonstrate that, where there are higher rates of ECE attendance and stimulating home environments, child development was also higher. All SEHCI results maps are presented in Appendix B.

These maps have proven to be a cost effective, successful data dissemination strategy, and exemplify the value of a census approach to the monitoring of child development. Maps acted as a facilitator in various data dissemination activities (see below). They prompted conversations around the importance of early childhood development, how children are developing in one community relative to another, what was working well in communities which had on average, good child development scores, as well as what could be improved in communities in which child development was poor – all while simultaneously engaging communities around the SEHCI results in an easily understandable and locally meaningful way. Maps continue to be utilised and are also displayed to the public in MESC spaces.

Data dissemination SEHCI results were provided back to communities and stakeholders throughout Samoa via a range of methods. As with data collection, dissemination methods aimed to capitalise on opportunities to build local ownership, capacity and understanding of the SEHCI datato help facilitate a repeat of the SEHCI in years to come, with the hope that the government will continue the initiative after PEARL funding ceases.

In January 2017, census results were initially launched at the MESC annual convention in Apia, for which the Minister of Education and Chief Executive Officer Dr Karoline Afamasaga Fuata’I was in attendance, as well as over 400 teachers, ECE principals, and MESC employees. This initial presentation highlighted key findings from the survey, indicating that ECE attendance, a stimulating home environment, and higher levels of mother’s education were all association with better child development. Following the official release of the results, discussions between MESC, Sanigest and World Bank team members saw the creation of a results dissemination plan which included three key components:

1. Stakeholder meetings In February 2017, a series of meetings with key stakeholders were hosted, which included attendees from the MESC Core Management Team, the Education Sector Advisory Committee and Sector, the ECE Taskforce, the National Council of ECE, and

36 the Ministry of Women, Community and Social Development. Stakeholder meetings were utilised to deliver key messages from the census results to key high level stakeholders, who could then relay information to their networks and encourage attendance at the community meetings. Stakeholder meetings were well attended and involved rich, productive discussions of results.

2. Community meetings Following stakeholder meetings, a total of 10 community meetings were hosted across both islands to disseminate SEHCI results to the wider community. Representatives from each village including village mayors, church leaders, village women representatives, ECE teachers and principals were encouraged to attend. Four meetings were held in Upolu in February 2017, which saw approximately 600 community members in attendance. Another two meetings were held in Savai’i in March 2017, which had approximately 200 members attend. Each meeting included a presentation of geographical mapping of national SEHCI results, as well as results specific to the communities represented. Attendees were provided with print outs of individual community data, as well as overall trends for each MESC political division, which facilitated discussions around what was working well in communities which had on average, good overall child development scores, as well as conversation around what could be improved in communities for which average child development scores were poor.

As a final product, all the community-level data handouts were collated to createa compendium of community SEHCI results. The compendium is indexed by the political districts of each island, and is freely available to members of the public as an e-reader flipbook on the MESC website, as well as a PDF copy.

Photo 3 Community meetings in Upolu

Source: Sanigest Internacional

37 Photo 4 Community meetings in Savai’i

Source: Sanigest Internacional

3. Various media outlets A range of media outlets were also utilised to further disseminate results to the general public. A press release was launched at a press conference held by the Chief Executive Officer and other MESC employees in February 2017. The press conference presented geographical mapping of SEHCI results, demonstrating children’s developmental outcomes across islands and developmental domains. A range of follow-up media coverage ensued as a result of the press conference.

Next, two videos were created in order to deliver two key messages to the general public: that 3-5 year old children who attended ECE were developing better than those who had not attended ECE, and that 3-5 year old children who lived in a stimulating home environment had better development scores than those who did not. These videos were aired on television throughout the country.

Finally, social media outlets were also utilised. A Facebook page and Instagram account were created to allow the public in Samoa to remain up to date on the SEHCI results online. Over 30 posts were made across these social media avenues. Not only did these websites allow for the promotion of key messages from the census, but they also brought together a community of those interested in the SEHCI and what can be done to improve children’s development in Samoa.

38 PART SIX: CONCLUSIONS

Samoa is now one of the very few countries in the world, after Australia and Tonga, to have undertaken a census of children’s development across its entire population. As not all children in the country attend a single form of early education or health service at any one point in time to act as a system wide data collection point, the census required implementation of an innovative, mixed-method, and cross-sector approach to data collection. This is a pragmatic data collection model that other countries should consider utilising, and Samoa is to be commended on this achievement.

As a result, the country now has comprehensive local-level data that captures the development of children across the entire country. The data collection process in itself as well as the results dissemination processes is helping to foster community awareness of the importance of early childhood development, and how families can work to support their children’s learning and readiness for school. Further, the data act as a baseline of children’s development in Samoa, providing policy makers and service providers data with which to base their planning around, and a platform for monitoring policies and evaluating programs in terms of their impact on children’s development.

The results presented in this report highlight two key modifiable factors that are having a positive influence on children’s early development and school readiness. As such, the SEHCI has given Samoa the evidence required to put plans in place in order to enhance the development of children across the country. Namely:

(i) Preschool attendance is having a positive influence on all areas of children’s development – yet attendance across the country is low; there is great room for improvement. Increasing attendance rates through enhanced community awareness of the value of ECE for early childhood development as well as improvements in access through minimising financial and geographical barriers will positively impact the development and school readiness of future generations in Samoa.

(ii) Relative to other countries, children in Samoa are receiving low levels of stimulation and support for their development in their home environments. Children whose caregivers engaged in simple yet stimulating activities with them, such as reading, storytelling, and drawing, were developing better than children whose caregivers had not been interacting with them at home. Indeed, these activities were found to be the strongest predictor of child development as measured by the SEHCI. Efforts to enhance the capacity of caregivers to support their children’s development in the home environment should also be prioritised, and will result in enhanced child development outcomes.

Repeated implementation of the SEHCI will provide the country with data at multiple time points, and will thus enable Samoa to evaluate any policy changes, changes to service delivery, and community action to support early child development and school readiness. Local capacities were built throughout the instrument adaptation process, the data collection process as well as through the dissemination of results. Further, future implementations will bear less costs considering less work will be required (i.e. the instrument has already been adapted, and less technical support will be required due to the local capacity building undertaken in the first census). It is hoped that the country will drive repeat SEHCI collections, because only with repeat data will communities know if their work to support the children in their community are making a difference.

39 40 appendix A - Back-Translated Samoan Versions (teacher and parent completed) of the EHCI 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 appendix B - Geographically Mapped Results of SEHCI Domains Savai’i Overall Development

53 54

Upolu Overall Development

Upolu Overall development by village and percentage in stimulating home by district (Apia)

Apia Area

South Pacific Ocean Faleula Puipaa Safune

M uli Toamua ina nu Aele-Fou Sa u

ga a aig Matautu Tai V Sogi M u a Vaitele lo o t Vaiusu la Matafele a a u -F Vaitoloa v i t Vaipuna e o u e a i Nuu v s n U s Sa i a a V l e a g F i i T t u u s Vailoa aim u i a Saleufi a a a g M l Eli Ap a T V a a

o Levili

l t Faleata e u Aai-O-NiueLeone f

a os i o a l a Tufuiopa F V e a u u f a Moataa

T V p a a o Taufusi L Maluafou in e g t eg e o ifo L Vaimea o i ia u Siusega s T f i i l f e Talimatau i Malifa m le Aai-O-Fiti Pe a Vaiala-Uta n ae o u t ul o Lotopa g Palisi Lelata T a Motootua Vaivase Tafaigata m Tuanaimato-W a Tai Falelauniu Al Leufisa Fagalii Ulul Sinamoga Tanugamanono olo Tuanaimato-E M Vaivase

a ag Papauta Uta Aleisa ia Toomatagi gi- Tanumapua Lalovaea Vailele T

Alafua ai Letogo Tuaefu Moamoa Laulii Seesee Vailima Aleisa Tanoaleia Letogo Tuaefu % in stimulating home by Overall development Pacific Early Age ReadinesMs oaanmd oLaearning (PEARL) district Laulii

Overall development by village and percentage in No interviews Seesee 0 0,5 1 2Km stimulating home by district (Upolu Island) ® Maualuga le tulaga Tapatapao Vaoala Avele Feoloolo le tulaga Produced by: Sanigest International Magiagi-Uta Yes Currently Letava Maualalo le tulaga

55 56

Overall development by village and percentage in stimulating home by district (Savai’i Island)

Fagamalo

i Savai'i Island a S e a p

s a o a i p e m a e a l l e n v l a i u a Safotu a l a e a A o u u S t f

i L i i M a a l g a a a g a e e u a S l S l o a n a l i e o Vaipouli i a a Mauga v s a a g Paia v g S g a a g a South Pacific Ocean u t a t a f S a e t a a e Letui F L e F l M L a a F Vaotupua lo tu Samalaeulu F F a U le a (A a Papa-Uta g va lu a Vaisala p s ta o Matavai Sataua a Auala ) Aopo Vaisigago Patamea Tufutafoe

Neiafu Neiafu Tai Uta

F a le l im a Puapua Asaga Fagafau Salimu i Ta a Lano Malae I- t - -U ta -I Luua a a i t li ip m a u p a m t ai S a a S i Sapini S g aa o as F Tapueleele Sa Faiaai ii Vaiola a Tuasivi a v Vaiaata u a Siufa ip s ga Fogapoa a a e F V g n u o o si F g Fatausi a lo Sapapalii S la a a Fuifatu o g a F lu tu Lal Safu a ia oma a o u lava Eveeve F at a V S ilu aiafa la i Vaimaga Sa Tino-I-Iva Vaisaulu Vaifou

Siutu Salelavalu Tai Moasula Sapulu

i l Salelavalu Uta u Maota Fataloa Vailoa m Faala o Saletagaloa S V Palauli o Sili a t Gataivai a i t e u a Foua ia g Papa f a V e i l a u Falefia Taga P Pitonuu Tafua Satalafai Gautavai Vaiala South Pacific Ocean

Pacific Early Age Readiness and Learning (PEARL) % in stimulating home by Overall development district N o interviews Overall development by village and percentage in stimulating home by district (Savai'i Island) ® 0 2,5 5 10Km Maualuga le tulaga Feoloolo le tulaga Produced by: Sanigest International Yes Currently Maualalo le tulaga Overall development by village and percentage in stimulating home by district (Savai’i Urban Island)

Savai'i Island

Puapua Asaga Salimu Lano Malae Luua pi pi ai S i Sapini aa as Tapueleele Sa Vaiola Vaiaata Tuasivi Siu faga Fogapoa Fu si Sapapalii Fatausi South Pacific Ocean Fuifatu S Lalom afua alava Eveeve Vaiaf ai Vaimaga Tino-I-Iva Vaisaulu Vaifou Salelavalu Uta Salelavalu Tai Sapulu Saletagaloa Foua Maota Fataloa Falefia Faala Satalafai S V % in stimulating home by Legend Sili a aPacific Early Age Readiness and Learning (PEARL) Overall development t e district u N o interviews ia g Papa f aOverall development by village and percentage in 0 1,25 2,5 5 Km e i l a stimulating home by district (Savai'i Island) ® Maualuga le tulaga u P Pitonuu Feoloolo le tulaga Produced by: Sanigest International Yes Currently Tafua Maualalo le tulaga

Gautavai Vaiala

57 58

Overall development by village and percentage in stimulating home by district (Upolu Island)

Upolu Island

South Pacific Ocean Malau Utualii Alamutu

Tufulele i

L l a

e u

e e Apolima Island Paepaeala n

a i l e F a

u a l a

a u v u a Samea a

Satoi l o a Vailuutai M F T e F o a p N a a L a i S n e s s l v Salua Fuailolo e o o o a i i a f t a s F u u e al F o o eo t lo N g

o a a l a o S L u t Satuilagi e

p l u f Satuimalufilufi s o Sina m ii u

i t A Afia L t a a o o Apai Apolima F L l o e a a a Fou g l Afolau o l T e a Le v e i a Lepuiai Vaipapa a e M i u Luatuanuu t s

i an s u Lepale o T e Avele Faleu M Laulii Olo oa

o a u e i v U E i f m a a t Tausagi p a S a li s t o Vaoala gi na i ilu

i a a e i a f t le f u Aleisa n ag f Sa u Solosolo a a a a le us Lu Tiapapata ea m g i u p p F l a U Sa a a al ta t Tanumalala a u Sa o t F Falefa uf a i T u a a u P a Sa a a Si e g n m e u L u o l s a a te u Faleaseela Afiamalu Manunu le m Nefunefu S m a u lo Falevao S s u a u Matautu Matafaa a an Solaua L M to m o Salimu Levi a a a a Sauniatu Samamea fa ag ai V Sa af v e Taelefaga Lona Matanofo T Sa L Maasina O ifo Sataoa Uta Uafato a utu g a Amaile a i a t a G Ma t g a Samusu a u e f e i s i a o a s Saanapu t u g i V u Utufaalalafa Salamumu o F a Alafou N a a L s l i u o Tiavea Saleaaumua a a n a o i t v F i i u

n i f l u

a s a u m i

T l Sataoa Tai a M a u i a M t a

f v u t e Siunio i l u

l Si a o n Mutiatele

a t a S a a a a u a Piu l f a g g a M m a a g Po S a V f u u a S t ga e t a p

a a Lotopue a f

a a a t a Sa f T l v Lepa l o e La o a t l l a a om

o a Au Malaela M a V n M

L S u Satitoa Sapunaoa Lealatele Sapoe Ulutogia Salesatele Siupapa Utulaelae Vailoa South Pacific Ocean

% in stimulating home by Overall development Pacific Early Age Readiness and Learning (PEARL) district

Overall development by village and percentage in 0 2,5 5 10 km No interviews stimulating home by district (Upolu Island) ® Maualuga le tulaga Feoloolo le tulaga Produced by: Sanigest International Yes Currently Maualalo le tulaga Overall development by village and percentage in stimulating home by district (Upolu Rural Island)

L e a a e u

T v i a u

a u a l a

f n u a

F u l a e e

M Upolu Island a o u F l i e l

N s T p a a i a o a le o a L t e

i i

F f o i l l S e n a V o M o v South Pacific Ocean o a a a

o a Fal a u v e at P olo a s a s u s u e u a l t t i N li u g u iu Sa

e l i o u

t L U p ap u t i a S m a t

o a e a a e u N g m Sina o o i a t o e Afia u e l a a Af e L a a T L F a i f a g u F a l a a L i a i a lo a T lo Afolau S lo le a vi o A tu p a o im l Vaipapa im a t M a lu i -F f u an o ilu u f Lepale U om i Olo ta Tausagi o o Aleisa a S p a am a g i t o f a a i o Tanumalala a f v t a n a t u e f a p u a e u L t t iu n a u i a P u f a M S t a e T a N M m a Faleaseela S

nu Matafaa oa a at m ao fa ga V fa ia e Sa a a L South Pacific Ocean T av O S o if utu ga ta a Ma G a % in stimulating home by Overall development i Pacific Early Age Readiness and Learning (PEARL) district t N o interviews Overall development by village and percentage in 0 1 2 4 Km a stimulating home by district (Upolu Island) ® Maualuga le tulaga u s Produced by: Sanigest International Feoloolo le tulaga Yes Currently a u Saanapu g i Maualalo lea tulaga f

o Salamumu t o N L

Sataoa Tai

59 60

Overall development by village and percentage of children by districts (Apia)

Apia Area

South Pacific Ocean Faleula Puipaa Safune

M uli Toamua ina n u Aele-Fou Sa u

a g a aig Matautu Tai V Sogi M u a Vaitele lo o t Vaiusu la Matafele a a u -F Vaitoloa v i t Vaipuna e o u e a i Nuu v s n U s Sa i a a V l e a g F i i T t u u s Vailoa aim u i a Saleufi a a a g M l Eli Ap a T V a a

o Levili

l t Faleata e u Aai-O-NiueLeone f

a os i o a l a Tufuiopa F V e a u u f a Moataa

a ag Papauta Uta Aleisa ia Toomatagi gi- Tanumapua Lalovaea Vailele T

Alafua ai Letogo Tuaefu Moamoa Laulii Seesee Vailima Aleisa Tanoaleia Letogo Tuaefu % of children by district in Overall development Pacific Early Age ReadinesMs oaanmd oLaearning (PEARL) ECE Laulii

Overall development by village and percentage of No interviews Seesee 0 0,5 1 2Km children in ECE by district (Upolu Island) ® Maualuga le tulaga Tapatapao Vaoala Avele Feoloolo le tulaga Produced by: Sanigest International Magiagi-Uta Yes Currently Letava Maualalo le tulaga Overall development by village and percentage of children by districts (Savai’i Island)

Fagamalo

i Savai'i Island a S e a p

s a o a i p e m a e a l l e n v l a i u a Safotu a l a e a A o u u S t f

Neiafu Neiafu Tai Uta

Siutu Salelavalu Tai Moasula Sapulu

Pacific Early Age Readiness and Learning (PEARL) % of children by district in Overall development ECE N o interviews Overall development by village and percentage of children in ECE by district (Savai'i Island) ® 0 2,5 5 10Km Maualuga le tulaga Feoloolo le tulaga Produced by: Sanigest International Yes Currently Maualalo le tulaga

61 62

Overall development by village and percentage of children by districts (Savai’i Urban Island)

Savai'i Island

Puapua Asaga Salimu Lano Malae Luua pi pi ai S i Sapini aa as Tapueleele Sa Vaiola Vaiaata Tuasivi Siu faga Fogapoa F us i Fatausi Sapapalii South Pacific Ocean Fuifatu S Lalom afua alava Eveeve Vaiaf ai Vaimaga Tino-I-Iva Vaisaulu Vaifou Salelavalu Uta Salelavalu Tai Sapulu Saletagaloa Foua Maota Fataloa Falefia Faala Satalafai S V Sili a aPacific Early Age Readiness and Learning (PEARL) % of children by district in Overall development t e ECE u ia g No interviews Papa f a e i Overall development by village and percentage of 0 1,25 2,5 5 Km l a Maualuga le tulaga u children in ECE by district (Savai'i Island) ® P Pitonuu Feoloolo le tulaga Produced by: Sanigest International Yes Currently Tafua Maualalo le tulaga

Gautavai Vaiala Overall development by village and percentage of children by districts (Upolu Island)

Upolu Island

South Pacific Ocean Malau Utualii Alamutu

Tufulele i

L l a

e u

e e Apolima Island Paepaeala n

a i l e F a

u a l a

a u v u a Samea a

Satoi l o a Vailuutai M F T e F o a p N a a L a i S n e s s l v Salua Fuailolo e o o o a i i a f t a s F u u e al F o o eo t lo N g

o a a l a o S L u t Satuilagi e

p l u f Satuimalufilufi s o Sina m ii u

i t A Afia L t a a o o Apai Apolima F L l o e a a a Fou g l Afolau o l T e a Le v e i a Lepuiai Vaipapa a e M i u Luatuanuu t s

i an s u Lepale o T e Avele Faleu M Laulii Olo oa

om a u e i v U E i f a a t Tausagi p a S a li s t o Vaoala gi na i ilu

n i f l u

a s a u m i

T l Sataoa Tai a M a u i a M t a

f v u t e Siunio i l u

l Si a o n Mutiatele

a t a S a a a a u a Piu l f a g g a M m a a g Po S a V f u u a S t ga e t a p

a a Lotopue a f

a a a t a Sa f T l v Lepa l o e La o a t l l a a om

o a Au Malaela M a V n M

L S u Satitoa Sapunaoa Lealatele Sapoe Ulutogia Salesatele Siupapa Utulaelae Vailoa South Pacific Ocean

% of children by district in Overall development Pacific Early Age Readiness and Learning (PEARL) ECE

Overall development by village and percentage of 0 2,5 5 10 km No interviews children in ECE by district (Upolu Island) ® Maualuga le tulaga Feoloolo le tulaga Produced by: Sanigest International Yes Currently Maualalo le tulaga

63 64

Overall development by village and percentage of children by districts (Upolu Rural Island)

L e a a e u

T v i a u

a u a l a

f n u a

F u l a e e

M Upolu Island a o u F l i e l

N s T p a a i a o a le o a L t e

i i

F f o i l l S e n a V o M o v South Pacific Ocean o a a a

o a Fal a u v e at P olo a s a s u s u e u a l t t i N li u g u iu Sa

e l i o u

t L U p ap u t i a S m a t

nu Matafaa oa a at m ao fa ga V fa ia e Sa a a L South Pacific Ocean T av O S o if utu ga ta a Ma G a % of children by district in Overall development i Pacific Early Age Readiness and Learning (PEARL) ECE t N o interviews Overall development by village and percentage of 0 1 2 4 Km a children in ECE by district (Upolu Island) ® Maualuga le tulaga u s Produced by: Sanigest International Feoloolo le tulaga Yes Currently a u Saanapu g i Maualalo lea tulaga f

o Salamumu t o N L

Sataoa Tai Savai’i Approaches

Fagamalo

Sam e

s pai

a p eia ao i Savai'i ale lu aug Safotu ana Av a

Sal o

e l e L M lii

gi eau a a Saf oa Sat ee a Vaipouli in oa Mauga alu

gia Paia Sal ga gal av uv ag t a Sas a at F a Letui Lea F let M Lef South Pacific Ocean a F Vaotupua loa tu Sam alaeulu F F U

a a

lea a (Av Papa-U ta g at lup Vaisala s Matavai a) o Sataua a Auala Aopo Vaisigago Patamea Tufutafoe

Neiafu Neiafu Tai Uta

F a lel im a Puapua Asaga Fagafau Salimu i a a Lano Malae -T t a-I -U Luua at a-I i at li tu pip Sapini Sam ga Sai i Sam o aa F s Tapueleele Saa Faiaai Vaiola aii Tuasivi a Vaiaata av Siufa ipu s ga Fogapoa a e V ga Fu Village # of Surveys Village # of Surveys Village # of Surveys Village # of Surveys o on si F Fatausi Aopo 41 Fusi 99 Puleia 27 Satufia 56 lo Sapapalii Asaga 26 Gataivai 56 Saasaai 50 Satuiatua 30 Sag ala Fuifatu Auala 56 Gautavai 22 Safai 16 Sili 42 o ga F ua Lalo Saf Avao 21 Lalomalava 20 Safotu 67 Siufaga 58 alu iat mal ua Avata 73 Lano 37 Safua 20 Siutu 51 o u ava Eveeve F a V Eveeve 99 Leagiagi 0 Sagone 29 Tafua 34 Sat aiafai ailu Vaimaga Faala 32 Lefagoalii 32 Saipipi 32 Taga 30 Tino-I-Iva Fagaee 43 Lelepa 28 Salailua 51 Tapueleele 33 Sal Vaisaulu Fagafau 29 Letui 23 Saleaulu 52 Tino I Iva 81 Vaifou Fagamalo 31 Luua 58 Saleia 23 Tuasivi 99 Salelavalu Fagasa 30 Malae 58 36 Tufutafoe 40 Tai Salelavalu Siutu Faiaai Manase Utuloa Moasula Salelavalu Tai 30 67 Uta 27 0 Sapulu Falefia 34 Maota 52 Saletagaloa 21 Vaega 63

uli Salelavalu Uta Falelima 57 Matavai 50 Salimu 58 Vaiaaata 33 Maota Fataloa Matavai Vailoa Faletagaloa Samalaeulu Vaiafai Faala Saletagaloa 50 (Asau) 32 50 81 Sat Sili V Palauli oom Fataloa Mauga Samata I Tai Vaiala Gataivai a it 19 50 82 0 eg u a Foua Samata I Fatausi Moasula Vaifou Papa f a V 99 28 Uta 82 81 eia ia Fatuvalu 50 Neiafu Tai 20 Samauga 20 Vailoa 56 Falefia Taga Pul Pitonuu Foailalo 19 Neiafu Uta 35 Sapapalii 70 Vaimaga 70 Foailaluga 24 Paia 21 Sapini 58 Vaiola 33 Tafua Satalafai Fogapoa 99 Papa 18 Sapulu 35 Vaipouli 0 Fogasavaii 18 Papa Uta 73 Sasina 43 Vaipua 26 Gautavai Vaiala Fogatuli 30 Patamea 57 Satalafai 22 Vaisala 55 Foua 17 Pitonuu 43 Sataua 56 Vaisaulu 81 Fuifatu 99 Puapua 167 Satoalepai 12 Vaitoomuli 40 Vaotupua 73 Pacific Early Age Readiness and Learning (PEARL) Legend

0 2,5 5 10 15 20km Leai ni fa’ata lanoaga Approaches to learning/Auala o Aoaoga ® Maualuga le tulaga Feoloolo le tulaga Produced by: Sanigest International Maualalo le tulaga

65 66

Savai’i Cultural_spiritual

Fagamalo

Sam e

s pai

a p eia ao i Savai'i ale lu aug Safotu ana Av a

Sal o

e l e L M lii

gi eau a a Saf oa Sat ee a Vaipouli in oa Mauga alu

gia Paia Sal ga gal av uv ag t a Sas a at F a Letui Lea F let M Lef South Pacific Ocean a F Vaotupua loa tu Sam alaeulu F F U

a a

lea a (Av Papa-U ta g at lup Vaisala s Matavai a) o Sataua a Auala Aopo Vaisigago Patamea Tufutafoe

Neiafu Neiafu Tai Uta

0 2,5 5 10 15 20km Leai ni fa’ata lanoaga Cultural-spiritual/Aganuu ma le Faakerisiano ® Maualuga le tulaga Feoloolo le tulaga Produced by: Sanigest International Maualalo le tulaga Savai’i Literacy

Savai'i

67 68

Savai’i Numeracy concepts

Savai'i Savai’i Perserverance

Fagamalo

Sam e

s pai

a p eia ao i Savai'i ale lu aug Safotu ana Av a

Sal o

e l e L M lii

gi eau a a Saf oa Sat ee a Vaipouli in oa Mauga alu

gia Paia Sal ga gal av uv ag t a Sas a at F a Letui Lea F let M Lef South Pacific Ocean a F Vaotupua loa tu Sam alaeulu F F U

a a

lea a (Av Papa-U ta g at lup Vaisala s Matavai a) o Sataua a Auala Aopo Vaisigago Patamea Tufutafoe

Neiafu Neiafu Tai Uta

0 2,5 5 10 15 20km Leai ni fa’ata lanoaga Perseverance/Lavapapale ® Maualuga le tulaga Feoloolo le tulaga Produced by: Sanigest International Maualalo le tulaga

69 70

Savai’i Physical

Fagamalo

Sam e

s pai

a p eia ao i Savai'i ale lu aug Safotu ana Av a

Sal o

e l e L M lii

gi eau a a Saf oa Sat ee a Vaipouli in oa Mauga alu

gia Paia Sal ga gal av uv ag t a Sas a at F a Letui Lea F let M Lef South Pacific Ocean a F Vaotupua loa tu Sam alaeulu F F U

a a

lea a (Av Papa-U ta g at lup Vaisala s Matavai a) o Sataua a Auala Aopo Vaisigago Patamea Tufutafoe

Neiafu Neiafu Tai Uta

0 2,5 5 10 15 20km Leai ni fa’ata lanoaga Physical/Soifua Maloloina ® Maualuga le tulaga Feoloolo le tulaga Produced by: Sanigest International Maualalo le tulaga Savai’i Social Emotional

Fagamalo

Sam e

s pai

a p eia ao i Savai'i ale lu aug Safotu ana Av a

Sal o

e l e L M lii

gi eau a a Saf oa Sat ee a Vaipouli in oa Mauga alu

gia Paia Sal ga gal av uv ag t a Sas a at F a Letui Lea F let M Lef South Pacific Ocean a F Vaotupua loa tu Sam alaeulu F F U

a a

lea a (Av Papa-U ta g at lup Vaisala s Matavai a) o Sataua a Auala Aopo Vaisigago Patamea Tufutafoe

Neiafu Neiafu Tai Uta

0 2,5 5 10 15 20km Leai ni fa’ata lanoaga Social-emotional/Vafealoai ma Lagona Faaalia ® Maualuga le tulaga Feoloolo le tulaga Produced by: Sanigest International Maualalo le tulaga

71 72

Upolu Approaches

Upolu

Malau Utualii Alamutu

Apolima Island Tufulele i a

Lea l a

u e

Paepaeala e

n Apolima i a

e a

F a l l

Fou uv a p i

a u a

a u Samea a a

Satoi F l o Pu

Vailuutai M F e T o a a p a N a i L n S si e s l Salua Fuailolo e o o v o

a t i a Vaitele a

f e u s Fa F o o u le t o N lo g Si

a l o L u a a o S use

u t Satuilagi e u ga p s m l u f a Satuimalufilufi o Sina ii t u i t N a Afia L A t o a ig a o le a a F f

Apai l a Lalo o e a e a T u a g p a ile Afolau a u va l T f o a e a Leus v m a oa l V go i a u a a Al n ee L Vailim a o Lepuiai M Vaipapa i a m Luatuanuu t T anom i T Faleu u Lepale o es oa Avele Let Olo Laulii oali M

U u i v a M E t a i a a Tausagi a Se o p s t Vaoala giagi iluf i e i a a i a t f Aleisa n f Sam u Solosolo a a us a Luf Tiapapata u eauna p p F l Sauan at aga a U t Tanumalala Salele al au a u o t F Falefa T a a a ai Village # of Surveys Village # of Surveys Village # of Surveys Village # of Surveys Pa e S a Siuf g Aai o Fiti 179 Lepea 44 Pata 54 Taelefaga 70 m le u L u o te Aai o Niue Lepuiai Pesega Tafagamanu Faleaseela Afiamalu Manunu a a us 73 28 179 19 m Aele Fou 183 Letava 84 Piu 47 Tafaigata 195 Nefunefu Sa um lo Falevao les Afega 122 Letogo 72 Poutasi 63 Tafatafa 57 u a Sa us Afia 20 Leufisa 27 Puipaa 131 Tafitoala 29 Matautu n L M Afiamalu Leulumoeg Matafaa a a Solaua Saaga Talimatau to Salimu East 37 a 81 178 70 a m o Afiamalu a a Samamea Leusoalii Saanapu Tai Tanoaleia Levi a g ia Sauniatu West 37 27 90 21 f a V Saanapu Tanugaman a f va e Taelefaga Lona Alafou Levi Matanofo S a a L 0 86 Uta 90 ono 58 T S Alafua 25 Levi 73 Safaatoa 21 Tanumalala 17 O Maasina Alamagoto 61 Levili 29 Safune I 131 Tanumapua 36 o Sataoa Uta Alamutu 86 Lona 70 Saina 40 Tapatapao 26 if Uafato Salamumu a tu Aleisa East Lotofaga Tauese u 13 109 Tai 0 73 g a Amaile a a i Salamumu t a Aleisa West Lotopa Taufusi G a t 13 23 Uta 19 20 M g a Amaile 24 Lotopue 75 Salani 48 Tausagi 0 a e Samusu Apai 25 Lotosoa 53 Saleapaga 47 Tiapapata 37 f e Apia 73 Luatuanuu 78 Saleaumua 75 Tiavea 44 su i a Apolima o a si Lufilufi Saleilua Toamua t u g Fou 59 76 63 65 Saanapu i V u Utufaalalafa Apolima Salamumu o F Alafou N a Maasina Salelesi Togafuafua sa la Island 59 70 44 23 L u i Saleaaumua Aufaga 29 Magiagi Tai 110 Salepouae 61 Togitogiga 0 a Tiavea Avele 30 Magiagi Uta 16 Salesatele 29 Toomatagi 22 a oa ino Elise Fou 211 Malaela 75 Saletele 0 Tuaefu 17 v F it i u

f l i Eva 44 Malaemalu 22 Saleufi 16 Tuanai 109 u an a t Faatoialem Tuanaimato s i a u m Malie Salimu u T anu 46 186 70 East 36 u

Sataoa Tai l a M Fagalii 110 Malifa 24 Salua 23 Tufuiopa 73 M u i a t

i va a f

Faleapuna 51 Malua 25 Samai 73 Tufulele 51 e t Siunio i lu l u Faleaseela 46 Maluafou 73 Samamea 70 Tulaele 42 S o a n Mutiatele

a t a S Faleasiu 290 Maninoa 178 Samatau 55 Tuloto 23 a a o u a la g a Piu ga M a Faleatiu Manono Uta Samea Uafato S P V a ga 21 107 158 70 a f S uf u em t a a pa Falefa 73 Manunu 31 Samusu 48 Ululoloa 104 a Lotopue a at f aga Falelauniu 178 Matafaa 18 Saolufata 52 Ulutogia 35 S t Lepa T va

l o L Faleolo 20 Matafele 0 Sapoe 51 Utualii 38 o a a lea l ala a om Faleu Matanofo Sapunaoa Utufaalalafa Auf Malaela M a 28 73 47 24 V n M Lot Sa Faleula 183 Matatufu 51 Satalo 40 Utulaelae 48 u Falevai 73 Matautu 40 Sataoa Tai 56 Vaiala Tai 51 Falevao 58 Matautu 73 Sataoa Uta 16 Vaiala Uta 51 Satitoa Fasitoo Tai 110 Matautu 57 Satapuala 49 Vaiee 19 Sapunaoa Fasitoouta 105 Matautu Tai 124 Satitoa 59 Vaigaga 65 Lealatele Matautu Sapoe Fausaga Satoi Vaigalu 63 Uta 25 23 36 Ulutogia Fuailoloo 158 Moamoa 101 Satuilagi 23 Vailele 101 Salesatele Siupapa Satuimalufil Fugalei Moataa Vailima Utulaelae 16 136 ufi 82 62 Vailoa Fusi 63 Motootua 18 Sauano 18 Vailoa 71 Fusi 44 Mulinuu 0 Sauniatu 31 Vailoa 35 Gagaifo O Mulivai Savaia Vailuutai Le Vao 50 36 23 16 Lalomanu 68 Mulivai 73 Savalalo 16 Vaimea 61 Lalomauga 58 Musumusu 70 Seesee 35 Vaimoso 179 Lalovaea 18 Mutiatele 75 Sina 0 Vaipuna 50 Lalovi 158 Nefunefu 73 Sinamoga 64 Vaisagano 63 Laulii 127 Nofoalli 111 Siufaga 54 Vaitele 336 Lealatele 47 Nonoa 38 Siumu Uta 178 Vaitoloa 44 Leaupani 0 Nuu 45 Siuniu 48 Vaiusu 211 South Pacific Ocean Leauvaa 407 Nuusuatia 29 Siupapa 47 Vaivase Tai 60 Leifiifi 73 Olo 158 Siusega 195 Vaivase Uta 41 Lelata 69 Paepaela 158 Sogi 17 Vaoala 84 Leone 63 Palisi 35 Solaua 25 Vaovai 37 Lepale 111 Papauta 17 Solosolo 97 Vavau 34 Vinifou 51 Legend Pacific Early Age Readiness and Learning (PEARL) 0 2,5 5 10 15 20 L eai ni fa’ata lanoaga Approaches to Learning/ Auala o Aoaoga km ® Maualuga le tulaga Produced by: Sanigest International Feoloolo le tulaga Maualalo le tulaga Upolu Cultural Spiritual

Upolu

Malau Utualii Alamutu

Apolima Island Tufulele i a

Lea l a

u e

Apolima Paepaeala e n i a

F a l a l

Fou uv a p i

a u a

a u Samea a a

Satoi F l o Pu

Vailuutai M F e T o a a p a N a i L n S si e s l Salua Fuailolo e o o v o V a a i a i t a t f e u s e Fa F o o u le le t o N lo g Si

a l o L a a o S u use

u t Satuilagi e g

p u a s m l u f a Satuimalufilufi o Sina ii t u i t N a Afia L A a t o g a o i a F a a Apai l Lalo o e f e le

a u a a g T p va Afolau a ile l T a o e a l Leus v m o a i a a go a u m L V ee Vailim a o Lepuiai M Vaipapa i n a Luatuanuu t a o anom i T T Faleu u Lepale o es M Avele Olo Laulii oali M Let

U u i v a E t a i a a Tausagi a Se o p s t Vaoala giagi iluf i e i a a i a t f Aleisa n f Sam u Solosolo a a us a Luf Tiapapata u eauna p p F l Sauan at aga a U t Tanumalala Salele al au a u o t F Falefa T a a a ai Village # of Surveys Village # of Surveys Village # of Surveys Village # of Surveys Pa e S a Siuf g Aai o Fiti 179 Lepea 44 Pata 54 Taelefaga 70 m le u L u o te Aai o Niue Lepuiai Pesega Tafagamanu Faleaseela Afiamalu Manunu a a us 73 28 179 19 m Aele Fou 183 Letava 84 Piu 47 Tafaigata 195 Nefunefu Sa um lo Falevao les Afega 122 Letogo 72 Poutasi 63 Tafatafa 57 u a Sa us Afia 20 Leufisa 27 Puipaa 131 Tafitoala 29 Matautu n L M Afiamalu Leulumoeg Matafaa a a Solaua Saaga Talimatau to Salimu East 37 a 81 178 70 a m o Afiamalu a a Samamea Leusoalii Saanapu Tai Tanoaleia Levi a g ia Sauniatu West 37 27 90 21 f a V Saanapu Tanugaman a f va e Taelefaga Lona Alafou Levi Matanofo S a a L 0 86 Uta 90 ono 58 T S Alafua 25 Levi 73 Safaatoa 21 Tanumalala 17 O Maasina Alamagoto 61 Levili 29 Safune I 131 Tanumapua 36 o Sataoa Uta Alamutu 86 Lona 70 Saina 40 Tapatapao 26 if Uafato Salamumu a tu Aleisa East Lotofaga Tauese u 13 109 Tai 0 73 g a Amaile a a i Salamumu t a Aleisa West Lotopa Taufusi G a t 13 23 Uta 19 20 M g a Amaile 24 Lotopue 75 Salani 48 Tausagi 0 a e Samusu Apai 25 Lotosoa 53 Saleapaga 47 Tiapapata 37 f e Apia 73 Luatuanuu 78 Saleaumua 75 Tiavea 44 su i a Apolima o a si Lufilufi Saleilua Toamua t u g Fou 59 76 63 65 Saanapu i V u Utufaalalafa Apolima Salamumu o F Alafou N a Maasina Salelesi Togafuafua sa la Island 59 70 44 23 L u i Saleaaumua Aufaga 29 Magiagi Tai 110 Salepouae 61 Togitogiga 0 a Tiavea Avele 30 Magiagi Uta 16 Salesatele 29 Toomatagi 22 a oa ino Elise Fou 211 Malaela 75 Saletele 0 Tuaefu 17 v F it i u

f l i Eva 44 Malaemalu 22 Saleufi 16 Tuanai 109 u an a t Faatoialem Tuanaimato s i a u m Malie Salimu u T anu 46 186 70 East 36 u

Sataoa Tai l a M Fagalii 110 Malifa 24 Salua 23 Tufuiopa 73 M u i a t

i va a f

Faleapuna 51 Malua 25 Samai 73 Tufulele 51 e t Siunio i lu l u Faleaseela 46 Maluafou 73 Samamea 70 Tulaele 42 S o a n Mutiatele

l o L Faleolo 20 Matafele 0 Sapoe 51 Utualii 38 o a a lea l ala a om Faleu Matanofo Sapunaoa Utufaalalafa Auf Malaela M a 28 73 47 24 V n M Lot Sa Faleula 183 Matatufu 51 Satalo 40 Utulaelae 48 u Falevai 73 Matautu 40 Sataoa Tai 56 Vaiala Tai 51 Falevao 58 Matautu 73 Sataoa Uta 16 Vaiala Uta 51 Satitoa Fasitoo Tai 110 Matautu 57 Satapuala 49 Vaiee 19 Sapunaoa Fasitoouta 105 Matautu Tai 124 Satitoa 59 Vaigaga 65 Lealatele Matautu Sapoe Fausaga Satoi Vaigalu 63 Uta 25 23 36 Ulutogia Fuailoloo 158 Moamoa 101 Satuilagi 23 Vailele 101 Salesatele Siupapa Satuimalufil Fugalei Moataa Vailima Utulaelae 16 136 ufi 82 62 Vailoa Fusi 63 Motootua 18 Sauano 18 Vailoa 71 Fusi 44 Mulinuu 0 Sauniatu 31 Vailoa 35 Gagaifo O Mulivai Savaia Vailuutai Le Vao 50 36 23 16 Lalomanu 68 Mulivai 73 Savalalo 16 Vaimea 61 Lalomauga 58 Musumusu 70 Seesee 35 Vaimoso 179 Lalovaea 18 Mutiatele 75 Sina 0 Vaipuna 50 Lalovi 158 Nefunefu 73 Sinamoga 64 Vaisagano 63 Laulii 127 Nofoalli 111 Siufaga 54 Vaitele 336 Lealatele 47 Nonoa 38 Siumu Uta 178 Vaitoloa 44 Leaupani 0 Nuu 45 Siuniu 48 Vaiusu 211 South Pacific Ocean Leauvaa 407 Nuusuatia 29 Siupapa 47 Vaivase Tai 60 Leifiifi 73 Olo 158 Siusega 195 Vaivase Uta 41 Lelata 69 Paepaela 158 Sogi 17 Vaoala 84 Leone 63 Palisi 35 Solaua 25 Vaovai 37 Lepale 111 Papauta 17 Solosolo 97 Vavau 34 Vinifou 51 Legend Pacific Early Age Readiness and Learning (PEARL) L eai ni fa’ata lanoaga Cultural & Spiritual/ Aganuu ma le Faakerisiano 0 2,5 5 10 15 20km ® Maualuga le tulaga Produced by: Sanigest International Feoloolo le tulaga Maualalo le tulaga

73 74

Upolu Literacy

Upolu

Malau Utualii Apolima Island Alamutu Tufulele

Apolima i a Lea l

Fou a u e

Paepaeala e n i a

e l a F a

l uv a p i

a u a

a u Samea a a

Satoi F l o Pu

Vailuutai M F e T o a a p a N a i L n S si e s l Salua Fuailolo e o o v o

a a Vaitele t i a

f e u s Fa F o o u u le t o N lo g Si

a l o L a a o S u use

u t Satuilagi e ga p

l u f a s m t Satuimalufilufi o N Sina ii u i t a Afia L A t o a ig a o a a F f a Apai Lalo l e le o u e a a a T p a g a Afolau a va l u ile T f go e a Leus m o o v a l i a u a o a a Vailim a ee m Lepuiai Vaipapa i n Al L V M a Luatuanuu t a T o anom i Let u T es Faleu Lepale o M Avele Olo Laulii oali M

f l i Eva 44 Malaemalu 22 Saleufi 16 Tuanai 109 u an a t Faatoialem Tuanaimato s i a u m Malie Salimu u T anu 46 186 70 East 36 u

Sataoa Tai l a M Fagalii 110 Malifa 24 Salua 23 Tufuiopa 73 M u i a t

i va a f

Faleapuna 51 Malua 25 Samai 73 Tufulele 51 e t Siunio i lu l u Faleaseela 46 Maluafou 73 Samamea 70 Tulaele 42 S o a n Mutiatele

0 2,5 5 10 15 20 km Leai ni fa’ata lanoaga Literacy/ Tomai Faafaitautusi ma Tusitusiga ® Maualuga le tulaga Produced by: Sanigest International Feoloolo le tulaga Maualalo le ttulaga Upolu Numeracy Concepts

Upolu

Malau Utualii Alamutu

Apolima Island Tufulele i a

Lea l Apolima a

u e

Paepaeala e a

Fou n i a

F a l

l p uv a i

a u a

u Pu Samea a a

Satoi F l o

Vailuutai M F e T o a a p a N a i L n S si e s l Salua Fuailolo e o o v o

a t i a Vaitele a

f e u s Fa F o o u le t o N lo g Si a l o L a a o S uu use

u t Satuilagi e ga p a s m l u f N t Satuimalufilufi Sina i o i a u i t Afia L A g t o a i a o a le f F a e Apai l e Lalo o a u a a il a T a g p u e Afolau a f Va a l T a va e a Leus v m o Al o o i a u l a Vailim a g n ee m Lepuiai Vaipapa i a o M a a L t Luatuanuu t T e anom i o L u T es Faleu Lepale o M Avele Olo Laulii oali M

f l i Eva 44 Malaemalu 22 Saleufi 16 Tuanai 109 u an a t Faatoialem Tuanaimato s i a u m Malie Salimu u T anu 46 186 70 East 36 u

Sataoa Tai l a M Fagalii 110 Malifa 24 Salua 23 Tufuiopa 73 M u i a t

i va a f

Faleapuna 51 Malua 25 Samai 73 Tufulele 51 e t Siunio i lu l u Faleaseela 46 Maluafou 73 Samamea 70 Tulaele 42 S o a n Mutiatele

a t a S Faleasiu 290 Maninoa 178 Samatau 55 Tuloto 23 a a o u a la g a Piu ga M a ga Faleatiu Manono Uta Samea Uafato S P V a 21 107 158 70 a f uf u

t S a a em pa Falefa 73 Manunu 31 Samusu 48 Ululoloa 104 a f Lotopue a at aga Falelauniu 178 Matafaa 18 Saolufata 52 Ulutogia 35 S t Lepa T va l o L Faleolo 20 Matafele 0 Sapoe 51 Utualii 38 o a a lea l ala a om Faleu Matanofo Sapunaoa Utufaalalafa Auf Malaela M a 28 73 47 24 V n M Lot Sa Faleula 183 Matatufu 51 Satalo 40 Utulaelae 48 u Falevai 73 Matautu 40 Sataoa Tai 56 Vaiala Tai 51 Falevao 58 Matautu 73 Sataoa Uta 16 Vaiala Uta 51 Satitoa Fasitoo Tai 110 Matautu 57 Satapuala 49 Vaiee 19 Sapunaoa Fasitoouta 105 Matautu Tai 124 Satitoa 59 Vaigaga 65 Lealatele Matautu Sapoe Fausaga Satoi Vaigalu 63 Uta 25 23 36 Ulutogia Fuailoloo 158 Moamoa 101 Satuilagi 23 Vailele 101 Salesatele Siupapa Satuimalufil Fugalei Moataa Vailima Utulaelae 16 136 ufi 82 62 Vailoa Fusi 63 Motootua 18 Sauano 18 Vailoa 71 Fusi 44 Mulinuu 0 Sauniatu 31 Vailoa 35 Gagaifo O Mulivai Savaia Vailuutai Le Vao 50 36 23 16 Lalomanu 68 Mulivai 73 Savalalo 16 Vaimea 61 Lalomauga 58 Musumusu 70 Seesee 35 Vaimoso 179 Lalovaea 18 Mutiatele 75 Sina 0 Vaipuna 50 Lalovi 158 Nefunefu 73 Sinamoga 64 Vaisagano 63 Laulii 127 Nofoalli 111 Siufaga 54 Vaitele 336 Lealatele 47 Nonoa 38 Siumu Uta 178 Vaitoloa 44 Leaupani 0 Nuu 45 Siuniu 48 Vaiusu 211 South Pacific Ocean Leauvaa 407 Nuusuatia 29 Siupapa 47 Vaivase Tai 60 Leifiifi 73 Olo 158 Siusega 195 Vaivase Uta 41 Lelata 69 Paepaela 158 Sogi 17 Vaoala 84 Leone 63 Palisi 35 Solaua 25 Vaovai 37 Lepale 111 Papauta 17 Solosolo 97 Vavau 34 Vinifou 51 Legend Pacific Early Age Readiness and Learning (PEARL)

0 2,5 5 10 15 20km Leai ni fa’ata lanoaga Numeracy Concepts/ Konesepi Faamatematika ® Maualuga le tulaga Produced by: Sanigest International Feoloolo le tulaga Maualalo le tulaga

75 76

Upolu Perserverance

Upolu

Malau Utualii Alamutu

Apolima Island Tufulele i a Lea l

Apolima a

u e

Paepaeala e

Fou n i e a

F a l

l a uv a p

a u a i

a u Samea a a

Satoi F l o Pu

Vailuutai M F e T o a a p a N a i L n S si e s l Salua Fuailolo e o o v o

a t i a a Vaitele f e u s Fa F o o u u le t o N lo g

a l o L a a o S u Siu u t se Satuilagi e g

p a s m l u f N Satuimalufilufi o Sina ii ta u i t a i Afia L A t o a ig a n o a a F f Apai l a e Lalo o e a le a a g T p a va u Afolau f o l T u l ile e a a a Leus v a o a i a Vailim a a go a Al L e ee m V Lepuiai M Vaipapa i o Luatuanuu t L a anom i o T Faleu u Lepale o es M Avele Olo Laulii oali M

U u Let i v a E t a i a a Tausagi a Se o p s t Vaoala giagi iluf i e i a a i a t f Aleisa n f Sam u Solosolo a a us a Luf Tiapapata u eauna p p F l Sauan at aga a U t Tanumalala Salele al au a u o t F Falefa T a a a ai Village # of Surveys Village # of Surveys Village # of Surveys Village # of Surveys Pa e S a Siuf g Aai o Fiti 179 Lepea 44 Pata 54 Taelefaga 70 m le u L u o te Aai o Niue Lepuiai Pesega Tafagamanu Faleaseela Afiamalu Manunu a a us 73 28 179 19 m Aele Fou 183 Letava 84 Piu 47 Tafaigata 195 Nefunefu Sa um lo Falevao les Afega 122 Letogo 72 Poutasi 63 Tafatafa 57 u a Sa us Afia 20 Leufisa 27 Puipaa 131 Tafitoala 29 Matautu n L M Afiamalu Leulumoeg Matafaa a a Solaua Saaga Talimatau to Salimu East 37 a 81 178 70 a m o Afiamalu a a Samamea Leusoalii Saanapu Tai Tanoaleia Levi a g ia Sauniatu West 37 27 90 21 f a V Saanapu Tanugaman a f va e Taelefaga Lona Alafou Levi Matanofo S a a L 0 86 Uta 90 ono 58 T S Alafua 25 Levi 73 Safaatoa 21 Tanumalala 17 O Maasina Alamagoto 61 Levili 29 Safune I 131 Tanumapua 36 o Sataoa Uta Alamutu 86 Lona 70 Saina 40 Tapatapao 26 if Uafato Salamumu a tu Aleisa East Lotofaga Tauese u 13 109 Tai 0 73 g a Amaile a a i Salamumu t a Aleisa West Lotopa Taufusi G a t 13 23 Uta 19 20 M g a Amaile 24 Lotopue 75 Salani 48 Tausagi 0 a e Samusu Apai 25 Lotosoa 53 Saleapaga 47 Tiapapata 37 f e Apia 73 Luatuanuu 78 Saleaumua 75 Tiavea 44 su i a Apolima o a si Lufilufi Saleilua Toamua t u g Fou 59 76 63 65 Saanapu i V u Utufaalalafa Apolima Salamumu o F Alafou N a Maasina Salelesi Togafuafua sa la Island 59 70 44 23 L u i Saleaaumua Aufaga 29 Magiagi Tai 110 Salepouae 61 Togitogiga 0 a Tiavea Avele 30 Magiagi Uta 16 Salesatele 29 Toomatagi 22 a oa ino Elise Fou 211 Malaela 75 Saletele 0 Tuaefu 17 v F it i u

f l i Eva 44 Malaemalu 22 Saleufi 16 Tuanai 109 u an a t Faatoialem Tuanaimato s i a u m Malie Salimu u T anu 46 186 70 East 36 u

Sataoa Tai l a M Fagalii 110 Malifa 24 Salua 23 Tufuiopa 73 M u i a t

i va a f

Faleapuna 51 Malua 25 Samai 73 Tufulele 51 e t Siunio i lu l u Faleaseela 46 Maluafou 73 Samamea 70 Tulaele 42 S o a n Mutiatele

l o L Faleolo 20 Matafele 0 Sapoe 51 Utualii 38 o a a lea l ala a om Faleu Matanofo Sapunaoa Utufaalalafa Auf Malaela M a 28 73 47 24 V n M Lot Sa Faleula 183 Matatufu 51 Satalo 40 Utulaelae 48 u Falevai 73 Matautu 40 Sataoa Tai 56 Vaiala Tai 51 Falevao 58 Matautu 73 Sataoa Uta 16 Vaiala Uta 51 Satitoa Fasitoo Tai 110 Matautu 57 Satapuala 49 Vaiee 19 Sapunaoa Fasitoouta 105 Matautu Tai 124 Satitoa 59 Vaigaga 65 Lealatele Matautu Sapoe Fausaga Satoi Vaigalu 63 Uta 25 23 36 Ulutogia Fuailoloo 158 Moamoa 101 Satuilagi 23 Vailele 101 Salesatele Siupapa Satuimalufil Fugalei Moataa Vailima Utulaelae 16 136 ufi 82 62 Vailoa Fusi 63 Motootua 18 Sauano 18 Vailoa 71 Fusi 44 Mulinuu 0 Sauniatu 31 Vailoa 35 Gagaifo O Mulivai Savaia Vailuutai Le Vao 50 36 23 16 Lalomanu 68 Mulivai 73 Savalalo 16 Vaimea 61 Lalomauga 58 Musumusu 70 Seesee 35 Vaimoso 179 Lalovaea 18 Mutiatele 75 Sina 0 Vaipuna 50 Lalovi 158 Nefunefu 73 Sinamoga 64 Vaisagano 63 Laulii 127 Nofoalli 111 Siufaga 54 Vaitele 336 Lealatele 47 Nonoa 38 Siumu Uta 178 Vaitoloa 44 Leaupani 0 Nuu 45 Siuniu 48 Vaiusu 211 South Pacific Ocean Leauvaa 407 Nuusuatia 29 Siupapa 47 Vaivase Tai 60 Leifiifi 73 Olo 158 Siusega 195 Vaivase Uta 41 Lelata 69 Paepaela 158 Sogi 17 Vaoala 84 Leone 63 Palisi 35 Solaua 25 Vaovai 37 Lepale 111 Papauta 17 Solosolo 97 Vavau 34 Vinifou 51 Legend Pacific Early Age Readiness and Learning (PEARL) 0 2,5 5 10 15 20 L eai ni fa’ata lanoaga Perseverance/ Lavapapale km ® Maualuga le tulaga Produced by: Sanigest International Feoloolo le tulaga Maualalo le tulaga Upolu Physical

Upolu

Malau Utualii Apolima Island Alamutu

Tufulele i a

Lea l a

Apolima u e

Paepaeala e n i a

Fou F a l a l uv a p i

a u a

a u Samea a a Pu

Satoi F l o

Vailuutai M F e T o a a p a N a i L n S si e s l Salua Fuailolo e o o v o

a Vaitele t i a a

f e u s Fa F o o u le t o N u lo g Si a l o L a a o S u use u t Satuilagi e ga

p s m l u f Satuimalufilufi i o a Sina i N t u i t Afia L A a t o a a g o i a a le F a e Apai l Lalo o e f u a a a a p va g T a u ile Afolau f o l T m a l a e a a Leus v u a o a V go i Al L a n Vailim a ee o Lepuiai M Vaipapa i a m Luatuanuu t T a anom i o T Faleu u Lepale o es M Avele Olo Laulii oali M Let

f l i Eva 44 Malaemalu 22 Saleufi 16 Tuanai 109 u an a t Faatoialem Tuanaimato s i a u m Malie Salimu u T anu 46 186 70 East 36 u

Sataoa Tai l a M Fagalii 110 Malifa 24 Salua 23 Tufuiopa 73 M u i a t

i va a f

Faleapuna 51 Malua 25 Samai 73 Tufulele 51 e t Siunio i lu l u Faleaseela 46 Maluafou 73 Samamea 70 Tulaele 42 S o a n Mutiatele

0 2,5 5 10 15 20km Leai ni fa’ata lanoaga Physical/ Soifua Maloloina ® Maualuga le tulaga Produced by: Sanigest International Feoloolo le tulaga Maualalo le tulaga

77 78

Upolu Social Emotional

Upolu

Malau Utualii Apolima Island Alamutu

Tufulele i a Lea l

Apolima a

u e a Paepaeala e

Fou n i a e

F a l p l uv a i

a u a

u Pu Samea a a

Satoi F l o

Vailuutai M F e T o a a p a N a i L n S si e s l Salua Fuailolo e o o v o

a t i a u Vaitele a

f e u s Fa F o o u le t o N u lo g

a l o L a a o S Siu u t se Satuilagi e N g p a s m l u f Satuimalufilufi o Sina ii a u i t t Afia L A t o a a a o ig F a

Apai l a Lalo o e f a e ele

a a a u g T p a it Afolau a u a va l T f o o e a a Leus v m a l a go i u Al m a V a L Vailim a Vaipapa n ee a o Lepuiai M i a Luatuanuu t T o anom i T M Faleu u Lepale o es Avele Olo Laulii oali M Let

f l i Eva 44 Malaemalu 22 Saleufi 16 Tuanai 109 u an a t Faatoialem Tuanaimato s i a u m Malie Salimu u T anu 46 186 70 East 36 u

Sataoa Tai l a M Fagalii 110 Malifa 24 Salua 23 Tufuiopa 73 M u i a t

i va a f

Faleapuna 51 Malua 25 Samai 73 Tufulele 51 e t Siunio i lu l u Faleaseela 46 Maluafou 73 Samamea 70 Tulaele 42 S o a n Mutiatele

l o L Faleolo 20 Matafele 0 Sapoe 51 Utualii 38 o a a lea l ala a om Faleu Matanofo Sapunaoa Utufaalalafa Auf Malaela M a 28 73 47 24 V n M Lot Sa Faleula 183 Matatufu 51 Satalo 40 Utulaelae 48 u Falevai 73 Matautu 40 Sataoa Tai 56 Vaiala Tai 51 Falevao 58 Matautu 73 Sataoa Uta 16 Vaiala Uta 51 Satitoa Fasitoo Tai 110 Matautu 57 Satapuala 49 Vaiee 19 Sapunaoa Fasitoouta 105 Matautu Tai 124 Satitoa 59 Vaigaga 65 Lealatele Matautu Sapoe Fausaga Satoi Vaigalu 63 Uta 25 23 36 Ulutogia Fuailoloo 158 Moamoa 101 Satuilagi 23 Vailele 101 Salesatele Siupapa Satuimalufil Fugalei Moataa Vailima Utulaelae 16 136 ufi 82 62 Vailoa Fusi 63 Motootua 18 Sauano 18 Vailoa 71 Fusi 44 Mulinuu 0 Sauniatu 31 Vailoa 35 Gagaifo O Mulivai Savaia Vailuutai Le Vao 50 36 23 16 Lalomanu 68 Mulivai 73 Savalalo 16 Vaimea 61 Lalomauga 58 Musumusu 70 Seesee 35 Vaimoso 179 Lalovaea 18 Mutiatele 75 Sina 0 Vaipuna 50 Lalovi 158 Nefunefu 73 Sinamoga 64 Vaisagano 63 Laulii 127 Nofoalli 111 Siufaga 54 Vaitele 336 Lealatele 47 Nonoa 38 Siumu Uta 178 Vaitoloa 44 Leaupani 0 Nuu 45 Siuniu 48 Vaiusu 211 South Pacific Ocean Leauvaa 407 Nuusuatia 29 Siupapa 47 Vaivase Tai 60 Leifiifi 73 Olo 158 Siusega 195 Vaivase Uta 41 Lelata 69 Paepaela 158 Sogi 17 Vaoala 84 Leone 63 Palisi 35 Solaua 25 Vaovai 37 Lepale 111 Papauta 17 Solosolo 97 Vavau 34 Vinifou 51 Legend Pacific Early Age Readiness and Learning (PEARL) 0 2,5 5 10 15 20 L eai ni fa’ata lanoaga Social & Emotional/ Vafealoai ma Lagona Faaalia km ® Maualuga le tulaga Produced by: Sanigest International Feoloolo le tulaga Maualalo le tulaga REFERENCES

Bradley, R. H., & Corwyn, R. F. (2002). Socioeconomic Status and Child Development. Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 371-399. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135233

Brinkman, S., Gregory, T., Harris, J., Hart, B., Blackmore, S., & Janus, M. (2013). Associations between the Early Development Instrument at Age 5 and Reading and Numeracy Skills at Ages 8, 10 and 12: A Prospective Linked Data Study. Child Indicators Research, 6(4), 695-708. doi: 10.1007/s12187-013-9189-3

Brinkman, S., & Thanh Vu, B. (2017). Early Child Development in Tonga: World Bank. Washington, DC.

Britto, P. R., Lye, S. J., Proulx, K., Yousafzai, A. K., Matthews, S. G., Vaivada, T., . . . Bhutta, Z. A. (2016). Nurturing care: promoting early childhood development. The Lancet, Published Online October 4. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31390-3

Brooks-Gunn, J., Rouse, C., & McLanahan, S. (2007). School readiness and the transition to kindergarten. In R. C. Pianta, M. J. Cox & K. Snow (Eds.), Racial and ethnic gaps in school readiness. (pp. pp. 283-306). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes. .

Feinstein, L., & Duckwork, K. (2006). Development in the early years: Its importance for school performance and adult outcomes. London: Institute of Education.

Guhn, M., Gadermann, A. M., Almas, A., Schonert-Reichl, K. A., & Hertzman, C. (2016). Associations of teacher-rated social, emotional, and cognitive development in kindergarten to self-reported wellbeing, peer relations, and academic test scores in middle childhood. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 35, 76-84. doi: http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2015.12.027

Hambleton, R. K., Merenda, P. F., & Speilberger, C. D. (2005). Adapting educational and psychological tests for cross cultural assessment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.

Heckman, J. (2006). Skill formation and the economics of investing in disadvantaged children. Science, 312(5782), 1900-1902.

Hertzman, C., & Boyce, T. (2010). How Experience Gets Under the Skin to Create Gradients in Developmental Health. Annual Review of Public Health, 31, 329-347. doi: 10.1146/ annurev.publhealth.012809.103538

Hertzman, C., & Wiens, M. (1996). Child development and long term outcomes: A population health perspective and summary of successful interventions. Social Science and Medicine, 43(7), 1083-1093.

Irwin, L. G., Siddiqi, A., & Hertzman, C. (2007). Early Child Development: A Powerful Equalizer. Final Report for the World Health Organization’s Commission of the Social Determinants of Health. Vancouver: Human Early Learning Partnership.

Lynch, J. W., & Davey-Smith, G. (2005). A Life Course Approach to Chronic Disease Epidemiology. Annual Review of Public Health, 26(1), 1-35. doi: 10.1146/annurev. publhealth.26.021304.144505

Samoa Ministry of Education Sports and Culture. (2013). Samoa Education Sector Plan July 2013 - June 2018: Improved Focus on Access to Education and Training and Quality Learning Outcomes.

Samoa Ministry of Education Sports and Culture. (2016). Education Statistical Digest.

79 Sandraluz, L. C., Pebley, A. R., Vaiana, M. E., & Maggio, E. (2004). Are L.A.’s Children Ready for School? Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.

Status of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Report of the Secretary-General, United Nations, Sixty-fifth session Sess. 18 (2010).

World Bank. (2017). World Development Indicators DataBank. Samoa.

Young, M. E. (2007). Early Child Development: From Measurement to Action. Washington DC., USA: The World Bank.