Bangladesh Mcgovern-Dole Project
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Foreign Agricultural Service, United States Department of Agriculture Bangladesh McGovern-Dole Project FINAL EVALUATION October 20, 2018 Final Evaluation of McGovern-Dole-supported School Feeding Programme in Bangladesh Program: McGovern-Dole Food for Education and Childhood Nutrition Agreement Number: FFE-388-2014/048-00 Funding Year: Fiscal Year 2014 Project Duration: 2015 to 2017 Implemented by: World Food Programme Evaluation Authored by: Econometría Maria Gloria Cano Cristina Murphy Md. Farrukh Ahmed Helena Suarez Please note that this evaluation also serves as the baseline evaluation for the extension of this program funded in FY 2017 (Agreement Number: FFE-388-2017-019-00). DISCLAIMER: This publication was produced at the request of the United States Department of Agriculture. It was prepared independently by Econometría. The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Department of Agriculture or the United States Government. based based decision making - Decentralized Evaluation Final Evaluation of McGovern-Dole-supported Decentralized evaluation for evaluation evidence Decentralized School Feeding Programme in Bangladesh (FFE-388-2014/048-00) March 2015 to December 2017 Evaluation Report October 20, 2018 – Final report WFP Bangladesh Country Office Evaluation Manager: Ezaz Nabi Prepared by Maria Gloria Cano, Team Leader Cristina Murphy, International Evaluator Md. Farrukh Ahmed, National Evaluator Helena Suarez, Analyst Acknowledgements The ET is extremely thankful for the 18 school communities, students, parents, School Management Committee’s (SMC) members and teachers visited during our fieldwork for sharing their experiences concerning the WFP McGovern Dole School Feeding Programme implementation. We would like to extend our deepest thanks as well to the implementing partners BRAC and RDRS, the HEB Distributor, other government officials, the primary education authorities at the national level, at the upazila level and the Gaibandha district level. Our thanks to UNICEF and USDA for their involvement must also be given. All of them provided information and valuable time. Acknowledgements must be made to the WFP staff at the Bangladesh Country Office and the Rangpur Sub-Office for your support and collaboration during the entire evaluation. Disclaimer The opinions expressed in this report are those of the Evaluation Team (ET), and do not necessarily reflect those of the World Food Programme. Responsibility for the opinions expressed in this report rests solely with the authors. Publication of this document does not imply endorsement of the opinions expressed by the WFP. The designation employed and the presentation of material within the maps herein after does not imply the express consent of any opinion on behalf of the WFP concerning the legal or constitutional status of any country, territory or maritime designation, or concerning the delimitation of frontiers. Evaluation Report Template Version Novembre 2015 i | Page Table of Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................... i Methodology ................................................................................................. i Key Findings ................................................................................................ ii Overall conclusions and lessons learned ...................................................... iv Recommendations ....................................................................................... iv 1. Introduction ........................................................................................... 1 1.1. Overview of the Evaluation Subject (for more detail see Annex 2) ........................ 1 1.2. Context ..................................................................................................................... 4 1.3. Evaluation Methodology and Limitations (Additional information in Annex 3)... 5 2. Evaluation Findings ............................................................................. 7 2.1. Relevance (for additional information see Annex 4) .............................................. 7 2.2. Efficiency (Additional information in Annex 5) ................................................... 12 2.3. Effectiveness and impact (Additional information in Annex 6) ........................... 16 2.4. Sustainability (Additional information in Annex 7) ............................................. 28 3. Conclusions, Lessons Learned and Recommendations ....................... 35 3.1. Overall Assessment/Conclusions .......................................................................... 35 3.2. Lessons Learned and Good Practices .................................................................... 39 3.3. Recommendations (Additional information in Annex 8) ..................................... 41 Annexes ...................................................................................................... 43 Annex 1: Terms of Reference ...................................................................... 43 Annex 2. Evaluation subject ........................................................................ 61 Annex 3. Methodology ................................................................................ 81 Annex 4. Relevance ................................................................................... 105 Annex 5. Efficiency .................................................................................... 115 Annex 6. Effectiveness and impact ............................................................ 120 Annex 7. Sustainability .............................................................................. 151 Annex 8. Recommendations ...................................................................... 157 Documents reviewed - Bibliography ......................................................... 166 List of Acronyms ........................................................................................ 171 Evaluation Report Template Version Novembre 2015 ii | Page Table of Figures Table 1-1 McGovern-Dole -WFP SF Programme Factsheet ................................................. 2 Table 2-1 WFP-McGovern-Dole Programme expenditure per school per student ............ 13 Table 2-2 Complementary activity output attainment ....................................................... 19 Table 3-1 Matrix of Recommendations ............................................................................... 41 Figure 1-1 – Timeline of WFP operations and School Feeding support in Bangladesh ...... 2 Figure 1-2 Diagram of methodology approach ..................................................................... 6 Figure 2-1 . Number of days children biscuit distribution was interrupted due to external factors .................................................................................................................................. 16 Figure 2-2 Number of students enrolled vs. who consumed biscuits by gender ............... 17 Evaluation Report Template Version Novembre 2015 iii | Page Executive Summary 1. The WFP Bangladesh Country Office (CO) commissioned Econometría to perform an operations evaluation of the McGovern-Dole School Feeding (SF) Programme (FFE-388- 2014/048-00) implemented by the World Food Programme (WFP) in Bangladesh from March 20151 to December 2017. The evaluation purpose is accountability and learning by assess its performance and results, determine the reasons why certain results occurred or did not occur, draw lessons and provide recommendations. This evaluation is of direct interest to WFP-CO and Sub-offices and other WFP dependencies2, the USDA Food Assistance Division (FAD), the Government of Bangladesh (GoB), the school’s community, the NGO partners -RDRS and BRAC-, other United Nations’ agencies, and other actors such as local communities and suppliers. 2. Bangladesh, a South Asian country, is highly Bangladesh context facts densely populated with 260 million people. Poverty headcount rate (HCR) (HIES, BBS, 2016) 24.30% Recently it graduated as a developing country Gaibandha district HCR rate (Census 2011) 46.70% National literacy rate (HIES, 2016) 65.60% (2018) and received the status of a lower-middle Gaibandha literacy rate (NEP, 2010) 42.80% income country (2015). With almost 22 million Underweighted children (BDHS,2014) 33% children in pre-primary and primary ages, as Global Gender Gap Index (WEF, 2017) 47/144 enrolment rates reached more than 95%, the provision of education of quality became the main challenge for the GoB. The reduction of hunger through SF3 has been an instrument to reach primary education universal coverage, keep boys and girls at school for a longer period of time, and reduce drop out as well as social, gender, and regional disparities. 3. The WFP-McGovern-Dole SF Programme, with a total investment of USD24.5 million4, had two columns of action with different modalities: 1) Through NGOs: To provide high energy biscuits (HEB) and complementary activities to pre-primary and primary school students in the Gaibandha district (5 upazilas) searching for the reduction of undernutrition and hunger, the improvement of school-age children literacy, and the increase in the use of health and dietary practices5; 2) Directly: At the national level, the provision of technical support to the GoB by constructing institutional capacity and strengthening the SF legal framework. Methodology 4. The evaluation was designed