Educational Quality Improvement Program EQUIP2 Final Report Policy • Systems • Management By Anne Smiley, Ed.D. EQUIP2: Educational Policy, Systems Development, and Management is one of three USAID-fund- ed Leader with Associates Cooperative Agreements under the umbrella heading Educational Quality Improvement Program (EQUIP). As a Leader with Associates mechanism, EQUIP2 accommodates buy-in awards from USAID bureaus and missions to support the goal of building education quality at the national, sub-national, and cross-community levels. FHI 360 is the lead organization for the global EQUIP2 partnership of education and development or- ganizations, universities, and research institutions. The partnership includes fifteen major organizations and an expanding network of regional and national associates throughout the world: Aga Khan Founda- tion, American Institutes for Research, CARE, Center for Collaboration and the Future of Schooling, East-West Center, Education Development Center, International Rescue Committee, Joseph P. Kenne- dy, Jr. Foundation, Michigan State University, Mississippi Consortium for International Development, ORC Macro, Research Triangle Institute, University of Minnesota, University of Pittsburgh Institute of International Studies in Education, Women’s Commission for Refugee Women and Children. EQUIP2 Leader Award Final Report Nine years of experience in education policy, systems, and management. Anne Smiley, Ed.D. 2012 This paper was made possible by the generous support of the American people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) under Cooperative Agreement No. GDG-A-00-03-00008-00. The contents are the responsibility of FHI 360 through the Educational Quality Improvement Program 2 (EQUIP2) and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government. i Table of Contents 1 5 11 33 41 The Research: Application, Evidence, and Impact The Research: Conclusions Annex: EQUIP2 Associate Awards Introduction The Unique Features of EQUIP2 Contents Introduction 1 I n t r o d u c t i o n At the EQUIP end-of-project event on November 8, 2011, former EQUIP2 Director John Gillies made a simple but profound argument to a large audience of development practitioners: the effectiveness of international development activities is determined by the “how,” not the “what.” Development is about people and relationships, building trust and credibility, and helping countries lead their own development processes. By investing in structures, processes, and leadership, and understanding the political and institutional complexities of long-term educational reform, USAID has helped governments manage change. These insights are supported by the aid effectiveness research conducted by the Education Quality Improvement Program (EQUIP2), a major vehicle for USAID to assist developing countries to improve the quality of basic education through policy, systems, and management (Gillies, 2010). As one of three Education Quality Improvement Program (EQUIP) awards, EQUIP2 is a Leader with Associates (LWA) Cooperative Agreement managed by the Office of Education in the USAID Bureau for Economic Growth, Agriculture, and Trade (EGAT). The EQUIP mechanism combines technical leadership activities with “buy-in” awards from USAID missions and bureaus. EQUIP2’s focus on policy, systems, and management complements and supports activities in the other two EQUIP programs: improvements at the school and classroom levels (EQUIP1) and youth training and employment (EQUIP3). EQUIP2 addresses the systemic aspects of educational development essential to the sustainability, impact, and spread of reforms on the national scale. To help build organizational capacity, EQUIP2’s recognized experts provided state-of-the-art knowledge and the most current research on a range of issues related to educational policy, systems, and management. Within the context of global conversations about donor effectiveness, EQUIP2 emphasized the improvement of donor strategy and management, including advancing state-of-the-art knowledge of policy options. Based on a partnership model, the Leader award aimed to foster genuine participation from host countries and from a variety of collaborating organizations. Information, data resources, and systems were established to provide an empirical foundation for policy analysis and technical assistance, as well as to offer guidance for donor program and host country policy decisions. 2 The Leader award sought to build capacity through professional exchanges and collaborative work, including strengthening host country leadership for t r o effective policy planning and implementation. The Leader award also sought p e R to accomplish its goals through the guidance of a group of education policy l a n i experts from both academic institutions and implementing organizations. F d r EQUIP2 aimed to build consensus on critical issues by using communities of a w A practice and developing strategies of engagement. r e d a e L After nine years of implementation, EQUIP2’s breadth and depth have been 2 P I far greater than the designers had anticipated. With 32 associate awards in U Q E 20 countries, extensive research conducted in numerous topical areas, and 81 publications totaling 2,204 pages, the project has become a key tool for the expansion of USAID’s education portfolio and expertise in the policy arena. This final report seeks to understand the impact of EQUIP2’s work on the global education landscape, with a particular focus on the research contributions from the Leader award. Eleven members of the education policy expert team were interviewed about their participation in research activities, the management of the award, and the strengths and weaknesses of the EQUIP mechanism. Participants were also asked to reflect on the perceived impact of EQUIP2 research within USAID, paying particular attention to the 2011 USAID education strategy in the broader context of global education. Many documents were also reviewed, including all quarterly reports. Interviews and project documents were coded and analyzed, resulting in a final report organized according to emergent themes. The report begins with a discussion of EQUIP2’s unique features, including the mechanism itself, the education policy expert team, and the connection with EQUIP2 associate awards. The report also explores EQUIP2’s many research areas, focusing on the perceived impact of the work of the Leader award and offering possible new directions for further research. In conclusion, the report summarizes lessons learned and ends with a brief discussion of EQUIP2’s contribution to the current USAID education strategy. The annex summarizes each of EQUIP2’s associate awards. 3 Introduction The Unique Features of 5 Th EQUIP2 e U n i q u e F e a t u r e s o f E EQUIP’s unique features made it a dominant presence in USAID’s education Q U I portfolio from 2003-2012. First, the mechanism itself was unusual because P 2 its pre-competed Leader with Associates award was characterized by cost- share and partnerships. Second, its associate awards did not have a ceiling on the dollar value. Third, a team of education policy experts from USAID and a consortium of partner organizations put together a broad-based and rigorous research agenda. Finally, the engagement between the Leader and associate awards created a new kind of exchange between knowledge generation and program design. The unique features of EQUIP2 made it possible for an extraordinary amount of research, collaboration, and project implementation to take place over the course of nine years. THE MECHANISM EQUIP awards are Leader with Associate cooperative agreements (LWAs) that consist of partnerships with experienced organizations chosen competitively for their ability to assist USAID with addressing educational needs. The “Leader” is the core research grant awarded to the partnership. Under this core grant and pre-competed mechanism, missions and bureaus grant cooperative agreements, “associates” awards, to EQUIP. These associate awards align with the thematic focus of the Leader award (i.e., classroom/ school, policy/systems, or youth). The EQUIP2 Leader award allocated central funds to the lead organization (AED; later, FHI 360) and a consortium of partners to provide state-of-the- art knowledge and the most current research on a range of issues related to education policy, systems, and management. This agreement included a cost- share requirement of 15 percent, a goal that FHI 360 substantially exceeded, generating nearly $2 million through a variety of partnerships. The goal of cost share is to establish more local ownership and to identify sustainable partnerships to support a country’s education initiatives. The associate award option was attractive to USAID missions and bureaus for several reasons. First, the pre-competed Leader award made the process of initiating projects quicker and more efficient than stand-alone, competed government contracts. Second, the USAID 6 mission was directly responsible for the Defining Terms design, implementation, and monitoring t Cooperative Agreements give the r o of the award, from program development p government limited participation in e R with input from the Leader award when the recipient’s assistance program. l a n i appropriate, to management of all aspects This participation is limited to ap- F d proval of the implementation plan r of the award through mission staff, a w and key personnel, participation in or A including the Agreement