Principal investigator: Pedro Jorge Holanda Alves
Article title: DELIVERING EDUCATION TO THE UNDERSERVED THROUGH A PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM IN PAKISTAN
Article authors: Felipe Barrera-Osorio; David S. Blakeslee; Matthew Hoover; Leigh Linden;
Location of the Intervention: Sindh, Pakistan
Sample Size: 199 villages (2.089 families and 5.556 children aged 5 to 9 years for the baseline survey and 5.966 families and 17.720 children aged 5 to 17 years for the follow-up survey)
Main theme: Education.
Type of Intervention: Subsidies for tuition fees at private schools for underprivileged children.
Main Variable of Interest: Student enrollment and performance
Evaluation Method: Experimental evaluation (RCT)
Policy Problem
In Pakistan, the educational level is below what is desired, as is the number of children enrolled, even when compared to countries with similar income levels. Despite this fact, between the 1980s and 2005, the country experienced significant growth in the construction of private schools, increasing from 4.000 units to 47.000. Furthermore, it is observed that much of this expansion occurred in poorer villages and urban neighborhoods (ANDRABI, DAS E KHWAJA, 2008).
Evaluation Context
In order to achieve better school results and recognizing the high growth of private schools, the provincial government of Pakistan decided to create the Program for the Promotion of Low-Cost Private Schools in Rural Sindh (PPRS), a public-private partnership program whose objective is to subsidize free tuition for students from disadvantaged families in some private schools located in villages in the province of Sindh.
The program's main objective is to increase access to education in marginalized areas by convincing families in these regions to enroll their children in schools. This is expected to guarantee better living conditions in the future. The program also aims to reduce gender disparity by offering a larger subsidy for the enrollment of girls.
Intervention Details
The program stipulated that schools would receive a subsidy for each enrolled student, with amounts differentiated between boys and girls (approximately US$5 [CR1] per boy and US$6 per girl, in 2008 values). To ensure the success of the initiative, the government conducted periodic, unannounced monitoring of participating schools. Through this monitoring and oversight, the government verified the effective use of the subsidized funds, ensuring school attendance for the students and the proper provision of contracted private school services.
Thus, Barrera et al. (2017) conducted a study to evaluate how the PPRS affects the decision to enroll these children in schools and their performance on language and mathematics tests. Furthermore, the authors also attempted to assess the behavior of those who manage the schools and what the families benefiting from the program expect from their children in the future. To ensure that the study accurately represents the reality of the region, the authors selected the schools randomly.
Assessment Method
The program was designed and administered by the Sindh Education Foundation (SEF), a semi-autonomous organization whose goal is to undertake educational initiatives aimed at less developed areas and marginalized populations in the Sindh province. For program selection, the SEF used as criteria the size of the out-of-school child population, the gender disparity in school enrollment, and the percentage of families located at least 15 minutes from the nearest primary school.
The first phase of the program (which is the subject of the authors' study) was implemented in 8 of the province's 23 districts, which were characterized as the poorest localities with a lack of concern for law and order. From these districts, 199 of the 263 villages in selected districts, which presented low educational outcomes in the province, were identified. From these villages, 2.089 families and 5.556 children, aged 5 to 9, were interviewed for the baseline survey, while 5.966 families and 17.720 children, aged 5 to 17, were interviewed for the follow-up survey.
The evaluation sample selected 82 villages where the subsidy would be equal for both genders, 79 villages where the subsidy would be higher for girls, and 38 villages where there would be no subsidy at all. Separating these groups is necessary to verify the program's impact in the Sindh region (villages that received both types of subsidies represent the two treatment groups, and villages that did not receive subsidies form the control group). The analysis of this policy is important both for evaluating the possibility of expanding the local program and for serving as an example to be followed by similar regions.
The selection of schools was established in mid-2009, and a follow-up survey was conducted in the second half of 2011. This survey consisted of questionnaires for village leaders, a school survey of all schools in the general neighborhood, and a household survey that randomly selected 12 of 75 families who agreed to send their children to the proposed program school.
Results
The results show that the program appears to have been highly effective. In general, in terms of school enrollment, the program managed to increase the number of enrollments of children aged 6 to 10 and 11 to 17 by 30 and 12 percentage points, respectively – that is, if the school had 1000 students aged 6 to 10 enrolled, the program increased the number of enrollments by an average of 300 students. When the authors address the gender-differentiated subsidy (which aimed to generate greater incentives for girls), the result shows that the impact is similar to that of the undifferentiated subsidy, demonstrating that the program was not able to reduce gender differences in school enrollments.
The program also appears to have a positive impact on grades, raising the performance of all students who took the tests by a score of 0,63 points. For the children benefiting from the program, the results show an increase of 2 points compared to other students. Compared to students from public schools, the children in the program performed better than the students from public schools, achieving 0,16 points higher on standardized tests, despite having poorer socioeconomic backgrounds. When comparing scores by gender, the authors also found no differences in test performance.
Furthermore, families participating in the program become more optimistic, increasing the likelihood of them expressing aspirations for their children to become doctors and engineers, exceeding initial expectations. In other words, these families felt more hopeful that boys and girls would achieve higher levels of education and, in the future, become something different from what their reality represented. It is also worth noting that certain characteristics, such as female teachers, were scarce in the region, and the expectation that program participants could enhance the training of these professions may also generate benefits for the villages as a whole.
Lessons in Politics
In general, the program appears to have good results when the government provides adequate support, demonstrating that government assistance guarantees enormous potential for local politicians to find appropriate solutions to the challenges encountered. It is also important to highlight the positive measures adopted by the social planner, who selects teachers who best match the gender of the class, hires more qualified teachers, and ensures toilets or potable water in schools. That said, it is important to emphasize that for the program to succeed, all stakeholders must contribute—that is, the government, the companies that manage the schools, and the families.
Reference BARRERA-OSORIO, Felipe et al. Delivering education to the underserved through a public-private partnership program in Pakistan. The World Bank, 2017.
[CR1]Is this the monthly tuition fee at the schools? Do families earn the money and use it to pay the school fees? Is that correct? Or does the money go directly to the school?
