the untapped opportunity - ungei.org · the untapped opportunity: the educational policy data...

HOW PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS CAN ADVANCE EDUCATION FOR ALL

The Untapped Opportunity:

The Educational Policy Data Center (EPDC) is a public-private initiative launched in 2004 by the Academy for Educational Development and the U.S. Agency for InternationalDevelopment. The purpose of the EPDC is to contribute to improvement of informationand policies for education through better access and use of data and policy-orientedanalysis and research. The EPDC is developing a unique database containing national and sub-national education statistics from multiple sources and presentation and analytic tools for better understanding and analysis of education data.>> www.epdc.org

ABOUT AEDFounded in 1961, the Academy for Educational Development is an independent, nonprofit organizationcommitted to solving critical social problems and building the capacity of individuals, communities, andinstitutions to become more self-sufficient. AED works in all the major areas of human development,with a focus on improving education, health, and economic opportunities for the least advantaged in the United States and developing countries throughout the world.>> www.aed.org

©2006 Academy for Educational Development

The Untapped Opportunity:HOW PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS CAN

ADVANCE EDUCATION FOR ALL

George Ingram, Annababette Wils, Bidemi Carrol, and Felicity Townsend

The Academy for Educational Development (AED) offers this report,Education for All: Opportunities for Public-Private Partnerships,

to help focus and inform the discussion of the September 2006Conference on Business and Education. The Academy is pleased to be cosponsoring this program with the Conference Board andacknowledges the important support provided by Intel, Merrill Lynch, and Hewlett Packard.

The Academy has been involved in furtheringeducation in the United States and around the world for 45 years. From that experienceand knowledge we have come to believe bothintellectually and passionately that educationis a fundamental prerequisite for economic,social, and political stability and progress. Inrecent years we have expanded our experiencein public-private partnerships because of our understanding that education is not theexclusive territory of any single sector andcan best be advanced through collaborativeefforts of government, business, and civil society.

This report presents and analyzes recent datato demonstrate the extraordinary progressthat has been made in the last half century tobring primary and secondary education to theworld’s children. The report also reveals thecritical gaps in entry, retention, completion,and equity. It identifies where along the education ladder and in which countries are the greatest shortfalls and specific underserved population groups.

The report was written by the staff of theEducation Policy and Data Center, itself a

collaborative effort of the Academy and theU.S. Agency for International Development.While the preparation of this report wasfunded and prepared by AED, I want to expressmy appreciation for the core funding fromUSAID which has made this collaborative effortpossible and financed the data collection andanalytic tools which are available online andwere used by EPDC to prepare the first sectionof the report.

It is my hope and expectation that the report and conference will help broaden theunderstanding of the critical role of educationand of public-private partnerships in promotingprogress and development around the world.With 2 billion people living on less than $2/dayand 115 million children who have never seenthe inside of a classroom, it is our collectiveobligation and responsibility to use these and other instruments to better the lives ofall people.

Stephen F. MoseleyPresident & CEO Academy for Educational Development

Foreword

THE

UN

TAP

PE

DO

PP

OR

TUN

ITY:H

OW

PU

BLIC

-PR

IVATEPA

RTN

ER

SH

IPS

CA

NA

DVA

NC

EE

DU

CATIO

NFO

RA

LL

3

Table of ContentsEXECUTIVE SUMMARY _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 5

INTRODUCTION _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 7

WHAT ARE THE GAPS IN THE PROVISION OF HIGH QUALITY SCHOOLING FOR ALL CHILDREN? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 10

Gap # 1: Children Who Never Enter School _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 12Gap # 2: Children Who Drop Out from Primary or Secondary School _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 12Gap # 3: Learning in School _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 14Gap # 4: Inequality Within Countries _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 17

DO THE TRENDS IN ENTRY AND COMPLETION SHOW A CLOSING OF SCHOOLING GAPS? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 24

WHAT RESOURCES ARE NEEDED TO CLOSE THE GAPS? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 27Resource # 1: Financial Resources _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 28Resource # 2: Teachers _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 36Resource # 3: Management _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 36

HOW CAN AND SHOULD PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS PLAY A ROLE? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 43

Why Consider Public-Private Partnerships? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 44Guidelines for Building Effective Partnerships _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 46Evaluating the Success of Public-Private Partnerships in Education _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 47Partnering within National and International Frameworks _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 49

PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER: OPPORTUNITIES FOR PARTNERSHIPS IN EDUCATION _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 53

Reference List _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 56

page numbers will be updated inlater proof

4

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Global net enrollment rates 1930–2003 10

Figure 2a. Global map of net enrollment rates 11

Figure 2b. Global map of portion of primary school age children not in school 11

Figure 3. ENTRY: The portion of children who enter primary school 13

Figure 4. RETENTION: Portion of school-age cohort expected to complete primary school in comparison to the portion who will enter school 15

Figure 5. RETENTION: Portion of school-age cohort expected to complete secondary school in comparison to the portion who will enter school 16

Figure 6. Correlations between learning scores and age structure and income per capita around 2000 18

Figure 7. Differences in the likelihood that a child of primary school age is attending primary school: between wealth groups, provinces or regions within countries, rural/urban residence, and gender 19

Figure 8a. Trends and projections to 2015 for female primary entry 24

Figure 8b. Trends and projections to 2015 for female primary completion 25

Figure 8c. Trends and projections to 2015 for female secondary completion 26

Figure 9. Total education expenditure as percentage of GDP 29

Figure 10a. Relationship between primary enrollment and spending 31

Figure 10b. Relationship between secondary enrollment and spending 32

Figure 10c. Relationship between tertiary enrollment and spending 32

Figure 11. Private shares of enrollment for primary and secondary, median values by region 34

Figure 12. Total aid commitments to education by region, 2000–2004 35

Figure 13. Years of schooling lost to dropout for each primary graduate 38

Figure 14. Repetition rates in high-repetition developing countries, most recent year in 2002–2004 39

Figure 15. Log frame for evaluating the impact of education partnerships 48

In 2000 world leaders endorsed two land-mark commitments to basic education: the

six goals of Education for All and the primaryeducation objective of the broader gaugedMillennium Development Goals. This reportaddresses four fundamental questions relatedto these goals: what are the gaps in providinghigh quality primary and secondary schoolingfor all children; do trends in enrollment andcompletion show a closing of the gap; whatresources are needed to close the gaps; howcan public-private partnerships play a role?

EDUCATION GAPS

In addressing these questions, the reportfocuses on four issues: entry, retention,learning, and equality.

uEntry | The 20th century has witnessedtremendous advancement in education, with net enrollment rates in primary schoolalmost doubling in the last 75 years. Still, a sizeable number of children, 115 million,remain out of school. The largest numbersof out-of-school children are found in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia. While countries arenot nearly so far along in students enteringsecondary education, still progress has been significant.

uRetention | Just getting children into schoolis not enough. Of the children who do enterprimary school, approximately 25% do notcomplete.

uLearning | The quality of learning variesconsiderably from country-to-country andschool-to-school; it is a persistent problem inmost countries and in most school systems.

uInequality | Inequalities in all areas of edu-cation remain. Girls, poor and rural children,and children from marginalized regions areleast likely to receive education.

Projections by the Education Policy and Data Center on education in 73 developing countries suggest that by 2015 almost allcountries will have at least 90% of childrenenroll in primary school, and most countriescan be well on the way to near universal primary education by the end of the firstquarter of the 21st century.

The principal resource needs of education arefinancial, human (teachers), and management.Financial resources are provided principallyby government, households, and internationaldonors. With a few exceptions, governmentscontribute a significant amount of GDP toeducation, averaging 4 to 6%. Spending byhouseholds varies widely by country, but is significant in some poor countries. Forexample, private spending per child on primaryeducation is 2% of the per capita income levelin Malawi and 14% in Sierra Leone and Nigeria;for secondary school private spending is equalto 27% of the per capita income level in Malawiand 83% in Uganda. The focus of internationaldonor aid varies by region, but secondary edu-cation receives the smallest share in all regions.

The availability of teachers also varies widelyby region and country, but the shortage ofteachers, particularly trained teachers, ismost acute in Africa.

Good management is essential to the effectiveuse of resources and quality of outcome forany institution, including schools. In manycountries, effective teaching in classrooms isfar below what it could be. High dropout andrepetition rates, corruption, and inadequateinformation are all signs of inefficiency.

Executive Summary

THE

UN

TAP

PE

DO

PP

OR

TUN

ITY:H

OW

PU

BLIC

-PR

IVATEPA

RTN

ER

SH

IPS

CA

NA

DVA

NC

EE

DU

CATIO

NFO

RA

LL

5

ROLE FOR PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS

Improving education requires the collaboration of a range of actors—government, business, civil society,independent experts, communities,and families. A sound education sys-tem benefits business by providing awell-educated work force, politicalstability, and economic growth.Businesses can benefit by partneringwith government to influence the useof public resources and policy; lever-age government resources, educationexpertise, and legitimacy; gain accessto national and community leaders;enhance corporate visibility; anddeliver on social responsibility com-mitments.

Among the many skills and resourcesbusiness brings are expertise in man-aging people and resources, conductingstrategic planning, performing needsassessments, allocating resources,analyzing markets, using incentives,anticipating demand, and creating new opportunities.

Building effective partnerships takestime and planning. Paying close atten-tion to the process helps ensure thepay-off is more than the sum of theindividual parts. Assessing the effec-tiveness of the partnership requiresmonitoring and evaluating both thepartnership itself and the educationoutcomes. Evaluations of the partner-ship should be based on the principlesguiding its design. An important ele-ment in a successful partnership isworking within existing national andinternational frameworks. In educa-tion, these include the Education For All Fast-Track Initiative, NewPartnership for Africa’s Development,Poverty Reduction Strategies,Education Sector Plans, GlobalCompact, and the Paris Declaration.

What is clear from decades of expe-rience in developed and developingcountries is that successful educationsystems will not be designed or oper-ated by any sector alone. Resourcesand skills from all sectors must be combined.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

6

Introduction

The 20th Century was a successstory for primary education, with

the final chapter remaining to be written in the first quarter of the 21stCentury. This report provides a synop-sis of the state of basic education inthe world and outlines the role thatpublic-private partnerships can play in writing that final chapter.

There has been a rapid rise in primaryschool enrollment over the past fifty years, but gaps continue. Theseare particularly evident in primarycompletion, secondary education, andlearning.

The report is organized around fourquestions:

1. What are the gaps in the provisionof high quality primary schoolingfor all children and opportunitiesto continue to secondary schooling?

2. Do the trends in entry and com-pletion show a closing of school-ing gaps?

3. What resources are needed toclose the gaps?

4. How can and should public-private partnerships play a role?

Driving forces behind universal highquality education are the six EducationFor All (EFA) goals and the MillenniumDevelopment Goals (MDGs) declaredby world leaders at summits markingthe new millennium. The EFA goalsaim to provide equitable access to primary education for all children by 2015, access to life skills andlearning programs for youth, andexpanded adult literacy.

In the Millennium Declaration of 2000,world leaders pledged to ease theplight of the millions of people aroundthe world living in abject poverty byachieving the MDGs. The MDGs have one specific education goal ofuniversal primary completion and arelated goal on gender equity. Beyondthat, education is often viewed as thefoundation for achieving the othergoals, which relate to poverty reduction,

THE

UN

TAP

PE

DO

PP

OR

TUN

ITY:H

OW

PU

BLIC

-PR

IVATEPA

RTN

ER

SH

IPS

CA

NA

DVA

NC

EE

DU

CATIO

NFO

RA

LL

“We will spare noeffort to free our fellow men, womenand children fromthe abject and dehumanizing conditions ofextreme poverty, towhich more than abillion of them arecurrently subjected.We are committed tomaking the right todevelopment a realityfor everyone and tofreeing the entirehuman race fromwant”

United Nation MillenniumDeclaration, adopted bythe UN General Assemblyin 2000.

7

HIGHLIGHTS OF EDUCATION FOR ALL GOALS—BY 2015

1. Comprehensive early childhood care and education, especially for the mostvulnerable and disadvantaged children

2. Access for all children, especially girls, to complete free and compulsoryprimary education of good quality

3. Equitable access for all young people and adults to appropriate learningand life skills programs

4. 50% improvement in levels of adult literacy by 2015, especially for women

5. Eliminating gender disparities in primary and secondary education by2005, and achieving gender equality in education by 2015

6. Improving all aspects of the quality of education

MILLENIUM DEVELOPMENTGOALS 2000

1. Eradicate extremepoverty andhunger

2. Achieve universalprimary education

3. Promote genderequality andempower women

4. Reduce child mortality

5. Improve maternalhealth

6. Combat HIV/AIDS,malaria, and otherdiseases

7. Ensure environmentalsustainability

8. Develop a globalpartnership fordevelopment

8

women’s empowerment, health, andenvironment. For the achievement ofthese other goals, secondary and tertiary education is as important asprimary.

The centrality of basic education toeconomic development was recognizedagain at the July 2006 G-8 Summit.Recommitting to the MDG and EFAeducation goals, the communiquéstates that “Education is at the heartof human progress” and notes thateducation is a key driver of marketproductivity and a source of cohesionfor all nations.1

A recent report2 on progress towardsthe MDG goals finds that while progresshas been made by many countries,there are many others—especially insub-Saharan Africa—that are far fromachieving the goals. Despite the chal-lenges to reducing poverty rates, thereare opportunities for hastening change.Some of the poorest countries haveexperienced rapid economic growth inthe last few years. The issue in thosecountries is to ensure that growthbenefits the entire population, not just a few.

The climate for change is positive.Political leaders are campaigning foroffice on providing education to all.The growth of information and com-munication technologies, while uneven,has led to creative solutions to prob-lems facing developing countries.Support from international sources inthe form of aid to developing countriesis on the rise, and foundations andprivate corporations, recognizing theneed for a stable, healthy, educatedworld, are entering the field of inter-national development, bringing withthem deep knowledge of managementand technical expertise.

It is in this context that this reportfocuses on the role of public-privatepartnerships. Mindful that govern-ments could not achieve the MDG andEFA goals on their own, public-privatepartnerships have been consideredimportant vehicles to fuel progress.Public-private partnerships are part ofachieving the Millennium Developmentand Education for All goals and thelarger development agenda of eradi-cating poverty.

INTRODUCTION

1 Official website of the G8 presidency of the Russian Federation, “Education for InnovativeSocieties in the 21st century,” (16 July 2006) http://en.g8russia.ru/docs/12.html.

2 Global Monitoring Report Millennium Development Goals: From Consensus to Momentum(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2005).

WHAT ARE THE GAPS IN THEPROVISION OF HIGH QUALITY

SCHOOLING FOR ALL CHILDREN?

WHAT ARE THE GAPS IN THE PROVISION OF HIGH QUALITY SCHOOLING FOR ALL CHILDREN?

EPDC EstimatesUN Estimates

FIGURE 1. Global net enroll-ment rates 1930–2003.3

10

Net enrollment rates in primaryschool have almost doubled since1930, bringing the goal of full primaryeducation for all within reach. In 1930,net primary enrollment rates aroundthe world stood at approximately 48%for primary education. By 1980, theglobal rate was 74% and rose to 85%by 2003, as shown in Figure 1.

Net enrollment rates by country areshown in the map in Figure 2a. By 2002,more than 650 million children were inprimary school4. Yet a sizeable numberremain out of school, 115 million inall5 (Figure 2b). While sub-SaharanAfrica contains only 16% of the world’sprimary school age children, it has40% of the out-of-school children.Another 20% of those out of schoolare in South Asia, mainly in India.

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1930 1940 1950 1960 1970Year

1980 1990 2000 2010

Net

enro

llmen

trat

e

3 The net enrollment rate is the number of children of primary school age in school divided bythe number of children of primary school age. The NER for 1970 and later are based onweighted averages of the NERs for countries where data was available, weighted by primaryschool age children age 6–11. These averages may underestimate progress slightly as there aremore data for the least developed countries (with lower NER’s) in the later years. The pre-1970values are estimates based on gross enrolment rates—GER (all primary school studentsregardless of age divided by the population of primary school age children)—multiplied by theratio of NER/GER in 1970. 2003 is the last year for which there was data, at the time of writingthis report.

4 Sum of primary school pupils, both sexes, in 2002 (or most recent year) in 180 countries. Datafrom UIS, accessed July, 2006.

5 UNESCO Institute for Statistics and UNICEF Children Out of School: Measuring ExclusionFrom Primary School (Montreal, Canada: UNESCO Institute for Statistics, 2005).

FIGURE 2a. Global map of netenrollment rates by country. Source: EPDC using datafrom UNESCO Institute ofStatistics (UIS).

NER33–6061–7879–8889–9596–100Data unavailable

FIGURE 2b. Portion of childrenof primary schoolage not enrolled in school. Source: EPDC using data from UIS.

% Out of School0-45-1112-2021-3839-66Data unavailable

So with all the emphasis on gettingchildren into school, why are so manystill not there? There are several reasons. According to the UNESCOInstitute for Statistics (UIS), 12% ofschool age children are likely never toattend school.6 Furthermore, somedrop out. The EPDC estimates that, of

the children in developing countries whoenter first grade, about one-quarterdo not make it to fifth grade.7

Moreover, even the 650 million pluschildren in primary school are not alllearning what they should. Many are inschools where teachers are frequently

THE

UN

TAP

PE

DO

PP

OR

TUN

ITY:H

OW

PU

BLIC

-PR

IVATEPA

RTN

ER

SH

IPS

CA

NA

DVA

NC

EE

DU

CATIO

NFO

RA

LL

11

6 UNESCO Institute for Statistics and UNICEF, Children Out of School: Measuring ExclusionFrom Primary School.

7 This approximation was calculated by taking the average survival rates for 122 non-industrializedcountries weighted by school-age population, using most recent UIS data for survival to the end ofprimary school and school age population. Does not include China. UIS data accessed July, 2006.

Primary Net Enrollment Rate (2000–2004)

Portion of Primary School Age Children Not in School (2000–2004)


While sub-SaharanAfrica contains only16% of the world’sprimary school agechildren, it has 40% of the out-of-schoolchildren.

12

absent, books rare, health poor, andconsequently, learning slow.8 For all children to have a full, quality education, four things have to happen:

1. School entry: children have tostart school

2. Retention: they have to stay inschool

3. Learning: while in school, childrenneed to learn effectively

4. Equality: all must have the opportunity to benefit equally

The remainder of this section willfocus on these four elements, in turn.

GAP # 1: CHILDREN WHONEVER ENTER SCHOOL

In many developing countries,enrolling the final 5–10% of studentsin school has proven difficult. In Asia,a small handful of countries (India,Nepal, and Afghanistan) continue tostruggle. For countries with large populations like India, even a low out-of-school rate translates into millions of children. In Latin America,on the other hand, access is high in allcountries, with one exception: Haiti. In sub-Saharan Africa, the range is largest. There are a number of countries there where school accessis quite high. The best performers are Uganda, Gabon, Lesotho, andZimbabwe. But getting children

into school remains a tremendouschallenge in many countries in Africa.

Figure 3 shows entry, the portion ofchildren who will enter primary schoolby country, according to recent house-hold surveys for 73 countries. Thesurveys are for years ranging from2000–2005. In some countries witholder data, there likely has beenimprovement. Still, considerable dif-ferences within regions likely remain.

The figure covers developing countriesand is arranged by region. The regionsare presented in ascending order: Sub-Saharan Africa, Asia, Arab States, LatinAmerica, Eastern Europe, and CentralAsia. Within the regions, countries arearranged by rate of girls enteringschool, from lowest to highest.

GAP # 2: CHILDREN WHODROP OUT FROM PRIMARYOR SECONDARY SCHOOL

The EPDC estimates that today 34% ofall children will not complete primaryschool, 12% because they never enterschool and 22% because they drop outbefore the end of primary.9 In otherwords, almost two-thirds of the globalgap to children completing primaryschool is due to children dropping out.These dropouts represent a squander-ing of resources and children’s time,because many probably have not learned

8 Information based on Helen Abadzi Efficient Learning for the Poor: Insights From the Frontierof Cognitive Neuroscience (Washington, DC: World Bank, 2006).

9 This estimate is based on calculations with UIS data from the previous section—12% of children do not enter school at all and a 75% survival rate to the last grade of primary of those who enter. These two figures imply that 34% of children will not reach the end of primary (12% + (100–12%)*(1–75%) = 34%).

THE

UN

TAP

PE

DO

PP

OR

TUN

ITY:H

OW

PU

BLIC

-PR

IVATEPA

RTN

ER

SH

IPS

CA

NA

DVA

NC

EE

DU

CATIO

NFO

RA

LL

FIGURE 3. ENTRY: The portionof children whoenter primaryschool.Source: Household surveys from 2000–2005and EPDC calculations.

13

100% 0Portion of children

100%

MALE FEMALE

80% 60% 40% 20% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Sub-

Saha

ran

Afri

caEa

stAs

iaan

dth

ePa

cific

Arab

Stat

esLa

tinAm

eric

aan

dth

eC

arib

bean

East

ern

Euro

pean

dC

entr

alAs

ia

NigerBurkina Faso

EthiopiaMali

GuineaBurundi

ChadGuinea-Bissau

SenegalCote d'Ivoire

Congo DRCentral African

BeninNigeria

MauritaniaMozambique

TogoZambiaEritreaGhanaAngola

CameroonMadagascar

RwandaKenya

TanzaniaSierra Leone

MalawiNamibia

SwazilandUganda

Sao Tome andZimbabwe

GabonLesotho

AfghanistanNepal

LaosIndia

CambodiaVanuatu

Solomon IslandsMyanmar

BangladeshPhilippines

VietnamSri LankaIndonesia

North SudanMorocco

EgyptsJordan

HaitiNicaragua

GuatamalaHondura

Suriname Brazil

El SalvadorColombia

MexicoDominican Republic

BoliviaPeru

Guyana

AzebaijanTajikistan

KazachstanUzbekistan

ArmeniaMoldova

enough to have an impact on theirlives. Many others drop out betweenprimary and secondary school.

Countries within the same region, and with similar economic or culturalbackground, have very differentdropout rates. Even some countrieswith high percentages of childrenentering school see large numbers of drop outs.

Figures 4 and 5, following the sameorder as in Figure 3, show an estimatefor the percentage of boys and girlswho will complete primary and sec-ondary, respectively.10 The grey barshows the portion of children in thecountry who will enter school. Thecolored bars (blue for primary; red forsecondary) show the percentage of

children who will complete primaryschool or complete secondary school.The difference between the coloredbars and the grey bars is the dropout.

In many countries, the portion thatwill complete primary school is muchsmaller than those who enter, and theportion that will complete secondaryschool is miniscule, far from the ratesnecessary for high levels of per capitaincome.11

GAP # 3: LEARNING IN SCHOOL

Better learning in school is associatedwith higher economic growth12. But notall children who enter school leavewith the same quality of learning. Infact, the difference between highestand lowest learning scores can vary


The EPDC estimatesthat today 34% of allchildren will not com-plete primary school,12% because theynever enter schooland 22% because theydrop out before theend of primary. Inother words, almosttwo-thirds of theglobal gap to childrencompleting primaryschool is due to chil-dren dropping out.

14

10 The way the portions expected to complete primary and complete secondary are calculated isbased on age-specific education attainment found by household surveys, and takes advantage ofthe observation that most school entry, primary completion, and secondary completion occursby relatively predictable ages. In our calculations, a fairly large margin for late school entry, andslow school progress, is included.

The portion to enter school = children who were ever in school (age 10)/all children (age 10).

The portion expected to complete primary = portion to enter school x [persons who completedprimary (age 17)/persons who were ever in school (age 17)].

The portion expected to complete secondary = portion expected to complete primary x [personswho completed secondary (age 24)/persons who completed primary (age 24)].

11 In 2000, all countries with upper-middle income or higher (those with a per capita GDP of$2936 or more according to the World Bank Atlas Method) had adult secondary attainment levelsof 20% or more (90% of the countries had adult secondary attainment of at least 40%). Data from:Robert J. Barro and Jong-Wha Lee International Data on Educational Attainment: Updates andImplications 2000) and World Bank, “EdStats,” http://devdata.worldbank.org/edstats/cd5.asp,accessed July, 2006.

12 Erik Hanushek, “Why Quality matters in Education,” Finance and Development 42, no. 2 (2005).

THE

UN

TAP

PE

DO

PP

OR

TUN

ITY:H

OW

PU

BLIC

-PR

IVATEPA

RTN

ER

SH

IPS

CA

NA

DVA

NC

EE

DU

CATIO

NFO

RA

LL

FIGURE 4. RETENTION:Portion of school-age cohort expectedto complete primaryschool in compari-son to the portionwho will enterschool.Source: Household surveys and EPDC calculations.

15


100%

MALE FEMALE

80% 60% 40% 20% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Sub-

Saha

ran

Afri

caEa

stAs

iaan

dth

ePa

cific

Arab

Stat

esLa

tinAm

eric

aan

dth

eC

arib

bean

East

ern

Euro

pean

dC

entr

alAs

ia

NigerBurkina Faso

EthiopiaMali

GuineaBurundi

ChadGuinea-Bissau



BeninNigeria



CameroonMadagascar

RwandaKenya


MalawiNamibia

SwazilandUganda


GabonLesotho

AfghanistanNepal

LaosIndia

CambodiaVanuatu

Solomon IslandsMyanmar

BangladeshPhilippines


North SudanMorocco

EgyptsJordan

HaitiNicaragua

GuatamalaHondura

Suriname Brazil

El SalvadorColombia

MexicoDominican Republic

BoliviaPeru

Guyana

AzebaijanTajikistan

KazachstanUzbekistan

ArmeniaMoldova


FIGURE 5. RETENTION:Portion of school-age cohort expectedto complete sec-ondary school incomparison to theportion who willenter school.Source: Household surveys and EPDC calculations.

16


100%

MALE FEMALE

80% 60% 40% 20% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Sub-

Saha

ran

Afri

caEa

stAs

iaan

dth

ePa

cific

Arab

Stat

esLa

tinAm

eric

aan

dth

eC

arib

bean

East

ern

Euro

pean

dC

entr

alAs

ia

NigerBurkina Faso

EthiopiaMali

GuineaBurundi

ChadGuinea-Bissau



BeninNigeria



CameroonMadagascar

RwandaKenya


MalawiNamibia

SwazilandUganda


GabonLesotho

AfghanistanNepal

LaosIndia

CambodiaSolomon Islands

MyanmarBangladeshPhilippines


North SudanMorocco

EgyptsJordan

HaitiNicaragua

GuatamalaSuriname

BrazilEl Salvador

ColombiaMexico

Dominican RepublicBolivia

PeruGuyana

TajikistanKazachstanUzbekistan

ArmeniaMoldova

by a factor of three.13 Some of thatvariation is a result of differencesbetween schools; some of it is determined by the children’s back-ground and health.

The recent Global MonitoringReport on quality found that suffi-cient instruction time, good teach-ing methods, mother-tongueinstruction for the first few years,investment in teacher training andsupport, and appropriate learningmaterials are factors that impactchildren’s learning.14

A 2004 study by Crouch and Fasihfound that countries with higherincome, higher adult education, andlower percentages of children in thepopulation tend to have higher learningscores, as shown in Figure 6. A highpercentage of children means fewerresources can be invested in eachchild. In their multivariate model,Crouch and Fasih found the effects are independent. But there are somecountries which beat the odds andhave better-than-expected learningoutcomes. Among such countries are Uganda, Kenya, Burkina Faso,Bolivia, and Honduras. These countrieshave lessons to share on how to

improve learning in the most challenging situations.

GAP # 4: INEQUALITY WITHIN COUNTRIES

In many countries, children from poorfamilies, rural children, children fromdisadvantaged regions, and girls areless likely to enter and remain inschool.15 Inequality within countries isparticularly important for policy andpartnerships.

Figure 7 shows the results of an ongoing EPDC study of the likelihoodof attending school for boys versusgirls, children residing in urban versusrural areas, children from richesthouseholds versus those from pooresthouseholds, and children living in themost advantaged versus least advan-taged regions. Countries are orderedaccording to net enrollment rate fromlowest (Burkina Faso) to highest(Peru). The length of the bars showsthe difference in the likelihood ofbeing in school between a child in thewealthiest quintile vs. the poorestincome quintile, a child in the mostadvantaged region compared to the

THE

UN

TAP

PE

DO

PP

OR

TUN

ITY:H

OW

PU

BLIC

-PR

IVATEPA

RTN

ER

SH

IPS

CA

NA

DVA

NC

EE

DU

CATIO

NFO

RA

LL

But not all childrenwho enter schoolleave with the samequality of learning. In fact, the differencebetween highest andlowest learning scores can vary by a factor of three.

17

13 Luis Crouch and Tazeen Fasih, “Patterns in educational development: implications for futureefficiency analysis,” 2004). The study mapped math and reading test scores from 93 countries to a consistent, comparable scale. The mapping is imperfect and their findings are only indicative, but they are robust enough to confirm that there are big differentials in learning across the world.

14 UNESCO EFA Global Monitoring Report 2005, Education for All—The Quality Imperative(Paris, France: UNESCO, 2005).

15 Deon Filmer and Lant Pritchett, “The effect of household wealth on educational attainment:Evidence from 35 countries,” Population And Development Review 25, no. 1 (1999); UNESCOInstitute for Statistics and UNICEF, Children Out of School: Measuring Exclusion From PrimarySchool; Education Policy and Data Center, “Gender, Urban-rural, regional and wealth effects inschool attendance,” (2005). The UIS and EPDC analyses found the likelihood of school atten-dance is affected by each of these factors independently.


FIGURE 6. Correlationsbetween learningscores and agestructure (top) andincome per capita(bottom) around2000. Source: UN populationdata; Crouch and Fasih(2004), relative learningscores; World Bank,income data.

18

least advantaged region, a child in arural vs. urban residence, and boys vs.girls.

Regional and wealth differences are large, in particular in countrieswith lower overall attendance such as Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Mali,Mozambique, Tanzania, Zambia, andNigeria. A child from the wealthiestquintile is 30–40 percentage pointsmore likely to be in school than a child from the poorest quintile inthese countries. Similarly, a child from the best-off region is up to

40–50 percentage points more likely to be in primary school than a childfrom the worst-off region in Ethiopia,Tanzania, and Nigeria.

Boys and those in urban areas tend tohave some advantage. But there are a few countries, such as Bangladesh,Philippines, Nicaragua, and Malawi,where girls are more likely to beattending primary school than boys. In Bangladesh, rural children surpris-ingly have an advantage over urbanchildren in terms of school attendance.

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%Population under 15 as a portion of adults 15-64

Rela

tive

Lear

ning

Scor

es

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

100 1,000 10,000 100,000

Rela

tive

Lear

ning

Scor

es

US $ GDP per capita in 2000 (logarithmic scale)

THE

UN

TAP

PE

DO

PP

OR

TUN

ITY:H

OW

PU

BLIC

-PR

IVATEPA

RTN

ER

SH

IPS

CA

NA

DVA

NC

EE

DU

CATIO

NFO

RA

LL

FIGURE 7. Differences in thelikelihood that achild of primaryschool age isattending primaryschool, betweenwealth groups,provinces or regionswithin countries,rural/urban resi-dence, and gender. Source: EPDC using DHS data.

19-20% 20% 40% 60%

PeruEgypt

BoliviaPhilippines

IndonesiaBangladesh

VietnamGhana

CameroonNicaragua

UgandaMorocco

ColombiaBenin

MalawiNigeria

NepalKenyaGabon

NambiaZambia

TanzaniaMozambique

EthiopiaMali

Burkina Faso Best vs. Worst Region

PeruEgypt

BoliviaPhilippines

IndonesiaBangladesh

VietnamGhana

CameroonNicaragua

UgandaMorocco

ColombiaBenin

MalawiNigeria

NepalKenyaGabon

NambiaZambia

TanzaniaMozambique

EthiopiaMali

Burkina Faso Urban vs. Rural

PeruEgypt

BoliviaPhilippines

IndonesiaBangladesh

VietnamGhana

CameroonNicaragua

UgandaMorocco

ColombiaBenin

MalawiNigeria

NepalKenyaGabon

NambiaZambia

TanzaniaMozambique

EthiopiaMali

Burkina Faso Male vs. Female

PeruEgypt

BoliviaPhilippines

IndonesiaBangladesh

VietnamGhana

CameroonNicaragua

UgandaMorocco

ColombiaBenin

MalawiNigeria

NepalKenyaGabon

NambiaZambia

TanzaniaMozambique

EthiopiaMali

Burkina Faso Richest vs Poorest

0%

Difference in likelihood of attending primary school

DO THE TRENDS IN ENTRY ANDCOMPLETION SHOW A CLOSING

OF SCHOOLING GAPS?

All children need a decent education,so they can live productive lives andcontribute to their family’s and nation’seconomic and social development.This section shows prospective growthto 2015 to identify countries makingrapid progress towards closing thegaps discussed in the preceding pagesand those that are projected to movemore slowly. Policies and programsmust be structured according to thespeed of change in countries. That iswhy it is important to understand therate of progress and collect data tomonitor changes.

Data to estimate future growth isavailable for school entry and for primary and secondary completion(gaps #1 and #2). There is not adequatedata to project learning and equality.However, there is a strong linkbetween learning and equality andentry and retention. The former maybe expected to rise with the latter.

The EPDC recently published a reportwith projections for primary schoolentry and primary school completionfor 73 developing countries.16 Thatreport includes trend projections, whichassume that a country’s educationgrowth rates proceed along the samepath as over the past 40–50 years. Italso includes fastest projections, whichassume that a country’s primary entryand completion trend accelerates tothe historically fastest rate (Indonesiain the 1970s and 1980s). This reportpresents updated calculations withnewer data for some countries andthe addition of secondary completionprojections. Moreover, for a historical

comparison, the primary entry, completion, and secondary completionrates from 30 years previous havebeen added. The graphs are shownonly for female education trends andprojections. Graphs for males wouldlook similar but with slightly highervalues in most countries. Figures 8a, b, and c present three graphs for primary entry, primary completion,and secondary completion.

Each of the three graphs shows themost recent values represented byblue circles. As one might expect, themost recent year values are highestfor primary entry. In two-thirds of thecountries in the primary entry graph,more than 80% of the girls enterschool. The most recent year valuesare much lower for primary completion.Only one-fourth of the countries covered have 80%+ expected primarycompletion, and just over half havemore than 50%. Secondary completion,as the third graph shows, is minimalin all but a handful of countries and isbelow 5% in more than one-fourth ofthe countries shown.

The graphs also show historicalprogress over the last roughly 30 years.The red diamond on each bar showsprimary school entry and completionand secondary completion 30 yearsearlier. Many countries more thandoubled primary school entry andcompletion, and more than half of thecountries tripled secondary completion.This experience shows that rapidprogress is possible.

DO THE TRENDS IN ENTRY AND COMPLETION SHOW A CLOSING OF SCHOOLING GAPS?

Only one-fourth of thecountries coveredhave 80%+ expectedprimary completion,and just over halfhave more than 50%.

22

16 Annababette Wils, Bidemi Carrol, and Karima Barrow Educating the World’s Children:Patterns of Growth and Inequality (Washington, DC: Education Policy and Data Center, 2005).

In addition, the graphs show the trendprojection to 2015, represented by the solid gray bar, and the fastest projection, represented by burgundyarrowheads. Most countries will reach90% or higher primary school entry by2015. If all countries were able toaccelerate to equal the high growthrate of Indonesia, by 2015 primaryentry would be close to 100% in mostcountries. The greatest gains fromaccelerating school entry growth areto be made in the countries that needit most: where school entry is still very low.

The trends are for rapid progress in primary completion, with many countriesraising the primary completion rates bymore than 20 percentage points fromthe starting year to 2015. The countriesin the middle of the graph appear to bemaking the most progress, those start-ing with expected primary completionrates of 30–70%. This is not surprising,given that education growth in mostcountries is an s-curve, slow at first,then climbing rapidly, and finally slow-ing down again when rates of 80–90%have been achieved, with only the moremarginalized children remaining to bereached. Again, accelerating progresscan benefit almost all countries.

Secondary completion is still low inmost countries, but much progress hasbeen made. Around 30 years ago, inonly 5 of the 69 countries shown did20% of women receive a secondaryhigh school diploma. By 2000/5, thatnumber had risen to 29 out of 69.According to the trend projection, by2015 secondary completion will almostdouble with more than 40% of theyoung women completing secondary in28 of the 69 countries. Even though thisis rapid progress, it is not fast enoughfor developing countries to break out ofpoverty within this generation.

The graph shows, however, that thetrend projection generally falls far shortof the fastest observed. Some coun-tries, notably Jordan, Egypt, Indonesia,Zimbabwe, and Nigeria, made veryrapid progress in secondary completionover the past 30 years, proceeding from0–5% completing secondary school to35–50%. It would be useful to studyhow these countries achieved theirremarkable progress and how partner-ships can transfer it to other countries.

THE

UN

TAP

PE

DO

PP

OR

TUN

ITY:H

OW

PU

BLIC

-PR

IVATEPA

RTN

ER

SH

IPS

CA

NA

DVA

NC

EE

DU

CATIO

NFO

RA

LL

Most countries willreach 90% or higherschool entry by 2015.…The greatest gainsfrom acceleratingschool entry growthare to be made in thecountries that need itmost: where schoolentry is still very low.

23


FIGURE 8a. Trends and projec-tions to 2015 forfemale primaryentry rates.Source: EPDC calculations.

24

ArmeniaMoldova

Bosnia and HerzegovinaJordan

PeruGuyana

UzbekistanIndonesia

BoliviaGabon

KazakhstanSri Lanka

Dominican RepublicLesotho

AzerbaijanMexico

TajikistanZimbabwe

VietnamColombia

UgandaSao Tome and Principe

Solomon IslandsBrazil

PhilippinesSwaziland

El SalvadorSuriname

BangladeshMorocco

Egypt, Arab Rep.Namibia

MalawiRwanda

Sierra LeoneVanuatu

HondurasGuatemale

MyanmarMauritania

KenyaTanzania

NicaraguaAngolaNepal

CambodiaCameroon

EritreaIndia

Lao PDRGhana

TogoMadagascarNorth Sudan

ZambiaMozambique

HaitiNigeria

Cote D'IvoireCentral African Republic

SenegalBenin

Guinea-BissauCongo, Dem. Rep.

EthiopiaGuinea

ChadBurundi

MaliBurkina Faso

AfghanistanNiger

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Portion of children

¢ Trend to 2015u Fastest to 2015l Most recent yearu 30 years ago

THE

UN

TAP

PE

DO

PP

OR

TUN

ITY:H

OW

PU

BLIC

-PR

IVATEPA

RTN

ER

SH

IPS

CA

NA

DVA

NC

EE

DU

CATIO

NFO

RA

LL

FIGURE 8b. Trends and projec-tions to 2015 forfemale primarycompletion rates.

Source: EPDC calculations.


25

UzbekistanArmenia

KazakhstanAzerbaijan

TajikistanSri Lanka

PeruSolomon Islands

IndonesiaPhilippines

MoldovaJordan

GuyanaBosnia and Herzegovina

ColombiaMexico

ZimbabweVietnam

El SalvadorBrazil

Sao Tome and PrincipeNorth Sudan

Egypt, Arab Rep.GabonGhanaBolivia

NamibiaBangladesh

SurinameDominican Republic

NicaraguaCameroon

NepalIndia

Lao PDRLesotho

SwazilandNigeria

TanzaniaZambia

GuatemaleMauritania

AngolaMorocco

TogoUgandaVanuatu

Congo, Dem. Rep.Sierra Leone

KenyaCote D'Ivoire

HaitiCentral African Republic

EritreaCambodia

SenegalMyanmar

MadagascarRwandaMalawi

Burkina FasoBenin

GuineaMozambique

EthiopiaHonduras

Guinea-BissauBurundi

ChadMali

AfghanistanNiger



FIGURE 8c. Trends and projec-tions to 2015 forfemale secondarycompletion rates. Source: EPDC calculations.

26

ArmeniaKazakhstan

JordanUzbekistanPhilippines

PeruColombia

Egypt, Arab Rep.North Sudan

TajikistanZimbabwe

NigeriaDominican Republic

IndonesiaMexico

El SalvadorMoldova

BoliviaGuyana

MyanmarIndia

BrazilSri Lanka

KenyaNamibia

NicaraguaVietnam

Bosnia and HerzegovinaNepal

BangladeshGuatemale

BurundiLesothoMalawiGhana

SurinameEritrea

Cote D'IvoireUganda

MauritaniaLao PDR

Congo, Dem. Rep.MoroccoRwandaZambia

TogoCameroon

MadagascarGabon

Solomon IslandsSao Tome and Principe

Burkina FasoHaiti

EthiopiaCambodia

Guinea-BissauSenegal

AfghanistanBeninChad

GuineaTanzania

MozambiqueMali

Central African RepublicSwaziland

Sierra LeoneAngola

Niger



WHAT RESOURCES ARE NEEDED TO CLOSE THE GAPS?

All parents hope that their childrenwill acquire valuable skills and knowl-edge in a school where they can studyin safety and comfort, with well-trained teachers committed to helpingchildren learn and using books andmaterials that illuminate the world oflearning. Many countries, and espe-cially the poorest, are far from reach-ing that standard. Poverty, conflict,weak political structures—all hinderthe achievement of this vision.

Expanding access, improving quality,and reducing inequities are intricatelytied to the amount and type of resourcesput towards education. All resources,from financial and human to manage-ment, are needed. The ability to raiseresources and use them efficientlyand equitably determines, to a signifi-cant extent, how successful countrieswill be in their quest to reach educa-tion goals. School dropouts, high rep-etition rates, low levels of learningachievement, lack of informationabout the performance of children andschools, inadequate opportunities tolearn, corruption at various levels, andpersistent inequities all point to low or inefficient use of resources.

This section of the report discussesthe sources, levels, and patterns offinancial resources across differentcountries; reviews human resourceneeds (particularly as relates toteachers); and discusses resourcemanagement.

RESOURCE # 1: FINANCIAL RESOURCES

Financing for education in developingcountries comes from three principalsources—national governments,households, and external donor assistance agencies. In some coun-tries, corporations and religiousorganizations contribute to education,but these usually account for only asmall portion of total spending. Ananalysis of education funding flowssuggests that in many (but not all)countries, governments and house-holds already make large contribu-tions to primary and secondary educa-tion. It may be difficult for them toprovide the additional resourcesneeded to fill remaining finance gaps,and international donors only fill apart of the need.

Government Spending on EducationA common measure of a government’scommitment to education is publicexpenditure on education as a per-centage of GDP.

Figure 9 shows differences in education spending across a group of low and middle income countrieswith comparable data—from a low of1% of GDP in Indonesia to a high of15% in the Marshall Islands. The latteris an extreme case. Most countriesspend between 4% and 6% of GDP on education. A few countries, such as The Gambia, United Arab Emirates,Indonesia, and Niger, spend a relativelylow percentage of their GDP on education.


The ability to raiseresources and usethem efficiently andequitably determines,to a significant extent,how successful coun-tries will be in theirquest to reach educa-tion goals.

28

THE

UN

TAP

PE

DO

PP

OR

TUN

ITY:H

OW

PU

BLIC

-PR

IVATEPA

RTN

ER

SH

IPS

CA

NA

DVA

NC

EE

DU

CATIO

NFO

RA

LL

FIGURE 9.Total educationexpenditure as percentage of GDP.

29

Sub-

Saha

ran

Afric

aEa

stAs

iaan

dth

ePa

cific

Arab

Stat

esLa

tinAm

eric

aan

dth

eCa

ribbe

anEa

ster

nEu

rope

and

Cent

ralA

sia

IndonesiaBangladesh

Lao PDRPhilippines

NepalThailand

Korea, Rep.Hong Kong

IranTonga

FijiMalaysia

Marshall Islands

United Arab EmiratesOman

MoroccoKuwait

KazakhstanTajikistan

AlbaniaArmenia

AzerbaijanMacedonia

RomaniaBulgaria

Slovak RepublicCzech RepublicKyrgyz Republic

CroatiaUkraineMoldovaHungary

PolandMongolia

EstoniaBelarus

Latvia

UruguayEl Salvador

PeruAntigua and Barbuda

PanamaArgentina

ChileParaguay

ArubaColombiaCostaRica

BelizeGrenadaJamaica

MexicoGuyanaBolivia

Barbados

GambiaNigerTogo

ZambiaCongo, Rep.

BeninEritrea

ComorosMauritius

UgandaBurundi

South AfricaSeychellesSwaziland

KenyaNamibia

Cape VerdeLesotho

0% 2% 4 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16%

A commitment of public resourcesalone does not signal success or failure: witness Indonesia, the countrywith the fastest education growthrates, with what appears to be one ofthe lowest public spending profiles.The data do not tell us whetherIndonesia was able to achieve thisbecause of very efficient resource useand a rapidly expanding economy orrather that the 1% is misleadingbecause other, unmeasured resourcesare being used.

In addition to making resources avail-able to education, governments makechoices about how they distribute edu-cation funds among the different lev-els. Table 1 shows that the mid-pointfor financial allocations to the primarylevel17 for all countries is 35% of thetotal education budget. However,countries in sub-Saharan Africa spendon average a higher proportion on theprimary level (mid-point is 45%),whereas countries in Eastern Europeand Central Asia spend less (mid-point is 19%). The latter are countriesthat are near or at universal primary

education and no longer need toexpand their primary system.Furthermore, population growth inthose countries is slow and does not put additional pressures on theprimary level.

Government spending on different levels of education involves tradeoffs.Figure 10 shows the relationshipbetween enrollment shares and spend-ing shares for various countries. Forboth primary and secondary education,there is a positive relationship betweenthe enrollment shares and spendingshares. Countries with their largestenrollments in primary or secondaryeducation tend to spend more on thoselevels. In contrast, there is no relation-ship between enrollment share andspending on tertiary education. Manycountries spend more on tertiary education than warranted given itsenrollment share (as suggested by the rather consistent portion going totertiary in Table 1). This may be due tothe higher relative costs of tertiaryeducation or the higher priorityassigned to tertiary education.


TABLE 1. Median allocation(%) of educationexpenditure to thevarious levels, bygeographic region.Source: Calculated datafrom UIS.

30

17 Note that the number of years in at each level differs among countries.

Region Primary Secondary Tertiary Other

East Asia & Pacific 39 33 15 12

Arab States 39 42 12 9

Eastern Europe & Central Asia 19 45 19 18

Latin America & Caribbean 36 29 15 11

Sub-Saharan Africa 45 27 16 10

All Countries 35 34 16 12

THE

UN

TAP

PE

DO

PP

OR

TUN

ITY:H

OW

PU

BLIC

-PR

IVATEPA

RTN

ER

SH

IPS

CA

NA

DVA

NC

EE

DU

CATIO

NFO

RA

LL

3131

Prim

arys

hare

ofsp

endi

ng(%

)

0 20 40 60 80 100Primary share of enrollment (%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Albania

Argentina

Armenia

Azerbaijan

Burundi

Bangladesh

Bulgaria

Belarus

Belize

Bolivia

Chile

Congo, Rep.

Colombia

Comoros

Cape Verde

Costa Rica

Cuba

CzechRepublic

Eritrea

Estonia

Fiji

Gambia

Guyana

Croatia

Hungary

Indonesia

Iran

Jamaica

Kazakhstan

Kenya

Kyrgyz Republic

Lao PDR

Lesotho

Latvia

Morocco

Moldova

Marshall Islands

Macedonia

Mongolia

MauritiusMalaysia

Namibia

Niger

Nepal

Oman

PanamaPeru

Philippines

Poland

Paraguay

Romania

El Salvador

Slovak Republic

Swaziland

Thailand

Tajikistan

Tonga

Uganda

Ukraine

Uruguay

SouthAfrica

Mexico

FIGURE 10a.Relationshipbetween primaryenrollment andspending.

Source: Ed Stats


FIGURE 10b.Relationshipbetween secondaryenrollment andspending.

Source: Ed Stats

32

Seco

ndar

ysha

reof

spen

ding

(%)

0 20 40 60 80 100

Secondary share of enrollment (%)

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Albania

Argentina

Armenia

Azerbaijan

Burundi

BangladeshBulgaria

Belarus

Belize

Bolivia

Chile

Congo,Rep.

Colombia

Comoros

CostaRica

Cuba

Czech Republic

Eritrea

Estonia

Fiji

GambiaGuyana

Croatia

HungaryIndonesia

Iran

Jamaica

Kazakhstan

Kenya

Kyrgyz Republic

LaoPDR

Lesotho

Latvia

Morocco

Moldova

Mexico

Marshall Islands

Macedonia

Mongolia

Mauritius

Malaysia

NamibiaNiger

Nepal

Oman

Panama

Peru

Philippines

Poland

Paraguay

Romania

El Salvador

Slovak Republic

Swaziland

Thailand

Tajikistan

Tonga

Uganda

UkraineUruguay

South Africa

CapeVerde

Tert

iary

shar

eof

spen

ding

(%)

0 20 40 60 80 100Tertiary share of enrollment (%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Albania Argentina

Armenia

Azerbaijan

Burundi

Bangladesh

Bulgaria

Belarus

Belize

Bolivia

Chile

Congo,Rep.

Colombia

Comoros

CapeVerde

CostaRica

Cuba Czech Republic

Eritrea

Estonia

Fiji

Gambia

Guyana

Croatia

HungaryIndonesia

Iran

Jamaica

KazakhstanKenya

Kyrgyz Republic

LaoPDR

Lesotho

LatviaMorocco

Moldova

Mexico

Marshall Islands

Macedonia

Mongolia

Mauritius

Malaysia

Namibia

Niger

Nepal Oman

Panama

PeruPhilippines

Poland

Paraguay

Romania

El Salvador

Slovak RepublicSwaziland

Thailand

TajikistanTonga

Uganda

Ukraine

Uruguay

South Africa

FIGURE 10c.Relationshipbetween tertiaryenrollment andspending.

Source: Ed Stats

TABLE 2.HouseholdExpenditure on pri-mary and secondaryeducation per child,2000–2003.Source: Sierra LeoneIntegrated HouseholdSurvey (2003). All others,Demographic and HealthSurveys for various years.

THE

UN

TAP

PE

DO

PP

OR

TUN

ITY:H

OW

PU

BLIC

-PR

IVATEPA

RTN

ER

SH

IPS

CA

NA

DVA

NC

EE

DU

CATIO

NFO

RA

LL

33

Household Expenditure on EducationThe second major source of fundingfor education is from households.Households in many countries con-tribute significantly to their children’seducation. Even where school feeshave been abolished in primaryschools, families are usually requiredto pay for uniforms, books, and othersupplies; supplementary tutoring;examination fees; and transportation.

In general, it is difficult to quantify theexact amounts of household spendingon education, but a few household surveys provide information. Table 2shows average annual householdexpenditure on primary and secondaryeducation for five African countries forwhich there are recent household surveys. Households contribute muchmore for secondary education than forprimary. As a percentage of per capitaGDP, household spending per child inprimary school ranges from 2% inMalawi to 14% in Sierra Leone andNigeria. For secondary school, therange is from 27% of GDP per capitain Malawi to 83% in Uganda.

Enrollment in private schools isanother proxy for household spending

on education. Whereas some govern-ments subsidize private schooling, inmany developing countries householdsbear the cost of private education.Figure 11 shows the private share ofenrollments by region. There aresome obvious differences—in EasternEurope and Central Asia, the share ofprivate enrollment is negligible in primary and secondary education,whereas Asia and Latin America haverelied on private schools to expandtheir education system. Also, with theexception of Arab States, the privateshare of enrollment in secondary education is much higher than in primary education.

International Donor Spending on EducationMany low- and middle-income countries receive support for educa-tion from international sources. Onebenefit of external funding is that itcan be targeted to areas that receivetoo little attention and resources from government.18

The OECD Donor AssistanceCommittee (DAC) database providesinformation on commitments and disbursements for education by

18 For example, capital expenditure or support for marginalized children.

US Dollar % of per capita GDP

Survey Year Primary Secondary Primary Secondary

Uganda 2000 $ 22 $ 212 9% 83%

Nigeria 2003 $ 58 $ 148 14% 35%

Malawi 2002 $ 3 $ 47 2% 27%

Zambia 2002 $ 32 $ 121 9% 34%

Sierra Leone 2003 $ 22 $ 86 14% 55%

¢ Primary¢ Secondary

bilateral and multilateral organizations.The information from the DAC databaseis more useful as a window into donorpriorities than into level of funding forseveral reasons. First, it relies on voluntary reporting by donor countriesand not all countries report in a timelymanner. Second, DAC countries contribute either to specific projectsor, in a few countries, directly into thegeneral government budget, whichmakes it difficult to ascertain theexact amounts spent on education.Third, a portion of the funding is provided for technical assistance.

Figure 12 shows the total level of aidcommitments19 from DAC countries byregion and by education sector overthe years 2000 and 2004. Sub-SaharanAfrica received the largest amount ofaid commitments, followed by Far EastAsia. The distribution of that aid varies

by region—in Far East Asia, highereducation received the largest commit-ments, whereas in South and CentralAsia, the largest share went to basiceducation. In all regions, secondaryeducation receives the smallest shareof donor commitments, even thoughthat sector is expected to grow rapidly.

Financial Resource Gap Not only are additional financialresources needed to provide goodquality primary education to all children by 2015, but even moreresources are required for expandingsecondary education.

Researchers have estimated the additional resources needed to reachuniversal primary completion by 2015,ranging from a low of $7 billion ayear20 to a high of $2721 billion a year.

19 Actual disbursements do not always match commitments.

20 Barbara Bruns, Alain Mingat, and Ramahatra Rakotomalala Achieving Universal PrimaryEducation by 2015: a Chance for Every Child (Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 2003).

21 S. Devarajan, M. Miller, and E. V. Swanson Goals for Development: History, Prospects, andCosts (Washington, DC: World Bank, 2002). Mathieu Brossard and Luc-Charles GacougnolleFinancing Primary Education for All: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow (Paris: UNESCO, 2001).

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

East Asia & Pacific

Arab States Eastern Europe & Central Asia

Latin America& Caribbean

sub-SaharanAfrica


FIGURE 11.Private shares of enrollment for primary and sec-ondary, median values by region.Source: UNESCO Instituteof Statistics.

34

FIGURE 12.Total aid commit-ments to educationby region, 2000–2004.Source: OECD DonorAssistance Database.

THE

UN

TAP

PE

DO

PP

OR

TUN

ITY:H

OW

PU

BLIC

-PR

IVATEPA

RTN

ER

SH

IPS

CA

NA

DVA

NC

EE

DU

CATIO

NFO

RA

LL

35

The range is wide and the levels significant. However, compared to theUS$ 41 trillion of world income22 andthe potential economic, social, andpolitical benefits from education, theamounts are small.

With few exceptions, many govern-ments already contribute significantamounts of their GDP to education.Many spend between 40–50% of theireducation budgets on primary educa-tion alone. Government budgets arestretched, and the needs of other sec-tors, such as health, are also high. Asseen earlier, households in poor coun-tries already contribute significantlyfor education, and most of the chil-dren that are out of school are chil-dren of the poor who can hardly affordthe costs.

Where will the additional resourcescome from? The answer includesincreasing government commitments;

expanding the resource envelopethrough economic growth; reducinginefficiency and waste; private spendingand support. Beyond this, countrieslook to international partnerships anddonors. Acknowledging those needs,donors formed the EFA Fast TrackInitiative (FTI) in 2001. It is an attemptto enhance both national governmentcommitment and capability and international collaboration and contribution. FTI seeks to increaseresources for basic education throughgreater focus, efficiencies, and financing. Its principal instrumentsare (1) encouraging developing countries to develop comprehensivenational education plans, (2) increasinginternational donor financial contribu-tions to those plans, and (3) improvingthe effectiveness of assistance throughdonor coordination and alignment with national plans and reducing theburdens of donor reporting and procurement requirements.

22 World Bank, www.worldbank.org, accessed July, 2006. Number is world income in US$ current for 2004.

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

US$

(con

stan

t200

3m

illio

ns)

Far East Asia

MiddleEast

North & CentralAmerica

Oceania South &Central

Asia

South America

Africa—North of Sahara

Africa—South of Sahara

¢ Post Secondary¢ Secondary¢ Basic¢ Other

RESOURCE # 2: TEACHERS

To achieve universal primary completion by 2015, many countrieswill need to increase the number ofteachers. According to a recent estimate, countries in sub-SaharanAfrica would need to increase thenumber of primary teachers by 68% if all children were to be in primaryschool in classes with an average sizeof 40 students.23 In other areas of theworld, there does not necessarilyappear to be a shortfall of primaryschool teachers.

Another problem is that in many countries teachers lack the requisitetraining and qualifications to be effective in their classrooms. By farthe majority of teachers around theworld have teaching qualifications, butthere are some regions where a sizableminority does not. In Africa, 30% ofteachers are uncertified, and in Asiancountries (excluding India and China),18% are uncertified.24 The countrieswith the greatest needs in terms ofexpanding access, improving quality,and increasing financial resources arealso the most in need of additionalteachers. For these countries, thereare no simple answers and thechoices to be made are difficult.

Various strategies to address the needfor more teachers have been proposed,from hiring “para-teachers” to reducing

attrition among current teachers.25

Each country will have to decide thepolicies that best suit its situation.Motivating teachers and better management and supervision are alsoimportant. But providing more salariesfor teachers and administrators costsmoney. Their salaries comprise thelion’s share of education expenditures.

RESOURCE # 3: MANAGEMENT

Good management is the third resourceessential for a well-functioning educa-tion system. Only efficient systems canuse financial and human resourceswisely. Management is always an issue,but it is an even bigger problem whenmoney and highly educated peopleare scarce.

Strategic planning is needed todesign and implement appropriateincentive structures and informationand accountability systems. Strategicplanning and good managementensure that money and people areefficiently and equitably allocated; that relevant curricula and teachingmethods are adopted; that resourcesflow as intended to the schools andare used effectively; that teachers arepresent in classrooms and are pro-ductively using the time for learningwith relevant curricula and effectivemethods.


36

23 UNESCO Institute for Statistics, Teachers and Educational Quality: Monitoring Global Needsfor 2015.

24 According to UIS data from 2002.

25 UNESCO Institute for Statistics, Teachers and Educational Quality: Monitoring Global Needsfor 2015.

THE

UN

TAP

PE

DO

PP

OR

TUN

ITY:H

OW

PU

BLIC

-PR

IVATEPA

RTN

ER

SH

IPS

CA

NA

DVA

NC

EE

DU

CATIO

NFO

RA

LL

In Africa, 30% of theteachers are uncerti-fied, and in Asiancountries (excludingIndia and China), 18%are uncertified.

37

Unfortunately, in countries where gov-ernments are ineffective or inefficientand there are too few incentives andrewards for excellent managers, plan-ners, and technicians, talent moves tothe private sector or abroad. The result-ing imbalance between skills in govern-ment and in the private sector not onlyhurts the education system, but ulti-mately also hurts business and eco-nomic growth in these countries.26

Rectifying this imbalance is an areawhere partnerships can play a vital role.

Where Management of ResourcesCan be StrengthenedDrop out—Students who enroll inschool but drop out before completingthe full cycle of primary or secondaryeducation represent a waste ofresources and loss of opportunities.Figure 13 represents such inefficien-cies. It shows the number of years inprimary school that do not contributeto primary graduation due to dropout.To read this figure, if there are zeroyears “lost” to dropout, all childrenwho enter primary school eventuallygraduate. The higher the excess years,the more resources are being wasted.Sadly, many of the countries with the

highest inefficiencies are also thosethat have insufficient financial andhuman resources.27

Repeating a class is another indica-tion of inefficiency. In most countries,repetition is low, ranging from 0–5%.But in some countries, primary repeti-tion is as high as 30%, as shown inFigure 14. Repetition is inefficientbecause when a child is in a gradetwice (or even three times), two (orthree) times as many resources areused and completion of, Grade 6 forexample, may take on average sevenor eight years. Research by Mingat28

suggests that higher repetition ratesare not correlated with more or betterlearning, perhaps because higher rep-etition rates are themselves a symp-tom of poorly functioning and lowquality schools. There is also evidencethat repetition contributes toincreased dropout. If countries wereable to reduce the need for repetition,the classroom spaces and teachers’time could be channeled into higherquality schooling and a vicious cyclechanged to a virtuous one.

Lack of opportunity to learn resultsfrom various inefficiencies. To learn,children need to spend time on tasks

26 Malcolm McPherson, “Problems and Potential of Corporate Investment in Public SectorCapacities, Paper presented at conference on “Adding Public Value: the Limits of CorporateResponsibility: Drivers of Corporate Investment in Public Sector Capacity,” Centre for EconomicPolicy Research (London, May 9, 2006).

27 The calculation measures how many student years are needed to get to each grade andsums them up. To get to first grade, 1 student year is needed. For a second grade pupil 1 (second grade year) + 1/T1, is needed, where T1 is the transition rate from primary to secondary.For a third grade pupil, 1 + 1/T1 + 1/(T1*T2) is needed. For a pupil to reach grade 6, we calculate Pupil Years Needed = 1 + 1/T1 + 1/(T1*T2) + 1/(T1*T2*T3) + 1/(T1*T2*T3*T4) +1/(T1*T2*T3*T4*T5) + 1/(T1*T2*T3*T4*T5). The method does not take account of additional years spent repeating classes.

28 Alain Mingat, “Analytical and Factual Elements for a Quality Policy for Primary Education inSub-Saharan Africa in the Context of Education For All,” (2003).


38

ChadMozambique

MyanmarBurundi

Guinea BissauMalawi

HondurasRwandaUganda

EritreaCambodia

NigerVanuatu

KenyaDR Congo

TogoCentral African Republic

MauritaniaBenin

MadagascarZambiaYemen

TanzaniaMaliLaos

GuatemalaMorocco

AngolaCote D'Ivoire

GuineaHaiti

CameroonBurkina Faso

AfghanistanGabon

LesothoDominican Republic

GambiaSenegal

NepalNicaragua

BoliviaNamibia

BangladeshSuriname

PhilippinesZimbabwe

EthiopiaGhana

Andra PradeshNigeria

IndiaJordan

ColombiaPeru

KarnatakaBosnia and Herzegovina

BrazilMexico

Sao TomeEl Salvador

VietnamEgypt

Solomon IslandsIndonesia

GuyanaSri LankaTajikistanArmenia

AzerbaijanKazakhstan

MoldovaMongolia

North SudanUzbekistan

0 12Years of schooling lost to dropout

Orange areais inefficiency

due todropout rates

FIGURE 13. Years of schoolinglost to dropout for each primarygraduate.Source: EPDC using DHS.

THE

UN

TAP

PE

DO

PP

OR

TUN

ITY:H

OW

PU

BLIC

-PR

IVATEPA

RTN

ER

SH

IPS

CA

NA

DVA

NC

EE

DU

CATIO

NFO

RA

LL

FIGURE 14. Repetition rates inhigh-repetitiondeveloping coun-tries, most recentyear in 2002–2004. Source: Edstats, accessedJuly 2006.

39

0 10 20 30 40

Repetition rate (%)

Orange areais inefficiency

due to highrepetition rates

GabonMadagascar

BurundiComoros

CameroonSao Tome and Principe

Congo, Rep.ChadTogo

BeninNepal

EritreaBrazil

MozambiqueLao PDR

MaliRwandaLesothoDjiboutiMalawi

Cote d'IvoireSwaziland

MauritaniaUganda

GuatemalaMoroccoNamibia

Burkina FasoCape Verde

SenegalNetherlands Antilles

AlgeriaMaldives

BelizeVanuatu

CambodiaLebanon

NicaraguaGuinea

Gambia, TheAruba

HondurasUruguay

IraqPeru

Syrian Arab RepublicVenezuelaParaguay

TunisiaDominican Republic

BangladeshEthiopia

Costa RicaZambia

El SalvadorKenyaGhana

PanamaNiger

South AfricaBotswana

Trinidad and Tobago

relevant to learning, either by interacting with others, doing theirown work, or observing and listening. A recent study by Abadzi29 shows thatin many countries the hours spentlearning are drastically reduced byschool closures, split classes, teacherabsenteeism and tardiness, class time not devoted to learning tasks,and lack of material for both teachersand students. The following examples from Abadzi’s report provide a flavorof the problems:

u School closures—In Mali, schoolsare open only 70% of the schoolyear; in Honduras, schools were open 114 out of the official200 days.30

u Split classes occur in countrieswhere there are very high pupil-teacher ratios. As a solution to an oversized class, a school can split a large class and divide theteacher’s time between thesmaller groups. In five Africancountries where this is practiced,Mali, Guinea, Senegal, BurkinaFaso, and Cote d’Ivoire, children

in split classes received 32% lessinstructional time compared tothose in standard classes.31

u Teacher absenteeism is worse inremote schools with poor infra-structure and split classes. Manyteachers do not want to live inrural areas or live far away andoften do not show up for class. Ina selection of eight developingcountries, Abadzi found teacherabsenteeism rates of 11–27%.32

u Class time devoted to teachingcan range from 90% in effectiveclassrooms to 25% in ineffectiveones. Abadzi finds that in effectiveschools,33 an average of 75% ofthe time was spent on tasks, com-pared to only 52% in ineffectiveschools.

In these situations, only a fraction ofthe human and financial resourcesspent on schools actually goes toteaching students. When the curicu-lum is also poor or irrelevant, learningmaterials are absent, and teachingmethods ineffective, the limited


40

29 Abadzi, Efficient Learning for the Poor: Insights From the Frontier of Cognitive Neuroscience.

30 K. Kim in Comparative Study of Instructional Hours in West Africa (Washington, DC: WorldBank, 1000) In: Abadzi, 2006; and OED Honduras. 20 Years of IDA Assistance. ProjectPerformance Assessment Report. Rural Primary Education Management Project (Loan 2804).Basic Education (Credit 2694) (Washington, DC: World Bank, 2004).

31 Abadzi, 2006: 82, finding compiled from a number of studies, including: T Linden Double-Shifts Secondary School: Possibilities and Issues (Washington, DC: World Bank, 2001).

32 L. Alcazar, F. H. Rogers, N. Chaudhury, J. Hammer, M. Kremer, and K. Muralidharan Why AreTeachers Absent? Probing Service Delivery in Peruvian Primary Schools (Washington, DC:World Bank, 2004) in Abadzi, 2006. Countries included are Bangladesh (16% absenteeism),Ecuador (14%), India (25%), Indonesia (19%), Papua New Guinea (15%), Peru (11%), Uganda(27%), Zambia (17%).

33 Finding compiled from a number of studies, including: Linda Crone and Charles Teddlie,“Further examination of teacher behavior in differentially effective schools: selection and socialization processes,” Journal of classroom interaction 30, no. 1 (1995): 1-9In: Abadzi, 2006.

THE

UN

TAP

PE

DO

PP

OR

TUN

ITY:H

OW

PU

BLIC

-PR

IVATEPA

RTN

ER

SH

IPS

CA

NA

DVA

NC

EE

DU

CATIO

NFO

RA

LL

41

resources devoted to education arecompromised even further.

Corruption in education takes twobasic forms. The most common form ismisappropriation of funds and materi-als. For example, sometimes only afraction of the funds, books, and teach-ing materials makes it to schools. Evenmore insidious are the relatively smallpayments demanded of students andparents for better grades, test scores,entry or promotion, diplomas, andtutoring. They are all the more insidi-ous because they deprive students oflearning and society of adequately edu-cated school graduates. Nor can thepoor afford even small payments, sothey are deprived of even a basic levelof education.

Information is critical to good man-agement and to political and commu-nity engagement and support. Someschool systems have begun to improvetheir transparency. For example,Kenya, Uganda, and Zambia have poli-cies that require schools to post infor-mation on pupils, resources, and testscores. In addition, in Uganda, infor-mation on funds allocated to schooldistricts is published every month inthe newspaper. Such information,when it is good quality, helps man-agers, community leaders, and par-ents hold schools accountable.

HOW CAN AND SHOULD PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS

PLAY A ROLE?

Effective education can best beachieved when government collaborateswith a range of other actors—privatesector, civil society, independentexperts, communities, and families.Public-private partnerships entail thepooling of resources, competencies,and capacities from the public and private sectors to achieve outcomesthat add value beyond what either party could achieve acting alone. Theapproach builds on the idea that differ-ent sectors in society—public, private,civil society—have different yet poten-tially complementary core competen-cies and resources that, if appropriatelyjoined, produce a positive sum toadvance public and private goods.34

International agencies, including mul-tilaterals like the World Bank and theUnited Nations and bilateral agenciessuch as USAID, are also key players.This report is primarily about partner-ships between businesses and govern-ments in education, but similar princi-ples apply to multi-sector partnershipsinvolving a variety of partners.

To date, businesses have devoted con-siderable resources to training andeducating their employees. They haveprovided scholarships and internshipopportunities to potential employees.They have been involved in variousphilanthropic efforts such as donatingteaching and learning materials toschools in areas where they work. Andemployees have volunteered manyhours in schools and tutoring andmentoring programs.

All of these initiatives involve eitherbusinesses acting on their own orworking in a limited way with localschools. While it is perhaps easier andless costly to support education in thisway, a systematic public-privateapproach builds sustainability alongwith education opportunities, leadingto long-term change.

WHY CONSIDER PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS?

Clearly, business benefits from a well-educated work force, political stability,and economic growth—all products ofa sound education system. Morespecifically, partnering with govern-ments enables businesses to influenceand direct public resources and policyinto economically and socially con-structive venues and to leverage gov-ernment resources, education expert-ise, and legitimacy. Further,partnerships can provide access tonational and community leaders,enhance a corporation’s visibility andreputation, and help deliver on corpo-rate social responsibility commitments.

Governments benefit from public-private partnerships by gaining accessto corporate expertise and experience inmanagement, strategic planning, inno-vative problem solving, labor marketexpertise, skills development, efficientdelivery of goods and services, productdevelopment, and logistical support.Table 3 summarizes some potentialcontributions and benefits from partner-ships for the various types of partners.

HOW CAN AND SHOULD PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS PLAY A ROLE?

…systematic public-private approachbuilds sustainabilityalong with educationopportunities, leadingto long-term change.

44

34 In this report, the public sector refers to national, regional, and local governments and theirinstitutions. Private sector partners are businesses, corporations, and business associations.Civil society refers to non-governmental organizations, religious institutions, trade unions,school management committees, and other citizen organizations.

TABLE 3.35

Overview of thecontributions and benefits ofpartnerships, by type of partnership.

THE

UN

TAP

PE

DO

PP

OR

TUN

ITY:H

OW

PU

BLIC

-PR

IVATEPA

RTN

ER

SH

IPS

CA

NA

DVA

NC

EE

DU

CATIO

NFO

RA

LL

45

35 Parts of this table are based on Tim Unwin Partnerships in Development Practice: EvidenceFrom Multi-Stakeholder ICT4D Partnership Practice in Africa (Paris: UNESCO, 2005).

CONTRIBUTIONS AND BENEFITS FOR PARTNERS T0 A PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP

Government (Public) Business (Private sector)

Partners uGovernment institutions at thenational, regional, & local level; national and regional education bodies

uBusinesses, corporations, business associations, other business entities

Contributions uLegitimacyuExpertise managing an education

systemuPublic resourcesuSetting policies & rules

uExpertise in management & administration

uTechnological know howuLink from schools to jobsuMaterial & financial resources

Benefits uBetter management & administration

uMaterial & technical resourcesuExpertise & talent uIncreased operating effectiveness

uInfluence on public resources & policy

uAccess to national & communityleaders

uBetter skilled workforce uLeverage government resources,

education expertise & legitimacyuEnhanced visibility & reputationuDelivery on Corporate Social

ResponsibilityuImproved employee relations

OTHER PARTNERSCivil society International donors

Partners uParents, NGOs, trade unions,school management & parentcommittees, other citizen organizations

uMultilateral organizations such asthe World Bank, UN, EU; bilateralagencies such as USAID

Contributions uCredibilityuUnderstanding of the local

communityuVested interest & commitment uAbility to engage & mobilize

communities

uExperience & skills working withgovernment & civil society indeveloping countries

uKnowledge of education systemsuFinancial resources

Benefits uBetter education system for constituents

uLeverage of public & privateresources

uAccess to corporate best practices& expertise

uMaterial & technical resourcesuExpertise & talentuIncreased operating effectivenessuDelivery on development

objectives

GUIDELINES FOR BUILDINGEFFECTIVE PARTNERSHIPS

Success factors for effective partner-ships are increasingly well docu-mented.36 These factors, itemized inthe accompanying box, identify threeessential elements—vision, intimacy,and impact.37 Vision describes theobjectives, processes, and structure ofthe partnership. Intimacy refers to thelevel of integration of the partners.Impact looks at the capacity to deliverresults. One of the most importantfactors is working within existingnational and international frame

works. In addition to encouraging localownership of the program, it ensuresthe partnership’s objectives mirror thecountry’s priorities and that it is morelikely to produce sustainable results.

Attention to all these factors is criticalbecause public-private partnershipsare complex and often take time tomature. Realizing their many benefitsrequires careful planning, partnersmust assess the relative merits ofjoint versus individual action and anyinherent risks. To be worth the invest-ment, a partnership must be morethan the sum of its parts.


46

VISIONu Find the right mix of partners,

acknowledge different competencies, and clarify the contribution of each partner

u Agree on goals and objectives ofthe collaboration; separate as wellas shared objectives are acceptableas long as transparency isrespected

u Agree on clear targets, structure of partnership, and roles andresponsibilities

u Put the success of the partnershipabove individual needs

u Develop strategies for sustainablefinance

INTIMACYu Build trust and open communication

between different partnersu Identify well-connected individuals

in each institution who will serve aschampions of the partnership in order to ensure sustainability

u Be transparent about objectives,benefits, and risks

u Represent and include all stakeholders in planning and lifecycle of partnerships

u Share best practices and guidelines

u Encourage mutual accountability

IMPACTu Respond to local needs and

opportunities and work withinestablished national or local development frameworks

u Avoid placing undue burden onintended recipients

u Be flexible and adjust or improviseas necessary

u Conduct consistent long-term monitoring and evaluation of thepartnership process and outcomes

u Build internal capacity to managefor results

u Use well-defined metrics to monitorprogress and performance

u Use well-defined measures andstandards of mutual accountability

u Use common procedures and encour-age shared analysis when there aremultiple partnerships in existence

36 John G. Ruggie and Diana Barrett HIV/AIDS and Business in Africa and Asia: A Guide toPartnerships (Harvard: Center for Business and Government, 2003). S. Zadek Endearing Myths,Enduring Truths: Enabling Partnerships Between Business, Civil Society and the Public Sector:Business Partners for Development, (2001). “Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness: Ownership,Harmonization, Alignment, Results and Mutul Accountability,” (2005, http://www1.worldbank.org/harmonization/Paris/FINALPARISDECLARATION.pdf). World Economic Forum. HarnessingPrivate Sector Capabilities to Meet Public Needs: The Potential of Partnerships to AdvanceProgress on Hunger, Malaria, and Basic Education (Geneva: World Economic Forum, 2006).

37 Ruggie and Barrett, HIV/AIDS and Business in Africa and Asia: A Guide to Partnerships, p. 22.

There are always situational risks overwhich parties will have no control,including unstable political and governance climates and corruption.38

However, thoughtful construction of thepartnership can mitigate these risks.

EVALUATING THE SUCCESSOF PUBLIC-PRIVATEPARTNERSHIPS INEDUCATION

Tracking performance is commonpractice in business and in developmentprograms. Those responsible need toknow if management is effective and ifchanges need to be made mid-course.There are two core assessments. One is of the partnership itself—is itfunctioning as designed? The other isof the results—are the anticipatedresults being achieved?

Ideally, partners will include a monitoring and evaluation plan in thedesign of the partnership, with all participating in the selection of indicators to manage performance.This plan should be a living strategy,including regular feedback and adjustments according to program and partnership needs.

The Partnership: Is It on Track?Criteria for evaluating the partnershipitself should be driven by the principles

guiding its design—joint ownership,transparency, joint responsibility, and open communication. For themonitoring and evaluation process tobe useful, partners must be willing tomake changes based on feedback.

Measuring attributes such as trust,accountability, and open communica-tion are not always easy, but withsome creativity, partners can developa list of mutually agreeable indicators.For example, indicators could be cho-sen that monitor how well the com-munication objectives are being metand whether partners are transparentin their dealings with one another.

Education Program: Is It Achieving Results?Education systems around the worldhave increasingly adopted commonindicators to measure progress onaccess, completion, and, to a lesserextent, quality.39 A set of specific indi-cators has been selected to measureprogress on the Education For Allgoals. Public-private partnerships ineducation should use these indicatorsas well. This is in line with one of thekey factors of success—working withinnational frameworks—and lessens thedata collection burden for all. The Billand Melinda Gates Foundation, forexample, finds it useful to use com-monly accepted metrics to monitorperformance in education and health.

THE

UN

TAP

PE

DO

PP

OR

TUN

ITY:H

OW

PU

BLIC

-PR

IVATEPA

RTN

ER

SH

IPS

CA

NA

DVA

NC

EE

DU

CATIO

NFO

RA

LL

47

38 Ronald W. McQuaid, “The theory of partnership: Why have partnerships?,” Public-PrivatePartnerships: Theory and Practice in International Perspective, ed., S. P. Osborne (London:Routledge, 2000).

39 Data and presentational and analytic tools for tracking indicators and monitoring strategiesand programs for education can be found on the websites of the Education Policy and Data Center,the Global Monitoring Report, the UNESCO Institute for Statistics, and the World Bank EdStats.


FIGURE 15.Log frame for evaluating the impact of education partnerships adapted fromframework developed by the Dutch Ministryof Foreign Affairs. Indicators with an asteriskare also EFA monitoring measures.

48

WELFAREOUTCOMES

LEARNINGACHIEVEMENT

• Adult and youth literacy*

• Achievement in reading, writing, math, science, social sciences, and life skills

SCHOOL QUALITY

TEACHERS• Number of teachers• Pupil teacher ratio*• Qualification*• Responsibilities• Salary scale• Absenteeism• Non teaching staff• Time spent teaching

TEACHINGMATERIALS

• Number of textbooks• Teacher guides• Curriculum• Other materials

SCHOOLINFRASTRUCTURE

• Building rooms by condition and type

• Water source• Toilets

SCHOOLCHARACTERISTICS

• Ownership• Funding source• School type• Location• Day school/

boarding type• Hours open

INTERVENTIONS BY GOVERNMENT AND DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS• Policy• Budget• Implementation

PUPIL, HOUSEHOLDAND COMMUNITY

CHARACTERISTICS• Gender• Age• Parents• Welfare• Education of parents• Language• Location• Involvement in school

ACCESS• Intake rate*• Enrollment rate*• Survival rate*• Completion rate*• Drop out rate*• Repetition rate*• Gender equity*• School life expectancy*• Absenteeism

One of several analytical tools, the logframe (logical framework), is commonlyused by international organizations. Itprovides a simple way to tie goals andobjectives to inputs, processes, andoutputs.40 Figure 15 presents a sample.At the top is the policy, or partnershiplevel, that makes over-arching decisionsand policies and designs and initiatesprograms. These are translated intoinputs into the school system—be itadding schools, improving existingones, providing teaching materials, ortraining teachers. The schools and theinputs detailed in the boxes influenceschool quality (which is difficult tomeasure). This, in turn, translates intoschool outcomes—access (school entryand retention combined) and learningachievement. These are measured bythe indicators in the boxes. These arestandard, common indicators that areregularly collected, even at the schoolor district level, in most countries. Aninteresting feature of this particularlog framework is the inclusion at thebottom of household and communitycharacteristics as factors that affecteducation outcomes. This opens thedoor for partnerships that have animpact on education via health,employment, poverty reduction, orotherwise.

These and other methodologies areuseful tools. However, given culturaland operational differences in eachsetting and the increased emphasis on21st century skills, partners shouldmodify and improve any tools to fittheir needs.

PARTNERING WITHINNATIONAL ANDINTERNATIONALFRAMEWORKS

Before embarking on a public-privatepartnership in education, businesspartners should be aware of a numberof key initiatives that are important tothe way education policy and pro-gramming is shaped today in develop-ing countries. Below are some of theexisting national and global frame-works within which partnerships mayoperate. They include the Educationfor All Fast-Track Initiative, NewPartnership for Africa’s Development,Poverty Reduction Strategies, EducationSector Plans, Global Compact, and theParis Declaration.

Education for All Fast Track InitiativeThe Education for All Fast TrackInitiative is a global initiative to supportbasic education. Launched in 2002 bydonor governments under the organi-zational leadership of the World Bank,it was a direct response to the pledgesmade at Dakar in 200041 and atMonterrey in 2002,42 which said, amongother things, that the internationalcommunity would provide the neces-sary resources to countries committedto achieving the EFA and MDG goals.Key elements of FTI are (1) eligibilityrequires a country commitment andplan to implement a national education

THE

UN

TAP

PE

DO

PP

OR

TUN

ITY:H

OW

PU

BLIC

-PR

IVATEPA

RTN

ER

SH

IPS

CA

NA

DVA

NC

EE

DU

CATIO

NFO

RA

LL

49

40 http://www2.fhs.usyd.edu.au/arow/o/m05/pp25.htm.

41 The World Education Forum met in Dakar 2002.

42 United Nations International Conference on Financing for Development held March 2002 in Monterrey.

strategy and (2) donors agree to coordinate and harmonize their effortsbehind that strategy and help thecountry meet the required resourceneeds.43 Businesses have not formallyjoined any related partnerships yet, buthave had representatives at associatededucation meetings and their activeparticipation is being sought andencouraged.

New Partnership for Africa’sDevelopment (NEPAD)Developing countries are sendingstrong signals that greater involvementfrom the private sector would be welcome. For instance, the NewPartnership for Africa’s Development(NEPAD) states that African govern-ments wish to ”develop and sustainequitable partnerships between gov-ernment, civil society, internationalorganizations and businesses fordevelopment.”44 Specifically, NEPADinvites businesses to:

u Report annually on contributionstowards the MillenniumDevelopment Goals

u Support its MDG awareness-raisingcampaign to mobilize civil societyand governments

u Commit to equal opportunity of employment, encouraging participation of women andunder-represented ethnic groups

u Develop and apply relevant expert-ise to build capacity among otherpartners (including governmentand civil society), deliver servicesto achieve the MDGs, and proac-tively seek partnerships

Poverty Reduction Strategies(PRS) and Education Sector PlansEducation sector strategies, especiallyin countries classified as highlyindebted, often lie within the nationalPoverty Reduction Strategy (PRS). Thisapproach involves government engag-ing civil society in a broad consultativeprocess leading to a nationally ownedpoverty reduction strategy, which thenforms the basis for debt relief andother financing from internationalinstitutions. The strategy papers aresupposed to be results-oriented,country-driven, and focused on reduc-ing poverty—thereby allowing donorsto align their assistance with countrypriorities. Although the process hasbeen fraught with difficulties, manydeveloping countries now have PRSpapers. In addition, some countriesalso have education sector plans,which expand on the education strate-gies within the PRS.


50

43 http://www1.worldbank.org/education/efafti/.

44 NEPAD communiqué www.nepad.org.

Working within an overall povertyreduction strategy offers the opportunityto expand the partnership’s impactbeyond education and to connect itmore directly to economic growth and poverty reduction. In fact, it maybe that in some instances a public-private partnership can best contributeto education through relationshipswith government ministries and agencies in other sectors—labor,health, technology, sports, youth. Forexample, education for marginalizedgroups could be promoted throughpartnerships of a broader nature withgovernment agencies concerned withdisabled children, HIV/AIDS orphans,girls facing early marriage, or childlaborers. Or partners might work witha health program to improve healthand nutrition of poor school pupils, or build capacity for information andcommunications technology to fit with a country’s economic and technology plans.

Global CompactThe Global Compact was launched in2000 by UN Secretary-General KofiAnnan as a challenge to business tojoin with United Nations agencies,labor, and civil society in support ofuniversal environmental and socialprinciples.45 The Compact asks companies to support and enact 10universal principles in the areas ofhuman rights, labor, environment,

and anti-corruption. Over 2,500 companies in 90 countries have signed the Compact.

The Paris DeclarationThe Paris Declaration on aid effective-ness is an agreement signed by gov-ernment agencies and internationalorganizations in 2005 that sets outgeneral principles to improve thequality of aid.46 The guiding principlesare: local ownership, alignment, har-monization, result-based manage-ment, and mutual accountability:

u Local ownership | Partnershipsmust strengthen countries’national development strategiesand associated operational frame-works, rather than work outsidethem.

u Alignment with country systems |Partnerships should align withpartner country priorities, sys-tems, and procedures and help tostrengthen their capacities. Thisassumes that the country has reliable systems that adherebroadly to good practices or havea reform program to achieve them.The partnership should strengthencapacity and in particular avoidduplicating efforts. Where possible,it should use country public financial management and pro-curement systems.

THE

UN

TAP

PE

DO

PP

OR

TUN

ITY:H

OW

PU

BLIC

-PR

IVATEPA

RTN

ER

SH

IPS

CA

NA

DVA

NC

EE

DU

CATIO

NFO

RA

LL

51

45 Gearing Up—from corporate responsibility to good governance and scalable solutions, forthe UN/Private Sector Global Compact, at www.unglobalcompact.org

46“Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness: Ownership, Harmonization, Alignment, Results andMutul Accountability.” Web page, 2005 [accessed 25 July 2006]. Available at http://www1.worldbank.org/harmonization/Paris/FINALPARISDECLARATION.pdf.

u Harmonization of partnerships |Partnerships should use commonarrangements and procedures andencourage shared analysis, ratherthan competition. This meanseliminating duplication of effortsand rationalizing donor activities. It means reforming and simplifyingpolicies and procedures to encour-age collaborative behavior.

u Management for results | Likecompanies that manage in orderto achieve measurable resultssuch as market share, profits, andgrowth, partnerships should man-age for results, albeit differentones. These might include theshare of children finishing primary

school, graduation from highschool with high learning scores,percentage of marginalized tribalchildren receiving meals each dayin school, or books distributed.The results should also be alignedwith the country’s own frameworksto assess progress againstnational development strategiesand education programs.

u Mutual accountability | This impliesdefining standards of performanceas well as accountability of partnercountry systems in public finan-cial management, procurement,fiduciary safeguards, and environ-mental assessments. Partnersshould assess progress together.

SECTION TITLE SECOND PAGE

52

PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER: OPPORTUNITIES FOR PARTNERSHIPS

IN EDUCATION

How can public-private partnershipsplay a role in closing the gaps in providing primary and secondary students with access to relevant andquality education opportunities thatprepare them for the challenges of the 21st century?

Across the gaps—entry, retention,learning, inequity, and resources—business brings a range of skills andexperiences that can help improveeducational opportunities for children.Among relevant business skills andbest practices are managing peopleand resources, conducting strategicplanning, performing needs assess-ments, resource allocation, marketanalysis, using incentives to accom-plish specific objectives, anticipatingdemand, and innovating to create new opportunities.

The entry gap is a matter of both supply and demand. On the supply side,in some countries there simply are notenough schools nor enough spaces in existing schools. At the national and regional level, business mightcontribute to determining how andwhere to place more and better schoolscloser to students and partner with

governments and communities to provide the schools. On the demandside, there are many barriers to education, including the direct costs of school fees, transportation, and uniforms, and the indirect opportunitycosts of time spent in school. Somefamilies might not have adequateinformation on the benefits and valueof education. Business can educate thepublic, advocate for improved policiesand programs, and engage local communities.

Retention, like access, has a demandand a supply dimension. For manycountries retaining children to completeprimary and secondary school is ahuge challenge. Business can analyzethe market to bring greater clarity to the source of the problem. It cansuggest incentives or other creativesolutions. Business can help designcurriculum that provides skills needed to find employment. Similarly, mentoring programs, internships, and work/study programs can helpprovide students the wherewithal andincentives to complete their educationand find future employment. Suchprograms also allow business toinvest in a future labor force.

PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER: OPPORTUNITIES FOR PARTNERSHIPS IN EDUCATION

Across the gaps—entry, retention,learning, inequity, andresources—businessbrings a range ofskills and experiencesthat can help improveeducational opportu-nities for children.

54

Almost universally learning needsimprovement. Teachers need to betrained, children need books, learningmaterials are scarce, and curriculumare bloated with too many subjects.Business can contribute to teachertraining and the development of cur-riculum that is relevant. It also candirectly support the provision of books,curriculum manuals for teachers, andother learning materials.

Inequities too often are the norm ratherthan the exception in education systems.Normally children not in school orwho drop out are from well-definedmarginalized groups. This reality callsfor the development of programs andactivities that specifically target thesegroups—most commonly, children frompoor families and living in neglectedand rural regions within countries, andespecially girls. Business experiencewith social marketing campaigns can help address inequities boththrough government policy and public understanding. Business can workwith community leaders to find waysto bring marginalized children into the education system and can targetsupport programs to those childrenthrough well defined media messages.

There are various ways in which busi-ness can help close the resource gaps.To reduce the finance gap, businesscan use its marketing ability and itsaccess to policy makers to advocatefor increased education resources. Itcan make financial contributions, par-ticularly at the community level. Forteachers, business can use its expert-ise at human resource managementto work with school systems on man-aging teachers and staff. Business canwork directly with schools, providingvolunteer assistance that also will bolster employee morale and pride. To the management gap business can contribute to understanding andapplying incentives to produce a desiredoutcome and to responding to thedemands of markets and institutions.Business brings experience withchange management, performancemanagement, and knowledge on howto develop and direct competencies.

What is clear from decades of experi-ence in developed and developingcountries is that successful educationsystems will not be designed or oper-ated by any sector alone. Improvededucation and learning will be achievedonly by combining resources and skills.

THE

UN

TAP

PE

DO

PP

OR

TUN

ITY:H

OW

PU

BLIC

-PR

IVATEPA

RTN

ER

SH

IPS

CA

NA

DVA

NC

EE

DU

CATIO

NFO

RA

LL

What is clear fromdecades of experiencein developed anddeveloping countriesis that successfuleducation systemswill not be designedor operated by anysector alone.Improved educationand learning will be achieved only bycombining resourcesand skills.

55

56

Reference ListAbadzi, Helen. Efficient Learning for the Poor:Insights From the Frontier of CognitiveNeuroscience (Washington, DC: World Bank,2006).

Alcazar, L., F. H. Rogers, N. Chaudhury, J.Hammer, M. Kremer, and K. Muralidharan.Why Are Teachers Absent? Probing ServiceDelivery in Peruvian Primary Schools(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2004).

Barro, Robert J., and Jong-Wha Lee.“International Data on EducationalAttainment: Updates and Implications.” CID Working Paper, 42. (2000).

Brossard, Mathieu, and Luc-CharlesGacougnolle. Financing Primary Education forAll: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow (Paris:UNESCO, 2001).

Bruns, Barbara, Alain Mingat, and RamahatraRakotomalala. Achieving Universal PrimaryEducation by 2015: a Chance for Every Child(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2003).

Crone, Linda, and Charles Teddlie. “FurtherExamination of Teacher Behavior inDifferentially Effective Schools: Selection andSocialization Processes,” Journal ofClassroom Interaction 30, no. 1 (1995): 1-9.

Crouch, Luis, and Tazeen Fasih. “Patterns inEducational Development: Implications forFuture Efficiency Analysis.” UnpublishedMaterial. (2004).

Devarajan, S., M. Miller, and E. V. Swanson.Goals for Development: History, Prospects,and Costs (Washington, DC: World Bank, 2002).

Education Policy and Data Center. “Gender,Urban-Rural, Regional and Wealth Effects inSchool Attendance.” Unpublished Paper, (2005).

Filmer, Deon, and Lant Pritchett. “The Effectof Household Wealth on EducationalAttainment: Evidence From 35 Countries,”Population And Development Review 25, no. 1 (1999).

Hanushek, Erik. “Why Quality Matters inEducation,” Finance and Development 42, no. 2 (2005).

Kim, K. Comparative Study of InstructionalHours in West Africa. AFTHR Informal Report(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2000).

Linden, T. Double-Shifts Secondary School:Possibilities and Issues (Washington, DC:World Bank, 2001).

McPherson, Malcolm. “Problems andPotential of Corporate Investment in PublicSector Capacities.” Paper presented at conference on “Adding Public Value: theLimits of Corporate Responsibility: Drivers of Corporate Investment in Public SectorCapacity,” Centre for Economic Policy Research (London, May 9, 2006).

McQuaid, Ronald W. “The Theory ofPartnership: Why Have Partnerships?,”Public-Private Partnerships: Theory andPractice in International Perspective,ed. S. P. Osborne (London: Routledge, 2000).

Mingat, Alain. “Analytical and FactualElements for a Quality Policy for PrimaryEducation in Sub-Saharan Africa in theContext of Education For All.” Paper, (2003).

57

OED. Honduras. 20 Years of IDA Assistance.Project Performance Assessment Report.Rural Primary Education Management Project(Loan 2804). Basic Education (Credit 2694).Project Performance Assessment Report(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2004).

Official website of the G8 presidency of theRussian Federation. “Education for InnovativeSocieties in the 21st century.” Web page, July2006 [accessed 24 July 2006]. Available athttp://en.g8russia.ru/docs/12.html.

“Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness:Ownership, Harmonization, Alignment,Results and Mutul Accountability.” Web page,2005 [accessed 25 July 2006]. Available athttp://www1.worldbank.org/harmonization/Paris/FINALPARISDECLARATION.pdf.

Ruggie, John G., and Diana Barrett. HIV/AIDSand Business in Africa and Asia: A Guide toPartnerships (Harvard: Center for Businessand Government, 2003). [http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/cbg/hiv-aids/HIV_AIDS_AGuidetoPartnerships9.pdf].

UNESCO Institute for Statistics, and UNICEF.Children Out of School: Measuring ExclusionFrom Primary School (Montreal, Canada:UNESCO Institute for Statistics, 2005).

UNESCO Institute for Statistics. Teachers andEducational Quality: Monitoring Global Needsfor 2015 (Montreal, Canada: UNESCO Institutefor Statistics, 2006).

UNESCO. EFA Global Monitoring Report 2005,Education for All—The Quality Imperative(Paris, France: UNESCO, 2005).

Unwin, Tim. Partnerships in DevelopmentPractice: Evidence From Multi-StakeholderICT4D Partnership Practice in Africa (Paris:UNESCO, 2005). [http://www.gg.rhul.ac.uk/ict4d/UNESCOWSISpartnerships.pdf].

Wils, Annababbette, Bidemi Carrol, andKarima Barrow. Educating the World’sChildren: Patterns of Growth and Inequality(Washington, DC: Education Policy and DataCenter, 2005). [http://epdc.org/static/EducatingTheWorldsChildren.pdf].

World Bank. “EdStats.” Web page, [accessed24 July 2006]. Available at http://devdata.worldbank.org/edstats/cd5.asp.

World Bank. Global Monitoring Report.Millennium Development Goals: FromConsensus to Momentum (Washington, DC: 2005).

World Economic Forum. Harnessing PrivateSector Capabilities to Meet Public Needs: The Potential of Partnerships to AdvanceProgress on Hunger, Malaria, and BasicEducation (Geneva: World Economic Forum,2006). [http://www.weforum.org/pdf/Initiatives/Harnessing_private_sector.pdf].

Zadek, S. Endearing Myths, Enduring Truths:Enabling Partnerships Between Business,Civil Society and the Public Sector (BusinessPartners for Development, 2001). [http://www.bpdweb.com/endearing_myths.pdf].

PHOTOGRAPHY CREDITS: Bill Denison, Marco Javier, Richard Lord, Carolyn WatsonDESIGN: AED Social Change DesignPRODUCTION: Mary Argondale

>> www.aed.org

1825 Connecticut Avenue, NWWashington, DC 20009-5721Tel (202) 884-8000Fax (202) 884-8400

the untapped opportunity - ungei.org · the untapped opportunity: the educational policy data...

Documents