Independent Evaluation of the Girls’ Education Challenge Phase II – Aggregate Impact of GEC-T Projects Between Baseline and Midline Study - Report Annexes

Difference-in-difference (DID) by project, in percentage points

Key: Difference-in-difference (DID) coefficients with two asterisks are statistically significant at the 95% confidence level (p-value lower than 0.05 = 5%). Those with one asterisk are statistically significant at the 90% level (p-value lower than 0.1 = 10%).

Green cells show positive and statistically significant DID (GEC-T girls have increased significantly more than comparison girls), orange shows negative and statistically significant DID (GEC-T girls have increased significantly less than comparison girls).

Notes: (1) CSU’s design relies on a treatment group of disabled girls which is compared to a comparison group of non-disabled girls. These two groups are likely to not be fully comparable with respect to their learning progress. Besides, the project’s sample size is small (less than 400 girls per wave in the panel sample). For this reason, the CSU project’s results need to be interpreted with great caution. (2) Project only has nine recontacted girls in the comparison group (LCD Kenya) or does not have comparison group at all (Relief Somalia and WUSC Kenya). (3) Unique girls’ identifiers are not consistent between baseline and midline.

Table 31: Learning improvements by project, over and above comparison groups (cross-sectional sample)

Difference-in-difference (DID) by project in percentage points cross-sectional sample

Independent Evaluation of the Girls’ Education Challenge Phase II – Aggregate Impact of GEC-T Projects Between Baseline and Midline Study - Report Annexes

Difference-in-difference (DID) by project in percentage points – cross-sectional sample

Independent Evaluation of the Girls’ Education Challenge Phase II – Aggregate Impact of GEC-T Projects Between Baseline and Midline Study - Report Annexes

Independent Evaluation of the Girls’ Education Challenge Phase II – Aggregate Impact of GEC-T Projects Between Baseline and Midline Study - Report Annexes

Table 32: Sample composition of subgroups by project (with beneficiary-population weights)

Independent Evaluation of the Girls’ Education Challenge Phase II – Aggregate Impact of GEC-T Projects Between Baseline and Midline Study - Report Annexes

Independent Evaluation of the Girls’ Education Challenge Phase II – Aggregate Impact of GEC-T Projects Between Baseline and Midline Study - Report Annexes

Independent Evaluation of the Girls’ Education Challenge Phase II – Aggregate Impact of GEC-T Projects Between Baseline and Midline Study - Report Annexes