Evidence-Based Approach to Improve Programs’ Delivery and Partnership Office of The Vice President The Republic of Indonesia/ The National Team for the Acceleration of Poverty Reduction (TNP2K) Asia Pacific Leaders’ Forum on Open Government “Open Government for Inclusive Development” 14 December 2017, Jakarta - Indonesia
December 2017
1
TNP2K Evidence-Based Approach for Program Improvement Program Implementation
Program Improvement
Contextual Analysis
Existing Program
• Research • Regulation • Social politics context
Formulation
• • • •
Targeting Alignment Piloting Scale up
Recommendation • Targeting • Delivery Mechanism
Advocacy to relevant ministries
Support program implementation
Support program evaluation
2
Case Study 1: Improving Transparency and Accountability in Delivering Education Cash Assistance
3
Before 2013
Less than
10%
of students from poor households receive BSM*
Household Expenditure (Consumption) per decile
Percent of 6-18-year-olds that receive BSM
*) Cash assistance for students from poor households 4
Improve Policy: Utilization of UDB & Improve Delivery Mechanism Before
2013
School-based
Household-based
20 million students (2015) 5
Improve Targeting Accuracy for BSM (2014) Elementary School
Coverage of Beneficiaries (%)
Coverage of Beneficiaries (%)
Middle School
School-based Households-based (March 2014)
School-based Households-based (March 2014)
Source: Susenas 2009, SPS TW IV 2013 and TW I 2014
6
Case Study 2: Trust Building to Encourage Participation of Private Sector in Poverty Alleviation
7
Sustainable Develoment Goals GOAL 17 Means of Implementation
Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development
Multi-stakeholder partnerships
16. Enhance the global partnership for sustainable development, complemented by multi-stakeholder partnerships that mobilize and share knowledge, expertise, technology and financial resources, to support the achievement of the sustainable development goals in all countries, in particular developing countries
17. Encourage and promote effective public, public-private and civil society partnerships, building on the experience and resourcing strategies of partnerships
8
Public Private Partnership Synergy Local Wisdom & Empowerment • Local NGOs/CSOs • Community
Policy • National Government • Local Government
National Priorities in Poverty Reduction
Contribution/ Shared Value • Corporation • Philanthropy Institution
Targeted Beneficiaries 9
Joint Impact Collaboration Framework For Poverty Reduction Shared Value dan Economic Value Corporate
Government
Community
Financial and other resources
Poverty Reduction Priority
Community Participation
Joint Impact Collaboration Framework For Poverty Reduction Evidence-Based Needs assessment Action Plan Process Financial Needs
Fund management
Implementation
Project management
Beneficiaries
10
PPP Scheme: Electricity for the Poor Initiatives Contribution Cash/In Kind
Private Sector Corporate Private Sector
• National Level Government (Ministry of Energy) • Local Level Government (Government of Timor Tengah Selatan)
Fund Management
Beneficiaries Project Management
Public
Local NGO/CSO (Yayasan Besi Pae) 11
Timor Tengah Selatan, East Nusa Tenggara Poverty rate 26,79% 122,488 individuals live below poverty line Higher than provincial level poverty rate Higher than national level poverty rate
Source: BPS 2014
12
Timor Tengah Selatan, East Nusa Tenggara
More than 53,000* HH have no access to electricity About 45 villages** live in the dark (off grid area)*** Electrification Ratio
47 %*** * Source: Unified Database ** Source: Village Potential Data (Podes) *** Source: Ministry of Energy & Mineral Resources & State Electricity Companye (PLN)
13
Improve Productivity
Not long after becoming SHS beneficiary, I manage to open a kiosk to sell basic needs. This increase my income so I can repay my debt and have more money for the family.
With the SHS program, I can continue to weave up to 10-11 pm in the evening. Now I can finish the woven fabric 1 or 2 months faster.
Mr. Markus Lenamah
Mrs. Yohana Hauteas
(Tli’u Village)
(Oemaman Village) 14
Improve Social Cohesion
In the village of Naileu, students have more time to study. Some of the families provide learning space for other family with no electricity
In the village of Kusi Utara social gathering is happening every night. Increase social cohesion.
15
Case Study 3: Ensuring Accountability and Community Participation to Improve Education Services
16
The government spending on education in 2016 is USD 16.5 million, half of it covers teacher salary and allowances ‌ But teacher professional allowance led to no improvement in student learning outcomes
Teacher absence rate
Adapted from SMERU (2010)
6 4
31,5% 25,4%
2 0 Recipient Non-Recipient
Teachers in remote areas received hardship allowance at one times their base salary. Certified teachers received professional allowance, also at one times their base salary.
Teachers who receive remote area allowance had higher absenteeism rate compared to non-recipients (SMERU, 2010)
17
Innovative instrument: Supporting government regulations Social/ financial accountability
tied to
Education Service delivery
How?
Government regulations issued: • • • • • •
MoU with Head of Districts Head of District Decree for the Project Head of District Decree on Coordination Team Technical Guideline Head of Education Department Decree Head of Village Decree
MoU signing between TNP2K and Head of Districts 18
Innovative instrument: Teacher presence monitoring tool Social/ financial accountability
tied to
Education Service delivery
Is it affecting teacher presence?
Community empowerment instrument: KIAT Kamera, Android-based application, combined with community verification
Teachers allowances in Group 2 are tied to community-verified teacher presence 19
Innovative instrument: Community empowerment instrument Social/ financial accountability
tied to
Education Service delivery
Is it affecting teacher service?
Community empowerment instrument: Community Scorecard with 5-8 indicators for teacher service performance, scored by User Committee
Teachers allowances in Group 3 are determined by community monthly score 20
Innovative instrument: Student learning assessment tools Social/ financial accountability
tied to
Education Service delivery
Is it affecting student learning?
TNP2K’s Instruments Diagnostic tests to quickly identify student’s basic literacy and numeracy skills along a continuum One-on-one student learning assessment
21
Pilot locations and participants Sintang
Landak Control
13
Control
Intervention
38
21
Kalimantan 2 West East Nusa Tenggara
Intervention
66
Provinc es
270
Very remote schools
1778
Primary school teachers
Ketapang Control
14
1827
Intervention
45
User committee members
Manggarai Barat Control
9
Intervention
29
Manggarai Timur Control
7
Intervention
25
26062
Primary school students
22
67,99
66,96
89,9 89,46 91,19
91,36 91,15 94,28
91,61 89,58 90,58 72,56
Manggarai Timur
60
82,98 83,93 86,25
Manggarai Barat
70
59,2
Percentage
80
69,95
90
70,75
100
91,5 90,85 91,82
93,57 92,1 92,12
Community evaluation on teacher presence
50 40 30 20 10 0
ScoreSebelum before KIAT GuruGuru (Indi 01) FLG KIAT Score in May FLG Indikator - 1 (Triwulan 2) Mei
Landak
Ketapang
Sintang
5 Kabupaten
FLG - 1 (Triwulan 2) April ScoreIndikator in April ScoreIndikator in June - 1 (Triwulan 2) Juni FLG 23
91,45 90,6 92,33 55,05
85,9 85,67 87,37
89,62 87,88 89,75 53,23
Manggarai Timur
58,41
Manggarai Barat
60
45,02
58,84
80
60,82
Percentage
100
92,8 93,86 95
97,2 96 96,27
120
91,63 90,7 93,74
Community evaluation on teacher service performance
40 20 0 Landak
FLG ScoreSebelum before KIATKIAT GuruGuru Score in May 2 Setelah KIAT Guru Mei FLG Triwulan
Ketapang
Sintang
5 Kabupaten
FLG Triwulan Score in April 2 Setelah KIAT Guru April Score in June 2 Setelah KIAT Guru Juni FLG Triwulan
24
Initial results on student learning outcomes Literacy 100%
Numeracy 100%
0,91%
90%
90% 39,29%
80% 70% 60%
80%
40,87%
70% 60%
84,01%
50%
50%
40%
51,81%
30%
89,77%
40% 54,69%
30%
20% 10%
2,46%
20% 15,08%
8,89%
0% October-November Oktober-November 2016 2016
Buta Huruf
Illiterate
Di Bawah Below grade
Juli-Agustus 2017 July-August 2017
Sesuai/ di atas At or above grade
10% 0%
7,77%
4,44%
October-November Oktober-November 2016 2016
July-August Juli-Agustus 2017 2017
Source: Baseline survey (World Bank) and diagnostic test from 5072 students in 173 intervention schools (TNP2K) 25
Thank You
26