Slide 1

Report
Ghana – 2009 Programme
Review
GeSCI Team Meeting
Feb. 2010
Current Context –Post Evaluation
• General programme implementation literally
at a standstill:
– Changes in senior decision makers
– Centralised decisions via the DM’s Office
– Fate of GES unknown; no spending on core
activities since start of 2009
– Development partners, MoEFP threatening to
withdraw funding as no monies are being spent
(stand to loose USD 32 million!)
– Very politically tense
ICTE issues specifically…
• OLPC
– Dissemination to 30 schools
– No money for implementation, training, infrastructure
development (pen drives vs. servers!)
– MoE threatened by Foundation to be brought to
international arbitration
– National investigation in local Foundation still ongoing
– how funds were spent
• Committed funds for teacher training via Intel
Teach with drawn by the MoE
• ICTE budget not funded
ICTE issues specifically…
• No computers procured for schools
– No immediate plans
• Possibility of no EMIS this year
• Monies allocated under UNESCO still not
released
– Servers not paid for
– Lost possibility of accessing more via this route
ICT issues specifically…
• Sole sourced ICT procurement on the increase
– ADB schools
– Computerized School Placement for Senior High
Schools (CSPSS)
– Televic
– Ncomputing
• Little adherence to standards or guidelines met
• GeSCI’s technical advise from tech point of view not
incorporated into plans
• Re-hash of same old plans – no progress !
• In some ways back to Square 1?
Output 1 – Baseline study (e-readiness of
educational institutions to inform planning)
+ Baseline implemented
+ Good lessons and capacity building both for GeSCI
and MoE
+ Good sensitization in house – PBME and GES
+ Some attempts to use data to plan ( though less
by the ICT Unit itself!)
- Deployment and costing models to be finalised
- Pre-secondary level also needs to be tackled
Output 1 – Baseline study (e-readiness of
educational institutions to inform planning)
- Policy guidelines to be implemented
- Framework needed
Output 2: Revised Education Sector
Plan to include ICTE
+ Baseline data provided good justification on
issues
+ Feedback into ESP Process as spearheaded by
PBME
+ Gap analysis provided good input for projections
- Not all feedback incorporated – still needs to be
done in detailed workplan (yet to be developed by
the MoE)
- Indicators and M&E capacities to be built in
house (projected but not yet done)
- +/- Link to UIS – how to collaborate to build
capacities in PBME
Output 3 : Realistic and
comprehensive deployment models
+/-Baseline data available but under utilized
- Deployment model for SHS and other levels
not finalised
- TCO still to be developed for SHS
Output 4: Build capacity at the
MoE/GES
+ Participation in AKE raised general awareness on
issues related to ICT and Assessment ( better
coordination and collaboration with WAEC)
+ Some activities consolidated e.g. CRDD; also
Division has been implementing what has been
learnt
- SpED (Inclusive Education) : change of direction
by Division, promised deliverables not achieved
- ICT Unit : capacity lost through staff transfer; back
to the beginning !
Output 4: Build capacity at the
MoE/GES
- Strategy workshop on ICTE and policy to be
implemented ( funds secured)
Output 5: Transition Country Engagement
+ Internal review completed
- Findings not yet shared with MoE
- External review to be done
+/- Transition happening by virtue of GeSCI’s
involvement in other activities (next slide)
– Still needs to be formally agreed
– Balance ICTE vs. E ( diversification vs. opportunity)
– Funding models (in country staff + external GeSCI
staff)
– Programmes vs. projects
– Expected period of engagement
Not projected but…
+ USAID Support
–
–
–
–
Internet access for senior high schools
Largest PPP to date on an area within ICTE
USAID USD 1 million over 2 years
GeSCI part of support paid by USAID USD 230,000
over 2 years
+ WB support re Skills and Technology Development
– Multi-sectoral including IT ( skills development – post
primary)
– USD 32,000 + paid by WB over 4 months + high
possibility for longer term extension
– Other donor support possible via COTVET : Danida,
AfDB, JICA, CIDA
• Implications for GeSCI to be discussed in 2010
plan
Conclusion…
• Limited success :
– absorption and planning capacity of the MoE at
this time very low
– Funds to implement programme activities needed
– ICTs remain a priority only in rhetoric
– Some interest being shown by DPs but greater
support needed if we expect some systematic
changes
– Number of previous strategies ‘dusted off’ and
represented – e.g. Steering Committee on ICTE
Conclusion…
• Opportunities:
– STI (short and long term funding potential)
• Focus on education, innovation and research
• Parallel to our strategic foci in GeSCI + other DPs e.g.
SIDA , AfDB etc.
– Tapping into project funding available at the local
level
• USAID willing to support a number of pillars within the
ICTE framework
Conclusion…
• Reflections around OM
– Confession: not as rigorous as I should have been
 though did try to reflect within those
parameters
However noted:
Now…
- Boundary partners Evolving…
have changed
-1st :MoE
- 1st : Development
-2nd :GES (and Partners
Agencies)
-2nd : MoE
-3rd :
-3rd : GES (and
Development
Agencies)
Partners

similar documents