Analyzing crises and planning for development: the example of South Sudan

Editor's Notes

• #4: An analysis of the Education System: Snapshot of the whole education system that aims to tell us how the system transforms its inputs and resources into outcomes in terms of access, quality, equity and external efficiency? Based on statistical evidence (facts & neutrality) Focuses on statistical comparisons: over time, within a given country and with other countries Looking at these five main components : context, existing policies, system performance, management and costs and financing allows for the identification of the system’s strengths and weaknesses and the ESA is therefore an instrument to assist in the choice of educational policy priorities
• #6: As you know, the political context in South Sudan has been unstable for many years… and the country is currently coping with a major humanitarian crisis After the 2 major civil wars (1955-1972, 1983-2005), that ended in 2005 with the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), that began a 6 year transition period The country became independant on July 9, 2011 However, tensions between Sudan and South Sudan persist (oil revenue, border demarcation, mutual accusations of rebel support) Internal armed conflicts continue in Greater Upper Nile States Outbreak of civil war in December 2013 Peace Agreement signed in August 2015; civil strife persistent and ceasefire weakened Recurrent flooding which makes access difficult, and has lead to cholera outbreaks in Juba and in IDP camps Massive population displacement (approximately 2 million IDPs in the country) Human rights violations High casualties Intensification of other forms of conflict e.g. cattle rustlings among Pastoralist Communities; revenge Economic pressure (inflation, lack of foreign reserves and volatility of the exchange rate UN Office for the Coordination for Humanitarian Affairs (UN-OCHA) data from Humanitarian response plan, 2015 Has compiled a series of indicators on 1) conflict affected civilians, 2) death, injury and disease, 3) food insecurity and livelihoods and 4) widespread malnutrition They have used these indicators to develop a composite risk index which is available at county level 4 risk level : lowest, low, high and highest for Nov 2014 & June 2015 => average indicators Merged with 2015 EMIS data UNICEF Eastern and Southern Africa Regional Office (ESARO) Peace Building, Education and Advocacy (PBEA), 2015 Inputs from the Education Cluster and UNHCR throughout the ESA process
• #7: Once we’d mapped and localized the risks, we then looked at how the risks affect the education system performance in terms of access, quality and management. Some of the things we looked at related to access include enrolment, school ownership, reasons for non-enrolment. For quality, in terms of the risk analysis, we looked at school classroom type, school facilities, but also the extent to which the curriculum framework addresses risks. Finally for management we looked at teacher distribution, PTRs and textbook distribution. The hypothesis being that in those areas where risk levels are highest, education system performance would be weakest. EMIS data, 2014 Use of OCHA data from Humanitarian Response Plan, 2015 UNICEF ESARO PBEA, 2015 DfID Girls’ Education South Sudan reports
• #8: I need to preface the illustrative examples that I will be giving in the next few slides by saying that there is very low coverage by the EMIS data in GUPN States: only 2 of the 12 counties were covered in Upper Nile and (5/9) in Unity and Jonglei 3/12 were not covered. What we see is that under-reporting 3 times higher in critical risk zones vs. low risk zones which can therefore skew some of the findings of the risk analysis.
• #9: Conflict affects enrolment coverage The table here shows the evolution in gross enrolment rate, by sector, in South Sudan in 2009 & 2015 When we look at the whole of South Sudan, including the GUPN states, we see that gross enrolment has decreased in most sectors: In primary, the Gross enrolment rate went down from 72% to 57% from 2009 to 2015 In Secondary, the Gross enrolment Rate has slightly improved from 6% to 7% However, when we look at the 7 states not affected by conflict, we note that the GER has actually improved for all sub-sectors. In primary, the GER rose from 64% to 72% over 2009-2015; and from 7% to 9% in Secondary
• #10: We can see here that school ownership varies by risk level From lowest to highest risks areas, the share of students enrolled in Community schools decreases, while the share of NGOs schools increases. There doesn’t seem to be a correlation between level of risk and government or religious schools. Source: EMIS 2015 database. OCHA Vulnerability Index. own computation.
• #11: Another thing we looked at related to access were the reasons for non-enrolment. And this graph comes from the World Bank’s High Frequency Survey 2014 Report and highlights that insecurity and conflict are indeed deterring pupils from going to school. This is particularly important to note as we know that youth in conflict-affected areas may become particularly vulnerable to recruitment by armed forces when there are no education opportunities available (UNICEF. 2015) Source: High Frequency Survey 2014 Report. World Bank; 2014. (A survey which was undertaken in Juba, Wau and Rumbeck
• #12: With regard to management, we can see from this slide that volunteer teachers are more prevalent in high risk areas With the exception of pre-primary and secondary where there are Too few observations in the highest risk category to compute reliable indicators, the counties with the highest risk levels have the biggest shares of volunteer teachers. In AES, the disparity is particularly pronounced: two-thirds of teachers in the most risky areas are volunteers, whereas only one-third of the teachers are volunteers in the least risky areas These disparities really highlight the difficulty in attracting and retaining permanent teachers in risk-prone areas
• #13: We observe a similar tendency with the Pupil Teacher Ratios (PTRs) which are often higher in risky areas (in government schools) Despite the reliance of volunteers & part-timers, PTRs tend to be higher in risky zones than the least risky one (except in pre-primary). This means that students in risky areas are facing poorer teaching conditions than students in the lowest risk counties and it points towards the difficulty around attracting and retaining permanent teachers in risk-prone areas Source: EMIS 2015. own computations. Too few observations in the highest risk category for pre- primary and secondary to compute reliable indicators.
• #14: Here we can see that textbooks are lacking … particularly in high risk areas Textbooks are particularly limited in Upper Nile and Jonglei (more than 6 pupils/textbook), while they relatively more available in the Equatoria States and Lakes (around 2.3) The level of risk greatly affects textbook allocation: when we look at the pupil-textbook ratio from the lowest to the highest level of risk, the number of pupils per English textbook more than triples, from 2.2 to 6.5 Source: EMIS 2015. own computations. * The number of textbooks has been capped to the number of pupils. to account for useful textbooks.
• #15: Two key aspects to look at when assessing the capacity of the education system to reduce or mitigate risks are the existence of organizational arrangements, and the abilitiy to mobilize funds. In South Sudan, there are organizational arrangements in place to support risk reduction and the promote of social cohesion, however, the effective coordination with MoEST leaves room for improvement. In terms of funds mobilization, despite the fact that general humanitarian funding has essentially doubled in South Sudan since 2011, only 3% of funding goes to the Education cluster. Other key aspects of the capacity of the education system to reduce risks and promote social cohesion: School management policies for safety, resilience, and social cohesion Infrastructure and equipment (things such as access to water, toilets, school gardens and health centers were looked at) Teacher training Curricula We can retain here that there are mechanisms for coordination and resource mobilization, but that there is room for improvement in both of these areas, in order to more effectively provide equitable access to education services and reduce the effects of risks on the system. Education cluster exists and is co-ordinated by MoEST, with support from UNICEF and Save. The clusters are organized at national, state, and county levels to facilitate coordination of the many actors that are shown on the map. The map demonstrates that the majority of education humanitarian partners are primarily in the GUPN states, but that there are also many in CEQ A total of 174 organizations are involved in emergency programs, 27 are in education: NGOs and UNICEF Concentration of humanitarian education partners in conflict affected states (Jonglei, Upper Nile, Lakes) Central Equatoria is biased as most organizations are based there States with conflict receive more international support for all services Operations are not always channeled through the government Source: OCHA, Operational Presence (3W: Who does What, Where) September 2015 The clusters hold bi-weekly cluster meetings in order to share for situational reports of activities, achievements, challenges. When intervention activities are off-track, government will intervene. In addition State level meetings with NGO partners occur on a monthly or as needed basis. Coordination is also affected by access issues including insecurity, flooding, poor roads and long distances between counties and state capitals. These long distances also make it difficult to support partners in case of problems. Information sharing is hindered by poor communication (no Internet and/or mobile network) between the State Cluster and partners which negatively affects planning. In some cases, the State Clusters are also not in a position to identify which partners are operating in their States and therefore cannot ensure equitable distribution of resources to populations in need or prevent duplication of services.
• #16: We also looked at the new curriculum framework and found that it addresses safety and social cohesion in the following ways: Key aims, including producing good citizens that are also environmentally responsible The values and principles section explains that education in South Sudan should be based on a shared commitment to human rights and gender equity, respect and integrity, peace and tolerance, compassion and social justice, democracy and national pride The two competencies that address safety and social cohesion are: Co-operation, meaning to work collaboratively, Be tolerant, Adapt behavior, Negotiate, Contribute to environmental sustainability and Cultural identity so that students take pride in their South Sudanese identity and value cultural diversity. Safety and social cohesion are also addressed in the cross-cutting issues, which include environmental awareness and sustainability, peace education and life skills
• #17: IIEP has had a longstanding collaboration with MoEST (development of ESP in 2012), relationship building, awareness raising on safety, resilience and social cohesion, training for MoEST staff in ed planning Education Sector Analysis: capacity development process, took place over 4.5 months from September 2015 – January 2016 Stakeholders include National technical team of 20 MoEST representatives including at State level and humanitarian actors including Ed Cluster, UNHCR and NGOs We had access to a good amount of data, including the EMIS, DfiD‘s South Sudan Schools Attendance Monitory System, OCHA data and UNHCR data. The innovation here is that we merged the OCHA‘s severity index which is used in their Humanitarian Response Plan with the EMIS to see the effects of conflict, disease, displacement and food insecurity on the education system‘s performance. need for triangulation and data quality assurance which is time consuming Education Sector Plan to be developed from Feb– June 2016 Wider participatory process than ESA—primarily to ensure representation of development partners, local NGOs, and additional MoEST representatives as relevant. While the ESA process to date has primarily involved the national technical team, the ESP will bring additional education stakeholders including the Education Donor Group, the PEG and other education partners to the table. As of now, it is expected that the plan will have programmes on access, quality, management, and post-secondary ed ((TTI, TVET & HE). Within each of these components, there will be specific risk reduction measures. It is also likely that the plan will include programmes from the Humanitarian response Plan, in order to ensure that those areas most affected by crisis are covered. The MoEST and country- level partners really see this as an opportunity for innovative programming, and as a way to bridge the gap. Some ideas for this involve having humanitarian and risk reduction activities in the ESP Harmonize human resources management information systems (teachers trained by NGOs can be used as part of main system) Improving coordination between MoEST, EDoG and Education Cluster