Reaching the marginalized: EFA global monitoring report, 2010; 2010

010CHAPTER 42Education for All Global Monitoring ReportWhile there havebeen some realaccomplishments,the initiativemanifestlyhas not putthe poorestdevelopingcountries on‘an educationfast track’27. The evaluation covers2002-2008. The report isscheduled for late 2009.Working papers and thepreliminary draft report,which were available atthe time of writing, werereferred to for thissection.Reforming theFast Track InitiativeWhen the FTI was launched in 2002, JimWolfensohn, then president of the World Bank,hailed it as a ‘historic first step towards puttingall developing countries on an education fast trackthat could transform their social and economicprospects’ (World Bank, 2002a). The FTI was widelyseen as a catalyst for accelerated progress towardsEducation for All. While there have been somereal accomplishments, the initiative manifestlyhas not put the poorest developing countrieson ‘an education fast track’. The overall recordis one of sustained underachievement – and reformis an urgent priority.Disappointment in the FTI has been heightenedby the gap between its ambitions and itsachievements. At its inception, the initiative wasseen as embodying a new type of global compactbetween developing countries and aid donorsaimed at achieving international developmentgoals. Developing countries were to put in placecredible plans for accelerating progress ineducation, with donors backing strengthenednational efforts through increased, more effectiveand more predictable aid. Seven years on, thecredibility of the initiative is at an all-time low,reflecting its poor record on delivery.The time is ripe for developing countries, donorsand non-government organizations to reassessthe FTI. An independent evaluation is scheduledto report on the FTI’s effectiveness and formulateproposals for reform. 27 Several donors are pressingfor more predictable arrangements for financialreplenishment, including an initial US$1.2 billioncommitment. Meanwhile, the new United Statesadministration has signalled an intention to createa new global fund for education, though thedetails remain unclear. This backdrop createsan opportunity for far-reaching reform of the FTI.Seizing that opportunity is critical for progresstowards Education for All. The FTI is not working,but a dynamic multilateral aid initiative could createa powerful new momentum towards reaching thetargets set in Dakar in 2000. It could play a vitalrole in supporting countries that are off track forachieving the EFA goals and in mobilizing resourcesfor marginalized groups. Unlocking the potentialwill require strong political leadership and greaterclarity, notably over the role of the FTI inmobilizing and delivering the additional financeneeded to achieve the goals.This section provides a critical assessment ofthe Fast Track Initiative. It sets out the problemsin governance, finance and country coverage.The scale of these problems rules out business asusual. Bluntly stated, the FTI in its current form isindefensible. Abolishing the current framework anddeveloping a new multilateral blueprint from scratchis not the answer, however. The world needs anambitious multilateral framework to accelerateprogress towards the 2015 goals, and a reformedFTI is the most viable option. The following areamong the key messages of this section:The FTI has failed to mobilize and deliverfinancing on the required scale. The initiative hasdelivered too little aid with too many transactioncosts. Initially it was envisaged that the FTIwould galvanize resources indirectly through an‘endorsement effect’, with its stamp of approvalunlocking increased donor support. The CatalyticFund was later introduced to provide directsupport. There is no compelling evidence,however, that bilateral aid to FTI-endorsedcountries has increased. Meanwhile, theCatalytic Fund has suffered from a weakand erratic donor support base and a large gapbetween commitments and disbursements.The FTI has left intact a failed approach to theassessment of financing gaps. Achieving the EFAgoals will require a significant increase in aidfinancing. By this Report’s estimate, an additionalUS$16 billion is required annually to 2015. TheFTI has not provided a vehicle for addressing thischallenge. National plans still reflect donors’assessments of what they can afford rather thanwhat countries need, and fail to address theadditional costs of reaching marginalized groups.Aid financing for education continues to bedominated by short-termism (with typicalcommitment periods of one to three years),poor predictability and limited support forteacher salaries.The FTI has in some cases weakened effortsto improve aid effectiveness and implementthe Paris agenda. To be eligible for CatalyticFund support, countries must meet the rulesgoverning the release of funds from the WorldBank’s International Development Association(IDA). National reporting and procurement248