Ten-Year Impacts of Burkina Faso’s BRIGHT Program

More documents

Recommendations

Info

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY MATHEMATICA POLICY RESEARCH marriage, and any children they might have had. The response rate for the household survey was 99.85 percent; the survey was completed at 11,523 households • Tests on math and French were administered to all children and young adults ages 6 to 22 who lived in the households interviewed in the household survey, regardless of school enrollment. These tests were administered immediately after the household survey. The questions came from Burkina Faso primary education textbooks for grades 1through 6. A total of 31,419 children and young adults took the math assessment and 31,450 took the French assessment. • A school survey collected information on the physical infrastructure and supplies as well as the characteristics of the personnel of primary schools located within 10 kilometers of the sampled villages that children from the household survey reportedly attended as well as all of the secondary schools in the department in which a sampled village was located. The survey also collected attendance and enrollment data for children who were enrolled in the school, as reported by parents in the household survey. This survey collected information from 332 primary schools and 103 secondary schools • This evaluation also used application data from the forms collected in early 2005 by MEBA officials from each of the 293 villages. This information was used to compute the eligibility score which, in turn, determined which villages were eligible to participate in the BRIGHT program. B. Differences in school characteristics BRIGHT was designed to improve the educational outcomes of children in Burkina Faso by providing schools nearby in which to enroll and by ensuring that the schools have better infrastructure and resources. The schools are built with “girl-friendly” features (for example, gender-specific latrines) to improve educational outcomes for girls. Therefore, we begin by examining the differences in characteristics of schools in villages selected for BRIGHT and those not selected. This analysis allows us to assess the intervention at the time of this evaluation and establish whether the BRIGHT schools have sustained their superior quality ten years after the start of the intervention. The key findings are as follows: • Villages selected for BRIGHT are more likely to have a school, and these schools are more accessible than those attended by children in unselected villages. However, the differences in the availability and the accessibility of schools are lower than in previous evaluations. • Schools in villages selected for BRIGHT have significantly better educational infrastructure and resources, but these differences have also decreased over time. • Schools in villages selected for BRIGHT have more teachers, although the qualifications of the teachers are not significantly different from those in the schools in unselected villages. These results are similar to those observed in previous evaluations. • Even though the program has ended, BRIGHT schools have been largely successful in sustaining the girl-friendly characteristics that were incorporated as part of the BRIGHT implementation. However, the characteristics are less prominent than what we observed in 2012. xvi
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY MATHEMATICA POLICY RESEARCH C. Impacts of the BRIGHT program BRIGHT continued to have large positive impacts on school enrollment ten years after the start of the program, but the magnitude of the impacts have declined since 2008 and 2012. Self-reported enrollment of children in the villages selected for BRIGHT was 6.0 percentage points higher compared to the unselected villages (Table ES.1). This is a large impact, given that 91.5 percent of the unselected villages also had a school. However, this impact is smaller than the 15.4 and 20 percentage points impacts observed in 2012 and 2008, respectively. BRIGHT continued to have positive impacts on test scores ten years after the start of the program, but again, the magnitude of the impacts have declined sionce 2008 and 2012. Students in villages selected for the BRIGHT program scored 0.19 standard deviations higher than students in unselected villages (Table ES.1). This positive impact is consistent across the math and French sections of the exam. Impacts on test scores were higher in 2008 and 2012, 0.41 and 0.29 standard deviations, respectively. Table ES.1. Ten-year impacts of the BRIGHT program on enrollment and test scores Selected villages Unselected villages Estimated impacts Sample size Self-reported enrollment 37.9% 31.9% 6.0 pp*** 34,471 Test scores 0.11 -0.09 0.19*** 30,474 Sources: Mathematica household survey (2015) and Mathematica school survey (2015). Notes: Test scores are measured in standard deviations of student achievement. ***Coefficient statistically significant at the 1% significance level. BRIGHT had no impacts on the number of children engaged in labor activities in the past week. The program had reduced the number of children engaged in household activities in which children in Burkina Faso normally participate in the three and the seven year evaluations, but we did not find any significant differences in participation in any of the children’s labor activities ten years after the start of the program (Table ES.2). 7 7 We also investigated the impact on the hours engaged in labor activities and similarly found no significant impacts of the BRIGHT program (results reported in Chapter IV). xvii
Page 1 and 2: Ten-Year Impacts of Burkina Faso’
Page 3 and 4: ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This report is the
Page 5 and 6: CONTENTS ACRONYMS .................
Page 7 and 8: TABLES ES.1 ES.2 ES.3 ES.4 ES.5 ES.
Page 9 and 10: FIGURES I.1 Gross enrollment ratios
Page 11 and 12: ACRONYMS AMEs - Association de Mèr
Page 13 and 14: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The BRIGHT progra
Page 15: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY MATHEMATICA POLIC
Page 19 and 20: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY MATHEMATICA POLIC
Page 21 and 22: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY MATHEMATICA POLIC
Page 23 and 24: I. INTRODUCTION From 2005 through 2
Page 25 and 26: I. INTRODUCTION MATHEMATICA POLICY
Page 31 and 32: I: INTRODUCTION MATHEMATICA POLICY
Page 39 and 40: II. EVALUATION DESIGN AND DATA COLL
Page 51 and 52: III. IMPLEMENTATION SUMMARY Under t
Page 53 and 54: III. IMPLEMENTATION SUMMARY MATHEMA
Page 55 and 56: IV. FINDINGS In this chapter, we pr
Page 57 and 58: IV: FINDINGS MATHEMATICA POLICY RES
Page 67 and 68:
IV: FINDINGS MATHEMATICA POLICY RES
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
V. COST-EFFECTIVENESS AND COST-BENE
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
VI. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND DISCUSS
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
REFERENCES Abeberese, Ama Baafra, T
Page 97 and 98:
REFERENCES MATHEMATICA POLICY RESEA
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
APPENDIX A STATISTICAL MODEL FOR IM
Page 105 and 106:
APPENDIX A MATHEMATICA POLICY RESEA
Page 107 and 108:
APPENDIX B VALIDATION OF REGRESSION
Page 109 and 110:
APPENDIX B MATHEMATICA POLICY RESEA
Page 111 and 112:
APPENDIX B MATHEMATICA POLICY RESEA
Page 113 and 114:
APPENDIX C ROBUSTNESS OF IMPACT EST
Page 115 and 116:
APPENDIX C MATHEMATICA POLICY RESEA
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
APPENDIX D DETAILS ON COST-BENEFIT
Page 127 and 128:
APPENDIX D MATHEMATICA POLICY RESEA
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
APPENDIX E SURVEY FORMS
Page 151 and 152:
APPENDIX E MATHEMATICA POLICY RESEA
Page 153 and 154:
APPENDIX E BURKINA FASO MATHEMATICA
Page 155 and 156:
APPENDIX E MATHEMATICA POLICY RESEA
Page 157 and 158:
HOUSEHOLD LISTING FORM Village ID:
Page 159 and 160:
ENROLLMENT MODULE VILLAGE ID: ___ _
Page 161 and 162:
CHILD LABOR MODULE VILLAGE ID: ___
Page 163 and 164:
YOUNG ADULT MODULE VILLAGE ID: ___
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
ASSESSMENT CONSENT LANGUAGE: PLEASE
Page 171 and 172:
MATH ASSESSMENT VILLAGE ID: ___ ___
Page 173 and 174:
MATH ASSESSMENT VILLAGE ID: ___ ___
Page 175 and 176:
FRENCH ASSESSMENT VILLAGE ID: ___ _
Page 177 and 178:
FRENCH ASSESSMENT VILLAGE ID: ___ _
Page 179 and 180:
BURKINA FASO SCHOOL INFORMATION PAN
Page 181 and 182:
A: SCHOOL CHARACTERISTICS SC SC9. D
Page 183 and 184:
C: SCHOOL PHYSICAL STRUCTURE SS SS5
Page 185 and 186:
This page has been left blank for d
Page 187 and 188:
This page has been left blank for d
Page 189 and 190:
APPENDIX F MATHEMATICA POLICY RESEA
show all

Ten-Year Impacts of Burkina Faso’s BRIGHT Program

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?