A Diagnostic Study on Stipend Programmes in Bangladesh with …spfmsp.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/PESP-Final-Report... · 2018-02-06 · amount to Rupali Bank which is then kept

Finance Division, Ministry of FinanceGovernment of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh

A Diagnostic Study on Stipend Programmesin Bangladesh with Focus on

Primary Education Stipend Project (PESP)

Diagnostic Study on Stipend Programmes in Bangladesh with Focus on Primary Education Stipend Project (PESP)

2

Table of Contents List of Tables ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 4

List of Charts ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 4

List of Graphs.......................................................................................................................................................................................... 4

List of Acronyms ................................................................................................................................................................................... 5

Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................................................. 7

A. Backdrop and Rationale ................................................................................................................................................... 7

B. Assessment of Scheme Design ..................................................................................................................................... 7

Operational Processes Assessment .................................................................................................................................. 7

Financial Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................................... 9

MIS and Data Digitization ................................................................................................................................................. 10

C. Recommendations in Brief ........................................................................................................................................... 10

Chapter I. Backdrop and Overview.......................................................................................................................................... 13

1.1 Backdrop to the Assignment ................................................................................................................................. 13

1.2 About the Study ............................................................................................................................................................ 13

Chapter II. Methodology ................................................................................................................................................................ 15

2.1 Primary Surveys ..................................................................................................................................................................... 15

2.1.1 Districts and Upazilas Visited .............................................................................................................................. 15

2.2 Secondary Literature Review ........................................................................................................................................ 16

2.3 Limitations of Study ........................................................................................................................................................... 16

Chapter III. About the Stipend Schemes ............................................................................................................................. 17

3.1 Primary Education Stipend Project ................................................................................................................... 17

3.1.1 Objectives, Jurisdiction and Design ............................................................................................................. 17

3.1.2 Selection Processes and Implementation .................................................................................................... 18

3.1.3 Fund Flow ........................................................................................................................................................................ 18

3.1.4 Delivery Process ........................................................................................................................................................... 21

3.1.5 Budget, Costs and Coverage ................................................................................................................................ 22

3.1.6 Monitoring, Evaluation and Accountability .............................................................................................. 23

3.2 Secondary Education Stipends ............................................................................................................................. 23

3.2.1 Objectives ........................................................................................................................................................................ 24

3.2.2 Conditionalities ............................................................................................................................................................ 24

3.2.3 Selection Process ........................................................................................................................................................ 24

3.2.4 Budget and Costs ............................................................................................................................................... 26

3.3 Stipends for Students with Disabilities ........................................................................................................... 29


3

3.3.1 Objectives Process ...................................................................................................................................................... 29

3.3.2 Eligibility – Individuals and Institutions ...................................................................................................... 29

3.3.3 Selection Criteria and Process ........................................................................................................................... 29

3.3.4 Budget, Benefit Size and Coverage ........................................................................................................ 30

Chapter IV. Assessment of the PESP ...................................................................................................................................... 32

4.1 Program Objectives ............................................................................................................................................................. 32

4.2 Adequacy, Relevance and Effectiveness of the Benefit Package .......................................................... 36

4.2.1 Real Value ....................................................................................................................................................................... 37

4.2.2 Conditionalities ............................................................................................................................................................ 37

4.3 Analysis of Budget and Cost ......................................................................................................................................... 38

4.3.1 Administrative Costs ................................................................................................................................................. 38

4.3.2 Demand Generation for Payment .................................................................................................................... 40

4.3.3 Undisbursed Money Laying with Bank .......................................................................................................... 40

4.4 Operational Processes. ............................................................................................................................................... 41

4.4.1 Database of Beneficiaries ..................................................................................................................................... 41

4.4.2 Capacities, Awareness and Monitoring ........................................................................................................ 41

4.5 Delivery of Benefits – Cost and Time............................................................................................................... 42

4.5.1 Challenges with Transfers ..................................................................................................................................... 42

4.5.2 Challenges with Electronic Transfers ............................................................................................................. 42

4.5.3 Challenges with Timings ........................................................................................................................................ 44

4.6 MIS and Data Digitization .............................................................................................................................................. 44

4.7 Monitoring, Evaluation and Grievance Mechanism ....................................................................................... 45

4.8 Secondary Education Stipend Programs ............................................................................................................... 45

4.9 Stipend Program for Student with Disabilities ................................................................................................. 47

4.10 Coordination and / or Synergies within Stipend Programs .................................................................... 47

4.11 PESP Under Development Head ............................................................................................................................... 48

Chapter V. Recommendations and Way Forward .......................................................................................................... 49

5.1 Program Design .............................................................................................................................................................. 49

5.2 Implementation Processes ....................................................................................................................................... 49

5.2.1 Operational ............................................................................................................................................................ 49

5.2.2 Financial .................................................................................................................................................................. 50

5.2.3 MIS .............................................................................................................................................................................. 51

5.2.4 Payment System Reform ............................................................................................................................... 52

Annexure I. Proceedings / Minutes of Dissemination Workshop ......................................................................... 53


4

Annexure II. Terms of Reference for Study ....................................................................................................................... 58

Annexure III. List of Documents Referred .......................................................................................................................... 74

Annexure IV. List of Persons Met ............................................................................................................................................ 76

Annexure V. Questionnaires Administered ........................................................................................................................ 79

Annexure VI. Brief on Payment System Reform ............................................................................................................. 98

List of Tables Sl. Table Description 1 3.1 Budgetary Allocation, Expenditure and Costs for PESP 2 3.2 Coverage: Number of Beneficiaries and Expenditure Per Beneficiary 3 3.3 Overview of Stipend Programs for Secondary Education 4 3.4 Budget and Expenditure – Secondary Education Stipend Project (SESP)

5 3.5 Budget and Expenditure – Secondary Education Sector Investment Program

6 3.6 Budget and Expenditure – SEQAEP 7 3.7 Budget and Expenditure Higher Secondary Stipend Project 8 3.8 Number of Beneficiaries, Benefit Size and Total Budget for All Stipends

9 3.9 Coverage, Benefit Size and Budgetary Expenditure on Stipends for Students with Disability

List of Charts Sl. Chart Description 1 2.1 Field Visit to Districts 2 3.1 PESP Fund Flow for First 3 Quarters 3 3.2 Release of Fund for 4th Quarter

List of Graphs Sl. Graph Description 1 4.1 Enrolment Rates for Past Three Decades 2 4.2 Attendance Rates for Primary Students 3 4.3 Dropout Rates for Primary Education 4 4.4 Completion Cycle for Primary Education 5 4.5 Cycle Completion and Survival Rates 6 4.6 Parameters of Success for PESP 7 4.7 Real Value of PESP Benefit Size 8 4.8 PESP Expenditure Analysis


5

List of Acronyms 1 ASCR Annual School Census Report

2 ASPR Annual Sector Performance Report

3 AUEO Assistant Upazila Education Officer

4 BBEFT Bangladesh Bank Electronic Fund Transfer

5 BCC Bangladesh Computer Council

6 BDT Bangladeshi Taka

7 CAO Chief Accounts Officer

8 DBBL Dutch Bangla Bank Limited

9 DDO Drawing and Disbursing Officer

10 DG Director General 11 DPE Directorate of Primary Education

12 DPEO District Primary Education Officer 13 DPP Development Project Proforma

14 DP Development Partner

15 DSS Department for Social Services

16 ECNEC Executive Committee of National and Economic Council

17 EFT Electronic Fund Transfer

18 FD Finance Division

19 FGDs Focus Group Discussions 20 FY Financial Year

21 GoB Government of Bangladesh 22 HSSP Higher Secondary Stipend Project 23 IBAS Integrated Budgeting and Accounting System

24 IT Information Technology

25 KYC Know your Customer

26 M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

27 MFS Mobile Financial Services

28 MIS Management Information System

29 MO Monitoring Officer

30 MOE Ministry of Education

31 MoPME Ministry of Primary and Mass Education 32 MoSW Ministry of Social Welfare 33 NID National Identity

34 NSSS National Social Security Strategy

35 PSC Project Steering Committee

36 PD Project Director

37 PECE Primary Education Certificate Examination

38 PESP Primary Education Stipend Project 39 PFM Public Financial Management

40 PIN Personal Identification Number

41 PMT Proxy Mean Test

42 PSP Payment Service Provider


6

43 RADP Revised Annual Development Plan

44 SEQAEP Secondary Education Quality and Access Enhancement Project 45 SESIP Secondary Education Sector Investment Program 46 SESP Secondary Education Stipend Project 47 SIM Subscriber identity module 48 SMC School Management Committee 49 SMS Short Message Service 50 SOP Standard Operating Procedures

51 SPBMU Social Protection Budget Management Unit

52 SPFMSP Strengthening Public Financial Management for Social Protection

53 SSC Secondary School Certificate

54 UEO Upazila Education Officer

55 UNO Upazila Nirbahi Officer

56 URC Upazila Resource Centre

57 USEO Upazila Secondary Education Officer

58 VfM Value for Money


7

Executive Summary A. Backdrop and Rationale

A diagnostic study on stipend programmes was undertaken as a part of the mandated activities of SPFMSP Project being implemented by the Finance Division in association with 6 Line Ministries including MoPME, MoE and MoSW. The diagnostic study presents an independent and comprehensive analysis of the stipend programmes in Bangladesh with a focus on Primary Education Stipend Project (PESP) being implemented by the Ministry of Primary and Mass Education. The other stipend programmes are being implemented by the Ministry of Education and Ministry of Social Welfare. The diagnostic study performed an operational and financial analysis of stipend programmes with central focus on the identification of issues and challenges of the programme design, processes adopted for delivery in terms of efficiency, economy and effectiveness. Study provides evidence based findings and assessments leading to recommendations for the improvement of the programme in terms of its design, its implementation and the delivery system that may promote value for money.

B. Assessment of Scheme Design The PESP has been assessed in terms of its programme design and implementation processes. An assessment of programme objectives has been performed on the basis of Enrolment Rates, Attendance Rates, Dropouts, Completion Cycle and Survival Rates. Using the secondary datasets of the various Annual Sector Performance Reports, (2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016) and the Annual School Census Reports published by MoPME, it was found that by and large the scheme has been successful in contributing along with other interventions for increasing the enrolment and attendance rates, improvement in completion cycle and a reduction in the dropouts for the primary students over the last 10 years. International experience and research on financial incentives to encourage students to attend school and to improve their academic achievement, graduation rates, and other outcomes show similar findings as the ones found in Bangladesh

However, within the programme design there are issues in terms of adequacy of benefits. The monthly benefit size of PESP Stipend of BDT 100.00 (USD 1.25) was fixed in the year 2002 and has not been revised since then, despite the erosion of real value over the years. The effectiveness and size of the benefit was expressed as a major concern by the mothers / guardians of the students who receive the benefits. The same is valid in case of all 4 stipend programmes of the secondary education.

As the PESP has been universalised since 2016, it doesn’t pose a challenge of targeting of beneficiaries though the eligibility criteria of receiving stipend is based on certain conditionalities. The field assessment suggests that there are reports of pressure being applied from community / guardians to influence conditionality of 85% attendance and 33% pass marks in favour of their children for availing of stipends. The operations both, in terms of manual recording and calculation as well as technology driven uploading of data for compliance of conditionalities was also found to be time consuming and cumbersome. During field visits many mothers opined that the two conditionalities should be done away with. However, there is no research or evidence to conclude that the attendance and exam marks will not be adversely affected if the conditionalities were removed.

Operational Processes Assessment Primary Stipend

The study found that the existing operational processes of PESP require positive interventions by the Directorate of Primary Education for improving efficiency and effectiveness. The assessment finds that there is significant room for improving various processes involved in the delivery of stipends. Some of the observations that require attention are as follows:


8

• Based on the demand generated by the UEOs, stipend money is supposed to be transferred bythe PD to the Mobile Banking Division of Rupali Bank. However, as the demand from variousUpazilas are not synchronized to a specific timing or date, the PD transfers the entire stipendamount to Rupali Bank which is then kept in the Master Wallet of the bank. This money isthen transferred to each beneficiary’s Mobile Wallet only as per the demand generated by theUEOs and approved by the PD on the portal that belongs to the bank. This demand is usuallyfragmented and is generated at different times. Meanwhile the entire money rests with thebank as Floats.

• There are challenges of undisbursed money being reconciled between the bank and PD. It wasfound that for the FY 2016 – 17, a large chunk of funds remained undistributed andunreconciled. This defeats the principle of financial proprietary and relevant sections ofTreasury Rules according to which the money should be withdrawn from the Treasury /Exchequer only when it is required for immediate disbursement.

• The database of beneficiaries is not owned or possessed by the DPE / PESP authorities but is inthe possession of the Bank and its service provider which is a private firm with whom the DPEhas signed the contract for distribution of stipends.

• The DPE / PESP does not own or administer the web portal on which the database for paymentcycle is uploaded by the UEOs. The Project Office only has an access to this primary datathrough a terminal provided in its office. On the basis of the data uploaded by the UEOs onthe web portal, the PD authorizes the payment using the same web portal provided in hisoffice.

• Schools lack IT infrastructure in terms of hardware to capture conditionalities and upload thelist into the system.

• The introduction of mobile banking has increased efficiency to some degree, but teethingproblems are yet to be resolved.

• The teachers as well as the UEOs reported that there was no orientation and / or trainingimparted to these teachers in IT processes. In fact, there was no operational manual in the DPE/ PESP that would provide necessary operational guidelines to the officials involved in therevised process.

• Lack of communication and coordination between UEO officials and Mobile Banking team ofSureCash created a gap in the system. As the Standard Operation Procedures (SOPs) aremissing for mobile money transfer for the DPE and its field offices these gaps requireimmediate attention.

• Challenges also lay in the lack of knowledge about electronic transfers amongst thestakeholders that may range from Teachers to the Mothers / Guardians. There were noawareness campaigns organized by the GoB towards switching over from physical cash modeto electronic payment. There was no mobile literacy accorded to the mothers / guardians forcash-out processes etc.

• There is no dedicated monitoring outfit for the PESP at the central level. However, there is anoversight mechanism of PESP at district level through a Monitoring Officer which, as per ourassessment, is weak and requires further reinforcement. Similarly, there is no establishedformal grievance mechanism for the beneficiaries of PESP whose grievances at best areredressed in a limited way at the school level.

Secondary Stipends

• At the Secondary School level, head of the institutions and the teachers dealing with stipendwere not fully aware of the instructions and guidelines of the respective stipend programmesand hence non-compliance was the major issue observed. Since these stipends are not


9

universal and are targeted there is a strong need for the key players to comply with the guidelines and minimise the targeting errors.

• There is a lack of knowledge and awareness of grievance redress mechanism among theteachers as well as the students and their guardians for the Secondary Stipend Programs. Theexisting provision of appeal under the SESP in case of exclusion of poor students from the listwas not known to the teachers or the parents.

• The database of beneficiaries is currently maintained by a private firm and is not possessedand administered by the Department / Projects. There is no proper MIS and the data is also notbeing hosted at the BCC.

Stipend for Students with Disability

• Due to inadequate allocation, only a limited number of beneficiaries can receive the stipendunder the scheme. As a result of which a number of students with disabilities are receivingstipends under the regular stipend programmes such as PESP project (which is lower) thoughthey are entitled to get a higher allowance from Department of Social Services. However, thedepartment has been regularly providing stipend to an increasing number of beneficiaries ona year to year basis.

There is a lack of awareness amongst officials of education departments, student with disabilities, parents / guardian about the stipend for the Students with Disabilities program itself. The assessment also points out to lack of coordination and synergies that could be derived between the stipend programmes of three line ministries.

Financial Analysis Primary Stipend

The analysis of budgetary expenditure pattern reveals that while the cost of delivery of the PESP stipend for over a decade was within an overall range of 4 - 5%, the same would largely depend on the efficiency of operations within the system. Approximately 70% of this delivery cost constitutes service charges including VAT paid to banks. However, this does not take into account the salaries and overheads of the Department including indirect costs associated with the PESP delivery. This number would certainly rise the moment establishment costs and overheads are accounted for.

Interestingly, while the stipend delivery mechanism has switched over from the mode of physical cash payment involving banks to physically distribute cash to a more efficient, cost effective and scalable model of transfers through mobile banking, the PESP could not bring down the direct cost of transfers to the beneficiaries. Post universalisation, with a scalable model of e-transfers effected through mobile banking mode, this cost ought to have been brought down substantially but still remains at the same level of that of manual transfers, despite no physical distribution by the banks.

Secondary Stipends

The Secondary Education Stipends are being transferred at a cost of 1.0% of stipend amount for SESP, SESIP and HSSP and at 2.5% for SEQAEP. This is paid by the projects / programme to Agrani Bank which is contracted by the department. Agrani bank on its part, has entered into an agreement with a private sector bank, DBBL, and a Mobile Financial Service provider bKash in order to leverage their network and harness their services. Agrani Bank does not pass any commission that it receives from SESP and HSSP to the outsourced private bank (DBBL) which on its part is therefore compelled to charge 0.9% (90 Basis Points) service charge to the beneficiaries at the time of cash out. In case of SEQAEP, out of 2.5% that Agrani bank receives, it passes 0.9% to DBBL as a result of which the DBBL


10

does not charge beneficiaries at the time of cash out. SESIP is delivered through another MFS, bKash, to whom Agrani Bank does not share its commission with. However, bKash provides a free of charge cash out to the beneficiaries.

MIS and Data Digitization Both primary as well as secondary education have a database of beneficiaries and an MIS can be generated on demand. However, neither of the ministries or their respective Directorates own nor administer the database which still rests with the outsourced private company. The same has not been transferred to the Bangladesh Computer Council, that hosts the MIS for the SPBMU of the FD.

Primary Stipend

A contract has been signed1 between Rupali Bank and DPE towards affecting the delivery of stipend through mobile banking technology. Rupali Bank’s Technology Service Provider (TSP) Vendors’ brand name SureCash, have digitized approximately 10.10 million beneficiaries’ data and developed an MIS for managing these data. However, the digitized data as well as the MIS for PESP are stored at the server of the Vendor (SureCash) whereas the same ought to have been owned by the DPE / PESP. As per contract, Rupali Bank should install back up databank / store date at the DPE. However, the condition of having the backup of the data has not been fulfilled till date as a result of which the DPE / PESP has to largely depend on Rupali Bank and its TSP (SureCash) for managing the stipend programme. MoPME is working on the process of shifting the data to the Department / Project. However, it mentioned that once the data including the data of Pourashavas (Municipalities) is completed, actual shifting of data will take place.

Secondary Stipend

All the stipend programmes have a database of the beneficiaries that is in the possession of a private company hired for the purpose. The company provides ‘on demand’ data and information to the projects as and when needed by them. The updating of data for the purpose of effecting payments is also performed by this company. The Projects have no direct access or linkage to the database and hence they neither own it nor administer or manage it.

Stipend for Students with Disability

The database does not exist in any electronic or digital form. The data is manually captured and recorded in the manual registers of the department at Upazila level. No centralised database is available at the DSS Headquarter. The DDS however, informed that they are in the process of digitizing the database for all of their schemes,

C. Recommendations in Brief Program Design

• Size of Benefit: A mechanism should be developed for a periodic review to revise the benefitsize of PESP taking into account the increase in cost of living over the years. The NSSS alsomentions about the need for increasing the size of Primary Stipends. A similar mechanism forperiodic review of the size of secondary stipends and stipend for students with disabilityshould also be in place

• Harmonisation of Secondary Stipends: On Secondary Stipends, the recommendation of therecent study on harmonization of various secondary stipends titled ‘Comprehensive

1 Contract dated 22nd May, 2017 was for disbursement of stipend up to June 2017 with provision for extension of the contract for one more year with mutual consent.


11

Comparative Review of Bangladesh Secondary Education Stipend Projects / Programs’ conducted under the SESIP should be implemented.

Operation and Implementation

• PESP Operational Guidelines: An operational guideline encompassing end-to-end proceduresincluding data generation and maintenance, processes regarding updating and uploading ofdata of beneficiaries based on conditionalities of stipend, verification of data, monitoringguidelines, conceptual understanding and ease of usage of mobile banking for thebeneficiaries etc. should be issued by the DPE / PESP in view of the changes effected in thedelivery of PESP stipend. A similar Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) should be issued bythe Bank / Mobile Banks for seamlessly integrating the mobile banking with PESP.

• Compliance with Guidelines for Secondary Stipends: The secondary stipend projects /programmes must adhere to the guidelines in terms of targeting and its operations. Projectsshould strengthen monitoring in respect of selection of beneficiaries, enforcement ofconditionalities and disbursement of stipends. Similarly, the existing appeal mechanism forgrievances to the UNO under SESP should be enforced.

• Transferring PESP to Revenue Budget: PESP has been in existence for over a decade as aproject under Development Budget and fully funded by the GoB. The implementation of theproject currently faces many complications and delays associated with the procedure forrelease of funds under Development Budget and frequent breaks between the phases of theproject. An option to overcome those difficulties is to transfer the project to the RevenueBudget as an ongoing scheme of permanent nature. It would ensure timely availability offunds and consequently, payment of stipend to the beneficiaries in a seamless and predictablemanner. It is therefore recommended that the MoPME may initiate discussions with the FDand Planning Commission to transfer PESP into Revenue Budget.

• Monitoring of PESP: The monitoring needs to be strengthened at all levels, headquarter,districts and at field level. A dedicated outfit at the Headquarter level should be establishedfor monitoring of stipend programmes. The monitoring outfit should also evolve a formalmechanism for recording and addressing grievances.

• Data Ownership: Ownership and administration of the beneficiaries’ data and MIS of allstipend programmes should be transferred from private firms to the possession of theDirectorate / Project authorities as early as possible. Subsequently, the data of beneficiariesshould be moved from private firms and be hosted at the servers of the Bangladesh ComputerCouncil (BCC). Accordingly, the capabilities of the staff handling the MIS and delivery ofStipend should be enhanced.

• Adoption of Payment System Reform: The FD has developed a reform on payment systemthat benefits different stakeholders, the exchequer, the concerned line ministries as well asthe beneficiaries. The system is integrated with the MIS as well as NIDs of beneficiaries andremoves duplication, double dipping and other leakages. It works on minimizing thetransaction costs and time by providing greater efficiency and transparency. It also ensuresthat the money is withdrawn from the Treasury, only when the disbursement is due. Theamount of benefit gets directly credited (G2P) into the beneficiaries’ accounts without moneybeing accumulated at any intermediary level. It is therefore highly recommended that thisreform payment system should be adopted for PESP as well as other stipend programmes.Accordingly, MoPME, MoE and MoSW should initiate discussion with FD for implementationof the new payment system.

• Mobile Payments: It is recommended that SMS services including audio messages be sent tothe beneficiaries in Bangla script and language, wherever possible. Similarly, reminders should


12

be provided to the beneficiaries for cash-out. It is also recommended that only one SIM should be used by one mother/guardian despite having more than one child in the family. This recommendation is tenable for all stipends discussed in the report.

• Cost Reduction by Use of Technology: The direct cost of delivery for PESP should be broughtdown to a reasonable and sustainable level that matches the similar delivery methods adoptedby similar schemes. This could be further brought down by introducing competition amongstthe payment service providers. Ideally, the data digitization, updating and uploading should bethe responsibility of the Department and its field officials rather than being outsourced to thePayment Service Providers (PSPs).

• Training, Capacity Development and Communication/Awareness: Training courses shouldbe arranged on end to end processes including data generation and maintenance, processesregarding updating and uploading of data of beneficiaries based on conditionalities ofstipend, verification of data, monitoring guidelines, conceptual understanding and ease ofusage of mobile banking for the beneficiaries etc. at all levels of PESP including teachers ofschools, UEOs, AUEOs, DPEOs, Monitoring Officers, MIS team and other officials at field andheadquarter level. Similarly, a one-day orientation for SMC members, mothers, guardians,community leaders should be arranged in respective schools to improve their skills andknowledge about SMS, Wallet, Portal, filling KYC forms, preparation and correction of demandand disbursement lists etc mobile banking and delivery processes to beneficiaries. Publicityand awareness on rights and duties of the beneficiaries needs to be created towards receivingthe stipend amount. Necessary IT Equipment may be provided at the School and Upazila levelto meet the requirement of uploading the beneficiaries data for receiving stipends and tocope up with the new e – payment system requirements.

Dissemination Workshop

To discuss the findings and recommendations made in the diagnostic study, a dissemination workshop was held at the Ministry of Primary and Mass Education and was chaired by the Secretary, MoPME. The dissemination workshop was attended by officials of the Finance Division as well as three-line ministries (MoPME, MoE and MoSW) and their departments / projects engaged in the implementation of various stipend programs. The Workshop agreed broadly with the findings and recommendations of the study. The comments and suggestions made in the workshop have been appropriately addressed in this report. The Workshop also recommended to the Government for considering the suggestions made in the report for implementation. The proceedings / minutes of the workshop are provided as Annexure I to this report.


13

Chapter I. Backdrop and Overview 1.1 Backdrop to the Assignment A diagnostic study on stipend programmes was undertaken as a part of the mandated activities of Strengthening Public Financial Management for Social Protection (SPFMSP) Project being implemented by the Finance Division in association with 6 Line Ministries including Ministry of Primary and Mass Education (MoPME), Ministry of Education (MOE) and Ministry of Social Welfare (MoSW). The objective of this study was to undertake an in-depth, independent and comprehensive diagnostic on stipend programs belonging to the Ministries of Primary and Mass Education, Education and Social Welfare with a focus on Primary Education Stipend Project (PESP). The purpose of performing the diagnostic was to conduct an operational and financial analysis of the three programmes with central focus on identification of issues and challenges on the processes adopted for money flows from Ministry of Finance to the end beneficiaries under the PESP through multiple operational level and any challenges in transfer of moneys at different levels. The study provides evidence based recommendations for the improvement of the programme in terms of its objectives synchronizing with its features, the processes adopted for delivery mechanism in order to promote value for money by maximizing its efficiency and effectiveness in transferring stipends to the beneficiaries.

1.2 About the Study The objective of the study was to undertake an in-depth, independent and comprehensive diagnostic study on stipend programs with a focus on PESP and perform an operational and financial analysis of the scheme. This was done with a view to recommend improvement in scheme design (product), processes and implementation arrangements that promote economies of scale & scope, cost effectiveness, efficiency of operations and optimisation of resources. The study provides evidence-based concrete recommendations to improve design, eligibility, features, database of beneficiaries, delivery system, beneficiary selection if any, and efficiency of resource utilization that maximize Value for Money (VfM). Study focuses at exploring how financial allocations can be more meaningful and useful for the primary students’ stipend programme. Specifically, it focuses on the delivery mechanism including the payment system and how the beneficiary data could be used more efficiently to generate MIS and integrate into the Payment System. The Terms of reference for the Study are at Annexure II. of this report.

The study broadly covers three types of stipend programs of Bangladesh viz. Primary Education, Secondary Education and Stipend for Students with Disability with a focus on the Primary Education Stipend Project (PESP). While the PESP of the Ministry of Primary and Mass Education has an important role to play in the implementation of nation’s education policy, the National Social Security Strategy (NSSS) as well as the Hon. Finance Minister in his last budget speech, has strongly advocated for continuation of the scheme.

Graduating to the Secondary education, there are multiple stipend programs implemented by the Ministry of Education that aim at improving access to quality education and ensuring equity and equality at all levels of education. Equitable access to education implies ensuring additional conditional support for the poorest and most marginalised. Some important specific objectives of the stipend programme are to increase enrolment of students, ensure their retention in schools and reduce drop-out rate. The highest coverage of social security schemes during the school ages is mainly via the Primary and Secondary Student Stipends. The Ministry of Social Welfare implements the Stipend Program for Disabled Students that run through the Primary, Secondary and University level to provide assistance to the disabled students in their efforts to education.


14

On the basis of the findings of the diagnostic study a dissemination workshop was held at the Ministry of Primary Education on Thursday, 14th of December, 2017. The workshop was chaired by the Secretary, MoPME and attended by the senior officials of the FD, MoPME, DPE and PESP. The Workshop agreed broadly with the findings and recommendations of the study as presented. The comments made in the workshop have been appropriately addressed in this report. The Workshop also recommended to the Government for considering the suggestions made in the report for implementation. The proceedings / minutes of the workshop are provided as Annexure I to this report.


15

Chapter II. Methodology The methodology for the diagnostic study comprised a combination of primary and secondary surveys. On the primary side, it ranged from a wide variety institutional interviews to focused group discussions with the beneficiaries while on the secondary side, a literature / desk review of the existing documents and reports was performed for the stipend programmes.

2.1 Primary Surveys The Primary survey was confined to Institutional Interviews and Consultations with the officials of Line Ministries, relevant Departments, Project Offices, Banks and Other Financial Institutions at the central level and field visits to the Districts and Upazilas. During the filed visits, the team met School Headmasters, Teachers, Upazila Chairman as the Heads of the Upazila Education Committee, School Management Committees, Parents, Guardians, Students and other stakeholders.

2.1.1 Districts and Upazilas Visited The districts and Upazillas visited are shown in the map below:

Chart 2.1 Field Visit to Districts


16

A list of persons met during the study including that of field visits are at Annexure IV of this report. A set of questionnaires was developed for various stakeholders that were involved in the implementation process of different stipend programmes. The Questionnaires were developed for the Government officials at Field Level as well as that of Head Teachers. These questionnaires are produced at Annexure V of this report. Relevant officials and stakeholders were interviewed to get their perspectives on the design and improvements to be able to identify the gaps if any, in the perception and understanding amongst the officials at the LM, LD, Field Staff. Similarly, FGDs were performed with SMCs and Mothers / Guardians in five upazilas of three districts including ten schools.

2.2 Secondary Literature Review Besides the primary surveys mentioned above, secondary literature review including desk study of key documents of the GoB, relevant donors, and various reports were performed. A list of such documents so referred for the diagnostic study are at Annexure III of the report.

2.3 Limitations of Study It may be distinctly understood that the diagnostic study was neither an assessment of the stipend programmes nor was it an evaluation of any of the programme activities or projects. No quantitative analysis or survey has been performed. However, primary and institutional interviews were performed with relevant stakeholders and FGDs were performed with the SMCs and beneficiaries including the mothers / guardians of the children.


17

Chapter III. About the Stipend Schemes 3.1 Primary Education Stipend Project Primary Education Stipend Project is designed to provide conditional cash assistance through a stipend program to all eligible primary school students throughout Bangladesh in order to increase the enrolment rate among primary school-aged children; increase the attendance rate of primary school students and reduce the drop-out rate. In order to qualify for the stipend, selected students must maintain 85 percent monthly attendance, take up all the examinations of the school and attain a minimum of 33 percent marks in exams for each of the subjects of a class with certain exceptions. Students fulfilling these criteria are eligible to get BDT 100 per month for a single beneficiary in a family. Similarly, two children from the same family receive a total of BDT 200 per month whereas in case of three and four children from the same family, the stipend money is BDT 250 and BDT 300 pm month respectively. For pre-primary, each student receives BDT 50 PM. Within the purview of Primary Education, there are certain schools which have been expanded up to Grades VI-VIII for whom the stipend amount is BDT 125 for each pupil, 250 for 2 pupils per month.

3.1.1 Objectives, Jurisdiction and Design The Primary Education Stipend Project was originally designed to provide cash assistance to poor primary school pupils and their families throughout rural Bangladesh.

The objectives of the PESP are as follows:

- Increase the enrolment rate among primary school-aged children from poor families. - Increase the attendance rate of primary school pupils. - Reduce the dropout rate of primary school pupils. - Increase the cycle completion rate of primary school pupils. - Enhance the quality of primary education. - Ensure equity in the provision of financial assistance to primary school-age children. - Alleviate poverty. - Eradication of child labour. - Empowerment of women.

Originally, the targeted beneficiaries of the PESP were estimated to be 5.5 million pupils from the poorest households enrolled in eligible primary schools in all rural areas of Bangladesh (469 upazillas). At present (2016-17) as many as 11.1 million primary students are being covered through a Universal coverage where the stipend amount is paid to their mothers / guardians.

The PESP has the following jurisdiction: As per the Revised Development Project Proforma / Proposal (RDPP) for the PESP 3rd Phase, 2017, the primary schools eligible to participate in the PESP are:

- Government primary schools; - Government recognized independent Ebtedayee Madrassahs - High School attached Primary School - High Madrassahs attached independent of Ebtedayee Madrassahs - Primary Schools run by Shishu Kollyan (SKT) - Class VI to VIII opened in Primary Schools - Only the Government Primary Schools under MoPME and Idependent Ebtedayee Madrassahs

in City Corportaions and Municipality.


18

3.1.2 Selection Processes and Implementation Ever since the PESP has been made Universal in 2015-16, the processes for selection of beneficiaries has been done away with. However, the scheme has its own guidelines in the form of conditions for receiving the stipend as mentioned above.

In the past, identification of pupils from poorest families enrolled in grades 1-5 and their selection for participation in the PESP had been conducted at the school level, by the School Management Committees (SMC) with assistance from the head teachers. The list of proposed stipend recipients had subsequently been reviewed and approved by the Upazilla Education Officer (UEO) and countersigned by the Upazilla Nirbahi Officer (UNO). Currently, the PESP is intended to reach universal coverage of the primary education system in the country. The scheme is to reach all pupils that are estimated to be around 13 million, including that of Porusabh. Selection of the poorest pupils is thus not the criteria anymore. At the time of inception, Six State Owned Banks were designated to disburse the stipends on a quarterly basis to authorized parents/guardians on a pre-determined date at the local bank branch or at a temporary distribution post (“camp’) established at a convenient location within 5 Kilometers of the school site. Stipends would be disbursed to pupils’ parents or legal guardians who present the proper PESP bank-issued identity card. Preference had been given to issuing cards to the mothers of the selected pupil. The disbursement method has significantly changed since inception of the programme. Disbursement currently takes place through mobile banking i.e. through cell phones of the beneficiaries. Disbursement takes place through one State Owned bank, the Rupali Bank. The bank has composed a list of all beneficiaries, including their cell phone numbers to make disbursement possible. This particular dataset still resides with the bank, whereas the agreement between DPE and the bank clearly stipulates to preserve all data, Bank shall install backup data back / stores in DPE. Monitoring officers are posted at the district level to supervise the upazillas under him. Execution of the programme is carried out at upazilla level by the Upazilla Education Officer (UEO) and Assistant Upazilla Education Officers (AUEOs).

3.1.3 Fund Flow Government budget in Bangladesh has two parts: Revenue and Development. The former is concerned with current revenues and expenditures, concerning maintenance of normal priority and essential services, while the latter is prepared for development activities. Formulation of the two budgets follows different procedures. Their financing pattern and the delegated authorities of incurring expenditure in different tiers in them are also different. Development budget of the government of Bangladesh is a result of a continuous process of identifying new projects, preparing Development Project Proforma (DPP) and getting it approved by the Executive Committee of the National Economic Council (ECNEC). Stipends paid under the PESP program are under the Development head, unlike the other stipend programs for Disabled Students which is in the Revenue Head. The PESP was initiated under the Development Head in 2002-03. However, based on the continuity and perpetual nature of the program observed over the past two decades this ought to have got transferred into the Revenue Budget of the GoB once it was decided to have a permanent nature. Since the same has not been attained to this date, the complex processes for fund flow from the FD to the Project and up to the beneficiaries continue unabated as a result of which there are considerable difficulties and approvals required from different agencies that further delay the process.


19

Following flow chart depicts the flow of funds for the PESP

Chart 3.1 PESP Fund Flow for First 3 Quarters

Notes: 1. Total time required for the flow was found to be approximately 40 – 45 days2. Maximum time is consumed at the MOPME for processing of files may be because of different

queries, non-availability of desk officials and approving authority.3. For iBAS clearance DD, DPE and Additional Secretary of Ministry are the only two authorised

persons with password to get access into iBAS file. So in case of absence of any one of themeven approved proposal may get delayed.

4. CAO office takes a certain processing time and may make queries in the bills and sometimesdo not find clearance in their iBAS screen so they take longer time to pass the bill and issuethe cheque.

Approved breakup is entered into iBAS by DD, DPE which after matching is cleared by MOPME. Additional Secretary, MOPME and DD, DPE are the only authorised persons to get access into iBAS . Time=1-2 days or same day*

After receiving the cheque from CAO office the cheque is deposited in the account of PD, PESP ,Rupali Bank Branch , Green Road , Dhaka

Time=1 day

On the basis of the approval of release of fund from MOPME, PD submits a bill to CAO, MOPME for issuance of cheque in favour of PD, PESP. Time= 2 weeks

Individual beneficiary receives SMS in their mobile phone Wallet mentioning amount of stipend as e-money which he/she shows to local Sure cash agent who deliver cash money after transferring e-money to his Wallet from beneficiary’s Wallet sent from Mobile banking division of Rupali Bank, HO

After approval of the Annual and quarterly break up, MOPME sends it to DG, DPE and CAO of MOPME with a copy to PD, PESP Time= 3-4 weeks in MOPME

On the basis of Annual Development plan (ADP) PD PESP prepares detail break up of annual expenditure along with 1st quarter and sends to MOPME for approval

Time=1-2 days in PD office

From PD’s Green Road account stipend money is transferred to mobile banking division of Rupali Bank Head Office as and when required by PD, PESP

Time=1 day

Money is sent to the Wallet of individual Beneficiary as e-money directly from the Master Wallet of Mobile Banking Division Rupali Bank Head Office as per Instructions or requirement by PD, PESP.

Time= same day


20

Chart 3.2 Release of Fund for 4th Quarter

MOPME sends the proposal in a file to Finance Division (FD) for approval. FD gives approval in the file and sends back the file to MOPME

For 4th quarter PD, PESP sends proposal with detailed breakdown of the expenditure to MOPME for release of fund

Money is sent directly to beneficiaries Wallet from Master Wallet of Mobile Banking Division, Dhaka as and when directed by PD, PESP

Money is transferred from PD’s account directly to Mobile Banking Division of Rupali Bank, Head Office

Cheque received from CAO Office and deposited to the account of PD, PESP at Green Road Branch, Dhaka

After getting approval PD, PESP prepares bill and sends to CAO office for issuance of cheque in favour of PD, PESP

MOPME release the fund on the basis of approval of FD and sends approval letter to CAO, MOPME and PD, PESP


21

The release of funds in the first three quarters is a bit simplified compared to that in the last quarter. In the first three quarters, the MoPME releases the funds based on its budgetary availability, while in the last quarter the FD reviews the progress of the payments for previous quarters and accordingly approves the fund release on a need basis.

As the flow chart depicts, there have been considerable delays in transferring the stipend benefits to the students for various reasons mentioned in the flow chart above. However, one of the major reasons for the delay is the absence of timely preparation of the demand list at the field level. The demand list is prepared at the school level and is dependent on the conditionalities of the PESP such as a specific minimum percentage (85%) of attendance in a quarter and 33% pass marks in every exam. For genuine reasons identified by the authorities the clause of attendance is relaxed.

3.1.4 Delivery Process The Process of delivery of Stipends to the Beneficiaries for the PESP has been developed by the Rupali Bank through their TSP partner namely, Sure Cash. The system works through mobile banking where each beneficiary represented by their mother / guardian own a mobile wallet account where the money gets transferred to it. The process adopted for such transfer is briefly described below and is given in the so-called Clause GCC 17.3 of the Contract between DPE and Rupali Bank: Operational Procedures. The steps for disbursement of the stipend are as follows:

• PESP shall deposit total quarterly stipend in the Special Notice Deposit (SND) account 15 daysprior to communicating disbursement lists to the Bank

• Service charge will be counted on disbursed amount after successful disbursement• All stipend amount should be sent to beneficiaries mobile account• The beneficiaries shall open mobile account as per guidelines in the name of student’s

mother/father/legal guardians. The Banks will bear responsibility to open bank accountaccurately

• PESP will help the Banks in getting the KYC forms filled by the mothers / guardians foropening mobile bank accounts

• Concerned Head Teacher of the participating schools will introduce Mothers / legal guardiansto the bank during opening of mobile account pursuant to the contract and the project shallensure that mobile accounts so opened are for the actual legal guardians.

• Project party shall communicate the disbursement lists to the Bank 15 days prior to thedisbursement date.

• Project is responsible for accuracy of information provided in the disbursement lists• Bank is solely responsible to disburse stipend and for any technical reasons beneficiary fail to

get stipend then Bank will pay.• Bank after receiving stipend amount, service charges and accurate disbursement lists from

UEO, Bank shall take action to disburse stipend money to beneficiaries• Specific date of disbursement and the submission of disbursement report to project shall be

agreed mutually.• After disbursement of stipend to mobile accounts of beneficiaries the Bank shall within 7

working days provide the PESP with disbursement report.• Service charge of 2.50% against disbursed amount is net charge and excludes any taxes and

duties.• No fees will be charged from beneficiaries for withdrawal of stipend money• For any changes be deemed necessary would be considered during projects quarterly review

meeting.


22

• Banks will cover all expenses incurred for management of stipend including preparation ofdisbursement lists, collection of mobile accounts and filling KYC forms

• Banks to ensure payment to service provider, mobile operators, distributors, retail agents andother relevant agents

3.1.5 Budget, Costs and Coverage The following table provides a budgetary allocation and expenditure for the PESP for from 2010 – to 2015 – 16. It also provides the Budgetary allocation for the FY 2016 – 17.

Table 3.1 Budgetary Allocation, Expenditure and Costs for PESP (in Lakh Takas)

FY ADP

Allotment Stipend

Service Charges

VAT Total Other

Expenses Grand Total

Stipend as a % of Grand

Total

1 2 3 4 5 6 =

(3+4+5) 7

8 = (6+7)

9 = 3 as % of 8

2010-11 86500 82748 2069 482 85299 1136 86435 96%

2011-12 90000 86372 2160 323 88855 1109 89964 96%

2012-13 92500 88466 2212 332 91009 1227 92236 96%

2013-14 89848 86219 2155 323 88696 1102 89800 96%

2014-15 94000 90134 2253 338 92726 1149 93875 96%

2015-16 140000 134241 3356 503 138100 795 138895 97%

2016-17 140000 132897 3322 498 136717 1508 138226 96%

Source: Various Budget Documents for PESP

For the PESP, the amount of direct service charges paid to the bankers have been 2.5% over the last 7 years. The VAT charged as per rules is 15% over the service charges. However, other administrative expenses including Publicity, Awareness, Research and Equipment such as Computer Laptops, modems and other Miscellaneous is in the range of 1.25% to 1.5% of the Stipend amount paid. Thus, the total administrative and operational cost including the Direct Cost is in the range of 4% to 4.5% of the stipend distributed. However, this does not include cost of salaries, travel and establishment costs of the project. The table on PESP also depicts that almost 100% of the Budgetary Expenditure (ADP Allotment) has been utilized by the project.

Table 3.2 Coverage: Number of Beneficiaries and Expenditure Per Beneficiary

Fiscal Year Numbers Expenditure on Stipend in BDT

BDT (Amount) Per Beneficiary Per Year

2013-14 77,30,000 8621885000 1,115.38 2014-15 77,87,000 9013425000 1,157.50 2015-16 1,14,37,037 13424071000 1,173.74 2016-17 1,10,54,563 13289654000 1,202.19

Source: Various Budget Documents for PESP


23

At the time of introducing PESP in 2002-03, the coverage was 40% of the total Primary Students which was subsequently raised to 70% in 2008 based on Poverty criteria and has now been Universalized at 100% in the year 2015 – 16 with no means testing but with certain conditionalities as mentioned earlier.

3.1.6 Monitoring, Evaluation and Accountability There is a provision of a Monitoring Officer at the District level exclusively for PESP. Each district is assigned with one such officer who is supposed to visit at least 30 schools in a month.

The duties and responsibilities of the Monitoring Officer are as follows:

- To provide assistance to DPEO for smooth implementation of stipend programme - Ensure implementation of guidelines prepared for PESP at field level - Compilation of demand receipts from Upazila and forward the same to PD office - To supervise whether data and all information related to stipend project maintained and

recorded in the school in the fixed format - To visit once in a month in each Upazila and minimum thirty schools and submit report in a

fixed format and submit to PD office. In case of non-fulfilment of conditions for availing stipend to be reported after suspension of stipend facility.

- To report the problems that crops up during implementations of the stipend programme for primary education at field level. School included locally without complying conditions of the project to be reported after verification.

- To make a practical inquiry of the complains sent from PD office - To send the report to PD office with a request to bring the school under stipend programme.

in case of fulfilment of conditions by that school. - To submit a report after verifications of related files of Stipend programme at UEO office and

send the same to PD office at the end of each financial year.

3.2 Secondary Education Stipends The stipend program for the secondary education is administered and governed by the secondary and higher education division of the Ministry of Education under which, the Directorate of Secondary and Higher Education is currently implementing 04 (Four) projects / Program for providing stipend at the secondary level. They are Secondary Education Stipend Project 2nd phase (SESP), Secondary Education Quality and Access Enhancement Project (SEQAEP), Secondary Education Sector Investment Program (SESIP) and Higher Secondary Stipend Project (HSSP).

Stipends for grades VI-X are provided under three projects: SESP 2nd Phase, SEQAEP and SESIP, all three having complete separate jurisdiction in terms of upazilas. Stipends for grades XI-XII are provided under Higher Secondary Stipend Project (HSSP) throughout the country. These stipends are conditional cash transfers and distributed through mainly mobile banking channel. Beneficiaries are selected by the school-based committee on the basis of eligibility criteria under SESP and SESIP, while under SEQAEP on the basis of PMT method. The continuation of stipend is governed by 3 conditionalities – (1) Minimum attendance, (2) Passing in the annual examination and (3) Remaining unmarried till SSC/ Dhakil. HSSP contains similar features as SESP. SESP and HSSP are exclusively stipend programmes, while in case of SEQAEP and SESIP stipend is one of the components thereof. All these projects/program are restricted to the poorest children only. The overall objective of this stipend programme is to enhance access to education. Some important specific objectives of the stipend programme are to increase enrolment of students, ensure their retention in schools and reduce drop-out rate. It may be understood that a recipient of any secondary level stipend programme is not supposed to pay any tuition fee. In other words, the overall benefit available is a fee waiver along with


24

the stipend. However, all these 4 projects / program have its own system of target criteria, size of benefit and management.

3.2.1 Objectives SESIP: To realize increased access of students and retention in secondary education. The program is embedded in a larger effort to improve the quality of education.

SEQAEP: To ensure equitable access to education by providing stipends and incentives to economically poor girls and boys.

SESP: To increase student enrolment in secondary level institutions through continued financial assistance, prepare students with greater opportunities for self- employment for alleviation of poverty, increase the number of disabled learners in formal secondary education and promote women empowerment accelerating their role in socio-economic development.

HSSP: To encourage pro-poor students to study more: 40% of the total female and 10% of the total male enrolment at HSC level (Grade XI and Grade XII). Encouraging more male and female students to study in science group at HSC levels by providing them incentives at an enhanced rate. Reducing population growth rate: by ensuring non-marriage of the stipend recipients students up to HSC level. Education for Women Empowerment and reducing gender disparity.

3.2.2 Conditionalities Stipends for grades VI-X are provided under three projects/programme: SESP 2nd Phase, SEQAEP and SESIP having complete separate jurisdiction in relation to upazila. Again, stipends for grades XI-XII are provided under Higher Secondary Stipend Project (HSSP) throughout the country. These stipends are conditional cash transfers and distributed through mainly mobile banking channel. Beneficiaries are selected by the school-based committee on the basis of eligibility criteria under SESP and SESIP, while under SEQAEP on the basis on PMT method. The continuation of stipend is governed by 3 conditionalities –

a. Minimum attendance,b. Passing in the annual examination andc. Remaining unmarried till SSC/ Dhakil.

HSSP contains similar features just like SESP. Moreover, irregular students will not be provided stipend and other assistances from the project. If there is any break up to grade –XII it will be treated irregular.

3.2.3 Selection Process The programs differ from one another in its selection process. A very significant difference is the way the selection process is organized. Three projects (SESIP, SESP and the HSSP) organize this process through the pro-poor selection method, the fourth project, the SEQAEP uses the Proxy Means Testing methodology. The difference in selection method is perhaps the most crucial difference among the programs. Success in targeting the poor and enabling them to partake in the programs for the most part depends on sheer compliance of guidelines of selection process and the validity of this procedure. The programmes have been summarized in Table 3.3 below. As can be seen from table, the objectives of the 4 programs are similar. All are concerned with increasing enrolment in schools / Madarshas / Colleges, realizing retention and possibly improvement in academic achievements. The programs, also, do not differ in terms of the outcomes and impact that are expected to be achieved as these are in line with the objectives as set for them. Lastly, three of the programs have almost identical stipend rates, those programs aimed at classes VI thru X. The HSSP program, targeting classes XI and XII, has somewhat higher stipend rates.


25

Table 3.3 Overview of Stipend Programs for Secondary Education

Parameters SESIP SEQAEP SESP HSSP

Objectives Realize increased access of students and retention in secondary education. The program is embedded in a larger effort to improve the quality of education

Ensuring equitable access to education by providing stipends and incentives to economically poor girls and boys;

Realizing and fostering student’ enrolment in secondary level. Preparing students with greater opportunities for employment. Realizing decrease in poor student (boys & girls) dropout rate. Increasing the number of disabled learners in formal secondary education.

Encouraging the pro-poor students to study more: 40% of the total female and 10% of the total male enrolment at HSC level (Grade XI and Grade XII) Encouraging more male and female students to study in science group at HSC levels by providing them incentives as an enhanced rate. Reducing population growth rate: by ensuring non-marriage of the students up to HSC level Education for Women Empowerment Reducing gender disparity

Expected results and outputs

Covering Schools and Madrasahas of 54 selected Upazilas under 17 districts of the country and approximately 1399000 Secondary school level students over a period of 4 years (Class VI – X) and for SSC and Dakhil Examinations. This is over the period January 2014 – December 2017. The target group is the secondary and its equivalent level boys and girl students who come from different types of poor families. The yearly stipend rate is as follows: BDT 1380: Class 6 and class 7 BDT 1680: Class 8. BDT 2280: Class 9. BDT 3510: Class 10

SEQAEP is to target female and male students of secondary schools, and Dhakhil Madrasha of 250 Upazila. The program is to last until December 2017

The yearly stipend rate is as follows: 1500:class 6 1800:class 7 2220:class 8 2760:class 9 3510:class 10

SESP provided 35,32,312 students financial help in the three years’ period of July 2014- June 2017. # upazillas 183 The yearly stipend rate is as follows: 1380:class 6 1380:class 7 1620:class 8 2040:class 9 2790:class 10

HSSP provided stipends and other financial supports to 15,87,000 over the period of 3 years from July 2014 to June 2017 covering 7241 Institutions. The monthly rate of stipend for HSC Science group is Tk. 175 per student. They receive also TK 700 for buying books and TK 900 as examination fees The monthly rate of stipend for other (Business Studies & Humanities) groups is Tk. 125 per student and Tk. 600 per student for buying books as well as Tk. 600 as examination fees. The tuition fee is set Tk. 50 per student to be paid to non-government institutions.

Activities Selection process according to the pro-

Selection process according to the

Selection process according to the

Selection process according to the pro-


26

Parameters SESIP SEQAEP SESP HSSP

poor methodology Disbursement process predominantly thru mobile banking Financial management and M&E

Proxy Means Testing methodology Disbursement process predominantly thru mobile banking Financial management and M&E

pro-poor methodology Disbursement process predominantly thru mobile banking Financial management and M&E

poor methodology Disbursement process predominantly thru mobile banking Financial management and M&E

Inputs 2016-2017 in TK (ADP Only)

BDT 51,31,48,000 BDT 308,72,64,000

BDT 2,08,93,90,000

BDT 1,52,11,76,000

Results/ Outputs as realized to date

Over the school years 2014 and 15 stipends have been issued to 4, 94, 634 students, roughly 20 percent of the target of 1,399,000 that was set for the SESIP project.

Till June 2015, a total 78,62,891 was reached against target of the project, 90,23,000 (87%).

Stipends have been issued to 35,32,312 students from July 2014 to June 2017

15,87,000 Stipend have been issued till 2016-2017 against set target of three years of the project, 17,28,000

Expected outcomes and impact

Increased enrolment and retention of students; improved academic achievement; prevention of early marriage of female students .

Increased enrolment and retention of students; increased enrolment of students; improved academic achievement; prevention of early marriage of female students

Increased enrolment and retention of students; increased enrolment of students; improved academic achievement; prevention of early marriage of female students

Retention of students Enrollment of students academic achievements prevention of early marriage of female students students continuing in higher education

3.2.4 Budget and Costs Amongst the Secondary Programs, SESP, HSSP and SEQAEP are the projects whereas SESIP is a Program. However, all these stipends are under the Development Head. SEQAEP and SESIP are funded by donor World Bank and ADB respectively along with the contribution from the GoB.

The Budget depicted in the following tables pertains to Revised Annual Development Program (RADP) till 2016 – 17, whereas the Budgetary allocations for 2017 – 18 are the annual budgetary estimates expressed in BDT. The amount for 2017 – 18 is likely to be upwardly revised in accordance with the need of the project / program. The expenditure shall naturally be known only after the end of the fiscal year. The Budget, Costs, Total Expenditure, Utilization rate as well as the size of benefit and Coverage for the various stipend programs are provided below.


27

Table 3.4 Budget and Expenditure – Secondary Education Stipend Project (SESP)

(Amount in BDT)

Fiscal Year

Revised Annual

Development Program (RADP)

Stipend and Exam Fee

Tuition Fee Total Administrative

Cost Grand Total

% Utilization

2014-15 2,38,29,00,000 1,64,32,82,000 20,86,53,000 1,85,19,35,000 32,88,77,000 2,18,08,12,000 92%

2015-16 2,45,00,00,000 1,81,27,98,000 22,80,57,000 2,04,08,55,000 26,57,55,000 2,30,66,10,000 94%

2016-17 2,33,60,00,000 1,85,45,59,000 23,48,31,000 2,08,93,90,000 24,21,42,000 2,33,15,32,000 100%

2017-18 1,09,03,00,000 Note: Figure for 2017 – 18 is Budget Estimate and does not provide Revised figure

Table 3.5 Budget and Stipend Expenditure – Secondary Education Sector Investment Program (SESIP)

(Amount in BDT)

Fiscal Year Revised Annual

Development Program (RADP) on Stipend

Expenditure on Stipend Utilization

2013-14 227500000 206932890 90.96% 2014-15 461300000 453215120 98.25% 2015-16 540000000 522262670 96.72% 2016-17 571627000 513148000 89.77% 2017-18 735000000 NA NA

Note: Figure for 2017 – 18 is Budget Estimate and does not provide Revised figure

Table 3.6 Budget and Expenditure – SEQAEP

(Amount in BDT)

Fiscal Year RADP

Expenditure on Stipend

Admin / Other Expenses

Total Expenditure

Admin as % of Total

% Utilization of RADP

2014-15 4402400000 2,66,79,49,000 1,25,01,48,000 3,91,80,97,000 32% 89%

2015-16 7175500000 4,97,70,66,000 2,18,93,96,000 7,16,64,62,000 31% 100%

2016-17 6304400000 3,08,72,64,000 2,77,60,86,000 5,86,33,50,000 47% 93%

2017-18 3664600000

Table 3.7 Budget and Expenditure Higher Secondary Stipend Project (HSSP)


28

Amount in BDT

Fiscal Year

RADP Stipend Tuition Fee Examination

Fee Book

Purchase Total

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7=3+4+5+6)

2014-15 1,50,80,71,000 88,84,72,000 24,72,68,000 14,69,11,000 16,54,88,000 1,44,81,39,000

2015-16 1,50,00,00,000 83,46,68,000 27,07,49,000 17,52,84,000 17,86,38,000 1,45,93,39,000

2016-17 1,57,00,00,000 89,32,76,000 27,18,00,000 17,10,00,000 18,51,00,000 1,52,11,76,000

2017-18 49,87,00,000 Cont’d

Fiscal Year

RADP Expenditure (as 7 above)

Administrative Cost Grand Total % Utilization

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5=3+4) (5 as % of 1) 2014-

15 1,50,80,71,000 1,44,81,39,000 3,38,52,000 1,48,19,91,000 98% 2015-

16 1,50,00,00,000 1,45,93,39,000 3,75,01,000 1,49,68,40,000 100% 2016-

17 1,57,00,00,000 1,52,11,76,000 4,01,77,000 1,56,13,53,000 99%

Table 3.8 Number of Beneficiaries, Benefit Size and Total Budget for All Stipends

Fiscal Years

Programs Number of

Beneficiaries Benefit Size Total Budget

FY 2017-18

SESP 17,16,418 100/120/150 10903,00,000 HSSP 6,02,000 125/175 49,87,00,000 SEQAEP 18,68,005 100/125/160/180/200 366,46,00,000 SESIP 4,01,494 100/125/170/210 73,50,00,000

FY 2016-17

SESP 11,34,453 100/120/150 233,60,00,000 HSSP 5,66,000 125/175 157,00,00,000 SEQAEP 18,68,005 100/125/160/180/200 630,44,00,000 SESIP 2,98,834 100/125/170/210 57,16,27,000

FY 2015-16


FY 2014-15


FY 2013-14

SESP 12,28,000 100/120/150 273,00,00,000 HSSP 4,01,703 125/175 112,00,00,000

SEQAEP 10,04,350 100/125/160/180/200 493,78,00,000

SESIP 2,04,000 100/125/170/210 22,75,00,000


29

3.3 Stipends for Students with Disabilities The stipend program for the students with Disability is administered and governed by the Ministry of Social Welfare and is implemented by the Department of Social Services under the Ministry. To encourage the children with disabilities to enrol in the educational institution, the Government has introduced stipend programme for the students with disability. The Government has allocated Taka 545 Million in the FY 2017-2018 for this programme to the Ministry of Social Welfare and the responsibility for its implementation has been assigned to Department of Social Services (DSS) with a view to mainstreaming students with disabilities. Approximately, 80,000 students with disabilities of various institutions shall be receiving stipend. Monthly stipend for disabled students at the primary school level is Tk 500/-, for secondary school level is Tk.600/-, higher secondary level is Tk. 700/- and University level (graduation and above) is Tk. 1200/-.

3.3.1 Objectives Process The stipend programme for students with disabilities has as its objectives the following:

• To ensure commitment by GOB to ensure the rights of person with disabilities• Enrol children with disabilities in education with the stipend as an incentive• Main streaming of the disabled children in the educational Institutions and• Provide equal opportunities to increase enrolment

3.3.2 Eligibility – Individuals and Institutions Entitled to the stipends are students with disabilities in the following areas

1. Hearing2. Visual3. Speech4. Physical5. Intellectual6. Autism

The persons with above disabilities are identified and selected as beneficiaries of stipends provided by the Department of Social Welfare, GOB. Eligible institutions are the following:

• Social Welfare Ministry controlled educational Institutions• All Government and Non-Govt. Primary Schools and Secondary Schools• Government and Non-Govt. Colleges• Govt, recognised Madrasa• Government recognised Medical Colleges• Public and Govt. Recognised Universities• Government recognised Technical Education Institutions• Govt. Recognised private/NGO run schools

3.3.3 Selection Criteria and Process Important selection criteria are:

- Must be citizen of Bangladesh and have a disability as defined by GOB law - Priority is given to poor students, students that are homeless, landless, orphaned

distressed, tribal. - Students affected by natural calamities, acid burns or any other reasons


30

- Priority is given to students studying in Institutions controlled and run by Social Welfare Department/National disable Welfare Foundation.

- Students in primary, secondary and tertiary education are eligible to receive stipends.

The selection process is as follows:

- Interested students with disability can apply for stipend using prescribed form to Upazila Welfare Officer at Upazila level and at District and City level to City Social welfare officer;

- The Upazila /District Social Welfare officer with the help of teachers/education officer verifies this information as provided;

- The Upazila Selection Committee at Upazila Level and District /Metropolitan City selection at City/ district level eventually approve candidates by examining their applications and ensure their stipends.

The following conditionalities apply

- Registration with ID in District Social Welfare Office - Income of guardian less than 36000/00 - Attendance rate in school minimum 50% - Enrolled student must participate in all examinations and pass annual exam. - Must reside in the catchment area of the school attending

Termination of the stipend will occur due to

- Three Months of Continuous absence in the classroom - Non-participation in the exam without valid reason - Return to normalcy from disability.

There are awareness programmes conducted by the Social Welfare Department at field level to identify and attract disable persons and their families to inform them of their rights to get the benefit provided by the Government.

3.3.4 Budget, Benefit Size and Coverage In table 4 below data are given in relation to the budget as allocated and the number of students receiving this stipend. As already indicated, the budget reserved for this and the number of students receiving this is rather low. The number of students with disabilities in the country is likely to be higher.


31

Table 3.9 Coverage, Benefit Size and Budgetary Expenditure on Stipends for Students with Disability

Fiscal Years

Primary School Students Secondary School Students

Numbers

Benefit Size

(BDT) Total Budget

(BDT) Numbers

Benefit Size

(BDT) Total Budget

(BDT) FY 2017-18 50000 500 300000000 21000 600 151200000 FY 2016-17 45000 500 270000000 16000 600 115200000 FY 2015-16 35000 500 210000000 16000 600 115200000 FY 2014-15 25000 300 90000000 16000 450 86400000 FY 2013-14 14517 300 52261200 3600 450 19440000

Fiscal Years

Higher Secondary Students University / Advance Students

Numbers

Benefit Size

(BDT) Total Budget

(BDT) Numbers

Benefit Size

(BDT) Total Budget

(BDT) FY 2017-18 6000 700 50400000 3000 1200 43200000 FY 2016-17 6000 700 50400000 3000 1200 43200000 FY 2015-16 6000 700 50400000 3000 1200 43200000 FY 2014-15 6000 600 43200000 3000 1000 36000000 FY 2013-14 1418 600 10209600 947 1000 11364000


32

Chapter IV. Assessment of the PESP

This chapter focuses an assessment of the PESP on the observations from the field as well as analysis of the available data and information. While the focus of the assessment is on PESP, it also provides a brief assessment of the other stipend programs.

4.1 Program Objectives An assessment of program objectives has been performed on the basis of Enrolment Rates, Attendance Rates, Dropouts, Completion Cycle and Survival Rates. We have largely used the datasets provided at the Annual Sector Performance Reports, 2013, 14,15 and 2016 and Annual School Census Reports published by the MoPME.

By and large the scheme has been found to be successful in contributing along with other interventions for increasing the enrolment and attendance rates, improvement in completion cycle and a reduction in the dropouts for the Primary students. Following graphs are self-explanatory to understand the success of the project in terms of various indicators.

Enrolment Rates: Various measures have been taken up since independence in the primary education subsector to bring all school age children to schools among them enactment of Primary Education Act ,Food for Education Programme (FFE) in 1993, gradual increase of infrastructural facilities at Schools, free text book distribution, placement of qualified and trained teachers at schools etc are very important factors that have boosted up the participations of school age children in Primary schools.. Along these broad policy matters Bangladesh initiated an extra but innovative effort targeting poor households all over the country to send their children to school by providing cash incentives replacing Food for Education Programme. The cash based incentive Primary Education Stipend Project (PESP) introduced in 2002 – 03 and later extended under various phases with a view to increase educational participation in the area of enrolment, attendance, retention, persistence and avoid drop out covering the whole country made a big impact on the families of rural poor in Bangladesh.

Various reports revealed that there have been a big achievement in the primary education sector during the year 1990 and 2011 particularly in school enrolment and narrowing gender gap. The graph below reflects that enrolment rose from 60.48 % to 97.96% between 1990 and 2016. It appears that enrolment rate has been rising steadily since 2008 due to effective coverage of Primary Education Stipend Project which is a now (2016 – 17) universal covering all children of the country.

From a low rate of 60.48 in 1990, the enrolment rate grew to 87.5 by 2005 and then steadily increased to 97.96 in 2016 after seeing a peak of 98.7 in the year 2011.


33

Graph 4.1 Enrolment Rates for Past Three Decades

Attendance Rates: Attendance is one of the best indicators to measure the performance of the school in terms of their children continuation in the school. One of the conditions through PESP educational benefits is expected to transmit among the beneficiary families is the maintenance 85% attendance at schools by the recipients in order to continue to receive the stipend. The broad objective of the stipend programme is to motivate and create interest among the poor population the great majority of them live in the rural areas of the country to participate and get easy access to education. The introduction of FFE and PESP is not only an incentive but also act as an opportunity for poor families to participate in primary education through receiving regular cash incentives. In order to qualify for the stipend enrolled students must maintain attendance at school to enjoy the stipend. Most parents of the rural areas are poor and illiterate but their strong belief that education can change socio-economic conditions of their poverty stricken families. So, sending children school and ensuring their regular attendance lies greatly on the attitudes and behaviour of parents and guardians of enrolled children. The children have now more school oriented and parents particularly mothers have become guide to monitor attendance and performance of their children in the school because absenteeism leads to suspension of stipend money. The sharp rise of 83.5% in the year 2010 from 67% in 2005 now stabilising slowly to around 87% is a clear sign of maintaining attendance in the primary schools is largely due to effective continuation and management of stipend programme in the country.

Directorate of Primary Education reported2 that attendance rate has been significantly increased from 2000 to 2012 and may be attributed to the stipend and school feeding programme. In a FGD with SMC members, community members, Mothers/Guardians clearly indicates the systematic and regular contribution cash incentives significantly contributes to the reduction of dropout rate by regulating family members even at lowest economic level towards the need of sending their children to classroom. As the graph below suggest, the rate has been growing steadily since 2005 and also reiterates the fact that the conditionalities for stipend have been well received by the students.

2 (ASPR-2013).

60.48

75.7580.86

85.83 87.290.9 91.1 90.8 93.9 94.89

98.7 96.7 97.3 97.7 97.7 97.96

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1990 1995 1997 2000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Perc

enta

ges

Year

Enrolment Rates for Past Three Decades


34

Graph 4.2 Attendance Rates for Primary Students

Drop Out Rate: Dropout rates as reflected in the graph below from the year 2005 – 2016 shows that the gradual decrease from 50.5 in 2006 to 19.2 in 2016 is quite remarkable. The role of PESP in reducing the dropout rates is also reiterated in a study of BIDS in 2015. It mentions that PESP recipients students dropout ranges from 3-16% in relation to Non-PESP where the rate is 21%. It is therefore creditable on part of PESP to contribute to the rural poor participation in primary education. Dropout rates as depicted below are inverse to the Enrolment rates.

Graph 4.3 Dropout Rates for Primary Education

Dropout factors have a strong relation to poverty level of the large scale rural poor people and social and family pressure for child marriage. In a country like Bangladesh the tendency of poor families is usually to engage their grown-up children in family work or join a work force to earn for supporting basic needs. One of the objectives of the PESP is to address the traditional concern of dependency on child labour by providing incentives to poor families to prioritize school over earning money has now gained momentum to attract common people to education. Now bringing children in the school and

67 67.7

83.5 85.1 86 86.3 86.7 86.9

0102030405060708090

100

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Perc

enta

ges

Years

Primary Education Attendance Rates

47.250.5 50.5 49.3

45.139.8

29.726.2

21.4 20.9 20.4 19.2

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Perc

enta

ge

Years

Primary Education Dropout Rates


35

retaining them in the school is becoming a challenge for the Government so that they do not dropout from the primary cycle of education.

Cycle Completion Rates: The Primary completion cycle is the cohort of pupils who get enrolled in grade I and complete grade V. The measure of cycle completion from primary school is the success in passing PECE. Graph trend shows that cycle completion rate has risen since from 52.8 in 2005 to 79.6 in 2016. Graph shows that there was a low trend during the period between years 2006-2009. The increased number of attendance and reduction of dropout are important factors which are related to the cash incentives of stipend money provided to beneficiaries, contributing greatly to the completion of cycle of primary education. The other important factor envisaged by DPE report is the introduction of Primary Education Completion Examination (PECE). Prior to 2009, it was school based passing year end final examination.

Graph 4.4 Completion Cycle for Primary Education

Graph 4.5 Cycle Completion and Survival Rates

52.8 49.5 49.5 50.7 54.960.2

70.3 73.878.6 79.1 79.6

0102030405060708090

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Perc

enta

ge

Years

Primary Education Completion Cycle

5350 50 51

5560

7074

79 79 80 81

53 50 5255

60

67

8075

81 81 81 82

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Perc

enta

ge

Years

Cycle Completion V/s Survival Rates

Cycle Completion Rate Survival Rate


36

Graph shows that the Survival Rate to Grade V increased rapidly from 52.9% in 2005 to 79.5% in 2011 and dropped in 2012 (75.3). This increase in Survival Rate to Grade V is important as it signals a considerable increase in commitment to keeping children in school right up to Grade V. This may owe to the introduction of the new Primary Education Completion Examination (Terminal Examination). This perhaps provide an additional incentive for parents to retain their children in school in Grade V so that they have a chance of taking and passing these exams. More research is needed to establish whether the apparent increase in survival rates is an accurate reflection of the situation and if so, what the main factors drove these changes.

To sum the argument, the following chart captures in a nutshell, the success story of the PESP in terms of the key indicators mentioned earlier.

Table 4.6 Parameters of Success for PESP

As has become clear from the literature overview on the effectiveness of stipend programs in Bangladesh, furthermore, the programmes appear to have an effect on enrolment and drop-out. Enrolment increases, especially of girls, and drop-out decreases. Influence on the quality of education has not been established.

International experience and research on financial incentives to encourage students to attend school and to improve their academic achievement, graduation rates, and other outcomes show similar findings as the ones found in Bangladesh (Slavin, R.E. 2009). Conditional cash transfers programmes in developing countries have found positive effects on attendance in large-scale randomized experiments, and this has encouraged similar initiatives throughout the world. Research in developing countries has found that providing families with significant financial incentives increases secondary students’ attendance and reduces drop-out. Effects on graduation rates and on actual learning are less well documented and cannot be established.

4.2 Adequacy, Relevance and Effectiveness of the Benefit Package The package of BDT 100.00 under the PESP was fixed in the year 2002 and has not changed since then, despite the real value going down to almost half by the year 2017 – 18. Assuming an average Inflation rate of 7% PA, the value of BDT 100 in the year 2008 has gone down to BDT 50.83 by the year 2017 (PVIF, 7%, 10 Years).

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2 0 0 5 2 0 0 6 2 0 0 7 2 0 0 8 2 0 0 9 2 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 2 0 1 2 2 0 1 3 2 0 1 4 2 0 1 5 2 0 1 6

PERC

ENTA

GE

YEARS

PESP - PARAMETERS OF SUCCESS

Enrolment Rate Completion Cycle

Attendance Rates Dropout Rates


37

During the field visits, many of the mothers / guardians reported that the stipend size of BDT 100 was inadequate and that they wanted the same to be revised upward. Some of them also mentioned that the size has been kept at the same level for more than 10 years and hence does not meet the requirement in the current times.

4.2.1 Real Value Does the benefit package still meet the needs of beneficiaries? Does it adequately address financial barriers to accessing education? Does it have intended impacts on the quality and quantity of services provided?

A direct answer to this question is that the package is not sufficient. The field visits, the FGD with SMC, parents / guardians, mothers and students revealed that the amount of stipend money is not adequate. The FGDs, furthermore, revealed that value of money has declined compared to the past. Some of the beneficiaries also mentioned that due to higher cost of educations trend of child labour may increase causing further drop out in the schools among the poorest community.

Following chart depicts the real value of the Primary Stipend under various discounting rates:

Graph 4.7 Real Value of PESP Benefit Size

Our calculations reveal that adjusting for inflation, the real value of a primary stipend that was fixed in the base year 2002 at BDT 100 stands at BDT 36.24 in 2017. In terms of rice equivalents, the real value of this amount of money had declined from 7 kg of rice to 3.7 kg between 2003 and 2013 itself. By both measures, the value of the primary stipend has declined to less than half since it was introduced in 2002. The stipend should have kept up with inflation or at least revised from time to time. Furthermore, as has become clear from the interviews with officials at upazilla level and the FGDs with beneficiaries the stipend now does not have the desired influence on the quality of education, it does have an influence on preventing drop-out and increasing enrolment to a certain extent.

4.2.2 Conditionalities It was revealed by the parents during the discussions that there were big challenges in maintaining conditionality of 85% attendance and 33% pass marks in the exams. It was also found that there was

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Amou

nt in

BDT

Years

PESP - Benefit Size in Real Value

Rate 6% (BDT 42) Rate 7% (BDT 36)Rate 8% (BDT 32)


38

some pressure from guardians / community on the schools to waive of the conditions in case of failure by students to meet conditions of attendance and pass marks. It was also observed that there were attitudinal as well as qualitative change in the mindset of common people about the needs of education. This however, may not be ascribed only to the fulfilment of condtionality and may have much greater ramifications.

Further it was also observed that

- Increased commitment of the community to send their children to schools; - All rural mothers are taking care and showing responsibility about their children’s education - Rural women are now more aware and empowered to deal with the educational challenges of

their children even at lowest economic level.

The operations both, in terms of manual recording and calculation as well as technology driven uploading of data for selection of beneficiaries on the basis of conditionalities was found to be time consuming, cumbersome and costly. On an average this process eliminates some of the students who fail to fulfil the conditions and hence are deprived of the stipend. However, in the bargain, the executive time of Teachers and Officials consumed for such operations does not commensurate with the savings that might take place for distribution of stipend. Thus, it could be a debatable point if the GoB might want to continue with these conditions. Discussions with stakeholders also suggested that the parents were sending their wards to the school with the primary objective of securing a quality education rather than merely getting paid BDT 100 PM. In such cases, parents would still continue to send their wards to the school and the children would continue to improve on their attendance and pass the exams even if there was no such pressure to perform for the stipend.

In some areas where industrial activities were more prominent and had penetratingly spread, guardians were found to be showing interest to engage their kids to work for more earnings which also would affect the attendance and hence may not meet the conditionalities.

To sum up the assessment, many parents opined that they regularly send their wards to the school not merely to fulfil the conditions of the stipend but primarily to secure a quality education with or without picking up BDT 100 PM. However, there is no research or evidence to conclude that the attendance and exam marks will not be adversely affected if the conditions were removed.

4.3 Analysis of Budget and Cost Almost 95% of the Budgetary allocations have been used for the purpose of Stipend itself, while just about 5% cost has been spent of direct administration. Interestingly, while the stipend delivery mechanism has switched over from the mode of physical cash payment involving banks to physically distribute cash to a more efficient, cost effective and scalable model of transfers through mobile banking, the PESP could not bring down the direct cost of transfers to the beneficiaries. Post universalisation, with a scalable model of e-transfers effected through mobile banking mode, this cost ought to have been brought down substantially but still remains at the same level of that of manual transfers, despite no physical distribution by the banks. We now further analyse the costs as below.

4.3.1 Administrative Costs The analysis of budgetary expenditure pattern reveals that while the cost of delivery of the PESP stipend is within an overall range of 4 - 5%, the same would largely depend on the efficiency of operations within the system. Approximately 70% of this delivery cost constitutes service charges including VAT paid to banks. However, this does not take into account the salaries and overheads of the Department including indirect costs associated with the PESP delivery. This number would certainly rise the moment establishment costs and overheads are accounted and take into account the


39

salaries and overheads of the Department including indirect costs associated with the PESP delivery. Monitoring cost (for monitoring officers posted in each district) is included in the overall budget of PESP. However, discussions with the project team revealed that budget does not or insufficiently cover management of the scheme at local level. Similarly, there is an insufficient budget for monitoring of the scheme at central level and hence oversight of the scheme at local government level is weak.

While the introduction of mobile banking has increased efficiency to some degree, but teething problems are yet to be resolved. The study found that the existing operational processes of PESP require positive interventions by the Directorate of Primary Education for improving efficiency and effectiveness. The assessment finds that there is significant room for improving various processes involved in the delivery of stipends.

Graph 4.8 PESP Expenditure Analysis

The chart above clearly depicts that while the amount of stipend increased with the Universalization in 2015 – 16, the cost of Service Charges also increased proportionately. While the manual transfers were switched over to the Electronic Transfers in 2016 -17, the cost of transfers as a percentage of Stipends remained Unchanged at around 2.5 – 3% levels.

The Secondary Education Stipends, other than SEQAEP have a transfer cost of 1.0%. SEQAEP however, has a cost of delivery of 2.5%. On further investigation it was found that due to compulsions of involving a State Owned Bank, the cost to the GoB is much higher than the effective cost to the agency that is effecting the payments. In the current situation, Ministry of Secondary Education is engaging only with the State Owned banks for cash transfers, although officially there is no such restriction in place. Both HSSP and SESP could have directly entered into an agreement with DBBL but somehow they are under the impression that they could only have such agreements with public sector banks. Bangladesh Bank, however, denied posing any restriction to any government entity in this regard. There is practically no role for Agrani Bank in the whole arrangement of delivery of stipend but they still receive the fees for rendering the service. They do not pass on any fee or charges to the DBBL.

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

160000

2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17

BDT

Years

Expenditure Analysis of PESPStipend (96%)

Serv. Char inc VAT (3%)

Others (1%)

Linear (Stipend (96%))


40

Box 1: Stipend Payment through Mobile Banking HSSP was the first programme to use mobile bank facilities. HSSP signed an agreement with Agrani Bank on 07/06/2015 allowing it to use mobile banking to distribute the stipends. Agrani Bank signed an agreement with the Dutch-Bangla Bank Ltd (DBBL) on 23/06/2015 for obtaining their mobile phone bank facilities. A list of stipend recipients, their mobile phone numbers, and their stipend entitlement was handed over to the DBBL through Agrani Bank with copy to USEO. The letter to the Agrani Bank/DBBL mentions the date of fund transfer with a copy to USEO with instructions to supervise the disbursal of stipend amounts to the students. Students are also instructed to forward any complaint about non-receipt of stipend.

Upon receipt of information regarding transfer of stipend money along with a PIN code, the student may withdraw it from the nearest branch of the DBBL, withdraw the amount from an ATM booth of DBBL using their PIN code number, or visit an agent of the DBBL and receive money after showing their phone message and the PIN code. After disbursement is complete, DBBL sends a transaction report to the Agrani Bank. Agrani Bank reconciles its stipend account and sends a reconciliation report to the Project Director of the Programme. The bank is paid only 1% commission for the service provided.

4.3.2 Demand Generation for Payment Operationally, the demand for distribution of PESP stipends is generated at the school level and compiled by the UEOs on the basis of conditions being fulfilled by the students. This information is provided to the UEOs by the schools. This demand is uploaded on the servers that belong to the bankers / SureCash (http://pesp.surecashbd.com/accounts/login/?next=/). The project office has access to this primary demand through a terminal provided in his office and not GoB.

4.3.3 Undisbursed Money Laying with Bank Based on the demand generated by the UEOs, stipend money is supposed to be transferred by the PD to the Mobile Banking Division of Rupali Bank. Though the demand for stipend as generated by the UEOs are fragmented and are uploaded at different points of time, the entire money from the PD’s SND (Short Notice Deposit) account is transferred to the Bankers at the very first instance itself. Example can be cited for the previous fiscal year 2016 – 2017, where the PD office deposited three cheques (stipend, Service charge and Vat) in account of Rupali Bank at one go. The total amount was transferred to Rupali Bank Mobile Banking Division with a request to transfer the money to the beneficiaries as per the demand list. However, as the demand from various Upazilas are not synchronized to a specific timing or date, the PD transfers the entire stipend amount to Rupali Bank which is then kept in the Master Wallet of the bank. This money is then transferred to each beneficiary’s Mobile Wallet only as per the demand generated by the UEOs and approved by the PD on the portal that belongs to the bank. This demand is usually fragmented and is generated at different times. Meanwhile the entire money rests with the bank as Floats.

This operational flaw defeats the principle of financial proprietary where the money should be withdrawn from the Treasury / Exchequer only when it is due to be paid.

There are also challenges of undistributed money being reconciled with the PD/GoB. It was found that for the FY 2016 – 17, a large chunk of fund remained undistributed and unreconciled. However, this might be an exceptional case because of the change to mobile banking from traditional banking. This defeats the principle of financial proprietary where the money should be withdrawn from the Treasury / Exchequer only when it is required for immediate disbursement.

http://pesp.surecashbd.com/accounts/login/?next=/


41

4.4 Operational Processes. 4.4.1 Database of Beneficiaries The database of beneficiaries is not owned or possessed by the DPE / PESP authorities but is in the possession of the Bank and its service provider which is a private firm with whom the DPE has signed the contract for distribution of stipends. The DPE / PESP does not own or administer the web portal on which the database for payment cycle is uploaded by the UEOs. The Project Office only has an access to this primary data through a terminal provided in its office. On the basis of the data uploaded by the UEOs on the web portal, the PD authorizes the payment using the same web portal provided in his office.

It was observed that the data received by the schools for payment contained certain names and IDs of persons not being part of their schools. At the same time, the data did not contain names of persons who are eligible for receiving the benefits. Such inaccuracies in data were reported by schools as well as UEOs and if not checked may amount to inclusion and exclusion error, though not significant.

4.4.2 Capacities, Awareness and Monitoring It was found that the schools lacked IT infrastructure in terms of hardware and software to capture conditionalities and upload the list into the system. The teachers as well as the UEOs reported that there was no orientation and / or training imparted to these teachers in IT processes. It was also reported by the Schools that a considerable amount of time of the teachers is consumed in working out the conditionalities for each of the pupil. This was particularly prominent when there was a lack of IT systems as well as skilled manpower to capture and upload such conditions for the stipend.

A rough assessment was made of the time consumed for uploading conditionalities at Saturia Upazila of Manikganj District. There were 80 schools in the Upazila for which 5 School Teachers were required to travel to UEO’s office for a 7 days’ time period just to upload the data on the portal. Thus 35 men days were lost during every cycle of payment in merely uploading the data. This does not include the manual processes adopted by the schools to collect data and maintain the manual register for fulfilling the conditionalities for stipend payments. If this was added to the time lost for the teachers, at least on an average 3 days per school, depending on the number of students would actually be spent. This is the time spent by the School Teachers at the cost of perhaps compromising the quality of teaching.

In fact, there was no operational manual in the DPE / PESP that would provide necessary operational guidelines to the officials involved in the revised process. Lack of communication and coordination between UEO officials and Mobile Banking team of SureCash created a gap in the system. As the Standard Operation Procedures (SOPs) are missing for mobile money transfer for the DPE and its field offices these gaps require immediate attention.

Challenges also lay in the lack of knowledge about electronic transfers amongst the stakeholders that may range from Teachers to the Mothers / Guardians. There were no awareness campaigns organized by the GoB towards switching over from physical cash mode to electronic payment. There was no mobile literacy accorded to the mothers / guardians for cashout processes etc.

There is no dedicated monitoring outfit for the PESP at the central level. However, there is an oversight mechanism of PESP at district level through a Monitoring Officer which, as per our assessment, is weak and requires further reinforcement. Similarly, there is no established formal grievance mechanism for the beneficiaries of PESP whose grievances at best are redressed in a limited way at the school level.


42

4.5 Delivery of Benefits – Cost and Time The evolution and spread of mobile phone technology has enabled financial institutions to deliver various financial services to the people residing in unbanked areas. Banks and other financial institutions have been increasingly leveraging mobile phone coverage in Bangladesh to expand their outreach. Recognising the importance of mobile phone technology in delivering financial services to deprived populations, Bangladesh Bank has granted permission to as many as eighteen commercial banks for launching mobile phone banking services.

Dutch Bangla Bank Ltd (DBBL) is the pioneer of full-fledged mobile banking services in the country supported by their core banking solution. It has recently been branded as ‘Rocket’. The state-owned Rupali Bank has also initiated mobile banking services under the brand name ‘Sure Cash’. Similarly, Bank Asia has started a mobile service. bKash, a subsidiary of BRAC Bank Bangladesh, is making a significant contribution to promoting and popularising mobile phone banking through a number of dealers and agents across the entire country. Their services are however not supported by Core Banking Solution of the BRAC Bank and are therefore not covered by Deposit Insurance Scheme (DIS)3 of Bangladesh Bank. The DPE has entered into an agreement with Rupali Bank towards effecting e-transfers of stipend using their mobile banking model the details of which were discussed in the previous chapter.

In case of delivery of stipends for the Secondary Education the Directorate is already using e-transfers through mobile banking. In the light of the expanded outreach of mobile phone banking, the HSSP, SEQAEP and SESP are now being entirely delivered through the mobile banking of DBBL. Similarly, SESIP is being delivered through mobile financial services of bKash.

4.5.1 Challenges with Transfers The delivery system of the benefits in terms of stipends till 2015 – 16 was largely labour intensive and dependent on the manual labours of the bank officials as well as the schools where physical cash was handed over to the beneficiaries by the officials of the bank on specified days at specified locations of the schools. The system used to be cumbersome for all the three parties. While the mothers as beneficiary representatives were compelled to travel on a specific day to a specific school location to collect stipend cash, the schools were converted into temporary camps of the Bank Payment Booths. The bank officials too were supposed to travel and spend full time at the specified location (school) and spend time towards effecting cash payments that were inefficient and uneconomic from their perspective.

4.5.2 Challenges with Electronic Transfers The manual / booth system was switched over to a mobile banking model from the FY 2016 – 17. A mobile banking participation contract for disbursement of PESP (Phase III) was signed between the DPE and Rupali Bank on 22nd May, 2017. Accordingly, Rupali Bank was contracted by the DPE to disburse the stipend for that year with a provision to extend the contract for one more year. The Bank charges an amount equal to 2.5% of the total PESP stipend disbursement.

From earlier studies it has become apparent that the use of the banking channel for disbursing stipends with strict adherence to the proviso for the mother of the beneficiary student as the

3 As per The Bank Deposit Insurance Act, 2000, membership of DIS is mandatory for all scheduled banks and the branches of foreign banks operating in Bangladesh. Objective of the system is to protect small depositors, enhance public confidence, ensure stability of financial system, increase savings and encourage economic growth. About 85% of the total deposit accounts with banks are covered under insurance and a covered depositor would get her money back up to BDT 100,000 if her bank faces a collapse. Premium rate for DIS is determined on the basis of financial health/CAMELS rating of the bank.


43

authorized recipient has worked well. Transaction burdens on both the implementer and recipient side still appear to be an issue that requires to be addressed.

The biggest challenge lies in the lack of knowledge about these electronic transfers amongst the stakeholders that may range from Teachers to the Mothers / Guardians. There were no awareness campaigns being organized by the GoB towards switching over from physical mode to electronic payment. There was no mobile literacy accorded to the mothers / guardians.

Following types of transaction burdens of the previous payment system were indicated

- Disbursement Delay in terms of turnaround time from release of funds till the amount is received by the recipient.

- Opportunity cost of one day's lost labour and / or travel / food costs for guardians, specially from schools other than the mother school, since typically it takes a whole day for collection;

- Loss of teaching time on payment paperwork, and - Lapse of payment for mothers who miss collection on the appointed day.

The introduction of mobile banking has increased efficiency to some degree, but teething problems remain, as has become clear from the FDGs conducted in the framework of this diagnostic study.

Major issues reported during the discussions with the mothers / guardians of the beneficiaries are summarized below:

- A number of beneficiaries reported that they did not have their own mobile phone sets or phone numbers and that they had to depend on the phone of friends, family or neighbors. This lead to many of their messages remaining unread and uncomprehended. This also created a delay in getting the message of the stipend being available for their consumption.

- Some of the beneficiaries reported that they were Unable to open and read SMS in their mobile phone as there was a lack of mobile literacy.

- It was reported that many a times the inbox of the phone was full and that it would either get unnoticed or may not be able to delete it, so the messages do not get loaded in the phones.

- Some beneficiaries mentioned that they could not remember their PIN and so could not get the cash out at the agent’s location.

- It was also reported that at few times an agent may run out of cash due to a rush of many mothers / guardians at the same time. At a particular point of time, payment to everyone may then not possible by the agent. This may also be a consequence for having inadequate number of agents in a given area.

- Mobile numbers once registered as mobile wallets are difficult to change. If done, this may lead to non-payment of the stipend.

- When one phone number is used by more than one person, delays in payment is likely to occur.

- Sometimes SureCash agents charge a small amount of money as was reported to the team on every field visit. This is in principle illegal and not allowed by the terms of contract. However, the proportion of such complaints was not very high.

- Schools involved in the programme have no separate IT literate staff for this new and time-consuming work. It is likely that the Head Teacher as well as other teachers spend time reserved for teaching to fill forms. Schools have no computer/photo copier and extra manpower to maintain records for reference or future use. They hire experts from outside using their own budget for this.


44

- The UEO office is not involved in any financial management/ payment as a result of which they do not receive any information about the timing and fulfilment of the payment milestone.

- As the local field / department is not aware of stipend money being distributed to beneficiaries they have to rely on any such information or confirmation provided by the Rupali Bank / SureCash as they have no linkage to the database. They are compelled to get this information / reports only through the generated list of undisbursed cases, that is provided to them by the agency.

- Should there be any grievances on part of the beneficiary for non-receipt of the stipend money, the departmental authority is in no way able to address any of such issues. However, this may be possible if they get the list of undisbursed cases from TSP / PD office.

- Discussions with the team of sure cash revealed that almost 10% of the mobile numbers are either incorrect or were without mobile wallets. This usually happens due to errors at data entry level.

Lastly there appear to be no operational manuals for the stakeholders involved (UEOs, Teachers, SMCs etc.), Also no particular guidelines are issued to the beneficiaries regarding collection of the stipend.

Despite these problems the majority of beneficiaries preferred the mobile banking system for it is safe and quick and ensures a direct delivery to beneficiary. However, the shift towards mobile banking has posed certain teething problems for the management of the programme at local level that need to be addressed.

4.5.3 Challenges with Timings As observed in the previous chapter there is a considerable time lag between the release of funds and the amount being delivered to the recipients. As a consequence, there are moderate delays in delivering the benefits. The year 2016 – 17 was an exceptional year as the delays were beyond three quarters for various reasons including the reasons of switching over from manual booth system to digitized system of mobile banking. The amount was withdrawn from the GoB exchequer only on 30th of June, 2017 which was the last day of the FY 2016 – 17. For obvious reasons, the disbursement could not take place in the year 2016 – 17. The stipends for the FY 2016 – 17 could only be disbursed in the current fiscal of 2017 – 18. Despite having an exceptional year of 16 – 17, there can still be delays in disbursement due to the following:

- Delayed preparation of the beneficiary list and subsequent delays in onward transmission of the list

- Delayed receipt of allocated money by the bank from the government - Banks holding on to the funds for some time due to a delayed availability of the beneficiary

list before actual disbursement - On average, delays of two weeks are typical but delays sometimes extend to two months.

4.6 MIS and Data Digitization The assessment of the database and the MIS for PESP was performed by the SPFMSP team. The outcome of the assessment conducted is as follows:

i. PESP through the Technology Service Provider (TSP) Progoti Systems Limited / SureCash ofRupali Bank have digitized approximately 10.10 million beneficiaries’ data and developed anMIS for managing these data.

ii. The database also captures the scanned copies of the applications of the beneficiaries alongwith the NID Numbers of the Mother / Guardian.


45

iii. The digitized data as well as the MIS for PESP is stored at the server of the Vendor (SureCash).iv. The contract signed4 between Rupali Bank and DPE states that Rupali Bank should install back

up databank / stores at the Directorate of Primary Education. However, the condition ofhaving the backup of the data has not been fulfilled till date as a result of which the DPE /PESP has largely to depend on Rupali Bank and its TSP (SureCash) for managing the stipendprogram.

v. According to the contract the ‘Source Data’ was to be handed over to the DPE aftercompletion of periodic payments. The same has not been complied with.

4.7 Monitoring, Evaluation and Grievance Mechanism It was found that there exists no dedicated monitoring cell at the Ministry of Departmental level. However, as mentioned earlier, there exists and oversight mechanism of PESP at district level. At the district level there is a provision of a Monitoring Officer who is accountable to the PD of the PESP and works exclusively for PESP. Each district is assigned one such officer who is supposed to visit 30 schools in a month or 360 in a year. This is far less than the approximate 1000 schools in a district. Thus on an average the Monitoring Officer can visit a school only after 3 years. Furthermore, his role is also limited to collect some information based on certain formats and does not include providing assistance / guidance in demand generation at the schools / UEOs level. He is also not accountable for any delays in demand generation, payment released and any other grievance of the parents / guardians. Also, the linkage of the UEOs with that of the district level Monitoring Officer too is unclear and there is no operational manual for the MO

Lastly, no well-defined grievance mechanism in the PESP program was found either at the Head Office level or at the field level.

4.8 Secondary Education Stipend Programs The Secondary Education Stipends are transferred at a cost of 1.0% of stipend amount for SESP, SESIP and HSSP and at 2.5% for SEQAEP. This is paid by the projects / programme to Agrani Bank which is contracted by the department. Agrani bank on its part, has entered into an agreement with a private sector bank, DBBL, and a Mobile Financial Service provider bKash in order to leverage their network and harness their services. Agrani Bank does not pass any commission that it receives from SESP and HSSP to the outsourced private bank (DBBL) which on its part is therefore compelled to charge 0.9% (90 Basis Points) service charge to the beneficiaries at the time of cash out. In case of SEQAEP, out of 2.5% that Agrani bank receives, it passes 0.9% to DBBL as a result of which the DBBL does not charge beneficiaries at the time of cash out. SESIP is delivered through another MFS, bKash, to whom Agrani Bank does not share its commission with. However, bKash provides a free of charge cash out to the beneficiaries.

Non-Compliance of Policy Guidelines: While there is a specific institution-based selection committee for selection of beneficiaries in each project other than SEQAEP, which is supposed to meet at regular intervals however, no minutes of the meetings of the Selection Committee were found. It was also found in the visited institutions that no meetings of selection committee were properly held and minutized. The matter would simply be discussed in the meeting of the Managing Committee of the institution that would merely table the list of selected students prepared beforehand by the teachers or by forming a convener committee consisting of some teachers. Even the Chairman of governing body did not know the necessity of holding such meeting. During the field visits it was observed that the Head of the institutions and the teachers dealing with stipend were not fully aware

4 Contract dated 22nd May, 2017 was for disbursement of stipend up to June 2017 with provision for extension of the contract for one more year with mutual consent.


46

of the instructions and guidelines of the respective stipend programs. They were least careful of their responsibilities in this regard and even they did not completely comply with guidelines and instructions.

Non-compliance of Operational Procedure: There is a provision for hanging the list of selected students for stipend on the notice board of the institution. However, on discussing with the schools, it was found that no such list or record existed. It also appeared from stakeholder discussion that the teachers were under pressure from the guardians of the non-selected students as many of them were local elites and influential persons. There were found to be favouritism and influence from local elites and influential persons on the selection of recipients. Moreover, teachers were found to be under pressure that some good and brilliant students from background of economically better families may change their institutions if they were not considered for selection of stipend in their existing institution. This would create a flow of talent from the school.

Reduction in Quota: In Kolapara upazila of Patuakhali District the Principal of one institution admitted that some students had left the institution for not getting stipend under SEQAEP. In this upazila stipend was distributed before 2015 under SESP and subsequently replaced by SEQAEP. Under SEQAEP number of recipients decreased significantly due to application of PMT Method. This indicates that selection of good students from economically better families out of pressure or threat has caused exclusion errors in case of poor students.

Girls’ Stipend Program in Bangladesh An improved targeting is necessary to reach poorer families because existing criteria actually discriminate against them and can turn the Program into more of a scholarship than a stipend. By putting the onus of meeting the criteria on the beneficiaries, the government is avoiding the responsibility of reaching poorer families.

(Janet Raynor and Kate Wassen 2006:)

Appeal and Grievance: It has also been observed that there is a lack of knowledge and awareness of grievance redress mechanism among the teachers as well as the students and their guardians. Under SESP there is a provision for appeal in case of exclusion of poor students from the list. Very poor students if excluded from the list have the right to appeal to the UNO within 7 (Seven) working days. The UNO is supposed to address and resolve the problem within 5 (Five) working days. During stakeholder discussion it appeared that students who were not selected for receiving stipend would generally complain to the teachers verbally. However, no action is taken on their complaints. Teachers do not even advise the students to file an appeal before the local UNO.

Overestimation: During field visits it has appeared that there is a general tendency on the part of Madrashas to show inflated numbers of students in different classes and for schools to show such number especially in Grade-VI. This helps them to have more recipients in consideration of percentage of total number of male and female students in the process of selection. In case of Schools / Madarshas fulfilment of conditionalities in one grade will ensure continuation of stipend in next higher grade though the number of actual recipients is greater than the entitled number of recipients in view of percentage of targeting.

Overcharging by Agents: During stakeholder discussion almost all the guardians have informed that agents are realizing Tk 20/- from them at the time of withdrawal of stipend money. Some guardians complained that they did not get stipend money. But their number was very few. It has been informed that percentage of number of beneficiaries not getting messages for disbursement of transfer is still from 2% to 5%.


47

Secondary Review: A recent report on harmonization of the stipend programs for secondary education (Romijn et al, 2016) revealed that in terms of management of the programs at central level no major problems are experienced. The inputs are sufficient to be able to execute the programs. Although under the harmonized program, only one program management unit would suffice. Having four PIUs to target poor secondary education pupils is quite costly.

Accordingly, the study has put fourth certain recommendations to create one harmonized stipend program. Recommendations include:

• A selection method that bases eligibility on a set of indicators of families’ financial situationthat are consistently applied across all applicants (the approach currently used in the PMTmethod) is to be preferred over the poverty targeted approach. However, head teachers andUSEOs need to continue to be involved in verifying the information that students and familiesprovide on the application form.

• A single management unit should be installed to manage the harmonized program at central level.• Non-financial benefits especially for rural areas should be provided that may include gears

such as school uniforms and shoes.

Dominant problems as experienced by the beneficiaries are quite similar to those noted regarding the PESP, especially in relation to the timely disbursement of the stipends. Also, Head Teachers are likely to favour one pupil over the other disregarding the targeting criteria.

4.9 Stipend Program for Student with Disabilities As to the stipend programme for students with disabilities, there are a very limited number of children coming to primary school with disabilities in relation to the upzillas visited. In some cases, students with disabilities did receive stipends under the PESP programme though they would have been entitled to get a higher allowance from Social Welfare Department. As our study is not a survey, we cannot determine the extent to which this occurs in other cases.

Though the implementation manual emphasis on creating awareness amongst the public but in the visited areas and education institutions, officials of education departments, student with disabilities, parents / guardian were found to be unaware about the stipend for the Students with Disabilities program itself. There were some student with disabilities from poor families who were found to be deprived from receiving stipend. Due to the lack of effective result based monitoring, some children in the visited area were found to be dropped out from the schools for 3-4 years but were still continuing to be receiving benefits. Moreover, there was a lack of monitoring tool to review the conditionality mentioned in the implementation manual. Stipend for the student with disability payment system through bearer cheque usually takes considerable time for the USSO in preparation of bearer cheque for individual student with disability. The payment system was found to be inefficient and not friendly to the beneficiaries.

4.10 Coordination and / or Synergies within Stipend Programs Three different line ministries have been providing stipend for the students under different programs and with various objectives. Stipend for the students with disability is the one that is crosscutting in all education programs. But there was found to be no coordination mechanism in place between the two Education Departments and DSS both, at the central level as well as at the field level. Furthermore, there is no mechanism to share beneficiary data among the different ministries.

The following has been observed:

- From the perspective of coverage, there is overlapping of the Disability Stipend with that of PESP as well as other secondary level stipend programmes.


48

- According to field officials, there is full coordination at the Upazila level in implementing stipend programmes. Students with disabilities are clearly identified in Primary Schools and shared information with the Department of Social Service (DSS) to enrol students in their stipend programme.

- Some of the students with disability in the Primary section were found to be receiving the PESP stipend instead of the Disability Stipend which is much higher in quantum. Some disabled Students from Secondary Education Schools were found to not receiving any stipend at all. This clearly discourages disabled students from studying at the secondary education.

4.11 PESP Under Development Head The PESP was initiated in 2002 – 03 under the Development Head of the Budget and has remained unchanged till date. Under normal circumstances, the development projects are –

• Basically non-recurring in nature and taken for specific period (years)• Traditionally many development projects are implemented with the help of Development

Partners (DPs) with specific objectives• Requires special types of documentation (DPP) and approval at the highest level (ECNEC)

chaired by Hon’ble PM

It is also usually a trend that a specifically targeted time bound program begins in a project mode in Development Head and once the same stabilizes and is required to be continued in future, the same gets transferred to the Revenue Head.

However, in case of PESP

• Since beginning there has been no Development Partner that was involved and theDevelopment Project was solely financed by the GOB from year to year.

• Closing of one project prompted the government to take another similar project in the formof Phase I, Phase –II, Phase III etc. with seldom any change in the structure.

• Switching from one phase to another necessitated completion of cumbersome and timeconsuming formalities including evaluation of just completed phase and preparation of freshDPP and its consequent fresh approval by ECNEC from time to time.

• In most cases the stipend program got disrupted due to these phase change overs as therewere delays in approvals and implementation and gaps became inevitable between phases.

• There are also delays in the disbursement of funds due to time consuming and complicatedprocedure associated with the release of funds under Development Budget.

• Staffs associated with these stipend projects were for the duration of one phase only andtechnically their appointments get terminated after completion of each phase. However, inpractice most of them were retained from one phase to the other in order to maintaininstitutional memory and maintain experienced staff.

• Till now these staffs have temporary employment status which prompted the bright officialsto shift elsewhere with better permanent job prospect. As a result there were no dependablecapacity building though the stipend project is continuing for a long period.

Going forward, the PESP is likely to continue as a social safety net program of the government as it is also a part of the life cycle approach that has been strongly advocated by the National Social Security Strategy (NSSS). Moreover, as the full amount of Stipend Money (PESP) is in fact being financed from government revenue and hence there is no justification of continuing it under Development project. Transferring the project to revenue budget will help remove all the hurdles / bottlenecks mentioned above and ensure the disbursement of stipend to the beneficiaries in a seamless and predictable manner.


49

Chapter V. Recommendations and Way Forward

On the basis of the findings and assessment made in the previous chapters, following recommendation are suggested:

5.1 Program Design Stipend Size: A mechanism should be developed for a periodic review to revise the benefit size of PESP taking into account the increase in cost of living over the years. The NSSS also mentions about the need for increasing the size of Primary Stipends. A similar mechanism for periodic review of the size of secondary stipends and stipend for students with disability should also be in place.

Harmonisation of Secondary Stipends: On the side of Secondary Stipend Programmes, the recommendation of the recent study on harmonization of various secondary stipends titled ‘Comprehensive Comparative Review of Bangladesh Secondary Education Stipend Projects / Programs’ conducted under the SESIP should be implemented.

5.2 Implementation Processes 5.2.1 Operational PESP Operational Guidelines: An operational guideline encompassing end-to-end procedures including data generation and maintenance, processes regarding updating and uploading of data of beneficiaries based on conditionalities of stipend, verification of data, monitoring guidelines, conceptual understanding and ease of usage of mobile banking for the beneficiaries etc. should be issued by the DPE / PESP in view of the changes effected in the delivery of PESP stipend. A similar Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) should be issued by the Bank / Mobile Banks for seamlessly integrating the mobile banking with PESP. These guidelines should be both, a printed manual as well as a visual chart to be published by the DPE / PESP.

SOPs for PSPs: It is recommended that Standard Operating Procedure (SOPs) should be developed by the Payment Service Providers (PSP) with the approval of the respective Directorates that can be used by the officials of the DPE / PESP towards online interaction, monitoring the payments, resolution of grievances etc. against the PSPs. A reconciliation module that shall provide for immediate refund / return of money to the exchequer may be developed. It is also recommended that a mechanism may be developed to identify inactive mobile numbers before effecting the transfers so that money will only be disbursed to active numbers.

Compliance with Guidelines for Secondary Stipends: The secondary stipend programmes must adhere to the guidelines in terms of targeting and its operations. Projects should strengthen monitoring in respect of selection of beneficiaries, enforcement of conditionalities and disbursement of stipends. Similarly, the existing appeal mechanism for grievances to the UNO under SESP should be enforced.

Monitoring of PESP: The monitoring needs to be strengthened at all levels, headquarter, districts and at field level. A dedicated outfit at the Headquarter level should be established for monitoring of stipend programmes. The monitoring outfit should also evolve a formal mechanism for recording and addressing grievances. Monitoring should be strengthened and grievance mechanism should be developed by the DPE / PESP. It is also recommended to expand the role of Monitoring officer for information dissemination, data coordination and supervision of stipend programme at all levels.


50

Training, Capacity Development and Communication/Awareness: Training courses should be arranged on end to end processes including data generation and maintenance, processes regarding updating and uploading of data of beneficiaries based on conditionalities of stipend, verification of data, monitoring guidelines, conceptual understanding and ease of usage of mobile banking for the beneficiaries etc. at all levels of PESP including teachers of schools, UEOs, AUEOs, DPEOs, Monitoring Officers, MIS team and other officials at field and headquarter level. Similarly, a one-day orientation for SMC members, mothers, guardians, community leaders should be arranged in respective schools to improve their skills and knowledge about SMS, Wallet, Portal, filling KYC forms, preparation and correction of demand and disbursement lists etc mobile banking and delivery processes to beneficiaries. Publicity and awareness on rights and duties of the beneficiaries needs to be created towards receiving the stipend amount. This training may be organized at Upazila Resource Centres (URC) of DPE as they have the infrastructure and facilities to provide training on short courses.

IT Infrastructure: Necessary IT equipment should be provided at the school and Upazila level to meet the requirement of uploading the beneficiaries’ data for receiving stipends, and to cope up with the new e – payment system requirements.

Greater Role of PSPs: PSPs needs to take a more proactive measure to resolve grievance and be ready to action concerning complaints of beneficiaries entitled to receive a stipend who did not receive their money despite fulfilment of all requirement. All mobile agents should be warned not to charge money illegally from beneficiaries during delivery and the agency licence of offenders may be revoked. A separate redressal mechanism be put in place by the PSPs so that the grievances against payments be resolved quickly.

Promote Efficiency in Operations: Nominated school teachers should be trained on the system and should be responsible for uploading the dataset on the portal on a rotation basis. By imparting training and capacity development for the school teachers, a significant reduction in time for uploading the demand list could be achieved.

Improved Coordination: Strong coordination between PSPs and Field officials need to be established for smooth management of the programme at local level. It is recommended that the UEO offices should be made a focal point for financial and operational management of the program.

5.2.2 Financial Transferring PESP to Revenue Budget: PESP has been in existence for over a decade as a project under Development Budget and fully funded by the GoB. The implementation of the PESP as a Development Project currently faces many complications and delays associated with the procedure for release of funds under Development Budget and frequent breaks between the phases of the project. An option to overcome those difficulties is to transfer the Project to the Revenue Budget as an ongoing scheme of permanent nature. It would ensure timely availability of funds and consequently, payment of stipend to the beneficiaries in a seamless and predictable manner. It is therefore recommended that the MoPME may initiate discussions with the FD and Planning Commission to transfer PESP into Revenue Budget.

Cost Reduction by Use of Technology: The direct cost of delivery for PESP using manual cash distribution has been in the range of 5% for past one decade. However, the data have now been digitized and the processes have been subjected to automation and system driven with very little manual work. Moreover, the payment of the stipend has been effected using a more sophisticated mode of mobile financial services. Despite IT based systemic services, the direct cost of delivery has not been revised or reviewed by the Government. The direct cost of transfer still remains a matter of


51

concern at 2.5% of the amount disbursed. It is therefore recommended that efforts should be made to bring down the cost of delivery to a reasonable and sustainable level that also matches with similar delivery methods adopted by similar schemes.

Opportunity Costs for GoB: Capacities of the staff should be developed to optimally make use of disbursement / distribution report against the demand list and ensure that the undisbursed money is transferred back to the GoB without further delay. Payment Service Providers such as Banks and MFS in no case be allowed to have the floats for GoB money. Either the money should be transferred immediately to the beneficiary or should be returned back to the GoB

5.2.3 MIS Database of the beneficiaries should be created with extreme care and caution and capture KYCs as per the regulations. The data should also be regularly updated before each of the payment cycle for all stipend programmes. To prevent errors in the datasets, the data should be cross-checked at different levels (Schools and Upazila Offices) before being uploaded to the portal for payment of the stipend. The onus of correct data entry should vest with the schools and the same should not be left for the vendors / bankers to perform.

Based on the assessment of the current status of MIS, following are some of the recommendations that may help improving the operations and processes of stipends programs:

PESP

• Ownership of Data and MIS: The database of beneficiaries and schools, the MIS, and thePESP portal for uploading payment data should reside with the DPE / PESP. The MIS outfit ofDPE / PESP should be strengthened to take the responsibility for this operation. Ownershipand administration of the beneficiaries’ data and MIS of all stipend programmes should betransferred from private firms to the possession of the Directorate / Project authorities asearly as possible. Subsequently, the data of beneficiaries should be moved from private firmsand be hosted at the servers of the Bangladesh Computer Council (BCC). Accordingly, thecapabilities of the staff handling the MIS and delivery of Stipend should be enhanced.

• Linkage of MIS with SPBMU: Link the PESP MIS to SPBMU MIS by June 2018. The linkagewould help identification of ghost beneficiaries and duplicates as the SPBMU MIS is alsolinked with Election Commission’s NID database towards verifications and inter-schemevalidations of NIDs and a centralised payment system (G2P) in the near future.

• Improvement in Data Uploading: The PESP MIS design should be improved to makeuploading of data from schools efficient and also customised to conform with internationalstandards of MIS for Cash Transfers so that functions like payroll generation are decentralisedand managed by DPE instead of the PSP

MoE Stipend Programs

• Ministry of Education and the Directorates develop well-designed MIS and ensure that allstipend programs have their data digitised. The ownership and management of the databaseand MIS should be vested with respective Directorates rather than remaining with the privatefirm.

• The database and MIS of all the MoE stipend programs should be migrated to the BCC at theearliest as is the case for other GoB MIS.

• All the MISs and database of the stipend programs should be linked to SPBMU MIS to benefitfrom the available services such as National ID validation, double dipping checks and the G2Psystem to be piloted.


52

Stipend program for Students with Disability

• DSS should further develop the current MIS to include features for the disability stipend,digitise its data and plan to link it with SPBMU MIS.

5.2.4 Payment System Reform Adoption of Payment System Reform: The FD has developed a reform on payment system that benefits different stakeholders, the exchequer, the concerned line ministries as well as the beneficiaries. A short note on the proposed payment system reform is at Annexure VI of this report. The system is integrated with the MIS and removes duplication, double dipping and other leakages. It works on minimizing the transaction costs and time by providing greater efficiency and transparency. It also ensures that the money is withdrawn from the Treasury, only when the disbursement is due. The amount of benefit gets directly credited (G2P) into the beneficiaries’ accounts without money being accumulated at any intermediary level. It is therefore highly recommended that this reform payment system should be adopted for PESP as well as other stipend programmes. Accordingly, MoPME, MoE and MoSW should initiate discussion with FD for implementation of the new payment system.

Improvement in Existing Payment System: In the interim period, before the implementation of the Payment System mentioned earlier, following improvement is recommended:

• Following Treasury Code: It should be ensured that the stipend amount be withdrawn fromthe treasury, only when it is to be transferred to the beneficiary. Care should be taken that nomoney is withdrawn when it cannot be immediately transferred.

• Cash Availability: The contracted bank must ensure that their TSPs should not run out of cashduring the payment days. They must also provide adequate coverage of agents and ensurethat no agent charges extra money from the beneficiary.

• Effective Communication: SMS services including audio messages be sent to thebeneficiaries in Bangla script and language, wherever possible. Audio SMS should also carry amessage that no commission or charges be paid to any agents for cash-out. Similarly,reminders should be provided to the beneficiaries for cash-out.

• Redressal System: The contracted bank must provide for a redressal mechanism for thebeneficiary against overcharging or non-payment for want of commission. Also, their agencylicence may be cancelled for repeated offence of this nature.

• One SIM for One Mother: It is recommended that One mobile number / wallet should onlybe used by one individual (mother / guardian). When the mother has more children eligible toreceive a stipend, it may allow the same SIM card to receive it without compelling her to buymore SIMs.


53

Annexure I. Proceedings / Minutes of Dissemination Workshop


54


55


56


57


58

Annexure II. Terms of Reference for Study

Strengthening Public Financial Management for Social Protection (SPFMSP) Project

TOR for a Diagnostic Study and Recommendations on

Primary Education Stipend Project (PESP) Phase –III

Being Implemented by

Ministry of Primary and Mass Education (MOPME), Government of the Peoples’ Republic of Bangladesh


59

Backdrop

Maxwell Stamp PLC (MSP) has been contracted by the UK Department for International Development (DFID) as the Managing Agent (MA) for the Strengthening Public Financial Management for Social Protection (SPFMSP) project under Strengthening Government Social Protection for the Poor (SGSP) programme. SPFMSP is a 32 months technical assistance (TA) project aimed to support the Government of Bangladesh (GoB) in the area of social protection. The SPFMSP project is a part of a larger five-component DFID-funded Strengthening Government Social Protection for the Poor (SGSP) Programme launched in 2014. The aim of the overall SGSP Programme is to support the GoB establish policies, budgets and plans for a more effective and efficient social protection system. Other parts of SGSP are being delivered by four implementing partners: the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the World Food Programme (WFP), the World Bank (WB) and the Manusher Jonno Foundation (MJF), a local Bangladeshi NGO. As such, SGSP covers five specific components:

WB is conducting institutional analysis and assessment of key Social Safety Net (SSN) programmes along with Public expenditure reviews of the social protection schemes.

UNDP is working with the Planning Commission and Cabinet Division on the National Social Security Strategy (NSSS) of Bangladesh.

WFP is engaging with the Ministry of Women & Child Affairs (MW&CA) on the Vulnerable Group Development programme and, to support the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS) on the panel survey building on the existing collaboration with BBS and WFP. In addition, WFP will work with the BBS to implement an annual panel survey linked to the national household income and expenditure survey (HIES) and support government to implement reforms in the Vulnerable Group Development scheme.

MJF is establishing an independent platform to facilitate engagement of civil society on the NSSS and building on its experience of engaging civil society organisations in policy dialogues by undertaking research, advocacy, and act as an effective challenge function in monitoring the existing schemes.

MSP is implementing the SPFMSP component, a TA project to the Ministry of Finance (MoF). The objective of SPFMSP is to improve social protection policy-making, strategic planning, financing, implementation and monitoring and to build individual and organisational capacity of the Government of Bangladesh. This support is being provided mainly to the Finance Division (FD), MoF, where a new Social Protection Budget Management Unit (SPBMU) is planned, but will also include six other implementing Line Ministries - the Ministry of Social Welfare (MoSW), the Ministry of Primary Education (MoPME), the Ministry of Women and Children’s Affairs (MoWCA), the Ministry of Education (MoE), the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (MoH&FW) and the Ministry of Disaster Management and Relief (MoDMR). Overall, SPFMSP aims to ensure that the MoF and implementing line ministries are equipped to deliver their roles in the reform of the social protection programmes in Bangladesh. The underlying objective therefore is to transfer skills and capacity to these organisations.

SPFMSP Project

The Government of Bangladesh (GoB) is committed to strengthening the social protection system by ensuring efficiency and effectiveness in the use of resources (Value for Money – VfM) in the Sector. This commitment is clearly reflected in the recently approved National Social Security Strategy (NSSS). The Finance Division (FD) of the Ministry of Finance (MoF) has undertaken the SPFMSP Project, with the assistance of UK DFID and Australian DFAT, to follow through on the VfM commitment.


60

The TAPP of the Project has been approved by the Government and its implementation has already started. DFID has procured a Managing Agent (MA), Maxwell Stamp PLC, to assist the FD and above six LMs to implement the Project. The major activities of the Project are the following:

Establish and Operationalize a Social Protection Budget Management Unit (SPBMU) in the Finance Division –The SPBMU will lead the implementation of the Project and on completion of the Project it will continue as a permanent unit of the Budget Wing of the FD. The purpose of establishment of the SPBMU is to enhance the capacity of the FD: i) to draw evidence based Social Protection(SP) Budget that responds to efficiency and effectiveness objectives, ii) to improve monitoring of SP expenditure and iii) to analyse existing policies, procedures, systems and commission studies and research to improve/ reform the existing systems.

Undertake Diagnostic Studies of Existing Social Protection Schemes – The Project will commission diagnostic studies of 7 SP schemes of the above LMs to bring improvement from the perspective of VFM, better targeting, prevent leakages, avoiding duplication and bringing efficiency in the delivery system including payment of benefits.

Conduct Research – The Project also will commission demand-driven, issue-based, as well as exploratory research with the objective to support the reform of the existing SP system by filling gaps in knowledge and meeting requests for additional analysis.

Assist in Preparing Costed Plans for the Reforms of Priority Social Protection Schemes – The Project will assist the Government in preparing costed plans for SP reforms on the basis of the results of the Diagnostic Studies and research undertaken by the Project.

Establish a Management Information System (MIS) to Track and Evaluate SP Expenditure – The Project will assist the FD in establishing a functional and effective MIS to perform cross-cutting monitoring including expenditure tracking, analysis and evaluation of SP schemes. The system will be piloted in the FD and two selected line ministries.

Provide Training and Capacity Development – The Project will implement a number of Capacity Development initiatives for SPBMU, FD and the six LMs. The major activities in this area will include national and international training programmes for suitable GoB officials in the different aspects of SP relevant to the objectives of the Project and study tours for policy level officials to acquire knowledge on best global practices in SP.

The Project will be implemented by the SPBMU of the budget wing of the FD under the overall supervision of the Additional Finance Secretary (Budget) who will also act as the National Project Director (NPD) for the Project. An Executive Director(ED), who also will act as the Project Director (PD), will head the SPBMU. The Government has approved the organizational set-up of the SPBMU. The Managing Agent has fielded the requisite number of national and international consultants to support the FD and LMs.

The Project will have two governance structures. A Project Steering Committee (PSC) will oversee the Project and be chaired by the Finance Secretary with representation from six LMs, UK DFID, Australian DFAT and other government relevant ministries/agencies. In addition to the Steering Committee, a Project Implementation Committee, chaired by the NPD with representation from six LMs and UK DFID and Australian DFAT, will monitor the timely implementation of the Project.


61

Overview of Stipend Program with Focus on PESP

a. Primary Education Stipend Programme

Primary Education Stipend Project is designed to provide conditional cash assistance through a stipend program to all eligible primary school students and their families throughout rural Bangladesh in order to increase the enrolment rate among primary school-aged children; increase the attendance rate of primary school students and reduce the drop-out rate. The following types of Primary Schools of the country are included in this stipend programme:

Government Primary Schools

Independent government recognized Ebtedai Madrasha

High school attached Primary Schools

High Madrasha attached independent Ebtedai Madrashas

Primary Schools run by Shishu Kalyan Trust (SKT)

Class Six to Eight opened in Primary Schools

In order to qualify for the stipend, selected students must maintain 85 percent monthly attendance, take up all the examinations of the school and attain a minimum of 33 percent marks in each of the subjects of a class. Students fulfilling these criteria are eligible to get Tk.100 per month for single beneficiary in a family and Tk 200 per month for two beneficiaries in a family. In case of three and four children from a family, the stipend money shall be Tk 250 and Tk 300 pm month respectively

The program, is the biggest educational programmes of the government. With a budgetary allocation of Taka 14.00 billion, (about 3.0% of SP Budget) the scheme offers conditional cash transfers to about 13.0 million primary school students.

The scheme has the following distinguishing features:

Cash-based incentive to all eligible primary school students.

Conditionalities on selected students to increase attendance rate, maintain a minimum percentage of attendance and pass in all subjects in school exams;

Use of banking channel to provide the cash incentive;

Pursuit of a women empowerment goal by making the mother of the beneficiary (student) to collect the cash incentive from bank;

With more than a decade old implementation (still in development budget), the scheme has a few assessment and evaluation studies performed by independent agencies. The scheme targeting the primary school students is most likely to continue in future and has an important role to play in the implementation of nation’s education policy. The National Social Security Strategy (NSSS) strongly advocates for continuation of the scheme.

b. Secondary Education Stipend Programme

Ministry of Education of the Government of Bangladesh aims at improving access to quality education and ensuring equity and equality at all levels of education. Equitable access to education implies ensuring additional conditional support for the poorest and most marginalised.


62

The Government of Bangladesh first launched Female Secondary School Assistance Project (FSSAP) in 1993 with IDA assistance in 118 Upazilas with the aim of reducing the gender disparity in access to secondary education (Grade VI-X) and raising empowerment of women, and then undertook a Nation-wide Female Secondary Stipend Programme (FSSP) in 1994. Thereafter Stipend programmes are being implemented up to the graduate level. After 2006 Government changed the policy and introduced a pro-poor targeting programme. Now the intervention is open to boys along with girls. However this support is restricted to the poorest children only. Currently Directorate of Secondary and Higher Education are implementing 04 (Four) projects/Program for providing stipend at the secondary level under the control of Secondary and Higher Education Division of Ministry of Education. Stipends for grades VI-X are provided under three projects: SESP 2nd Phase, SEQAEP and SESIP having complete separate jurisdiction in relation to upazila. Again stipends for grades XI-XII are provided under Higher Secondary Stipend Project (HSSP) throughout the country. These stipends are conditional cash transfers and distributed through mainly mobile banking channel. Beneficiaries are selected by the school-based committee on the basis of eligibility criteria under SESP and SESIP, while under SEQAEP on the basis on PMT method. The continuation of stipend is governed by 3 conditionalities – (1) Minimum attendance, (2) Passing in the annual examination and (3) Remaining unmarried till SSC/ Dhakil. HSSP contains similar features just like SESP. The overall objective of this stipend programme is to enhance access to education. Some important specific objectives of the stipend programme are to increase enrolment of students, ensure their retention in schools and reduce drop-out rate. The highest coverage of social security schemes during the school ages is mainly via the Primary and Secondary Student Stipends.

C Stipend for Disabled Students

WHO estimates that 10% of people in Bangladesh (population about 150 million) could conceivably have around 15 million people with disabilities. Many children with disabilities are out of school or dropped out from education as equal facilities for the children with disabilities are not ensured in the educational institution. Poverty also hinders them from getting education. The Government has introduced stipend program for the student with disabilities to encourage the children with disabilities to increase enrolment in the educational institution as well as to increase the retention rate. The main objective of this program is to ensure the commitment of the constitution, National disability related policy, Bangladesh Protabandhi Kalayan Ain (Law), 2001 and UN Convention on the rights of the persons with Disabilities. To encourage the children with disabilities to enroll themselves in the educational institution, the Government has introduced stipend programme for the student with disabilities. The Government has allocated taka 47.88 core in the financial year 2016-2017 for this programme. The responsibility has been given to Department of Social Services (DSS) under the Ministry of Social Welfare (MoSW) to implement this programme. Through this programme attempt has been taken to mainstreaming students with Disabilities. Through this programme new avenue is created for higher education. Approximately, 70,000 students with disabilities of various institutions are receiving stipend. Monthly stipend for the primary school level is Tk 500/-, for secondary school level is Tk.600/-, higher secondary level is Tk. 700/- and University level (graduation and above) is Tk. 1200/-.

Proposed Consultancy Assignment

Objective

The objective of the proposed consultancy assignment is to undertake an in-depth, independent and comprehensive diagnostic study on stipend programs with a focus on PESP and perform an operational and financial analysis of the scheme. This shall be done with a view to recommend


63

improvement in scheme design (product), processes and implementation arrangements that promote economies of scale & scope, cost effectiveness, efficiency of operations and optimisation of resources. The study shall provide evidence-based concrete recommendations to improve design, eligibility, features, database of beneficiaries, delivery system, beneficiary selection and efficiency of resource utilization that maximize Value for Money (VfM).

Focus

Study would focus at exploring how financial allocations can be more meaningful and useful for the primary students’ stipend programme. Specifically, it would focus on the delivery mechanism including the payment system and how the beneficiary data be used more efficiently to generate MIS and integrate into the Payment System. With an improvement in system, both in terms of design and processes, can there be an improved process to receive benefits, identification of ghost beneficiaries if any, improved efficiencies and leak-proof delivery mechanism and enforcement of stipulated criteria leading to value for money.

The Diagnostic study shall be conducted with a view that the report and recommendations shall be used to develop reform plans, if the evidence so suggest. In this way policy development, programme implementation and monitoring for the Government of Bangladesh will be systematically improved.

Scope of Services

Specifically, this would include, but not limited to:

Design: Review the different characteristic features of the scheme that target different sets of beneficiaries under different stipend programmes of three line ministries namely, MoPME, S&HED of MoE and MoSW. It shall review the design of the scheme (product) including its objectives, program design, features such as eligibility criteria; exclusion and inclusion errors if any; size, timelines, frequency and volume of benefits delivered; budgetary allocations versus expenditure analysis and suggest recommendations for improvement. With special emphasis on the programme design of PESP:

Examine the existing status of the digitized data and MIS of the schemes with a view to integrate the same with that of SPBMU MIS and Payment System. What could be the Learnings from the process of Digitization adopted by the MoPME.

Analyse the implications of covering the presently excluded areas and students through PESP programme and suggest the pros and cons to expanding the same.

Examine the modalities of convergence and /or interfacing of database of different stipend projects to build up synergies and promote VfM

Examine the relevance of the scheme in the ‘Development Head’ and suggest if the same may be more appropriate to be taken to the ‘Revenue Head’.

Implementation: Review the implementation arrangements of all stipend programs with a focus on the PESP scheme including the processes and models adopted for targeting of beneficiaries; maintenance of beneficiary records including NIDs, register (data base) and accounts for transfer; timeliness and quality of services being offered to the beneficiaries; and issues and challenges currently being faced by the officials delivering the transfers as well as beneficiaries. With a focus on PESP:

Review the present ‘end to end’ fund flow system of PESP including identification of the cost elements at each stage, from the Ministry to Project Office extending it to the beneficiary level with


64

an understanding of the cost of delivery and suggest economising and improving efficiency from the PFM point of view

Examine the present reconciliation system and return of undistributed cash advance to the Government exchequer and suggest efficiency from PFM point of view.

Identify the present ‘Turn-Around Time (TAT) starting from allocation of fund from MOF to return of undistributed amount to the exchequer and suggest improvements, if any.

Review the implementation processes of stipend program of MoSW and that of S&HED of MoE and suggest improvements with focus on double dipping and inclusion errors.

Primary and Secondary Sources: Review relevant literature / documents including assessment and evaluation reports and meet relevant officials and stakeholders to get their perspectives on the design and improvements. Identify the gaps if any, in the perception and understanding amongst the officials at the LM, LD, Field Staff as well as beneficiaries.

Grievance Mechanism: Review the process of accountability framework through monitoring and evaluation (M&E) as well as grievance mechanism and suggest improvements that could promote greater transparency and fairness.

Database and MIS: Review the status of database / MIS of all stipend programs of three LMs and suggest if PESP data could be transferred and used as base for S&HED stipend programs.

Evidence for Reform: Identify, if there is a prima facie evidence for systemically reforming the PESP programme and accordingly, review and suggest measures for a follow-up Reform Plan that promotes value for money by improvement in budgeting, targeting and monitoring and ensuring an efficient and reliable delivery system.

Global Practices: Document some of the best practices on stipend projects that are being adopted in other countries with similar education background, policy and schemes.

Suggested Template for Report

In addressing these issues, the draft diagnostic report will be expected to follow a template along the lines of:

I. Backdrop to the Assignment

a. Overview of Stipend context in Bangladesh as a social protection program

b. Objectives of the Stipend initiative in view of the objectives of the current diagnostic

II. Methodology

Methodology: Overview of how diagnostic study was performed, using what info, secondary literature review, processes etc. Details about field trips, interviews, focus groups etc.

III. About the Scheme

Product: Objectives, Design and Features of the scheme such as eligibility and criteria for exclusion and inclusion, type of benefits in services and cash transfers, benefit size and beneficiaries’ profile etc.


65

Selection Processes: Processes for Selection of Beneficiaries including publicity of scheme and knowledge about the rights and duties. Rules, regulations/guidelines and government orders towards selection.

Delivery Processes: Basic organogram of everyone involved; Process of delivery of goods and delivery services (who does what). Timeliness of delivery, grievance process etc.

Budget and Cost: Budgetary size of the scheme including last 5 years of budget allocation v/s expenditure analysis. Budget should be disaggregated into cost types (staffing, non-staff recurrent by type including office functioning, vehicle maintenance, fuel, facilitation, and capital expenditures such as MIS equipment, vehicles, etc). Map of flows of benefits (how cash flow from Line Ministries, schools, banks governments and beneficiaries), including all relevant sources of resources at facility level (government, donor). Number of beneficiaries by facility type over last 5 years.

Monitoring, evaluation and accountability: The current status of recordkeeping of beneficiaries including individual profiling and accounts and maintenance on a decentralized basis; NID Verifications, flows of information; reporting process to Line Ministries/GoB (who, what, when); evaluation: evidence, process (how does accountability fit into wider concept of Public Financial Management?); grievance mechanism, if any.

IV. Assessment of the scheme

This section should focus on assessing how the scheme works in practice – undertaking the actual diagnosis. For each of the aspects below, it should be made clear what the sources of evidence are (evaluation reports, consultant’s own observations from interviews, etc), as well as what the major gaps in information are.

Adequacy and relevance of the benefit package: Does it meet the needs of beneficiaries? Does it adequately address financial barriers to accessing care? Does it have intended impacts on the quality and quantity of services provided?

Effectiveness of the targeting approach: Are existing guidelines implemented as they should be? Are the guidelines practicable? Do they yield efficient targeting? What are the errors of inclusion and exclusion?

Delivery: Is the benefit package delivered in a timely manner? Are there any issues with quality of delivery? Are the grievance mechanisms in place appropriate and functioning?

Monitoring: Is there adequate management oversight of the scheme, facilitated by monitoring reports? Are accountability systems in place?

Budget execution: Are budgets sufficient for implementing the scheme, across all types of expenditure (especially staffing levels and non-staff recurrent spending on fuel, functioning, befit flow to delivery points etc to allow for adequate monitoring and supervision)? Are disbursements of Stipends made on time? Are there any bottlenecks in the flow of funds? Please analyze the present situation and recommend for improved delivery mechanism.

Evaluation: Are arrangements in place to effectively evaluate performance of the programme in terms of outcomes and impacts?


66

Overlap or synergies with other relevant schemes: Are there any areas of duplication with other schemes? Are there synergies in the field of mutually supporting schemes?

V. Conclusions and Way Forward

Prima facie evidence from the diagnostic that the scheme could / not be selected for costed reforms and strong reasons thereof. Reasons may also include a revisit of the design, product and processes, implementation practices, global best practices etc.

Way forward for follow-up reform plan, identify and discuss the current gaps and existing issues and challenges that may be further explored in the reform plan.

Identify possible courses of reform plans – Improving / Combining / Merger of Schemes, Consolidation of Schemes, Convergence of Schemes with Single Nodal Authority, New Scheme etc.

Identify the externalities related to the scheme on designing the costed reforms. For example, external line departments may play important role of convergence towards the reformed plans.

Deliverables and Outputs

The study shall be performed in two phases. The first phase shall constitute ‘evidence based fact finding’ where the consultants shall perform a desk review using secondary literature and available reports, primary surveys like institutional interviews and stakeholders’ reviews through field visits etc. The first phase shall end with a draft report on the findings including a comparison between the regulations / operational manual and what is actually happening in the field that shall be submitted to the SPFMSP project. The first phase shall essentially end by August 20th 2017.

Based on the evidence gained in the first phase and subsequent discussions with the supply side such as the Government and implementing agencies, the second phase shall constitute concrete recommendations to be provided by the consultants towards improving the financial and operational efficiencies of the program that promote value for money.

The consultants shall be reporting to the Team Leader of SPFMSP Project at Dhaka office and shall be required to perform various tasks in order to deliver the following:

7.1 First Phase ending August 20th, 2017

First Deliverable – Short Inception Report including Understanding of Tasks, Work Plan and Timelines. Research Methodology including the application of different tools and techniques shall also be a part of this deliverable (07 Days).

This shall include but not limited to, Orientation on Assignment with SPBMU and MSP; Literature Review and Briefing; Pre-arranged meetings with Finance Ministry, Line Ministry, Line Directorate and Donor Agencies. Designing Research Plan including Tools and Techniques; a short Presentation and Finalisation of the work plan.

Second Deliverable –Draft Report on Findings (15 Days),

This shall include evidence based findings on Field Visit to Two or more Upazilas including meetings at District, Upazila and Union Level and with those of Beneficiaries. Data and information gathering and processing; further discussions and fact findings if any and submission of the Draft Report to the SPFMSP project Team Leader.


67

There shall be a gap of time before the next activity. This time period shall be utilized by the SPFMSP project and Government stakeholders to provide comments and opinions on the draft report. A Skype call with the International Consultant may be held where the findings and draft report may be presented to the project officials.

7.2 Second Phase beginning 15th September, 2017

Third Deliverable as draft final report providing concrete recommendations to improve upon the Program on incorporating suggestions and comments from the stakeholders

(08 days)

Once the comments and suggestions are provided to the team of consultants, it is expected that they submit the final draft report within two weeks using the buffer of 15 days as mentioned above. This report shall carry evidence based concrete recommendations so as to improve upon the programs.

Fourth Deliverable – Conduct Half Day Stakeholders’ Workshop on Findings and Recommendations and Submission of Final Report (03 Days)

Consultants shall be responding / incorporating the suggestions received from the SPFMSP project, and conduct Stakeholders’ Workshop in Dhaka. This shall involve the second travel to Dhaka for the international consultant.

Fifth Deliverable – Submission of Final Report based on opinions / comments / recommendations from the workshop within the next three days. (03 Days)

Schedule of Deliverables and Outputs

Deliverables

Deliverable No. of Days Output Deadline

First Phase

Detailed Joint briefing with Executive Director, Team Leader and other team members’

Literature Review of Available Documents and Reports.

Meetings with Ministry of Finance (MoF), Line Ministry and Line Directors in consultation with the Team Leader.

Prepare a Research Plan and Tools & Techniques. Presentation to SPFMSP and finalize the Inception Report

07

(5 Days at Dhaka for International Consultant)

Inception Report Submitted 25th July, 2017


68

Field Visit to Two or more Upazila, Unions and Meetings with Stakeholders, Service Providers and Beneficiaries

Data and Information Processing on Evidences based Findings and

Submission of Draft Report

15

(Field Visit for National Consultant and Home Office)

Draft Report Submitted

20th August, 2017

Second Phase

Incorporation of Suggestions and comments and submission of final draft report

08

(Home Office)

Final Draft Report

12th October, 2017

Presentation of Findings, Recommendations and the Way Forward (for Reform Plan) to Stakeholders in the form of a workshop in Dhaka

03

(Dhaka)

Workshop Conducted

25th October, 2017

Final Report to the Team Leader & DFID Bangladesh

03

(Dhaka / Home Office)

Final Report Submitted

31st October, 2017

Total Days 36

Note:

It is assumed that both the consultants shall be reporting to the project at Dhaka on a pre-decided date but not later than 15/07/2017.

The International consultant shall be required to work in Dhaka / Bangladesh for a total period of 11 Days of which 5 days shall be spent during the first tenure at Dhaka. Similarly, during the end of the study, 06 Days should be spent in Dhaka including conducting the dissemination workshop and finalization of the report.

International Consultants shall be provided with Two Return Tickets from the Home Office to Dhaka and Travel arrangements from Dhaka to Field.

Indicative Sources of Information for Desk Review and Interviews

The consultant will review the following literatures of the project as a part of desk review:

Primary Education

a Mid-Term Evaluation/Assessment of “Primary Education Stipend Project (Phase –II)” done by independent consultants (March 2012)


69

This report presents the principal findings of the Mid-term Evaluation of the Primary Education Stipend Project (PESP) conducted by an independent consulting firm (BETS in joint venture with CRDS).The report was prepared on the basis of data collected from the beneficiary students and different program manager groups. The main objectives of the study were to assess the enrolment rate, attendance rate, dropout rate, completion rate and the quality of overall primary education due to the interventions made by Primary Education Stipend Project (PESP)

Bangladesh Primary Education Stipends – A Qualitative Assessment done jointly by GOB and UNICEF (November 2013):

The study was undertaken collaboratively and the report was jointly produced by the Directorate of Primary Education, the Ministry of Primary and Mass Education, the Power and Participation Research center (PPRC) and UNICEF Bangladesh. The purpose of the study was to assist appropriate programme and policy reform in the primary education stipend programme for the new phase of the sector wide Third Primary Education Development Programme (PEDP- III)

http://www.unicef.org/bangladesh/Bngladesh_Primary_Education_Stipends_survey.pdf

c. How Effective the Primary Education Stipend Program in Bangladesh to HelpRural Poor Children to Enrol and Protect from School Dropout? Ahmed Ullah and MuniPerumal

http://www.wbiconpro.com/231-AhmedUllah.pdf

d.The Bangladesh Primary Education Stipend Project: A Descriptive Analysis Karen Tietjen

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EDUCATION/Resources/278200-1099079877269/547664-1099080014368/BangladeshStipend.pdf

2. Secondary Education

e.The Girls' Stipend Program in Bangladesh

by Raynor Janet, Wesson Kate (2006). Journal of Education for International Development 2:2 July 2006. http://www.equip123.net/JEID/articles/3/Girls’StipendPrograminBangladesh.pdf

This paper evaluated the program’s effects to set precedence for other developing countries seeking to support girls’ education as part of the effort to meet EFA and Millennium Development Goals.

f. Empowerment Case Studies: Female Secondary School Assistance Project, Bangladesh*

[*This case study was prepared by a team comprising Prof. Deepti Bhatnagar and Ankita Dewan at the Indian Institute of Management (Ahmedabad) and Magüi Moreno Torres and Parameeta Kanungo at the World Bank (Washington DC). ]

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTEMPOWERMENT/Resources/14828_Bangladesh





http://www.equip123.net/JEID/articles/3/Girls'StipendPrograminBangladesh.pdf



70

g. Poverty and Equity: Access to Education in Bangladesh by Altaf Hossain and Benjamin Zeitlyn,Create Pathways to Access, Research Monograph No-51, December 2010 (PTA51).

This paper shows how strongly poverty affects access to primary and secondary schools. It also influences the extent of silent exclusion – children who are over age, irregularly attending, and under achieving. Though considerable gains have been made in improving overall levels of access it is clear that inequalities remain large and may even be growing. Schemes designed to reduce inequality have suffered from poor targeting and inefficient implementation.

h. Development of Secondary Education through Projects intervention: An assessment

By M. A. Mojid, Senior Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist,

Monitoring & Evaluation Wing, Directorate of Secondary and Higher Education

http://bea-bd.org/site/images/pdf/42.pdf

i. Female secondary school stipend programme in Bangladesh: A critical assessment

Simeen Mahmud, Senior Research Fellow, Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies First Draft May 28, 2003; Revised July 2, 2003

http://portal.unesco.org/education/en/file_download.php/6c1807a68c58613a407957a6adbd8cc7Female

j. SEQAEP 5 Years Success Story, Documentation of SEQAEP. 2014

Through SEQAEP, PMT system has been introduced in Bangladesh for the first time. Female students can get priority, but in this system pro-poor boys group can also get priority. PMT has been successfully implemented by SEQAEP since 2009. Through this method stipend and tuition facilities are provided to students of ultra-poor and poor families for secondary education. The impact of this component of the project was profound. The percentage of poor students who enrolled in the secondary schools was 47.18% in project period while the target had been 39%. This shows that both parents and students in Bangladesh are interested to pursue education and this kind of programs can bridge the gaps.

k. Evaluation Study of Pro-poor Stipend Program under SESDP

By Prof. Dr. Md. Lutfur Rahman, Consultant

November 2013 Dhaka

l. Evaluation Approach Paper

Impact Evaluation of ADB Supported Interventions in Bangladesh’s Secondary Education Sector

August 2013

Team Leader: Karl Hughes, Senior Evaluation Specialist





71

There are currently two modalities of targeting children for stipends in Bangladesh – the proxy means testing (PMT) method of the World Bank and the community-based targeting method of ADB and GoB. Given that there are plans to harmonize the approach used in Bangladesh for administering the stipend intervention by 2017, which approach should be adopted?

http://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/evaluation-document/36126/files/eap-ban-educ.pdf

3. Stipend for Disabled Students

Implementation Manual for the Programme on Stipend for the Students with Disabilities 2013 of Department of Social Services (DSS) Under the Ministry of Social Welfare.

Indicative List of Stakeholder for Meetings and Interviews

The consultants shall be required to perform discussions at different level within the Ministry and Line Directorates. Following is an indicative list of government officials and other stakeholders that consultant shall be required to meet.

In Dhaka

At the Ministry Level: Secretary / Joint Secretary Ministry of Primary and Mass Education – For policy perspective

At the Line Directorate Level: Director General Primary Education

Project Director, Primary Education Stipend Programme – For detailed status of implementation

Bankers associated with PESP

Other knowledgeable persons in PESP programme.

At District Level

Deputy Commissioner, District Primary Education Officer,

Bankers associated with PESP

Primary Education Stipend Programme Monitoring Officer

Upazila and Union Level

Upazila Chairman / Vice Chairman

Upazila Nirbahi officer

Upazila Education officer

Upazila Assistant Education officer

Head Master / Local School teacher



72

Bank Representatives/Mobile banking Service(MFS) providers

Field Level

Head Master / School Teachers

Meeting with few Beneficiaries and Non Beneficiaries

Initial Briefing and Field Visit

It is expected that the service providers shall begin his / her work with a short orientation on the programs and tasks and shall meet the SPFMSP team and its members within the first week.

First Week on Job at Dhaka

One Day of Orientation on Assignment with SPBMU and MSP

One Day of Literature Review and Briefing from National Consultant

One day of Pre-arranged meetings with Line Ministry Officials

Two days of Pre-arranged meetings with the Line Directorate officials as well as with the Civil Societies / NGOs

Second Week on Job at Dhaka

One Day of literature review of other documents

One Day for Designing Tools and Techniques

One Day for Designing the Diagnostic Study Plan

One Day for Presentation of the Diagnostic Study Plan and Tools and Techniques

One Final Day for Fine Tuning and Finalization of the work plan including tools and techniques.

Field Visit: At the end of two weeks, the service provider is supposed to be ready with the knowledge and information from the policy as well as strategy perspective as the meetings with the LM and LD as well as secondary literature review would equip her / him with the research objectives and questions as well as an approach to be adopted for the research plan in the field.

Beginning week three, the service provider is expected to be in the field and would begin from the district headquarter meeting the Deputy Commissioner and other officials including district officials of the line directorate. The next two weeks shall be dedicated to the field visit where two districts should be covered by the service provider, to be decided later

Third Week on Job at Field – District One

One Day of Discussions at District Level

One Day of Discussions at Upazila Level

Half Day of Discussions at Union Level and Half day of Discussions with the Beneficiaries

One Extra Field Visit Day

One Day Back in Dhaka for Recapitulating


73

Fourth Week on Job at Field – District Two

One Day of Discussions at District Level

One Day of Discussions at Upazila Level

Half Day of Discussions at Union Level and Half day of Discussions with the Beneficiaries

One Extra Field Visit Day

One day back in Dhaka for Recapitulating

Note: Depending on the work requirement as agreed between the service provider and the Team Leader of the SPFMSP, only two district could be chosen and program modified accordingly.

Counterpart Staff Availability

The service provider shall be reporting to the Team Leader (TL) of the SPFMSP project. All deliverables are required to be essentially approved by the TL. The TL shall also remain the single point of contact (SPOC) for the service provider for all administrative and technical functions. However, the SPFMSP project shall make available one official from the Managing Agent who would be coordinating with the service provider on one hand and the government and other officials on the other towards organizing various meetings etc. If necessary, the counterpart staff shall also be accompanying the service provider during the field visits and shall facilitate meetings and discussions. The service provider shall be provided with a working space along with a WiFi at the office of the SPBMU in Dhaka. However they are expected to have their own laptops and / or other equipment to perform their tasks.

Location of Assignment

The consultant will undertake work in Dhaka and a maximum of two selected Districts and its Upazilas / Unions as the case may be, where the PESP is being implemented. While Seven (7) Weeks are supposed to be spent in Bangladesh, the international consultant can work from Home Office for the rest of the period.


74

Annexure III. List of Documents Referred

1. Primary Education

a Mid-Term Evaluation/Assessment of “Primary Education Stipend Project (Phase –II)” done by independent consultants (March 2012)

This report presents the principal findings of the Mid-term Evaluation of the Primary Education Stipend Project (PESP) conducted by an independent consulting firm (BETS in joint venture with CRDS). The report was prepared on the basis of data collected from the beneficiary students and different program manager groups. The main objectives of the study were to assess the enrolment rate, attendance rate, dropout rate, completion rate and the quality of overall primary education due to the interventions made by Primary Education Stipend Project (PESP)

a. Bangladesh Primary Education Stipends – A Qualitative Assessment done jointly by GOBand UNICEF (November 2013):

The study was undertaken collaboratively and the report was jointly produced by the Directorate of Primary Education, the Ministry of Primary and Mass Education, the Power and Participation Research center (PPRC) and UNICEF Bangladesh. The purpose of the study was to assist appropriate programme and policy reform in the primary education stipend programme for the new phase of the sector wide Third Primary Education Development Programme (PEDP- III) http://www.unicef.org/bangladesh/Bngladesh_Primary_Education_Stipends_survey.pdf

c. How Effective the Primary Education Stipend Program in Bangladesh to HelpRural Poor Children to Enrol and Protect from School Dropout? Ahmed Ullah and MuniPerumal


d.The Bangladesh Primary Education Stipend Project: A Descriptive Analysis KarenTietjen


2. Secondary Education

e.The Girls' Stipend Program in Bangladeshby Raynor Janet, Wesson Kate (2006). Journal of Education for International Development 2:2 July 2006. http://www.equip123.net/JEID/articles/3/Girls’StipendPrograminBangladesh.pdf

This paper evaluated the program’s effects to set precedence for other developing countries seeking to support girls’ education as part of the effort to meet EFA and Millennium Development Goals.






http://www.equip123.net/JEID/articles/3/Girls'StipendPrograminBangladesh.pdf


75

f. Empowerment Case Studies: Female Secondary School Assistance Project, Bangladesh*[*This case study was prepared by a team comprising Prof. Deepti Bhatnagar and Ankita Dewan at the Indian Institute of Management (Ahmedabad) and Magüi Moreno Torres and Parameeta Kanungo at the World Bank (Washington DC). ] http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTEMPOWERMENT/Resources/14828_Bangladesh

g. Poverty and Equity: Access to Education in Bangladesh by Altaf Hossain and Benjamin Zeitlyn,Create Pathways to Access, Research Monograph No-51, December 2010 (PTA51). This paper shows how strongly poverty affects access to primary and secondary schools. It also influences the extent of silent exclusion – children who are over age, irregularly attending, and under achieving. Though considerable gains have been made in improving overall levels of access it is clear that inequalities remain large and may even be growing. Schemes designed to reduce inequality have suffered from poor targeting and inefficient implementation.

h. Development of Secondary Education through Projects intervention: An assessmentBy M. A. Mojid, Senior Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist, Monitoring & Evaluation Wing, Directorate of Secondary and Higher Education http://bea-bd.org/site/images/pdf/42.pdf i. Female secondary school stipend programme in Bangladesh: A critical assessmentSimeen Mahmud, Senior Research Fellow, Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies First Draft May 28, 2003; Revised July 2, 2003


j. SEQAEP 5 Years Success Story, Documentation of SEQAEP. 2014Through SEQAEP, PMT system has been introduced in Bangladesh for the first time. Female students can get priority, but in this system pro-poor boys group can also get priority. PMT has been successfully implemented by SEQAEP since 2009. Through this method stipend and tuition facilities are provided to students of ultra-poor and poor families for secondary education. The impact of this component of the project was profound. The percentage of poor students who enrolled in the secondary schools was 47.18% in project period while the target had been 39%. This shows that both parents and students in Bangladesh are interested to pursue education and this kind of programs can bridge the gaps.

k. Evaluation Study of Pro-poor Stipend Program under SESDPBy Prof. Dr. Md. Lutfur Rahman, Consultant November 2013 Dhaka

l. Evaluation Approach PaperImpact Evaluation of ADB Supported Interventions in Bangladesh’s Secondary Education Sector August 2013 Team Leader: Karl Hughes, Senior Evaluation Specialist There are currently two modalities of targeting children for stipends in Bangladesh – the proxy means testing (PMT) method of the World Bank and the community-based targeting method of ADB and GoB. Given that there are plans to harmonize the approach used in Bangladesh for administering the stipend intervention by 2017, which approach should be adopted? http://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/evaluation-document/36126/files/eap-ban-educ.pdf







76

Annexure IV. List of Persons Met

Lists of Persons Met at Dhaka

1. Muhammed Muslim Chowdhury, Secretary, Finance Division, Ministry of Finance2. Mr.Gias Uddin Ahmed, Additional Secretary, Ministry of Primary and Mass Education3. Mr. Mohiuddin Khan , Additional Secretary ( Development), S&H E Division, Ministry of

Education4. Gazi Muhammed Nurul Kabir, Director General (Additional Secretary), Directorate of Social

Services5. Md. Ramjan Ali, Additional. Director General, (additional Secretary), Directorate of Primary

Education6. Prof. Dr. S.M. Wahiduzzman, Director General, Directorate of Secondary and Higher Education7. Muhammed .Manzoor Alam Bhuyan, Executive Director, SPMFSP, Ministry of Finance8. Dr.Mohiuddin Ahmed, Project Director (Joint Secretary), Primary Education Stipend Project

(PESP)9. Mr. Abu Muhammed Yousuf, Director (programme), Directorate of Social Services10. Md. Ataur Rahman, Deputy Director (Deputy Secretary) SPMFSP, Ministry of Finance11. Dr. Nurul Amin, Deputy Director (Planning), Directorate Of Primary Education)12. Md. Mahfujur Rahman, Assistant Director, Primary Education Stipend Project, MOPME13. Mr.Siddiqur Rahman Chowdhury, Team Leader, SPMFSP, Ministry of Finance14. Kavim Bhatnagar, SP Economist, SPMFSP15. Mr.AKM Shamsuddin, SP specialist, SPMFSP16. Mr.Abdul Matin Chowdhury, SP Specialist, SPMFSP17. Mr.Kazi Ariful Huda, SP Specialist, SPMFSP18. Mr. Justus Oguna, MIS, SP Specialist, SPMFSP19. Mr. Arif Hasan, MIS, SPMFSP20. Mr. Main Uddin, General Manager, Rupali Bank, Head Office21. Dr.Shahdat Hussain,CEO,Pragati System LTD,SureCash

List of Persons Met During Field Visits

1.District: Patuakhali

1. Dr. Masumur Rahman, Deputy Commissioner,2. Mr. Molla Bakhtiar Rahman, Assistant District Primary Education Officer3. Mr. Moklesur Rahman, Monitoring Officer, PESP4. Manager, Rupali Bank, DC office Branch

Upazila: Kalapara

5. Mr. Abdul Motaleb Talukdar, Chairman, Kalapara Upazila6. Mr. Mostafa Kamal, Vice-Chairman7. Mr. Khandakhar Rabiul Islam, UNO,8. Mr. Manilal Shikdar, Upazila Education Officer, Kalapara9. Mr. Shahid Hussain, Upazila Secondary Education Officer10. Md. Montasir Billah, Upazila Social Services Officer


77

11. Md. Nasir Ahmed,Vice- Principal, Khepu Para Nesar Uddin Fazil Madrasa12. Mr. Abdul Hye Azad, Head Teacher, Gamuri bunia Government Primary School13. Chairman SMC, Mothers/Guardians and community leader of Gamuri bunia Government

Primary School

Upazila: Dumki

14. Md. Shahjahan Shikdar,Chairman, Dumki Upazila15. Ms.Kamrun Nahar, UNO,16. Upazila Secondary Education Officer17. Md. Jonayed Ivne-Aziz, Upazila Social Services Officer18. Md.Jahangir Hussain Khan, Upazila Education Officer (Incharge),19. Moulana Sayedur Rahman, Dumki Islamia Fazil Madrasa20. Ms. Fatema Khanam, Head Teacher, Dumki Satani Government Primary School21. Md Zillur Rahman,member Union Parishad,22. Md.Abdul Jabbar,Chairman ,SMC members, Mothers/Guardians and Students of Satani

Government Primary School23. Mr. Shahin, Sure Cash agent

2) District: Nilphamary

1. Mohammed Khaled Rahim,.Deputy commissioner2. Mr. Shafiqul Islam, District Education Officer3. Deputy Director, DSS4. Md. Osman Ghani, District Primary Education Officer5. Mr. Mijanur Rahman, Monitoring Officer, PESP

Upazila: Domar

6. MD. Abdur Razzaque Basunia, Chairman, Domar Upazila7. Umme Fatima, UNO8. Mr. Amir Hussain, Upazila Education Officer9. Upazila Secondary Education Officer,10. Mr. Farhad Hossain, Upazila Social Services Officer11. Md.Abu Jafar Shamsuddin, Head Master,Punga Mohesh Chandra Lala High School12. Mr. Maidul Islam, Head Teacher, Punga Government Primary School13. Chairman SMC, Members, Mothers/Guardians/Community leader and students of Punga

Government Primary School

Upazila: Saidpur

14. Md. Mokhsedul Mumin, Chairman, Saidpur Upazila15. Md. Bazlur Rashid, UNO16. Md. Shahjahan Mandol, UEO17. Most. Shakerina Begum, Upazila Secondary Education Officer18. Mr.Pulin Chandra Das, Head Teacher, Samir Uddin Adarsha High School, Saidpur19. Ms. Razia Sultana, Head Teacher, Uttar Sonakhuly Nesaria Government Primary School


78

20. SMC Members, Mothers/Guardians and Students of Sonakhuly Nesaria Government PrimarySchool

21. Manager, Rupali Bank, Saidpur22. Distributor,SureCash, Saidpur23. Mr. Tanvir Taher Aaryan, Area Sales Manager, SureCash24. Mr. Ayub Ali, Campaign Manager, SureCash

3)District: Manikganj

Upazila: Saturia

25. Mrs.Badrunnesa Jhinuk, Women Vice-Chairman26. Ms.Nahid Farjana Siddiqui, UNO27. Mr. Ruhul Amin, Chairman, Baliati Union Parishad28. Md. Mainul Islam, Upazila Education Officer29. Mrs. Rina Akhter,Head Teacher, Fukur Hati Purbopara Government Primary School30. Md Gulam Hussain, SMC Chairman31. Assistant Teachers , Mothers/Guardians of Fukur Hati Purbopara Government Primary School32. Md. Tariqul Haque Khan, Area Manager, SureCash33. Md. Rashedul Islam, Territory Manager, SureCash


79

Annexure V. Questionnaires Administered

Review of Bangladesh Primary Education Stipend Program and the program for students with disabilities.

Interview Schedule for Head Teachers

Introduction

Hello. My name is _____________________

We are conducting a study for the Ministry of Finance about student experiences with the primary school stipend program as well as the program for students with disabilities. We would like to ask you some questions about your experience as a head teacher. It will take about one hour. We will not attach your name to the interview results and what you say will be treated as confidential and anonymous. We would like your permission to record the interview, but only the interview team will hear the recordings. The recording helps us make sure our interview notes are accurate.

Do you have any questions?

A. Personal information

1. District:...............................................................................................2. Upazilla:..........................................................................................

3. Gender:3.1 female 3.2 male

4. Age:

5. Highest educational qualification:5.1 Graduate 5.2 Post Graduate 5.3 M Phil

6. Professional qualifications:6.1 C-in-Ed. 6.2 B.Ed/Dip-in-Ed 6.3 M.Ed 6.4 No degree

7. Years of experience in the organisation: ____

8. Source of stipend funds


80

-primary education stipend -stipends for students with disabilities

9. Name of school:

10. Place:

B. Responsibility of the head teacher

11. What are your duties regarding the stipend program(s)

11.1 To develop awareness among the communities, students 11.2 Help students applying for a stipend 11.3 To ensure conditions of stipend are upheld by the recipients 11.4 Others(Specify)-----------------------------

C. Training on Stipend

12. Did you have any training on stipend program?

12.1 Yes

12.2 No

13. If yes, please answer the following:

13.1 Place of training: ..............................................................................................

13.2 Duration of training.................................................................................

14. How effective was the training?

14.1 Very Much

14.2 Much

14.3 Some

14.4 Not at all

15. Do you need more training on stipend management?

15.1 Yes

15.2 No


81

D. Selection Method and Criteria.

PLEASE ASK THESE QUESTION FOR THE PRIMARY EDUCATION STIPEND AND STIPENDS

FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES SEPARATELY.

16. How does the selection of beneficiaries take place?

- for the primary education stipend program

- for the program for students with disabilities

17. Is the selection process sufficient?

17.1 Yes

17.2 No

Please explain

18. Are the personnel operating well?

18.1 Yes

18.2 No

Please explain

19. Do applicants fill out forms required correctly?

19.1 Yes, all

19.2 Most

19.3 Only some

19.4 Almost no one

20. What selection system do you think works best in avoiding the wrong students getting

a stipend or avoiding exclusion of students who have a right to receive stipend?It is very

important to determine for instance if students or members of the household indeed

comply with the conditions to partake in the stipend program.

21. Are there fake students?

21.1 Yes

21.2 No


82

If yes, how many do you think? Give a rough estimate in percentage of students in the

school

22. Do you go about verifying information such as the actual marital status of students or

the actual income of a household?

22.1 Yes

22.2 No

Please explain

23. Are there students receiving a stipend where they actually are not entitled to do so?23.1 Yes 23.2 No

If yes, how many do you think? Give a rough estimate in percentage of the total number of students receiving stipends in your school in the current school year.

24. Are there students not receiving a stipend who actually are entitled to receive one.24.1 Yes 24.2 No

25. If so, how many are there in the current school year. Just a rough estimate inpercentages

E. Stipend rate as provided.

PLEASE ASK THESE QUESTION FOR THE PRIMARY EDUCATION STIPEND AND STIPENDS

FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES SEPARATELY.

26. How high is the stipend?26.1 Grade 1 26.2 Grade 2 26.3 Grade 3 26.4 Grade 4 26.5 Grade 5 26.6 Grade 6 26.7 Grade 7 26.8 Grade 8

27. Are potential beneficiaries made aware of the possibility to apply for a stipend?27.1 Yes


83

27.2 No

How does this happen?

28. Do you collect the stipend forms and distribute in the schools?

28.1 Yes 28.2 No

29. Do you correct the filled-in forms for any errors?29.1 Yes 29.2 No

30. If yes, what errors have you found?30.1 No signature of students 30.2 No names of parents / guardians 30.3 No information of bank 30.4 No signature of bank officers 30.5 No date of admission 30.6 No signature of head teacher 30.7 Others.........................................

F. Disbursement of the stipends.

PLEASE ASK THESE QUESTION FOR THE PRIMARY EDUCATION STIPEND AND STIPENDS FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES SEPARATELY.

31. Is the disbursement of the stipends well organized?31.1 Yes 31.2 Yes to some degree 31.3 No

Please explain

32. Is the funding process well organised?32.1 Yes 32.2 Yes to some degree

32.3 No

Please explain

33. Are the stipends readily accessible for the beneficiaries?33.1 Yes, 33.2 Yes to some degree 33.3 No

Please explain


84

34. Do you, for instance, find any error with banks providing the stipend, for instanceproviding the stipends too late or not at all. Errors might be:

34.1 Delay in payment 34.2 Delay in submitting account opening form & specimen signature card 34.3 Delay in supplying pass book and cheque book 34.4 Delay in Payment Advice 34.5 No attestation of students’ acoounts opening form & photo by HT 34.6 Discripency in students’ specimen signature 34.7 No up to date of students’ passbook 34.8 Others: ...........................................................

Please explain

Please indicate where applicable.

35. Could you give us your opinion about the process of awarding the stipends?

35.1 Is information about the stipends easily available to families the stipends are meant for.

Always Usually Sometimes Almost never

35.2 The process for applying for stipends is clear to families?


35.3 If families have questions about how to apply for a stipend, it is clear how they can get the information they need?


35.4 How appropriate is the scheme for determining financial need?

Very appropriate

Appropriate Somewhat appropriate

Not appropriate

35.5 When there are problems in awarding the stipends, the problems are usually at what management level?

Central level

Upazilla Bank school

36. do you know about any problem in delivery process of stipend at school level?

36.1 Yes 36.2 No

.37.If Yes, what are the problems?

37.1 .No opening of bank account by the institute in time

37.2 Delay in filling up the form by the student

37.3No record keeping of stipend related documents by the Upazilla offices.

37.4. Pressure of guardian for increasing students’ exam marks


85

37.5 Pressure by guardians to include their wards for stipends

37.6 Problem in deciding marital status of students

37.7. Others: ...........................................................

38. Is there any problem in communicating with local banks?

38.1 Yes

38.1 No

39.Are there any non-financial benefits awarded through the programs?

41.1 Yes 41.2 No

40.In your opinion, how widespread is each of the following issues?

40.1 Misuse of funds extremely very somewhat not at all

40.2 Giving stipends to the wrong students

extremely very somewhat not at all

40.3 Teachers or committee members favoring the children of their family and/or friends


40.4 Giving families incorrect information extremely very somewhat not at all

40.5 Being slow to respond to questions from families


40.6 Headteachers who are uncooperative extremely very somewhat not at all

40.7 Teachers treat stipend students less well than they treat other students


41.In your opinion, how serious is each of the following issues?

41.1 Misuse of funds extremely very somewhat not at all

41.2 Giving stipends to the wrong students extremely very somewhat not at all

41.3 Teachers or committee members favoring the children of their family and/or friends


41.4 Giving families incorrect information extremely very somewhat not at all


86

41.5 Being slow to respond to questions from families


41.6 Problems communicating with other government offices


41.7 Headteachers who are uncooperative extremely very somewhat not at all

41.8 Teachers treat stipend students less well than they treat other students


41.9 Is there tension between students who receive a scholarship and those that do not as far as you know?

always usually sometimes seldom

41.10 How do teachers treat stipend students compared to other students as far as you know?

better About the same

not as well

G. Effectiveness of the program

PLEASE ASK THESE QUESTION FOR THE PRIMARY EDUCATION STIPEND AND STIPENDS FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES SEPARATELY.

What benefits have the recipients derived from the program?

42. They have been able to remain in school

42.1Yes, for most students; 42.2Yes, but only for some students; 42.3 No, for almost no students;

43. They have been enrolled in school

43.1 Yes, for most students; 43.2 Yes, but only for some students; 43.3 No, for almost no students;

44. Their performance in school has been improved.44.1 Yes, for most students; 44.1 Yes, but only for some students; 44.1 No, for almost no students;

........................................................................................................................................


87

Review of Bangladesh Primary Education Stipend Progams and the stipend program for students with disabilities.

Interview schedule for education officers at upazilla level

Introduction

Hello. My name is _____________________

We are conducting a study for the Ministry of Finance about student experiences with the primary education stipend program and the program for students with disabilities. We would like to ask you some question about your experience with the programs. It will take about one hour. We will not attach your name to the interview results and what you say will be treated as confidential and anonymous.

Do you have any questions?

A. Personal information

1. District:...............................................................................................2.Upazilla:..........................................................................................

3.Gender:

4.Age:

5.Highest educational qualification:

(1= Graduate2= Post graduate 3=M.Phil)

6.Professional qualificatios:

(1= C-in-Ed. 2= B.Ed/Dip-in-Ed3=M.Ed4= No degree)

7.Experience in the organisation: yrs

Date: ...................


88

B Responsibility of UEO

8.Which stipend projects/programs do you supervise?

9. What are your duties to implement the stipend programs?

9.1To communicate with bank officials 9.2To fix date and place for stipend distribution

9.3To supervise schools regularly 9.4To develop awareness among the community 9.5To ensure conditions of stipend

9.6Others(Specify)-----------------------------

B. Training on Stipend

10. Do you have any training on stipend program?

10.1 Yes

10.2 No

11. If yes, please answer the following:

Duration of training : ...................................................................................

12. How effective was the training?

12.1 Very Much

12.2 Much

12.3 Some

12.4 Not at all

Please explain

13 Do you need more training on stipend management?

13.1 Yes;

13.2 No

14 If so, what kind of training do you need?


89

D. Impact of the program

PLEASE ANSWER FOR THE PRIMARY EDUCATION STIPEND PROGRAM AND THE PROGRAM FOR

STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES SEPARATELY

15 Has the money reserved for the stipends been used in an efficient way?

15.1 Yes 15.2 No 15.3 If not, what is wrong?

16 Has the manpower reserved for the management been used in an efficient way?

16.1 Yes 16.2 No 16.3 If not, what is wrong?

17 Have the expected numbers of stipend to be issued indeed been reached over the past year?

17.1 Yes, 17.2 No 17.3 if no, why not?

18. What benefits have the recipients derived from the program?

. They have been able to remain in school;

18.1 Yes, for most students; 18.2 Yes, but only for some students; 18.3 No, for almost no students;

19. They have been enrolled in school;19.1 Yes, for most students; 19.2 Yes, but only for some students; 19.3 No, for almost no students;

20. Their performance in school has been improved.20.1 Yes, for most students; 20.2 Yes, but only for some students; 20.3 No, for almost no students;

21. Have measures been taken to make the effects and impact of the programs last in oneway or another?

21.1 Yes, 21.2 No.


90

21.3 If not, why not 22. Do you have any recommendations for the program or programs?

To increase its relevance?

To change the objectives?

To increase its efficiency?

To improve its management (selection,

disbursement, financial, management)

To improve its effectiveness and impact.

E. Selection Method and Criteria.

PLEASE ANSWER FOR THE PRIMARY EDUCATION STIPEND PROGRAM AND THE PROGRAM FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES SEPARATELY

23. How does the selection of beneficiaries take place?

Please explain

24. Do applicants fill out the form correctly?

24.1. yes all

24.2. most

24.3. only some

24.4. almost no one

24.5. NA

25. What selection system works best in avoiding the wrong students getting a stipend or avoiding

exclusion of students who have a right to receive stipend?

Please explain

26. Could you tell us what are the strengths and weaknesses of each of the programs as far as you

know them?

It is very important to determine for instance if students or members of the household indeed comply

with the conditions to partake in the stipend program(s).

27. Are there fake students?

27.1. Yes

27.2. No

Please explain


91

28. Do you go about verifying information such as the actual marital status of students or the actual

income of a household?

28.1. Yes

28.2. No

Please explain

29. Are there students receiving a stipend where they actually are not entitled to do so?29.1. Yes 29.2. No

If so, how many are there in the current school year do you think. Just give a rough estimate in percentage

30. Are there students not receiving a stipend who actually are entitled to receive one.30.1. Yes 30.2. No

31. If so, how many are there in the current school year. Just a rough estimate in percentage. ____

32. Are potential beneficiaries made aware of the possibility to apply for a stipend?

32.1. Yes

32.2. No

F. Disbursement procedures


33. Is the disbursement of the stipends well organized?

33.1. Yes,

33.2. No,

33.3. If not, what is wrong?

34. Is the funding process well organised?

34.1. Yes,

34.2. No

34.3. If not what is wrong?


92

35. Are the stipends readily accessible for the beneficiaries?

35.1. Yes,

35.2. No

35.3. If not what is wrong?

Do you, for instance, find any error with banks providing the stipend, for instance providing the

stipends too late or not at all.

Errors might be:

36. Delay in payment37. Delay in submitting account opening form & specimen signature card38. Delay in supplying pass book and cheque book39. Delay in Payment Advice40. attestation of students’ acoounts opening form & photo by HT41. Discripency in students’ specimen signature42. No up to date of students’ passbook43. Others: ...........................................................

44. Do you know about any problem in delivery process of stipend at school level?

44.1. Yes,

44.2. No

45. If Yes, what are the problems?

45.1. No opening of bank account by the institute in time 45.2. Delay in filling up the form by the student 45.3. No record keeping of stuipend related documents by the

Upazilla offices.

45.4. Pressure of guardian for increasing students’ exam marks 45.5. Pressure by guardians to include their wards for stipends

45.6. Problem in deciding marital status of students

45.7. Others: ...........................................................

46. Is there any problem to communicate with local banks?

46.1. Yes

46.2. No

47. If yes, please indicate what problems these are.

48. Are there any non-financial benefits awarded through the programs?

48.1. Yes

48.2. No


93

49. If yes, what benefits?

50. Are the beneficiaries notified on time (for instance before the tuiton is due)?

50.1. Yes,

50.2. No.

51. If no what time elapses between the notification and actual disbursement of the stipend?

Could you give us your opinion about the process of awarding the stipends?

52. Is information about the stipendseasily available to families thestipends are meant for.


53. The process for applying forstipends is clear to families?


54. If families have questions abouthow to apply for a stipend, it isclear how they can get theinformation they need?


55. How appropriate is the scheme fordetermining financial need?

Very appropriate

Appropriate A bit appropriate

Notappropriate

67 When there are problems in awarding the stipends, the problems are usually at what management level?

Central level upazilla bank school

H. Financial Management


68. Are you or the upazilla involved in any financial management?

68.1 Yes

68.2 No


94

If so, then answer:

69 Are financial statements available on time?

69.1 Yes

69.2 No

70 How frequent are audits? Indicate frequency per year -----

71 Are distribution of non-cash benefits accounted?

71.1 Yes

71.2 No

71.3 Not applicable

72 Are audit reports available, including recommendations for improvement;

72.1 Yes

72.2 No

72.3 If not, why not

In your opinion, how widespread is each of the following issues?

73 Misuse of funds extremely very somewhat not at all

74 Giving stipends to the wrong students extremely very somewhat not at all

75 Teachers or committee members favoring the children of their family and/or friends


76 Giving families incorrect information extremely very somewhat not at all

77 Being slow to respond to questions from families


78 Headteachers who are uncooperative extremely very somewhat not at all

79 Teachers treat stipend students less well than they treat other students



95

In your opinion, how serious is each of the following issues?

80 Misuse of funds extremely very somewhat not at all

81 Giving stipends to the wrong students extremely very somewhat not at all

82 Teachers or committee members favoring the children of their family and/or friends


83 Giving families incorrect information extremely very somewhat not at all

84 Being slow to respond to questions from families


85 Problems communicating with other government offices


86 Headteachers who are uncooperative extremely very somewhat not at all

87 Teachers treat stipend students less well than they treat other students


88 Is there tension between students who receive a scholarship and those that do not as far as you know?

always usually sometimes seldom

89 How do teachers treat stipend students compared to other students as far as you know?

better About the same

not as well


96

1.Focus group discussions: students, parents, guardians

Engagement questions for students

What do you think of the school you are currently attending?

What do you like about your school?

What don’t you like about your school?

Exploration Questions for students

What do you think of the stipend you receive?

Is it important for you? Why is it important?

Do you think the stipend is enough for you?

If not, how much more do you need?

What goes well in the stipend program? What does not go well?

Do you benefit from the stipend? In what way? If you do not benefit? Why is that?

Engagement questions for parents and guardians

What do you think of the school the children go to?

What do you like about the school?

What don’t you like about the school?

Could you name the stipend programs you know?

Exploration questions for parents and guardians

What do you think of the stipend for the children?

Is it important for the children do you think? Why is it important?

If you think it is not important, why is that. What should change to make it more important for the children?

Do you think the stipend is enough?

If not, how much more is needed?


Do the children who receive a stipend indeed benefit from the stipend? In what way? If you do not benefit? Why is that?


97

Does the community benefit from the stipend programs? If so in what way? If not what should happen to make the community benefit from the program?

Exit questions

Is there anything you would like to add to the discussion we had just now?

2.Focus group discussions: Management Committees (SMCs)

Engagement questions

What do you think of the school the children go to?

What do you like about the school?

What don’t you like about the school?

Could you name the stipend programs you know?

Exploration questions

Exactly what is your task in the management of the school? What are difficulties, what goes well.

What do you think of the stipend for the children?

Is it important for the children do you think? Why is it important?

If you think it is not important, why is that. What should change to make it more important for the children?

Do you think the stipend is enough?

If not, how much more is needed?


Do the children who receive a stipend indeed benefit from the stipend? In what way? If you do not benefit? Why is that?

Does the community benefit from the stipend programs? If so in what way? If not what should happen to make the community benefit from the program?

Exit questions

Is there anything you would like to add to the discussion we had just now?


98

Annexure VI. Brief on Payment System Reform

Proposed Reform Plan

The proposed reform plan targets the Payment System from the perspective of three different sets of stakeholders that are independent but are integrated within the system. While it strengthens the supply side on part of the exchequer and the concerned line ministries, it also focuses on empowering the beneficiaries at the demand side. From the perspective of the Finance Division, it works on minimizing the transaction costs and providing greater transparency to the system. It also ensures that the money is withdrawn from the Treasury, only when the payment is due and has been credited into the beneficiaries’ accounts. For the line departments, it eases out most of their functions and time that they spend on processing the payments to the beneficiaries as well as on independently negotiating and signing contracts with bankers / service providers. It also averts a situation where government money may be lying idle in intermediary banks for long durations. Most importantly, the reform system keeps the beneficiaries as the focal point of social protection programmes and strives to empower them to make an informed choice for obtaining their payments through any of the three principal modes currently available in the country, i.e., through the banks, mobile financial services (MFS) and the post offices.

For the MoPME, it would ease out most of their functions and time that they spend on processing the payments to the beneficiaries as well as on independently negotiating and signing contracts with bankers / service providers. It also averts a situation where government money may be lying idle in intermediary banks for long durations. Most importantly, the reform system keeps the beneficiaries as the focal point of social protection programmes and strives to empower them to make an informed choice for obtaining their payments through any of the three principal modes currently available in the country, i.e., through the banks, mobile financial services (MFS) and the post offices. Following are the salient features of the proposed reform plan that we feel that MoPME should consider for implementing transfer of Stipends:

- The current procedure for selection of beneficiaries including complying with conditionalities will continue for PESP. DPE shall remain to be the custodian of the data on beneficiaries and would be responsible for regularly updating them through their field staff at UEOs. Beneficiaries’ data shall also be digitized and updated at the field level capturing the NIDs of mothers / guardians.

- Beneficiaries (Mothers / Guardians) shall choose the mode of receiving the payments from among the approved channels and will inform accordingly to the field officials of the concerned department. Field staff, with the help of local community organisations and elected officials, shall be required to educate the beneficiaries and support them to make appropriate choice for mode (Bank, MFS providers, Postal) of receiving their payments. They will also be supported to choose a particular provider within their opted mode of payment.

- MIS units of the DPE / PD PESP shall maintain the data of beneficiaries on the platform and formats compatible with that of SPBMU MIS or FD for which SPBMU has already committed to the MoPME for linking the same.

Role of Key Players

1. Before the start of every payment cycle, the Schools with the help of the UEOs shallupload the list of beneficiaries in the MIS Portal of PESP along with the beneficiaries’payment option. The options may continue with the mobile wallet as before. PSESP MISshall verify the correctness of the updated data and the corrected data will be


99

automatically and immediately transferred to SPBMU MIS for cross validation with other schemes, whereever necessary.

2. The SPBMU MIS will validate the data with help of NID database of beneficiaries as well aswith the databases of all the other line ministries on a real-time basis.

3. The SPBMU MIS will highlight any discrepancy found in the data. The PESP / DPE will beresponsible for addressing all such discrepancies.

Role of DDO / CAO of PESP

1. Once the data is validated by SPBMU and whenever payment under any particular schemebecomes due, the DDO at the PESP will prepare the bill / claims for payment authorisationon the basis of ‘validated’ beneficiary data and submit the same to CAO through iBAS++.

2. The CAO of MoPME after performing all the required statutory checks prescribed byexisting regulations will instruct Bangladesh Bank through the iBAS++ platform foreffecting payment to the beneficiaries, directly into their accounts (G2P)

G2P Effected by Central Bank

1. On receiving payment instructions from the concerned CAO, the Bangladesh Bank(BB) willaccess the EFT file at iBAS++ platform and will instruct the designated banks to credit thebeneficiary accounts through the Payment System Provider selected by them.

2. In case of payment through Mobile Financial Services, the BB shall transfer the fundthrough the designated bank of the MFS.

3. In case of payment through Post Office, the BB shall transfer the fund instructions to SonaliBank and Sonali Bank on its part will transfer the same to the PO.

Reconciliation: After the transfer to beneficiaries account the PSP shall furnish the payment list to BB through their designated banks. The BB in turn will forward the same to the respective CAOs where it would be reconciled with the DDOs. Accounting and auditing of the disbursed funds will continue to be conducted as per the existing provisions in the rules.

Following three diagrams schematically depict the three stages of the proposed operational procedures

• Validation of beneficiary data• Payment Process, and• Post Payment Reconciliation


100


101

Implementation Requirements

In order to implement such a system, it may be necessary to develop and strengthen certain systemic processes and capacities at the FD, the line ministries as well as the banking system, MFS providers and the BPO. For the FD, while it is an essential prerequisite to operationalise the central MIS at the SPBMU that is linked with the iBAS++ on one hand and the MIS of line ministries on the other, there is also a need to access the NIDs of the beneficiaries for validation purposes. On the part of the line ministries, it is absolutely necessary to have digitized databases of the beneficiaries that are verified and mapped to their NIDs. While the data entry and verifications with NIDs could be performed at the field level, the digitized data should be integrated into the departmental MIS at the central level. At the level of the Central Bank, there may be a necessity to enhance the capacity for a real-time transfer of the funds through the BEFTN to the concerned banks, MFS and BPO that will need to develop the capacities to credit each individual account using the core or locally developed banking solutions. While many of these elements already exist in some form or the other with each stakeholder, it would be essential to bring all of these pieces together and make them compatible so that an integrated payment system may be implemented by the GoB.

Published on December 2017

The report on the Diagnostic Study on Stipend Programmes in Bangladesh with Focus on Primary Education Stipend Project (PESP) was prepared by Strength-ening Public Financial Management for Social Protection (SPFMSP) Project under Finance Division, Ministry of Finance, Government of People’s Republic of Bangladesh funded by UK DfID and Australian DFAT.