Nepal SABER Country Report Engaging the Private Sector in Education 2016 Policy Goals for Independent Private Schools (Institutional Schools) Status 1. Encouraging Innovation by Providers Central government has the legal authority to set minimum standards for teachers, determine how the curriculum is delivered, and establish class sizes. Schools have the legal authority to appoint, deploy, and dismiss teachers without review by central authorities. Schools also have authority to determine teacher salary levels, within central guidelines. 2. Holding Schools Accountable Government sets standards for what students need to learn, by when, and how well. Board exams are administered annually, although with limited standardization over time. Government requires schools to undergo a standard term inspection, but no standard inspection report format exists. Sanctions include additional monitoring, fines, and as a final measure, school closures. 3. Empowering All Parents, Students, and Communities Regular information is provided to parents on standardized exam results. Student or parents are interviewed as part of the inspection process. While the government does not provide tax subsidies or cash transfers, the private sector is legally required to provide some subsidized education services for low-income students through scholarships. 4. Promoting Diversity of Supply Certification standards that are not linked to education outcomes restrict market entry, including facilities, assets, and proximity to other schools. Registration guidelines are made public by multiple sources. Government does not set standardized tuition fees but imposes caps. The government allows all of the following organizational types to operate schools: community, not for profit, faith based, and for profit. Schools are able to operate while paying two to three types of fees. Policy Goals for Government-Funded Non-State Schools (Community Schools) Status 1. Encouraging Innovation by Providers Central government has the legal authority to set minimum standards for teachers, determine how the curriculum is delivered, and establish class sizes. Legal authority to appoint, deploy, and dismiss teachers, as well as set teacher salary levels, is divided between central authorities and schools: central authorities have authority over teachers provided by the government, and schools, for privately hired teachers. Schools have legal authority over the management of school operating budgets, within central guidelines. 2. Holding Schools Accountable Government sets standards for what students need to learn, by when, and how well. Board exams are administered annually, although with limited standardization over time. Government requires schools to undergo a standard term inspection, but no standard inspection report format exists. Sanctions include additional monitoring, fines, and as a final measure, school closures. Government requires schools to report on the use of public funds as a condition of continued funding during a standard term. 3. Empowering All Parents, Students, and Communities Regular information is provided to parents on standardized exam results. Student or parents are interviewed as part of the inspection process. Schools are allowed to select students based on academic performance or geography. Parental choice is restricted by voluntary monetary parent contributions. 4. Promoting Diversity of Supply Certification standards that are not linked to education outcomes restrict entry. Registration guidelines are made public by multiple sources. The government allows community, not-for-profit, and faith-based providers to operate schools. Schools are able to operate while paying one type of fee. Academic operating budgets are not equivalent to per-student amounts in government-funded schools, nor is start-up funding available. Schools receive information on the allocations to be transferred to them between one and three months before the start of the academic year. NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................ 3 Education in Nepal .................................................................................................................................................................. 7 Education Providers in Nepal ................................................................................................................................................ 10 Classification of Schools in Nepal Using the SABER Framework ........................................................................................... 12 Benchmarking Nepal’s Private School Policies ..................................................................................................................... 14 Goal 1: Encouraging innovation by providers ................................................................................................................... 14 Goal 2: Holding schools accountable ................................................................................................................................ 16 Goal 3: Empowering all parents, students, and communities .......................................................................................... 18 Goal 4: Promoting diversity of supply ............................................................................................................................... 20 From Analysis to Action: Policy Options for Nepal ............................................................................................................... 24 Policy Option 1: Improve the regulatory environment to support a greater supply of post-primary schools in underserved areas .................................................................................................................................................................................. 25 Policy Option 2: Strengthen accountability measures, including regularly collecting and disseminating comparable information on school performance, while increasing school autonomy ........................................................................ 27 Policy Option 3: Consider providing additional support to poor and marginalized students attending independent schools and post-primary schooling ................................................................................................................................. 31 Acknowledgments................................................................................................................................................................. 33 References ............................................................................................................................................................................ 33 Annex I: SABER-Engaging the Private Sector Rubrics............................................................................................................ 37 2 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 Introduction In recent years, private sector engagement in education draws on the Engaging the Private Sector (EPS) —which includes a vibrant mix of non-profit, for-profit Framework, a product of the World Bank’s Systems and faith-based organizations—has grown significantly Approach for Better Education Results (SABER). SABER around the world. In the last two decades, the collects and analyzes policy data on education systems percentage of students in low-income countries around the world, using evidence-based frameworks to attending private primary schools doubled, from 11 highlight the policies and institutions that matter most percent to 22 percent (figure 1). This growth in private for promoting learning for all children and youth. provision is closely connected to the boom in access that SABER-EPS research in Nepal found that despite has taken place in low-income countries over the same impressive gains in enrolment and gender parity at the two decades: primary net enrolment increased from 55 primary level, access to post-primary schooling remains percent to 80 percent between 1990 and 2010. low, and ensuring equity in education remains a As countries redouble their efforts to achieve learning challenge. Learning outcomes stand to improve across for all at the primary and secondary levels, the private the education system. School providers in Nepal include sector can be a resource for adding capacity to the institutional schools, which are private, and community education system. By partnering with private entities, schools that receive government funding. Detailed the state can provide access to more students, information on institutional and community schools are particularly poor students who are not always able to provided in this report. Families have increasingly chosen access existing education services (Pal and Kingdon 2010; to enroll children in private institutional schools. Based Patrinos, Barrera-Osorio, and Guáqueta 2009; Hossain on a review of existing policies, SABER-EPS offers the 2007). Additionally, evidence shows that governments following recommendations for Nepal to enhance have been successful at improving education quality and private sector engagement in the education system to student cognitive outcomes in many countries through meet the challenges of access, quality, and equity: effective engagement with private education providers 1) Improve the regulatory environment to support (Barrera-Osorio and Raju 2010; French and Kingdon a greater supply of post-primary schools in 2010; Barrera-Osorio 2006). underserved areas. 2) Strengthen accountability measures, including Figure 1. Private enrolment as a percentage of total the regular collection and dissemination of primary enrolments, by country income level comparable information on school performance, while increasing school autonomy. Low-income countries 3) Consider providing additional support to poor and marginalized students attending independent schools and post-primary schooling. Middle-income The rest of the report provides an overview of SABER- countries EPS, followed by a description of the basic education system in Nepal, with a focus on the private sector and High-income government policies related to the private provision of countries education. The report then benchmarks Nepal’s policy environment utilizing the SABER-EPS Framework, and offers policy options to enhance access and learning for Source: Baum et al (2014). all children in primary and secondary school. This report presents an analysis of how effectively the current policies in Bangladesh engage the private sector in basic (primary and secondary) education. The analysis 3 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 Overview of SABER-Engaging the education system and, subsequently, have a positive impact on educational outcomes. Private Sector Box 1. Key private sector engagement policy goals In many countries, the extent and activity of the private sector in education is largely undocumented and 1. Encouraging innovation by providers. Local decision making and fiscal decentralization can have positive unknown. SABER-EPS is working to help change that. effects on school and student outcomes. Most high- SABER-EPS assesses how well a country’s policies are achieving countries allow schools autonomy in oriented toward ensuring that the services of non-state managing resources (including personnel) and providers promote learning for all children and youth. educational content. Local school autonomy can improve the ability of disadvantaged populations to determine how local schools operate. The aim of SABER-EPS is not to advocate private schooling. The intention is to outline the most effective 2. Holding schools accountable. If schools are given evidence-based policies specific to each country’s autonomy over decision making, they must be held current approach toward non-state provision of accountable for learning outcomes. Increases in education. SABER-EPS assesses the extent to which autonomy should be accompanied by standards and interventions that increase access and improve quality. policies facilitate quality, access, and equity of private The state must hold all providers accountable to the education services. Data generated by SABER-EPS can same high standard. further the policy dialogue and support governments in 3. Empowering all parents, students, and communities. engaging private providers to improve education results. When parents and students have access to information on relative school quality, they can have the power to Four policy goals for engaging the private hold schools accountable and the voice to lobby sector governments for better-quality services. For empowerment to work equitably, options for parents SABER-EPS collects data on four key policy areas that and students should not depend on wealth or student international evidence has found effective for ability. strengthening accountability mechanisms among citizens, policymakers, and providers (box 1). These 4. Promoting diversity of supply. By facilitating market policy goals were identified through a review of rigorous entry for a diverse set of providers, governments can increase responsibility for results, as providers become research and analysis of top-performing and rapidly directly accountable to citizens as well as to the state. improving education systems. The four policy goals enable a government to increase innovation and strengthen accountability among the critical actors in an education system (figure 2). Empowering parents, students, and communities enhances the ability of parents to express their voice and hold policymakers accountable for results. Additionally, when parents are empowered, in most contexts, they can have greater influence over provider behaviors. Increasing school accountability strengthens the quality- and equity-assurance mechanisms between the state and education providers. Encouraging innovation and promoting diversity of supply can allow providers to respond to local needs. Increasing school-level autonomy in critical decisions improves the services provided to students. Allowing a diverse set of providers to enter the market can increase client power and enable citizens to choose from a wider range of models. By developing these policy goals, a government can improve the accountability of all providers in an 4 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 Figure 2. Relationships of accountability for successful government or non-government providers or service delivery both, depending on the system. SABER-EPS analyzes laws and regulations to: (1) identify the types of private engagement that are legally established in each country and (2) assess each education system’s progress in achieving the four policy goals. The aim of the SABER-EPS Framework is to provide policy guidance to help governments establish strong incentives and relationships of accountability among citizens, governments, and private education providers, with the goal of improving education results. Source: Adapted from the World Bank (2003). SABER-EPS recognizes that the four policy goals outlined in box 1 can assist governments in raising accountability for the education services provided in their countries. The tool allows governments to systematically evaluate their policies and implement practices that are effective across multiple country contexts. Four types of private provision of education Across the world, governments can implement numerous strategies to improve educational outcomes by supporting non-state education provision. SABER-EPS benchmarks key policy goals across the four most common models of private service delivery: 1. Independent private schools: schools that are owned and operated by non-government providers and are financed privately, typically through fees. 2. Government-funded private schools: schools that are owned and operated by non- government providers, but receive government funding. 3. Privately managed schools: schools that are owned and financed by the government, but are operated by non-government providers. 4. Voucher schools: schools that students choose to attend with government-provided funding; these schools can be operated by the 5 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 Benchmarking Education Policies: The The hypothetical country’s overall score for this policy goal would be: (2+3+4+4)/4 = 3.25. The overall score is SABER-EPS Methodology converted into a final development level for the policy goal, based on the following scale: The World Bank has developed a set of standardized questionnaires and rubrics for collecting and evaluating Latent: 1.00 – 1.50 data on the four policy goals for each type of private Emerging: 1.51 – 2.50 school engagement established in a given country. Established: 2.51 – 3.50 Advanced: 3.51 – 4.00 The policy goals are benchmarked separately for each type of private engagement. A point of emphasis here is The ratings generated by the rubrics are not meant to that these tools only assess official and established be additive across policy goals. That is, they are not policies governing private education provision. added together to create an overall rating for engaging Additional tools determine on-the-ground the private sector. implementation of these policies. The SABER-EPS information is compiled in a comparative database that interested stakeholders can access for detailed reports, Use of the SABER-EPS tool background papers, methodology, and other resources; SABER-EPS is not intended to be used as a prescriptive the database details how different education systems policy tool, but rather, as a tool to generate an informed engage with the private sector. assessment of a country’s policies vis- à-vis current knowledge about effective approaches. The results of For each indicator associated with the respective four this benchmarking exercise serve as a good starting point policy goals, the country receives a score between 1 and to discuss potential policy options that could be 4 (figure 3), representing four levels of private sector considered, based on the nuances of the local context engagement: 1 (latent), 2 (emerging), 3 (established), or and national education system. Education systems are 4 (advanced). likely to be at different levels of development across indicators and policy goals. While intuition suggests it is Figure 3. SABER rubric benchmarking levels probably better to be as developed in as many areas as possible, the evidence does not clearly show the need to be functioning at the advanced level for all policy goals. National education priorities lay at the center of recommended policy options; countries may prioritize higher levels of development in areas that contribute most to their immediate goals. For more information on the global evidence underlying EPS and its policy goals, see the SABER framework paper, What Matters Most for Engaging the Private Sector in Education (Baum et al. 2014). Source: Baum et al. (2014). The overall score for each policy goal is computed by aggregating the scores for each of its constituent indicators. For example, a hypothetical country receives the following indicator scores for one of its policy goals: Indicator A = 2 points Indicator B = 3 points Indicator C = 4 points Indicator D = 4 points 6 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 Education in Nepal These gains in educational access and attainment vary by educational level and significant challenges remain, Effects of the 2015 earthquake have and will continue especially in terms of equity and efficiency, as elaborated to impact the education sector in the following sections. The education cycle in Nepal consists of four levels: primary, lower secondary, In April and May 2015, major earthquakes and secondary and higher secondary, covering grades 1–5, 6– aftershocks caused widespread destruction in Nepal. 8, 9–10, and 11–12, respectively. Entry into grade 1 is Early estimates show that an additional 3 percent of the recommended for 5-year-olds. Under the current School population has been pushed into poverty, which is as Sector Reform Plan, school cycles are being revised to many as one million people (World Bank 2015). Damages include only two cycles: basic and secondary schooling, and losses have been catastrophic, estimated at around covering grades 1–-8 and grades 9–12, respectively US$7 billion. A slowdown of the economy and recovery (World Bank 2009). projects due to the earthquakes will inevitably continue to affect the education sector in the following years Figure 4. Primary net enrolment rate and gender parity (Nepal 2015). index for primary school in Nepal, 1999–2011 100 1 Despite limited resources and political instability, Nepal 95 0.95 has made impressive progress in education outcomes in the past two decades 90 0.9 85 0.85 Nepal is a low-income country in South Asia. GDP per 80 0.8 capita was US$ 690 in 2012, making the country one of the poorest in the region. Nepal has a population of 26.5 75 0.75 million, of which 25 percent live under the national 70 0.7 poverty line according to the National Living Standards 65 0.65 Survey 2010/11 (Nepal 2011). Nearly 40 percent of the population is under the age of 15. The past decade has 60 0.6 been one of political instability and transition in Nepal. 55 0.55 The country emerged from a decade-long armed conflict 1999 2000 2004 2011 2012 between the government and the Maoist Party in 2006, Enrolment Nepal Low income and in 2008 transitioned from being a constitutional Gender parity Nepal Low income monarchy to a republic (World Bank 2009). Source: EdStats; World Bank (2014). Despite the conflict and subsequent transition period, Nepal currently provides free primary education and Nepal has shown impressive progress in education has a policy goal of free secondary education outcomes. The net enrolment rate in primary education increased from 69 percent in 1999 to 95.5 percent in Nepal provides free primary education to all children. 2013 (Nepal-Department of Education 2014). The The School Sector Reform Plan for 2009–15 outlines the increase was driven by expansion in underserved areas following on primary education costs: in the mountains as well as in the Tarai, a region that stretches the length of the southern border. Nepal’s “The free basic education provisions include cost- success in improving enrolment from an international free services for admission, textbooks, tuition, and comparative perspective is shown in figure 4. The gender examinations. Community, under the aegis of parity index in primary enrolment rose from 0.77 to 0.99 existing laws and bylaws, will continue to mobilize from 1999 to 2012, surpassing the average for low- additional resources required for quality income countries (figure 4). The overall adult literacy enhancement.” (Nepal 2009, Page 14). rate increased from 36 percent in 1995 to 57 percent in 2010 (Nepal 2011). At the secondary level, the School Sector Reform Plan envisions moving gradually to free secondary provision. Although the initial goal of providing free secondary by 7 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 2015 was not met, the reform plan lists the following key Department of Education 2014). Thirdly, equity is a aspects of this goal: concern due to the inferior access of poor students to education. 1. Free secondary education will include at least free admission and tuition fees. In 2013, more than 7 percent of children dropped out 2. Textbooks and curricular materials will be made after grade 1, and 17.5 percent repeated the grade available on subsidized terms. (Nepal-Department of Education 2014). The overall 3. A special incentive package to promote access, primary school dropout rate in the same year was nearly participation, and completion of secondary 4.7 percent. In the Nepal Living Standards Survey of education for the children from disadvantaged 2010/11, among all 6–24-year-olds surveyed who had families will be introduced. dropped out of school at some point, 25 percent cited “poor academic progress” as the reason for dropping out 4. Partnerships with private providers to safeguard and 22 percent replied, “Help needed at home.” access to secondary education will be promoted. Although some children drop out of school to move away with their family (17 percent), in 7 percent of cases the Although lower secondary and secondary enrolments “parent did not want” the child to be in school and in 6 have increased, access to post-primary schooling percent of cases, schooling was “too expensive” (Nepal remains a challenge 2011). In 2013, more than 2.7 million children were enrolled at The more than 140,000 primary school-aged children the lower secondary and secondary levels in Nepal, of who are out of school represent 4.4 percent of the which two-thirds were in lower secondary and the primary school-aged population (Nepal-Department of remaining third in secondary (Nepal-Department of Education 2014). Of the 6–24-year-old age group, 9 Education 2014). Net enrolment in lower secondary percent have never attended school (Nepal 2011), the (grades 6–8; ages 10–12) grew from 43 percent in 2001 reasons for which are shown in table 1. For only 3 to 72.6 percent in 2013, while that in secondary (grades percent of children, school was too far away, and for just 9–10; ages 13–14) increased from 30 to 54.9 percent 7 percent, the costs of schooling were the primary during the same period (Nepal-Department of Education reason for non-attendance. However, the two most 2014). Nepal’s School Sector Reform Plan 2009–15 set a common reasons, “help needed at home” and “parents target for net enrolment in basic education (grades 1–8) did not want,” may also reflect an economic opportunity of 85 percent and for the survival rate to grade 8 at 66 cost beyond the direct costs referenced by school being percent (Nepal 2009); both of these goals have been “too expensive.” achieved. Table 1. Reasons for never attending school in Nepal, Access to secondary schools continues to be more 2010–11 restricted than to primary schools: the Nepal Living Standards Survey 2010/11 indicates that while 95 Share out of never- Reason percent of households are within 30 minutes of the attendees nearest primary school, only 56 percent are within the Parents did not want 30 % same reach of a secondary school (Nepal 2011). Help needed at home 26 % Not willing to attend 17 % Too expensive 7% Despite substantial progress in the provision of Too young 7% schooling services, challenges remain—particularly Other reasons, including no with regard to efficiency and equity 7% school School far away 3% Though the Government of Nepal has made considerable Disabled 3% progress in improving education outcomes, the country Source: Nepal (2011). still faces challenges, particularly with regard to efficiency and equity. Firstly, drop-out and repetition In addition to concerns regarding internal efficiency and rates are high. Secondly, more than 140,000 primary- out-of-school children, Nepal still faces the challenge of school aged children are still out of school (Nepal- ensuring equity in education. The impact of household 8 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 wealth on access to education is clearly seen in the As a share of GDP, Nepal spent 4.3 percent on education overall amount of schooling that children receive. In in 2010–11, up from 3.1 percent in 2003–04 (World Bank primary education, the difference in the net attendance 2013). This surpassed average spending in South Asian rate between the poorest and wealthiest households is countries (2.8 percent of GDP), as well as that of low- less than 6 percentage points (the poorest attended at a income countries (4.2 percent of GDP) in 2010 (Edstats). rate of 76.8 percent; the wealthiest, at a rate of 82.1 Government spending on education previously percent in 2010, as per the National Living Standards accounted for 16 to 17 percent of the total annual Survey (World Bank 2013). However, looking at the government budget, according to ministry data (World overall years of schooling completed, students from the Bank 2013), but this amount has decreased in recent poorest households finished 3.2 fewer years than their years to around 14 percent. wealthiest peers (figure 5). Inequities persist partially due to the significant contribution that parents and Systematic measurement of learning achievement in communities continue to make to overall education Nepal is lacking spending, especially at post-primary levels (World Bank 2009). The inequities may also reflect differences in Nepal has not participated in international learning access to secondary schools across income quintiles. assessments to date. In 2011, the Ministry of Education conducted the National Assessment of Student In a regional comparison, Nepal has a slightly more Achievement (NASA) for 8th graders, which was the equitable schooling distribution than its neighbors: the country’s first large-scale national assessment exercise. difference in the average years of schooling completed Students were tested in Nepali, mathematics, and social between the poorest and wealthiest quintile is 3.2 years studies, with results indicating weak student in Nepal, 3.4 years in Bangladesh, 3.8 years in India, and performance. There was also significant disparity by 4.2 years in Pakistan (figure 5). student characteristic; although performance between boys and girls was largely comparable, there was Figure 5. Average years of schooling for children aged significant variation between rural and urban areas, 15–19 by household wealth in Nepal, Bangladesh, India, across regions, and between government and privately and Pakistan (various years*) funded schools (World Bank 2013). 11.0 10.0 9.6 9.0 8.4 8.0 7.7 7.0 7.2 6.4 6.0 5.0 Quintile 1 2 3 4 Quintile 5 Nepal Bangladesh India Pakistan Source: EdStats; World Bank (2014). * All data from demographic and household surveys: Nepal (2011), Bangladesh (2007), India (2005), Pakistan (2006). Public spending on education in Nepal is above average for both South Asia and low-income countries worldwide 9 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 Education Providers in Nepal Table 2. Share of total basic education enrolment by type school in Nepal over time (percentage) Nepal has two main types of education providers: community schools and institutional (private) schools 1995/96 2003/04 2010/11 Community The Seventh Amendment (2001) to the Education Act of schools 89.7 81.6 71.9 1971 provides a legal foundation for two types of basic Institutional schools 8.5 16.7 26.8 education schools in Nepal: community and institutional Other types of schools. Community schools are eligible for regular schools, including government grants, while institutional schools are not. religious 1.9 1.7 1.2 That is, community schools are considered public and Source: Nepal (2011). institutional schools, private organizations. In the primary subsector, around 85 percent of students In 2001, all public schools were renamed community were enrolled in community schools in 2011, while about schools and the responsibility for their management was 15 percent were enrolled in institutional schools (figure given to school management committees (SMCs) (World 6). Recent data on enrolment at the secondary level are Bank 2009). An SMC consists of a group of elected parent unavailable, but in 2011 institutional schools accounted and community representatives, one teacher, the for 26 percent of the total number of schools offering headmaster, and a person from the school founders or secondary-level education (World Bank 2013), indicating donors. Community schools are differentiated by the that institutional schools play a larger role at the level of government support they receive (fully aided or secondary than at the primary level. unaided) and by whether or not they have been formally devolved to the community (referred to as community- Figure 6. Share of total primary education enrolment in managed schools), as explained in detail below. institutional schools in Nepal, 2001–2013 (percentage) 20 Institutional schools are classified into two types: trusts and companies. Trusts are run on a non-profit basis and companies are allowed to make a profit while delivering 15 % 15 education services. In addition to community and institutional schools, traditional religious schools also operate in Nepal, including madrassas (Islamic), gumbas 10 (Buddhist), and gurukuls (Hindu) (World Bank 2009). The share of enrolment in institutional schools has 5 more than tripled since 1995 According to the Nepal Living Standards Survey of 0 2010/11, 72 percent of all students enrolled in school 2001 2002 2003 2005 2008 2010 2011 2013 attend community schools (see table 2). Another 27 percent of students attend institutional schools Source: EdStats; World Bank (2014). (company and trust schools). This is a significant change from 15 years previously, when nearly 90 percent of Poor households are not able to access education at students attended community schools. Participation in institutional schools to the same extent as wealthier institutional schools increased from 9 percent to 27 households percent over this time (see table 2). Institutional schools are more accessible to wealthier and urban households. The Nepal Living Standards Survey 2010/11 indicates that about 60 percent of students from the wealthiest quintile are currently attending institutional schools, compared to only 6 percent of students from the poorest quintile. In urban 10 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 areas, more than one half of students attend institutional schools, while the proportion in rural areas is only 20 percent (Nepal 2011). Students in institutional schools have outperformed their peers in community schools in the past There is some data to suggest that at least in the past, students in institutional schools have outperformed their peers in community schools. Data from 2004 indicates that 10th graders in institutional schools performed significantly better than their peers in community schools in math, Nepali, and English in both urban and rural areas (figure 7). Students in urban institutional schools also outperformed their peers in rural institutional schools. Similar findings are seen in performance data for other years and across school grades. Figure 7. Student Performance, Nepal School-Leaving Certificate (SLC) Exam, 2004 70 60 50 40 30 20 Institutional Community Institutional Community Rural Urban Math Nepali English Source: Adapted from Dundar et al. (2014). Note: The SLC exam is administered in grade 10. 11 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 Classification of Schools in Nepal Using Private trust schools. Private trust schools (which are also considered institutional schools in Nepal) are not-for- the SABER Framework profit organizations, owned and managed by a private board of trustees. They are eligible to receive one-time Despite Nepal’s successes in increasing educational support from the government in the form of a waiver on access and attainment, enrollment at the secondary level registration fees and collateral for obtaining an operating remains low and challenges of efficiency and equity in license, and some have received government land grants the educational system persist. Families have in the past; but these schools do not receive regular increasingly chosen to enroll children in private government support. Very few schools are registered as institutional schools and there is evidence of better private trust schools in Nepal.1 student performance at those schools. This suggests that there may be opportunity to consider how to apply the International schools. There are two types of SABER-Engaging the Private Sector policy goals of international schools in Nepal, which are classified as encouraging innovation; holding schools accountable; independent private schools. There are few such schools, empowering all students, parents, and communities; and and they are not considered traditional institutional promoting diversity of supply to improve outcomes of schools in the Nepali context: the education system as a whole. x Schools established in affiliation with foreign As a first step, schools in Nepal must be classified using schools/colleges (such as schools providing the SABER-Engaging the Private Sector typology in order International Baccalaureate, Cambridge O and to apply the policy analysis framework described in the AS Levels, Indian CBSE, etc). These schools are introduction. Institutional schools are classified as regulated by the Government of Nepal, and must “independent private schools’ as they are privately seek affiliation permission directly from the owned, operated, and financed. Community schools in Ministry of Education, which has the legal Nepal are considered public; but they have a devolved authority to monitor and inspect such schools. management structure and are only partially funded by x Schools operated by diplomatic missions the state, indicating that the SABER framework and through direct agreement with the government, policy goals for non-state schools may have relevant primarily for children of employees. These lessons. Community schools are therefore included in schools are not regulated by the Government of the analysis and classified as “government-funded non- Nepal and do not follow the national curricula state schools,” using the SABER classification, as and academic calendar. explained further below. 2 Government-funded non-state schools (including Independent private schools are owned and operated community schools) by non-government providers and are financed privately, typically through fees. In Nepal, the following Government-funded non-state schools are schools that types of schools are classified as independent private are owned and operated by non-government providers, schools under SABER-EPS: but receive regular government funding. In Nepal, the following types of schools are classified as government- Company schools. Company schools are the most funded non-state schools under SABER-Engaging the common type of institutional school in Nepal. They are Private Sector: for-profit schools that do not receive any support from the government. They are required to pay income and Community schools. These schools are established and service taxes to the government. operated by the community and receive regular government grants to cover operating costs. These grants do not cover the full expenses of the schools, 1 Examples of private trust schools include L.R.I. School in than “private” is used in the Nepali context, given the Kathmandu and DAV Sushil Kedia School in Lalitpur. particular case of community schools. 2 The global SABER-EPS framework uses the term “government-funded private schools,” but “nonstate” rather 12 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 however, and additional resources must be provided by to receive one-time support from the government in the the community. All community schools are eligible for form of a waiver of registration fees and collateral for an scholarships for girls and disadvantaged students to help operating license. Such schools may also have received offset some of these additional costs. Community government land grants and customs waivers on schools are managed by a SMC that has authority over imported goods (Education Regulations, Chapter 30, the appointment of some teachers, resource generation, Clause 175). Some schools also receive substantial as well as the formulation, approval, and execution of the government funding for merit-based scholarships, while school budget. SMCs are elected by the parents’ at the same time charging fees to families that are able assembly. The vast majority of schools in Nepal are to pay. Very few schools are registered as public trust community schools. schools. The latter are not considered in the following analysis, given their limited role in Nepal, but they may There are different types of community schools: provide interesting management and policy lessons for 1. Some community schools have been approved consideration in the school system more broadly.3 for permanent teacher quotas in addition to government grants for other teaching staff and operating costs. These are referred to as “aided community schools.” The remainder of community schools still receive grants for temporary teachers and other operating costs, but do not have official permanent teachers and are referred to as “unaided community schools.” 2. Some community schools (about one-third) have been formally devolved to local communities and are referred to as “community-managed schools.” All community-managed schools are aided. Other schools that have not been formally devolved are referred to simply as “community schools” regardless of whether they are aided or unaided. Religious schools. These schools are affiliated with a religion and include gurukuls (Hindu), gumbas (Buddhist), and madrassas (Islam). Since 2008, the government has implemented a policy of mainstreaming such schools, whereby religious schools are eligible to receive grants for following the national curricula and using nationally approved textbooks. Other non-classified schools. There is an additional type of school in Nepal known as public trust schools. These are not-for-profit schools that are owned and managed by a public board of trustees with Ministry of Education representation. They are considered institutional schools in Nepal, but they do not fit the SABER-EPS “independent private school” classification because of government financing and management oversight. They are eligible 3 Siddhartha Vanasthali Institute in Kathmandu, Somang model school that receives significant government funding Academy in Lalitpur, and various army and police schools are through annual recurring grants, while generating revenue by examples of private schools operating as public trusts. charging user fees. Budhanilkantha School in Kathmandu is an example of a 13 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 Benchmarking Nepal’s Private School leaders is associated with increased student achievement, as well as reduced student repetition and Policies failure rates (King and Özler 2005; Jimenez and Sawada 2003; Gertler, Patrinos, and Rubio-Codina 2012). This section of the report presents the results of the SABER-Engaging the Private Sector analysis of laws, Box 2. International best practice—encouraging policies, and regulations governing institutional, innovation by providers community, and other schools using the SABER The following decisions/processes are made at the school classification of: (i) independent private schools and (ii) level: government-funded non-state schools. The report then x Establishment of teacher qualification standards. compares the benchmarking results to established x Appointment and deployment of teachers recommended practices. For more information on the x Teacher salary levels global evidence underlying these policy goals, see the x Teacher dismissals SABER-EPS Framework paper, What Matters Most for x The way in which the curriculum is delivered Engaging the Private Sector in Education (Baum et al. x Class-size decisions x Management of the operating budgets 2014). As noted in the introduction, this benchmarking analysis Development level focuses on official and established laws, regulations, and policies governing education provision. There is often a Independent private schools: difference between official policy “on the books” and implementation “on the ground.” The following analysis Government-funded non--state schools: focuses on official policy as a starting point for reform consideration, and notes differences between policy and In Nepal, education policies for both independent private implementation in a few cases. and government-funded non-state schools are emerging, demonstrating some instances of good The main policies, laws, and official documentation used practice. to benchmark private sector engagement in the education system in Nepal include: Provider innovation for both independent and 1. Education Act, 2028 (1971), Seventh government-funded non-state schools is restricted with Amendment (2001) regard to setting teacher standards, determining how the curriculum is delivered, and determining maximum 2. Education Regulations, 2059 (2002) class size. In all these areas, the central government has 3. Institutional School Standards and Operation the ultimate authority. In the case of teacher standards, Directive (2013). a candidate must receive a license from the Teacher Service Commission in order to become a teacher at Goal 1: Encouraging innovation by providers either a government-funded or an independent school.4 The highly particular and contextualized nature of However, enforcement of this requirement has focused education delivery necessitates decision making at the on teachers hired through government grants. The school level. In order to be aware of and adapt to process for obtaining a teaching license can be changing student needs, school leaders require authority cumbersome, resulting in many teachers at independent over the most critical managerial decisions. private schools being hired without a license. Regarding curriculum delivery, schools must implement the Methodologically rigorous studies assessing the impacts curriculum and textbooks approved by the government of local school autonomy on student learning outcomes of Nepal.5 A school can apply to the District Education generally find a positive relationship (Hanushek and Office for permission to use additional learning materials Woessmann 2013; Bruns, Filmer, and Patrinos 2011). A few studies find evidence that local autonomy for school 4 5 Education Act, Clause 11M. Ibid., Clause 8; Education Regulations, Chapter 7, Clauses 31, 35-37; Institutional School Standards and Operation Directive 2013, Chapter 4, #4.4. 14 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 and textbooks. 6 Regarding class size, the government numbers, as well as salaries for a fixed number of sets central standards, mandating that independent teachers. private schools classes should have a minimum of 22 students, an average of 33, and a maximum of 44 Based on the benchmarking results for goal 1, students. 7 In government-funded non-state schools, encouraging innovation by providers, the suggested class sizes should be 50 in Kathmandu Valley and Tarai, policy options for Nepal include: 45 in the Hills Region, and 40 in the Mountain Region.8 x Allow schools to determine their own standards for hiring teachers. For independent private schools, the policies for x Increase the flexibility of schools to adjust the appointing, deploying, and dismissing teachers represent curriculum to fit available school resources and best practice, while the policies for setting teacher needs of the local community. salaries reflect emerging good practice. In decisions concerning appointing and deploying teachers, the Government-funded non-state schools: school has legal authority, 9 although the SMC is x Allow government-funded non-state schools supposed to recruit teachers who have obtained a (community schools) to appoint and dismiss teaching license, as noted above. There are no existing permanent government-funded teachers in regulations regarding dismissing teachers, with the addition to temporary/privately hired teachers. implication that independent private schools can do so freely at present. Regarding teacher salaries, the SMC Table 3. Goal 1: Encouraging innovation by providers has legal authority to set them within the guidelines provided by central authorities. 10 These guidelines A. Common Policies: Independent Private Schools and Government-Funded Non-State Schools stipulate that the SMC is to provide teachers a minimum salary on par with the government pay scale. However, Item Score Justification the provision has not been implemented fully in practice, Central government and remains a point of contention for the Institutional Who has legal has legal authority to Latent School Teachers’ Union. authority to set set minimum €{{{ teacher standards? standards for In government-funded non-state schools, central teachers. authorities maintain stronger control over appointing Who has legal Central government and dismissing teachers and setting teacher salaries. As authority to Latent has the legal authority a major share of government support to government- determine how €{{{ over how the curriculum is curriculum is funded non-state schools is in the form of teachers, the delivered? delivered. Ministry of Education has legal authority to appoint, deploy, and dismiss teachers, as well as to determine Who has legal Central government authority to Latent has the legal authority their salary. The school has authority over these determine maximum €{{{ to determine class decisions when they concern a privately hired teacher. class sizes? sizes. As in independent private schools, government-funded non-state schools are required to provide independently hired teachers a minimum salary on par with the government pay scale. As for the school operating budget in government- funded non-state schools, the SMC has legal authority over its management, within guidelines provided by central authorities. Government-funded non-state schools are provided per-capita grants based on student 6 9 Education Regulations, Chapter 7, Clause 35. Education Act, Clause 12(7)(f); EducationRegulations, 7 Ibid, Chapter 15, Clause 77(2). Chapter 6, Clause 26; Chapter 18, Clauses 105–106. 8 10 Ibid., Chapter 15, Clause 77(1). Ibid., Clause 12(7)(f); Education Regulations, Chapter 6, Clause 26; Chapter 18, Clauses 105–106. 15 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 B. Policies for Independent Private Schools to perform more efficiently (Barrera-Osorio and Raju 2010; Patrinos 2002). A strong accountability system Item Score Justification requires that the government, parents, and educational The school has the professionals work together to raise outcomes. The Who has legal legal authority to government must play a role in ensuring that superior Advanced authority to appoint €€€€ appoint teachers education quality is delivered in schools. SABER-EPS and deploy teachers? without review from assesses multiple policy indicators to determine non- central authorities. state provider accountability. A list of the key indicators Who has legal The school has the is provided in box 3. Emerging legal authority to authority to €€{{ determine teacher determine teacher Box 3. International best practice – holding schools salary levels within salary levels? accountable central guidelines. The school has the x The central government sets standards regarding Who has legal Advanced legal authority to authority to dismiss dismiss teachers what students need to learn, including deadlines €€€€ teachers? without government for meeting these standards. review. x Students are required to take standardized C. Policies for Government-Funded Non-state Schools examinations; exam results are disaggregated by school, socioeconomic status, gender, etc. Item Score Justification x Schools are required to report on the use of public Central authorities funds as a condition of continued funding. have authority for x The central government or an external agency Who has legal teachers provided by performs school inspections as determined by authority to appoint Emerging the government, and school need. and deploy €€{{ schools have x Schools produce school improvement plans. teachers? authority for privately x School performance is tied to sanctions and/or hired teachers. rewards. Central authorities for teachers provided by Who has legal the government, and authority to Emerging €€{{ schools for privately Development level determine teacher hired teachers— salary levels? within central Independent private schools: guidelines. Central authorities for Government-funded non-state schools: Who has legal teachers provided by Emerging authority to dismiss the government, and €€{{ teachers? schools for privately Nepal’s policies for holding both independent and hired teachers. government-funded non-state schools accountable are Who has legal Schools have legal established, demonstrating systematic instances of good authority over practice. authority over the Emerging management of management of €€{{ school operating school operating The Nepalese government sets standards for what budgets, within budgets? central guidelines. students need to learn, by when, and how well for both independent and government-funded non-state schools. The curriculum for each grade specifies learning outcome targets and modes of evaluation for each Goal 2: Holding schools accountable subject in that grade. For instance, the curriculum for On average, students perform better in schools with English language specifies learning targets for speaking, higher levels of accountability to the state comprehension, writing, and reading. (Abdulkadiroglu et al. 2011; Carnoy and Loeb 2002; Woessmann et al. 2007; Hanushek and Raymond 2005). For non-state providers, when government funding is tied to accountability standards, schools are incentivized 16 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 Board exams are administered in selected grades supervisors have no standard reporting format and it is annually.11 In grade 8, students take the lower secondary unclear if supervisors produce and submit individual completion examination, which is administered at the school reports. Government-funded non-state schools district level. In grade 10, students take the School- are required to prepare five-year school improvement Leaving Certificate (SLC) examination, and in grades 11 plans (SIPs) to be implemented and updated annually. 17 and 12, the higher secondary examinations. These There is a provision for SIP grants for government-funded examinations are administered by district education schools in the annual Ministry of Education program and offices and national boards. Results are provided to budget, although there is no explicit linkage between individual students by the school. The relevant national central funding and SIPs. boards, such as the Office for the Controller of Examinations, allow researchers to use the raw data Independent private schools in Nepal can face sanctions upon request. However, there is limited disaggregation if inspectors find that regulations, such as those that of the data, for example, by student socioeconomic relate to the curriculum and required textbooks, have status. There is also limited standardization of these not been adhered to. Sanctions can include fines, loss of exams—they are not comparable across years, and in registration, and school closure. Sanctions can also be some cases (such as grade 8), across districts, which imposed on government-funded schools based on lack of decreasse their usefulness for measuring progress in adherence to regulations. In addition, teachers and head learning outcomes over time. teachers can face personal sanctions for poor student performance at these schools: Nepal requires all schools to undergo standard term x Teachers can receive no salary increase for five inspections. The inspection of independent private years or no promotion for two years due to poor schools is not dealt with separately in policy, but rather work performance.18 (According to Clause 137a the same officials (school supervisors/resource persons) of the Education Regulations, poor work that inspect government-funded schools are expected to performance includes poor student results in also monitor independent private schools. The District three successive years, measured against the Education Office, the agency mandated to carry out average standard.) inspections, is meant to inspect schools on a monthly x If the pass percentage of students in any school basis according to policy. 12 School supervisors are is below the specified percent, the District expected to assess whether or not schools have Education Officer may stop salary increases for implemented the approved curriculum and textbooks,13 the head teacher as well as the relevant subject are operating according to the relevant provisions of the teachers.19 Education Act and Education Regulations, have adequate and optimally used human and physical resources, and Government-funded schools and their teachers can also are operating according to set standards. It is also be given rewards for outstanding student performance: mandated to instruct schools to make necessary changes.14 x If any community school succeeds in passing more than 85 percent of its students (with a To ascertain the situation, the school supervisor is minimum number of 50 examinees), prizes can supposed to interact with the head teacher, parent be given to such schools and best-performing teacher association (PTA), and teachers during teacher(s).20 inspections, 15 as well as observe classes. The school supervisor is also expected to indicate the results of the Finally, government-funded schools are required to inspection, as well as discussions with the head teacher report on the use of public funds as a condition for the and the SMC, in the school’s inspection book.16 However, continuation of funding. All schools are required to keep accounts and submit financial reports to the respective 11 16 Education Act, Clause 5; EducationRegulations, Chapter 8; Ibid., Clause 17(a) 17 Higher Secondary EducationRegulations, Clause 6. School Grants Implementation Directive of 2007; Education 12 Education Regulations, Clause 17(a). For All 2004–09 Program Implementation Manual. 13 18 Ibid., Clause 16(t). Education Regulations, Clause 137. 14 19 Ibid., Clause 17(b). Ibid., Clause 143a. 15 20 Ibid., Clause 17(b) Ibid., Chapter 33, Clause 185A. 17 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 District Education Office. 21 Financial reports must be Table 4. Goal 2: Holding schools accountable submitted monthly or quarterly; while audits (financial A. Common Policies: Independent Private Schools and and social) need to be submitted on an annual basis.22 Government-Funded Non-state Schools Item Score Justification Informed by the results of the benchmarking exercise, Does government set Government does set the following suggested policy options would help Nepal standards on what Advanced standards for what increase the accountability of non-state schools: students need to learn and €€€€ students need to learn, by by when? when, and how well. x Strengthen the inspection system by Are students required to Board exams are standardizing the inspection report format and take standardized exams, Established administered annually for linking the report to a school improvement plan; €€€{ with results being grades 8 and 10. make this a requirement of both government- disaggregated? funded and independent schools. Are school inspections Government requires Established x Consider moving to a needs-based inspection performed as determined €€€{ schools to undergo a system to better utilize inspection and by school need? standard-term inspection. supervision resources and to target government Does the inspection report Latent No standard inspection resources on the most underperforming schools outline the strengths and €{{{ report format exists. with the most need of improvement. weaknesses of the school? x Further engage students, parents, and Sanctions include Are sanctions additional monitoring, communities in the accountability process administered based on the fines, and as a final through participation in school and classroom results of school Advanced measure, school closures, monitoring (elaborated further in the following inspections or €€€€ based on the results of section). performance on school inspections or standardized exams? performance on x Increase the standardization of board exams standardized exams. over time to enable improved monitoring of student learning outcomes. B. Policies for Government-Funded Non-state Schools Item Score Justification Are schools required to Government requires report to government on schools to report on the Established the use of public funds as use of public funds as a a condition of continued €€€{ condition of continued funding? funding during a standard term. Goal 3: Empowering all parents, students, and communities Empowering parents, students, and communities is one of the foundations of quality learning opportunities for all students. Poor and marginalized children, together with youth, disproportionately lack access to quality education services. To overcome this obstacle, governments need to increase providers’ accountability to all clients, particularly underserved groups. Educational access and the performance of schools and students can be substantially impacted by openly disseminating comparable school performance 21 22 Education Regulations, Chapter 30, Clause 170. Ibid., Chapter 30, Clauses 171-172; see also Clause 188. 18 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 information (Andrabi, Das, and Khwaja 2009; Pandey, (annex I). For instance, the question of whether the Goyal, and Sundararaman 2009; Björkman 2007; government provides tax subsidies or cash transfers to Reinikka and Svensson 2005); increasing parental families is only relevant for independent private schools. influence in the school (Skoufias and Shapiro 2006; King and Özler 2005; Jimenez and Sawada 1999; Gertler, In Nepal, inspectors are required to observe classes and Patrinos, and Rubio-Codina 2012; Di Gropello and may interact with students during inspections of both Marshall 2005); and implementing demand-side independent and government-funded non-state schools. interventions, such as scholarships, vouchers, or cash Inspectors are required to interview members of the transfers, to help the most vulnerable students (Orazem SMC, which include parents. However, information on and King 2007; Filmer and Schady 2008; Lewis and inspection results is not made available, as the Lockheed 2007; Patrinos 2002; Barrera-Osorio 2006). government is not required to give parents access to Effective policy practices for non-state providers include inspection reports. Given that there is no standard some of the indicators listed in box 4. reporting format for school inspections, it is unclear if inspectors produce and submit individual school inspection reports at all. Schools are not ranked based on Box 4. International best practice—empowering all inspections, and no programs are in place to provide parents, students, and communities information to hard-to-reach groups. x Information on standardized tests and school inspections is made available by multiple sources. With regard to the results of standardized exams, information on individual performance is provided to x Parents and students are included in the inspection students in both independent and government-funded and improvement-planning processes. non-state schools. The results are available for all x Admission processes for entry into publicly funded standardized exams in which students participate, schools are not based on student background; a namely, in grades 8, 10, 11, and 12. Immediate lottery is used in cases of oversubscription. information (pass or fail) is typically communicated via x School choice is not hindered by mandatory SMS, and mark sheets are given to individual students. financial contributions. No programs are in place to provide information to hard- to-reach groups on the results of standardized exams. x Tax subsidies, scholarships, or cash transfers are available to families whose children attend According to current policies, the government does not independent private schools. provide tax subsidies or cash transfers for families Development level attending independent private schools. However, independent private schools are required to make 10 Private independent schools: percent of total student seats available to poor and marginalized students via scholarships (offered to poor, Government-funded non-state schools: disabled, female, Dalit, or ethnic minority students). To select scholarship students, each school must have a scholarship selection committee consisting of the school The benchmarking of this policy goal reflects policy head teacher, a District Education Office representative, intent, not policy implementation. In Nepal, the policies and a parent member of the SMC.23 for independent private schools are established for empowering parents, students, and communities. The At present, no explicit policies exist to prohibit policies for government-funded non-state schools are government-funded schools from selecting students emerging, reflecting some instances of good practice. based on academic performance. In a very small number While there are common policies between independent of model schools that receive government support, private schools and government-funded non-state students must be selected from all parts of the country, schools, some policies are only applicable to one of the thus making geography a criterion of admission to these school types, as framed by the benchmarking rubric schools. The voluntary monetary parent contributions 23 Education Act, Clause 16J; Education Regulations, Chapter 26, Clause 151. 19 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 that government-funded non-state schools are currently B. Policies for Independent Private Schools allowed to charge can also restrict school choice. In some highly selective government-funded non-state schools, Item Score Justification the majority of students pay monthly market-level fees While the government as well.24 does not provide tax Does the government subsidies or cash provide tax subsidies Informed by the results of the SABER-EPS benchmarking transfers, the private or cash transfers to Established exercise for Nepal, the following suggested policy sector is legally families whose €€€{ required to provide options would help empower parents and students to children attend some subsidized improve the quality of education services provided by independent private education services to private schools: schools? low-income students through scholarships. x Guarantee parents’ access to comparable information on the quality of schooling, such as standardized exam results and school inspection C. Policies for Government-Funded Non-state Schools reports, disaggregated by important Item Score Justification characteristics, including school, socioeconomic background, gender, and other types of Are schools allowed to Schools are allowed to apply selective Emerging select students based disadvantage. This could also be done through admission criteria €€{{ on academic school report cards. when admitting performance or x Further engage students, parents, and students? geography. communities in the accountability process Voluntary monetary Are schools allowed to through participation in school and classroom charge additional fees contributions from Emerging parents are allowed, monitoring. or accept €€{{ which may restrict the x Consider expanding scholarships or other contributions from choice of sending parents? financial support to lower-income or otherwise children to school. disadvantaged students to enable them to choose from a wider range of school options, Goal 4: Promoting diversity of supply including independent private schools, without By opening education to a more diverse set of providers, being limited by monetary contributions. governments can increase client power and make providers directly accountable to students and parents Table 5. Goal 3: Empowering all parents, students, and for results. Although the public sector will always remain communities an important (and, in most cases, the predominant) A. Common Policies: Independent Private Schools and Government-Funded Non-state Schools provider of education services, educational choice can be used as part of a package of reforms to improve Item Score Justification education access and quality in both the public and Are standardized private sectors (Hoxby 2003; Levin and Belfield 2003; De Regular information is exam results and Established provided to parents on la Croix and Doepke 2009; Carnoy and McEwan 2003; inspection reports €€€{ individual standardized Himmler 2007; Angrist et al. 2002; World Bank 2003). In provided regularly to parents? exam results. order to facilitate quality improvements through increased school competition and choice, governments Are parents and Established Student or parents are can (i) allow multiple types of providers to operate; students interviewed €€€{ interviewed as part of (ii) promote clear, open, affordable, and unrestrictive as part of the the inspection process. inspection process? certification standards; and (iii) make government funding (and other incentives) available to non-state schools. This policy goal aims to increase the ability of diverse providers to provide education services. In order to do so, a number of policy indicators are suggested, as 24 Education Regulations, Chapter 24, Clauses 146, 152. 20 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 outlined in box 5. and buildings). Other minimum standards currently include: school playground/ minimum outdoor space, Box 5. International best practice—promoting diversity medical services, library, a specified number and size of of supply classrooms, a specified number of teachers, toilets, and drinking water.25 x The central government allows different types of providers to operate schools. The minimum requirements differ between independent x Certification standards do not prohibit market and government-funded schools in terms of class size entry. and teacher-classroom ratios. There have also been x Information on market-entry requirements is recent directives that add additional certification available from multiple sources. standards for the establishment of new independent x Regulatory fees do not prohibit market entry. private schools, such as the availability of other schools x Publicly funded non-state schools and public in the area. It is not clear to what extent these new schools receive equivalent student funding; requirements are limiting the establishment of new funding is increased to meet specific student private schools in practice. needs. x The central government provides incentives for The steps for registration for any school providing basic market entry, such as access to start-up funding, education opened by any party other than the public land, and public buildings. government of Nepal are as follows. New providers must x Schools are able to plan budgets six months in submit an application at the District Education Office no advance of the academic year. later than three months prior to the start of the academic x Privately managed schools are not restricted by year. Applications must be accompanied by a student numbers, school numbers, or location. recommendation from the concerned Village x The central government does not restrict tuition Development Committee or municipality. In the case of levels at private independent schools. primary (grades 1–5) and lower secondary (grades 6–8) schools, the District Education Office grants registration Development level no later than one month prior to the start of the Private independent schools: academic year. In the case of secondary schools (grades 9–10), the District Education Office will forward the Government-funded non-state schools: application (together with the opinion of the concerned District Education Committee) to the Regional Education In Nepal, the policies in place to promote diversity of Directorate for approval. In the case of higher secondary supply for independent private schools are established. schools (grades 11–12), the Higher Secondary Education For government-funded non-state schools policies, they Board, upon recommendation of the District Education are emerging—representing some instances of good Committee, grants approval.26 For independent private practice. schools, application for registration must also document whether the school is to be established as a company or The guidelines for registration of new providers are trust school. currently publicly available from multiple sources, including the Education Act 1971 (Seventh Amendment, The government allows all types of organizational 2001), Education Rules 2002, and the Institutional School providers (community, not for profit, faith based, for Standards and Operation Directive 2013. The minimum profit) to operate independent private schools. The vast operating standards for both independent and majority of government-funded non-state schools in the government-funded non-state schools are similar and country are established and managed at the community include criteria not directly linked to educational level. According to law, company schools (independent outcomes, such as certain facilities (e.g., science lab, for-profit schools) may not be operated in government internet/computers) and assets (e.g., ownership of land or public buildings, on government or public land, or on 25 26 Education Act, Clause 3; Education Regulations, Chapter 2, Education Act, Clause 3; Education Regulations Chapter 3, Clauses 3-11, Annex 1, 3; Institutional School Standards and Clauses 3, 5. Operation Directive 2013, Chapters 2, 3, 4. 21 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 land or in buildings donated by an individual or on allocations, and incentives for new providers could be organization, 27 which limits the opportunities for for- strengthened. The academic and non-academic budgets profit providers to establish schools. allocated to different government-funded non-state schools are not equivalent. All community schools According to current policies for independent private receive the same per-student amount for textbooks and schools, the government does not set standardized scholarships, but partially aided community schools tuition fees, but does impose a cap and requires receive less for teacher salaries and non-academic ministerial approval of all tuition fees: “School shall budgets than do fully aided community schools. Schools submit the proposed rate of fees levied to students for are informed one to three months prior to the start of the forthcoming academic session […] to the Ministry for the academic year of the amount of funding that they will approval at least two months before the start of the next receive. The government does not currently offer start- session.”28 up funding for newly established community schools. The fees that independent private schools must pay to Informed by the results of the SABER-EPS benchmarking operate are determined by four different categories exercise, the following suggested policy options would based on school infrastructure and quality of service.29 help to better promote diversity of supply of private Independent private schools are able to operate while schools in Nepal: paying the following fees:30 x Link school certification standards to education x One-time deposit of Nr 200,000 for secondary, outcomes, rather than to factors such as facilities, Nr 150,000 for lower secondary, and Nr 50,000 ownership of assets, and proximity of other schools. for primary school. The deposit is put into a fixed account and schools receive interest on the Independent private schools: amount. The deposit is reduced to 50 percent if the private school is established in a remote x Consider relaxing government authority over tuition district (as designated by the state). Deposit fees fees to give schools more autonomy over their are waived not-for-profit schools registered as resources (possibly combined with increased public trusts. support for scholarships targeting lower-income or otherwise disadvantaged students). x Registration fees and required annual income taxes (for-profit independent private schools Government-funded non-state schools: only). x Consider providing schools with access to start-up x Some administrative fees may be levied within a funding and/or government facilities or land to district. encourage new providers. x All private schools are required to contribute annually to the Rural Education Fund. 31 The x Move towards standard per-student funding for all centrally managed Fund assists in developing government-funded (community) schools. community schools in rural areas and aims to x Aim to provide information on budgetary allocations enhance their academic standards. more than three months before the start of the academic year. In the case of government-funded non-state schools, policies relating to fees and the diversity of providers reflect good practice. Schools are allowed to operate while paying one type of fee—an administrative fee levied by the District Education Committee. The amount of the fee varies by district. A one-time deposit of Nr 100,000 is required for secondary school (grades 9–10) only. Policies relating to funding allocations, information 27 29 Education Act, Clause 3, Sub-clause 6. Ibid., Chapter 24, Clause 145, and Annex 21. 28 30 Education Regulations, Chapter 25, Clause 146–148, and Ibid., Chapter 2, Clauses 10, 10A. 31 Annex 22. Ibid., Chapter 32, Clause 180. 22 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 Table 6. Goal 4: Promoting diversity of supply B. Policies for Government-Funded Non-state Schools A. Policies for Independent Private Schools Item Score Justification Item Score Justification Are there minimum Certification standards standards for that are not linked to Certification standards registration or education outcomes certification for Emerging restrict entry, including that are not linked to Are there minimum government-funded facilities (separate education outcomes €€{{ standards for non-state schools to science labs, etc.) and restrict entry, including registration or for Latent be allowed to assets (ownership of facilities (separate independent €{{{ operate? land or buildings). science labs, etc.), assets private schools to Are there guidelines (ownership of land or be allowed to clearly publicized by Registration/certifica- buildings), and location operate? multiple sources that Advanced tion guidelines are (presence of other schools in the area) outline requirements €€€€ made public by multiple for school sources. Are there registration? guidelines clearly The government allows Registration/certification publicized by Advanced the following guidelines are made Does the government multiple sources €€€€ organizational types of public by multiple allow multiple types of Established that outline schools: sources. providers to operate a €€€{ requirements for -Community school registration? school? -Not for profit The government allows -Faith based all of the following Are schools able to Schools are able to Does the Established organizational types of operate without operate while paying government allow €€€{ Advanced schools: paying fees? one type of fee. multiple types of €€€€ -Community Academic operating providers to -Not for profit Does the government budgets are not operate a school? -Faith based provide equivalent equivalent in terms of -For profit Latent funding of budgets for per-student amounts €{{{ Government does not all government- across government- Who has legal set standardized tuition funded schools? funded non-state authority to Emerging fees but imposes cap schools. determine tuition €€{{ (overall amount or Schools are provided fee standards? percentage increases on Is information on the information on the tuitions fees). amount of Emerging allocations to be Schools are able to government funding transferred to them Are schools able to Emerging provided in a timely €€{{ between one and three operate while paying operate without manner? months before the start €€{{ two to three types of paying fees? of the academic year. fees. Do government- Government-funded funded non-state Latent non-state schools do schools receive any €{{{ not receive any start-up start-up funding? funding. 23 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 From Analysis to Action: Policy Options Table 7 summarizes some of the critical challenges facing Nepal’s education sector, findings from this for Nepal benchmarking exercise, as well as suggested policy options for strengthening private sector engagement in Nepal has made great progress in educational outcomes the education system with the goal of ensuring learning over the past 15 years. Net enrolment in primary for all. (The policy options will be discussed in greater education exceeds 95 percent and gender parity has detail following the table.) These options are supported been effectively achieved. However, challenges remain by international evidence, best practice, and examples of in terms of access to school at the secondary level and countries that have used innovative interventions to quality and equity throughout the education system. improve from a variety of starting points. Table 7. Nepal: Summary of education challenges, findings, and suggested policy options Challenge Situation Findings Policy Options 1. Nepal has achieved 95% 1. Registration criteria for new 1. Ease registration criteria and link primary school enrolment. providers is burdensome and linked them to educational outcomes. 2. The government of Nepal to inputs rather than outputs. 2. Increase incentives for private desires universal free 2. Government does not provide start- providers to expand service delivery, secondary education. up funding or incentives for new especially post-primary: providers. a. Provide startup funding or other However: 3. Government restrictions apply caps incentives (e.g. public on tuition fees at private schools. land/buildings) to promote Access 1. Net enrollment is 72.6% in increased supply of post-primary 4. For-profit schools do not receive lower secondary and opportunities in underserved government funding. 54.9% in secondary areas. (Nepal-Department of b. Consider removing tuition caps Education, 2014). for private providers, along with 2. 44% of households are financial support for more than 30 minutes disadvantaged students. away from a post-primary c. Include for-profit schools in school. government funding programs for post-primary schools. 1. Results from the 2011 1. Mechanisms to monitor school 1. Strengthen performance monitoring National Assessment of performance are weak and the mechanisms, including linking school Student Achievement school inspection process could be inspections and improvement plans. (NASA) showed poor improved. 2. Better engage students and parents competency for 8th graders. 2. Comparable information on school in school monitoring and 2. There are distinct quality is not available to parents. management. differences in student 3. Government restricts school 3. Empower parents by requiring performance depending on autonomy in the areas of teacher schools to provide regular type of school (e.g., standards, hiring and dismissal, and information on the quality of Quality institutional or community) curriculum delivery. schooling. and location (urban or 4. Inspections are meant to be carried 4. Consider granting schools more rural). out on a monthly basis. autonomy on key management 3. Systematic analyses of questions, including teachers and student performance are the curriculum. not available. 5. Move to a needs-based inspection system to target resources to the most underperforming schools. 24 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 1. 140,000 primary-school- 1. Government-funded non-state 1. Consider providing additional aged children are out of schools are allowed to charge support to lower-income and school. voluntary monetary parent disadvantaged students to attend 2. Students from the poorest contributions. government-funded schools without households complete 3.2 2. Government does not provide tax incurring additional expenses or Equity fewer years of schooling subsidies or cash transfers to lower- requiring parental contributions. than their wealthiest peers. income students to help them 2. Consider providing means-tested or 3. There is much lower attend independent private schools. poverty-targeted scholarships to attendance at private enable lower-income students to schools by students from attend private independent schools. poor families. impact on student outcomes are: adequate numbers of Challenge 1: Access textbooks, exercise books, desks, tables, chairs, and blackboards, as well as electricity and high-quality walls, Policy Option 1: Improve the regulatory roofs, and floors (Glewwe et al. 2011). Out of the more environment to support a greater supply of costly interventions, school libraries appear to have a post-primary schools in underserved areas generally positive impact, while the impact of computers is less clear. In Nepal, the rates of enrolment in post-primary education remain low (72.6 percent in grades 6–8 and In Nepal, schools currently need to fulfill numerous 54.9 percent in grades 9–10). Moreover, nearly half (44 criteria in order to operate. Minimum criteria include percent) of households are not within 30 minutes of a certain facilities (e.g., science lab, internet/computers) post-primary institution. As a consequence, the and assets (e.g. ownership of land and building). For regulatory environment could be strengthened for both independent private schools, recent directives have also independent and government-funded non-state schools required consideration of the availability of other schools in order to encourage new providers to establish post- in the area. Certification criteria should either be linked primary schools in underserved areas. to health/safety and educational outcomes only, or schools should be allowed to fulfill the criteria gradually. Policies should explicitly outline the governance and For instance, schools could first be required to fulfill a financial arrangements in order to ensure transparency shorter list of minimum standards linked to health and in the system and to encourage new providers to enter. safety, with other facilities added gradually as the school Guidelines for certification should be simplified to make scales up. sure that they do not discourage market entry. Government could also consider providing incentives for Country example market entry, such as start-up funding or access to public land or buildings, eliminating tuition caps, and including In New York City, the Department of Education oversees for-profit schools in government funding programs for and supports new charter schools to improve learning post-primary education. opportunities and meet community needs. Charters have the autonomy to determine their own policies, 1. Ease registration criteria and link them to design their educational programs, and manage all educational outcomes human and financial resources of the school. When a new charter school is established, a five-year Strict certification guidelines can discourage private performance contract, or “charter”, is set up to ensure providers from operating legally, or even operating at all high student achievement. There are no set minimum in some cases (Härmä 2011). Additionally, regulatory criteria for registration; instead, performance standards measures that encourage supply include setting are organized under four guiding questions ((NYC certification standards that are limited to criteria that are Department of Education 2013)): linked either to educational outcomes or health and safety. International research has shown that the school x Is this school an academic success? infrastructure and pedagogical materials that have an 25 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 o High academic attainment and supply of school places in areas with low post-primary improvement opportunities. o Mission and academic goals o Responsive education program Country example o Learning environment x Is this school a fiscally sound, viable In Burkina Faso, a public-private partnership was set up organization? in order to increase enrolment in lower secondary o Governance structure and schools from 20 percent in 2004 to 33.5 percent by 2009. organizational design Through this partnership, the government supported the o School climate and community construction and equipment of 80 private schools and engagement hired and paid for two teachers per school. The schools o Financial and operational health aimed to reduce disparities among provinces in x Is this school in compliance with its charter and secondary school choice. The 18 provinces with the all applicable laws and regulations? lowest coverage would benefit from 70 percent of the o Approved charter and agreement program funding. These schools then operated at a lower o Applicable federal and state law cost than typical private schools. No recurrent costs were o Applicable regulations, such as safe and incurred by the government (World Bank 2006). secure school facilities x What are the school's plans for its next charter For more information see the World Bank Operations term? portal for Burkina Faso. o School expansion and model replication o Organizational sustainability b. Consider eliminating tuition caps for private o School or model improvements providers For more information on charter school certification in Regulatory caps on tuition are often introduced through NYC, click here. legislation in an attempt to protect poorer households from highly priced school fees, as is the case in Nepal. 2. Increase the level and quality of incentives for Unfortunately, even with such tuition caps, the poorest private providers to expand post-primary service students are still typically left out of the private delivery education market. As such, policies that impose tuition caps have the effect of constraining growth in the supply The private sector could substantially contribute to the of private education services, while still failing to enable expansion of post-primary education services. the poor. A more progressive and cost-effective Government policy could facilitate such expansion approach would be to liberate private providers from through improved incentives, which could be designed to tuition limits, thus allowing private schools to charge specifically encourage expansion in targeted more to wealthier students, while protecting the poor underserved areas, for instance, through linkages to through policies that require private schools to admit proper mapping of schools. Three incentive-based policy poorer students at no cost. Some equity-protection options are suggested: measures are already in place in Nepal through the Education Act; additional options to strengthen such a. Consider providing start-up funding or other support are provided in the second policy option below. incentives (e.g. public land/buildings) to new providers Country examples Currently, neither the most common independent In Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, and the Philippines, tuition private schools (company schools) nor government- fees are determined by the market rather than the funded non-state schools in Nepal receive start-up government. The market is therefore allowed to funding or other incentives, such as access to public land determine the price, resulting in differentiated school or buildings. The government could consider offering models to meet the demands of individual citizens. The such incentives to new providers to support a greater government in each country maintains a stewardship role to ensure learning for all (Patrinos 2012). 26 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 In Nepal, there are few mechanisms to monitor school In Dubai, tuition fee rate increases are dependent on the performance and hold schools accountable for delivering performance of a school. The aim of this innovative quality education. No comparable data on school quality framework is to regulate school fees to protect students is currently available, inspectors are not required to and their parents as beneficiaries of educational services, submit standard inspection reports, and parents cannot as well as to provide a favorable environment for compare the quality of different schools. investors in the education sector and encourage them to improve the quality of education (KHDA 2012). Accountability mechanisms are crucial for ensuring high- quality service delivery. During a year of schooling, For more information on Dubai’s tuition fee framework students with a poor teacher typically master less than click here. 50 percent of the curriculum, while students with a good teacher average one year of progression and those with c. Consider including for-profit schools in great teachers, one-and-a-half years of progression government funding programs at the post- (Hanushek and Rivkin 2010). But while good teaching is primary level essential, accountability mechanisms must also be effective and aligned in order to monitor teaching and One of the biggest obstacles to providing free universal learning. secondary education in Nepal will be infrastructure and manpower. In order to reach all students at the To raise the accountability of schools to the state, Nepal secondary level, the education system will need to more could strengthen its school monitoring and inspection than double its current supply of secondary services. To system. School inspections should be recorded using a do so quickly will require substantial incentives for school standard format and inspection reports could be more providers. By making government funding available to closely linked to school improvement plans. Parents and for-profit school providers, Nepal could greatly influence students could be better engaged in monitoring and the behavior of the school market and encourage an inspection by having access to information. To raise the increased level of service provision. accountability of schools to parents and the community, schools should be required to provide parents with Country example comparable and regular information on the quality of schooling. Once effective monitoring mechanisms are in In the Philippines, the government’s education service place, a mechanism to further improve quality is to give contracting (ESC) program pays for more 700,000 schools more autonomy over key management secondary students (more than half of all such students) decisions, such as hiring teachers and choosing learning to attend for-profit private secondary schools (LaRocque materials. Resources could be more effectively targeted 2014). This program provides substantial incentives for to underperforming schools by moving to a needs-based private schools and opportunity for new providers to inspection system. Specific recommendations and become financially viable. In the coming years, the international best practices include: Philippines plans to double its enrollment at the secondary level—the result of lengthening the secondary 1. Establish a standard format for inspection reports school cycle by two years—and plans on the private and link inspections to school improvement plans sector providing a large share of these services through the ESC program. An effective inspection process, including appropriate follow-up, can be an important means of school improvement. Inspection frameworks should outline Challenge 2: Quality strengths and weaknesses of schools and specific Policy Option 2: Strengthen accountability priorities for improvement. The government should also create mechanisms to ensure that the number and measures, including the regular collection location of inspections are actively monitored and and dissemination of comparable follow-up action is taken by schools, based on the information on school performance, while inspection recommendations. increasing school autonomy 27 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 In Nepal, school supervisors do not use a standard pupils, the quality of teaching, student behavior and reporting format, and individual school reports are not safety, and the quality of leadership and management. produced and published in a standardized way. This Inspectors identify the strengths and weaknesses of a limits the ability of government to effectively monitor school, as well as what it must do to improve. The lead schools and work with schools and SMCs in a consistent inspector has responsibility for ensuring that judgments way to improve school outcomes. about the school are collectively agreed by the inspection team and that they are supported Specifically, the school inspection process should be convincingly by recorded evidence. Following an linked to school improvement plans, which have been an inspection, the lead inspector will write a report that sets important piece of multiple successful education out the main findings. The findings should be consistent programs in developing countries (Bruns, Filmer, and with those explained orally to the school. The report is Patrinos 2011). Improvement plans traditionally outline sent to the school for a factual accuracy check and the goals that a school desires to achieve, strategies for published on Ofsted’s website, normally within 15 achieving those goals, and practical actionable steps for working days of the end of the inspection. A copy of the each individual within the school, which can be drawn report is sent at least to the head teacher of the school directly from school inspection reports. and the local authority, as well as to other prescribed persons. Research has shown that improvement plans can be successful when they clearly define goals; pursue simple For more information, please see Ofsted’s Framework actions with consistency; align standards, curriculum, for School Inspection, click here. instruction, and assessment; and create a culture of achievement (Schmoker and Marzano, 1999; Reeves Western Cape, South Africa, requires schools to submit 2006; Collins 2005). Changes at the school level, individual school improvement plans. Particular however, will only occur when relationships in the school attention is given to those schools that did not achieve are strengthened. School leaders must ensure that the required pass rate on the most recent state improvement plans are meaningful to all stakeholders examinations. The number of underperforming schools and purposeful actions taken throughout the school has declined every year since this requirement was (Fullan 2007). introduced, from 85 in 2009 to 26 in 2012 (Western Cape 2013). In Nepal, government-funded non-state schools (i.e., community schools) are required to prepare five-year In Sweden, schools are inspected regularly by the school improvement plans and there is provision for Swedish Schools Inspectorate. Regular inspections are grant funding to implement these plans (Nepal- carried out in all schools ever four to five years. This Department of Education 2012). However, there is no model was created to ensure evaluation and formal linkage between improvement plans and the accountability in the educational system, which is highly school inspection process, or between inspection plans decentralized and grants a large degree of autonomy to and central government funding. Independent private schools. The main purpose of regular inspections is to schools are covered by the school inspection process, but ensure that municipalities and schools fulfil their are not explicitly required to prepare improvement responsibilities set out in the Education Act. Inspections plans. Requiring all schools to conduct improvement also have other important objectives, including plans and consistently linking standardized school evaluating the extent to which schools are fulfilling inspection reports with such plans will improve school national objectives and the national curriculum, as well monitoring capacity in Nepal. as assessing if schools have systems in place for self- evaluation and self-improvement. Inspection reports Country examples outline where schools are failing to meet national requirements. Results are also discussed with the In the United Kingdom, the Office for Standards in municipalities and schools concerned, along with Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted) carries priorities for improvement. The Inspectorate can apply out inspections of schools. Inspectors focus on those penalties to ensure that schools improve after an operational aspects that have the greatest impact on inspection. If an independent school fails to take action, raising student achievement, including achievement of 28 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 the Inspectorate can apply a fine or even revoke its quality of schooling. Empowering parents through operating license. increased information can lead to greater transparency and enable them to influence school quality through More information on inspections in Sweden can be found raising complaints directly with the provider or informing here. public authorities. To exercise their voice and client power effectively, parents need detailed current 2. Better engage students and parents in school information on school quality. Policies in Nepal should monitoring and management guarantee that parents receive such information regularly. Information could include school report cards, When parents, students, and communities more broadly classroom assessment results, examination results, or are actively engaged in the monitoring and management inspection reports. of their schools, they are better able to influence learning outcomes and hold schools accountable for results. In Country examples Nepal, parent-teacher associations and SMCs are required to participate in the school inspection process. Interventions that give access to school performance But this involvement in school inspections could be information have had significant impacts in both strengthened, with the parental perspectives more developed and developing countries. In Punjab, Pakistan, formally included in standardized inspection reports. providing school report cards to parents, communities, More broadly, there is scope to strengthen the roles and and teachers improved student performance by 0.15 capacities of SMCs and parent-teacher associations to standard deviations and reduced fees in high-quality better engage families in school monitoring and private schools by over 20 percent. The largest learning management. gains (0.34 standard deviations) were for initially low- performing (below median baseline test scores) private Country examples schools (Andrabi et al 2009). In Denmark, parents are actively engaged in the quality In the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, assurance of schools in a number of innovative ways. Honduras, and Nicaragua, a USAID-funded program – Parents draw up annual evaluation plans and in some Civic Engagement for Education Reform in Central schools, are invited to observe lessons and even elect an America (CERCA) — implemented a school report card external inspector to review the school (Denmark that focused on indicators in four areas: Inspectorate of Education 2013). 1. Context: basic profile information (e.g., number of students in each grade, etc.) and access to services In the UK, OfSTED launched an online portal, Parent at the school (e.g., sanitation, electricity, etc.) View, which asks parents for their opinion on twelve aspects of their children’s schools, such as the quality of 2. Inputs: class size, access to resources (i.e., teaching and dealing with poor behavior. The notebooks, pens, etc.), and access to social information provided by parents is available on the services (e.g., school meals, health programs, etc.) website so that parents can compare schools. The data is 3. Processes: student and teacher attendance, school also used to inform the sequencing and timing of school plan implementation, and parent participation inspections. 4. Results: coverage and efficiency (the latter is tracked through repetition and retention rates) More information on OfSTED’s Parent View can be found here. The results of the school report card are used by communities to develop and monitor implementation of 3. Empower parents by requiring schools to provide school action plans (CERCA 2006). regular information on the quality of schooling In Andhra Pradesh, India, the Vidya Chaitanyam In order to implement the recommendation above to intervention used citizens to monitor and advocate for better engage parents and students so that schools higher-quality service delivery from government and better meet the needs of all students in the community, non-government basic education providers. This was parents must be able access regular information on the intended to strengthen the oversight function in the 29 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 state due to lack of capacity at the Local Education decisions and adapt the curriculum to student needs. For Offices, which are responsible for carrying out school example, some schools opt to use government teacher inspections. The program included members of standards, while other schools tailor these to meet the Women’s Self-Help Groups, who were often illiterate or needs of the local community. They are also able to tailor semi-literate, who assessed the quality of basic the curriculum, providing that it remains balanced and education provision through the use of school broad. Schools are still required to teach English, scorecards. The results of the scorecards were shared mathematics, and science, and to make provision for the with district officials, the local school management teaching of religious education (U.K. Department for committee, and local women’s Self Help Group meetings Education 2013). (CfBT 2013). For more information about the Academies Act of 2010, 4. Consider allowing schools more autonomy on key click here. management decisions, including teachers and the curriculum In Kenya, the low-cost independent private Bridge International Academies currently educate over 95,000 Nepal currently restricts the autonomy of schools, students. Bridge‘s curriculum was developed and is particularly regarding teachers and curriculum delivery. continuously reviewed by in-house leading education As school inspection, monitoring, and improvement experts. All lessons are scripted and delivered through mechanisms are strengthened, Nepal may want to tablets. Bridge has created its own instructional consider expanding school autonomy. Of greatest materials, including books and songs, in order to importance is that standards for school accountability facilitate positive behavior among students and create are focused on outcomes (i.e., student learning) rather an environment that reinforces learning. Bridge prices its than inputs (i.e., teacher and school certification education to be accessible to families living on US$ 2 a requirements, class sizes, etc.). Specific policies limiting day per person or less. school autonomy in Nepal include central government authority over curriculum and textbooks, class sizes for For more information on Bridge International both independent private and government-funded non- Academies, click here. state schools, and appointment and dismissal of permanent teachers in government-funded non-state schools (community schools). 5. Move to a needs-based inspection system to target resources to the most underperforming school Methodologically rigorous studies that assess the impacts of local school autonomy on student learning Nepal spends 4.7 percent of its GDP on education, outcomes generally find a positive relationship surpassing the South Asia average of 2.8 percent. (Hanushek and Woessmann 2010; Bruns, Filmer, and Although significant investment in education is certainly Patrinos 2011). International education research shows important, given resource constraints, there may be that teacher credentials—including factors such as years opportunities to spend education funding more of experience, certification, and education—fail to efficiently. predict student learning (Dobbie and Fryer 2011; Goldhaber and Anthony 2004; Goldhaber and Brewer One policy area in Nepal with room for efficiency and 2000; Hedges et al. 1994; Hanushek 1997). Instead, effectiveness improvements is the school inspection regulations on teaching credentials may limit the process. District Education Offices are required by policy potential for private providers to operate and expand, as to inspect every school on a monthly basis. To better certain schools may be unable to employ a sufficient target resources, Nepal could consider moving towards a number of qualified teachers. needs-based inspection system, whereby high- performing schools are inspected less frequently and Country examples inspectors target their efforts on underperforming schools. In England, private independent schools and privately managed schools (known as Free Schools and Academies) are able to make their own personnel 30 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 specific period of districts Country examples time Source: Based on World Bank consultations with the In Malawi, the inspection framework covers private government of Malawi. independent schools, religious schools, and public schools. Schools are inspected once every two years, but The inspection report includes the type of school visited, inspections based on need using a risk-based framework enrolment, staffing, and rating of school performance on are also carried out. The latter employ the following various aspects of operations, as well as the general criteria: strengths and weaknesses of the school. After the inspection, members of the school staff and head a) Schools with poor examination results. teacher are briefed on inspection findings. This b) Schools that are poorly managed. discussion gives the staff and head teacher a chance to c) Schools that have not been inspected for more start working on the weaknesses identified in the school. than two years. d) High-performing schools in order to learn good practices. Challenge 3: Equity Policy Option 3: Consider providing Malawi also has four different types of inspections, as additional support to poor and marginalized shown in table 8. students attending independent schools and post-primary education Table 8. Types of school inspection in Malawi Who As noted earlier in this report, more than 140,000 Type of carries it primary-school aged children in Nepal are currently out inspection Objective out Duration Full Evaluation of all Team of Full day of school (Nepal-Department of Education 2014). Poor inspection aspects of the inspectors students drop out earlier: the poorest students complete school: (3–6 3.2 fewer years of schooling than their wealthiest peers, curriculum, inspectors, and finish only 6.4 years of total schooling on average, organization of depending meaning that most drop out in lower secondary school teaching and on size of (grades 6–8). About 60 percent of students from the learning, general school ) wealthiest quintile currently attend private schools in school Nepal, compared to only 6 percent of students from the administration and poorest quintile. documentation, provisions of buildings and The SABER-EPS benchmarking exercise indicates that grounds, policies in Nepal to support poor and marginalized equipment students could be improved in both independent and Follow-up Evaluation of 1–2 2 hours government-funded non-state schools. Government- inspection extent to which advisors funded non-state schools are allowed to receive recommendations monetary contributions from parents, given that made in the full government support does not cover all operating costs. inspection report The government does require independent private have been schools to provide scholarships to poor and marginalized implemented students (at least 10 percent of school places are Partial Examination and 1–2 Depends mandated for such students), but no financial support inspection evaluation of one advisors on or a limited gravity from the government is generally available to enable number of aspects of aspect lower-income students to attend these schools. Some of school life model schools receive government funding for Block Improve 6 to 8 1–2 scholarships for low-income students, but these are inspection inspection supervisors weeks merit-based and only available at a very limited number coverage of from of schools. schools in a different 31 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 Policies in Nepal should ensure that students have interest in participating in EVS. A partnership between a equitable access to quality schooling and do not drop out school and EVS is dependent on continuous quality of post-primary schooling due to an inability to pay non- assurance, including school visits and bi-annual quality tuition expenses in either government-funded or assurance tests (QAT) that assess improvements in independent private schools. One option that could be student learning outcomes (Punjab Education considered is government vouchers or other forms of Foundation 2014). cash transfers or financial support that would cover the full costs of low-income or otherwise disadvantaged For more information on the Education Voucher Scheme, students of attending such schools. This could be click here. implemented in a way to both cover private tuition costs of independent private schools and expand scholarships The Andhra Pradesh state of India has a population of 85 for students with limited ability to attend government- million and a rural poverty incidence of approximately 20 funded schools without incurring expenses. percent. A voucher program was implemented in five districts, with students allocated to schools based on a Country examples lottery. The cost of delivering education by means of a voucher to attend private schools was one-third of the In Cambodia, two evaluations of the impact of cost of delivery in public schools. The cost difference was scholarships for lower secondary school have shown due to lower teacher salaries, but was offset by hiring substantial increases in school enrollment and more teachers, smaller class sizes, and less multi-grade attendance. Recipients were 20–30 percentage points teaching. Unannounced visits also showed that private more likely to be enrolled and attending school as a schools had a longer school day, a longer school year, result of the scholarships. Impacts on learning outcomes fewer teacher absences, more teaching activity, and were, however, limited (Filmer and Schady, 2008, 2009, better school hygiene. After two years, student and 2011). A new approach to scholarships at the outcomes, as measured by the average score across all primary level were subsequently tried, using two subjects, showed that voucher recipients scored 0.13 different targeting mechanisms: one based on the standard deviations higher than those who did not student’s poverty level and the other, on baseline test receive a voucher. Students who attended private scores (“merit”). Both targeting mechanisms increased voucher schools also scored 0.23 standard deviations enrollment and attendance. However, only the merit- higher than those who did not attend such schools based targeting induced positive effects on test scores. (Muralidharan and Sundararaman 2013). The results suggest that in order to balance equity and efficiency, a two-step targeting approach might be preferable: first, target low-income individuals and then, among them, target based on merit (Barrera-Osorio and Filmer 2013). For more information on scholarships in Cambodia, click here. In Pakistan, the Punjab Education Foundation launched an Education Voucher Scheme (EVS) in 2006 to benefit children in less affluent and underprivileged areas, who otherwise could not access education due to financial and social constraints. The scheme was immensely popular due to its positive effects on poorer households. The Scheme enables children aged 4-–7 years to attend a nearby EVS private school of their choice for free. It particularly targets out-of-school children, orphans, children of widows and single parents, as well as children who cannot afford school. There are no up-front infrastructure costs, as existing schools express their 32 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 Acknowledgments Björkman, M. 2007. “Does Money Matter for Student Performance? Evidence from a Grant Program in Uganda.” IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for This SABER-EPS Country Report was prepared by Anna- Economic Research) Working Paper 326. IGIER, Bocconi Maria Tammi and John Anderson at World Bank University, Italy. headquarters in Washington, DC, with inputs from Bruns, B., D. Filmer, and H. A. Patrinos. 2011. Making Schools Donald Baum, Minju Choi, Rachel Cooper, Oni Lusk- Work: New Evidence on Accountability Reforms. Stover, and Hugo Wesley. The report presents country Washington, DC: World Bank. data collected by Pramod Bhatta using the SABER-EPS data collection instrument. The report was prepared Carnoy, M., and S. Loeb. 2002. “Does External Accountability collaboratively with the World Bank Nepal Education Affect Student Outcomes? A Cross-State Analysis.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 24 (4): 305– team, with particular thanks to Saurav Bhatta and Ram 31. Rijal, and in consultation with the government of Nepal. Carnoy, M., and P. J. McEwan. 2003. “Does Privatization The SABER-EPS team would like to thank the Department Improve Education? The Case of Chile’s National for International Development (DFID) for their support of Voucher Plan.” In Choosing Choice: School Choice in International Perspective, ed. D. N. Plank and G. Sykes, the Education Markets for the Poor research study, 24–44. New York: Teachers College Press. which made this work possible. CERCA (Civic Engagement for Education Reform in Central America). 2006. School Report Card. Academy for Educational Development, Washington, DC. References CfBT Education Trust. 2013. “Community-Based Abdulkadiroglu, A., J. D. Angrist, S. M. Dynarski, T. J. Kane, and Accountability for School Improvement: A Case Study P. A. Pathak. 2011. “Accountability and Flexibility in from Rural India.” CfBT Education Trust, Reading, UK. Public Schools: Evidence from Boston's Charters and Collins, J. C. 2005. Good to Great and the Social Sectors: A Pilots.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 126 (2): Monograph to Accompany Good to Great. New York: 699–748. Harper Collins Business. Andrabi, T., J. Das, and A. Khwaja. 2009. “Report Cards: The De la Croix, D., and M. Doepke. 2009. “To Segregate or to Impact of Providing School and Child Test Scores on Integrate: Education Politics and Democracy.” The Educational Markets.” Unpublished manuscript. World Review of Economic Studies 76 (2): 597–628. Bank, Washington, DC. Denmark, Government of. “The Inspectorate of Education of Angrist, J., E. Bettinger, E. Bloom, and E. King. 2002. “Vouchers Denmark.” 2013. http://www.sici- for Private Schooling in Colombia: Evidence from a inspectorates.eu/getattachment/880bcaf4-fde0- Randomized Natural Experiment.” American Economic 4d31-a772-b8266e314760. Review 92 (5): 1535–58. Di Gropello, E., and J. H. Marshall. 2005. “Teacher Effort and Barrera-Osorio, F. 2006. “The Impact of Private Provision of Schooling Outcomes in Rural Honduras.” In Incentives to Public Education: Empirical Evidence from Bogotá’s Improve Teaching: Lessons from Latin America, ed. E. Concession Schools.” World Bank Policy Research Vegas, 307–58. Washington, DC: World Bank. Working Paper 4121. World Bank, Washington, DC. Dobbie, W., R. G. Fryer, and G. Fryer, Jr. 2011. “Are High- Barrera-Osorio, F., and D. Filmer. 2013. “Incentivizing Quality Schools Enough to Increase Achievement Schooling for Learning Evidence on the Impact of Among the Poor? Evidence from the Harlem Alternative Targeting Approaches.” Policy Research Children's Zone.” American Economic Journal: Working Paper 6541. World Bank, Washington, DC. Applied Economics 3 (3): 158–87. Barrera-Osorio, F., and D. Raju. 2010. “Short-Run Learning Dundar, H., T. Béteille, M. Riboud, and A. Deolalikar. 2014. Dynamics under a Test-Based Accountability System: Student Learning in South Asia: Challenges, Evidence from Pakistan.” World Bank Policy Research Opportunities, and Policy Priorities. Directions in Working Paper 5465. World Bank, Washington, DC. Development Series. Washington, DC: World Bank. Baum, D., L. Lewis, O. Lusk-Stover, and H. A. Patrinos. 2014. Edstats (database). World Bank, Washington, DC. “What Matters Most for Engaging the Private Sector in http://datatopics.worldbank.org/education/. Education: A Framework Paper.” SABER Working Paper. World Bank, Washington, DC. Education Act, 2028. 1971. 33 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 ———. Seventh Amendment. 2001. American Economic Review 100 (2): 267–71. Education Regulations, 2059. 2002. Hanushek, E. A., and L. Woessmann. 2013. “Does School Autonomy Make Sense Everywhere? Panel Estimates Filmer, D., and N. Schady. 2008. “Getting Girls into School: from PISA.” Journal of Development Economics 104: Evidence from a Scholarship Program in Cambodia.” 212–32. Economic Development and Cultural Change 56 (2): 581– 617. Härmä, J. 2011. Education Sector Support Programme in Nigeria (ESSPIN): Assignment Report: Study of Private ———. 2009. “School Enrollment, Selection, and Test Scores.” Schools in Lagos. Report No. LG-303. ESSPIN and World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 4998. World UKAID, U.K. Department for International Bank, Washington, DC. Development, Nigeria. ———. 2011. “Does More Cash in Conditional Cash Transfer Hedges, L.V., R. Laine, and R. Greenwald. 1994. “A Meta- Programs Always Lead to Larger Impacts on School Analysis of Studies of the Effects of Differential School Attendance?” Journal of Development Economics 96 (1): Inputs on Student Outcomes.” Educational 150–57. Researcher 23(3): 5–14. French, R., and G. Kingdon. 2010. “The Relative Effectiveness Himmler, O. 2007. “The Effects of School Choice on Academic of Private Government Schools in Rural India: Evidence Achievement in the Netherlands.” Georg-August- from ASER Data.” Department of Quantitative Social Universität, Göttingen, Sweden. Science Working Paper 10-03. Institute of Education, University of London. Hossain, N. 2007. “Expanding Access to Education in Bangladesh.” In Ending Poverty in South Asia: Ideas that Fullan, M. 2007. The New Meaning of Educational Change. 3d Work, ed. D. Narayan and E. Glinskaya, 304–25. ed. New York and London: Teacher’s College and Washington, DC: World Bank. RoutledgeFalmer. Hoxby, C. M. 2003. “School Choice and School Competition: Gertler, P., H. A. Patrinos, and M. Rubio-Codina. 2012. Evidence from the United States.” Swedish Economic “Empowering Parents to Improve Education: Evidence Policy Review 10: 9–65. from Rural Mexico.” Journal of Development Economics 99 (1): 68–79. Institutional School Standards and Operation Directive. 2013. Glewwe, P., E. Hanushek, S. Humpage, and R. Ravina. 2011. Jimenez, E., and Y. Sawada. 1999. “Do Community-Managed “School Resources and Educational Outcomes in Schools Work? An Evaluation of El Salvador’s EDUCO Developing Countries: A Review of the Literature Program.” World Bank Economic Review 13 (3): 415–41. from 1990 to 2010.” NBER (National Bureau of Jimenez, E., and Y. Sawada. 2003. “Does Community Economic Research) Working Paper 17554. NBER, Management Help Keep Kids in Schools? Evidence Using Cambridge, MA. Panel Data from El Salvador's EDUCO program.” CIRJE Goldhaber, D., and D. J. Brewer. 2000. “Does Teacher Discussion Paper F-236. CIRJE (Center for International Certification Matter? High School Teacher Research on the Japanese Economy), Faculty of Certification Status and Student Achievement.” Economics, University of Tokyo. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 22: 129– 45. King, E. M., and B. Özler. 2005. “What’s Decentralization Got to Do with Learning? School Autonomy and Student Goldhaber, D., and E. Anthony. 2004. “Can Teacher Quality Be Performance.” Discussion Paper 054. Interfaces for Effectively Assessed?” CRPE (Center on Reinventing Advanced Economic Analysis, Kyoto University. Public Education), University of Washington, Seattle, http://siteresources.worldbank. WA. org/EXTGOVANTICORR/Resources/3035863- Hanushek, E. A. 1997. “Assessing the Effects of School 1291223960989/Nicaragua_Teacher_Staffing_and_Mo Resources on Student Performance: An Update.” nitoring.pdf. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 19 (2): 141– KHDA (Knowledge and Human Development Authority). 2012. 64. School Fees Framework. KHDA, Dubai, United Arab Hanushek, E. A., and M. E. Raymond. 2005. “Does School Emirates. Accountability Lead to Improved Student LaRocque, N. 2014. Private Sector Engagement: The Performance?” Journal of Policy Analysis and Philippines. Presentation given at the Education Staff Management 24 (2): 297–327. Development Program: Engaging the Private Sector. Hanushek, E. A., and S. G. Rivkin. 2010. “Generalizations about World Bank, Washington, DC. Using Value-Added Measures of Teacher Quality.” Levin, H. M., and C. R. Belfield. 2003. “The Marketplace in 34 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 Education.” Review of Research in Education 27: 183– rk_for_school_inspection-.pdf. 219. ———. 2014b. Parent View website. OfSTED, U.K. Department Levin, H. M., and P. J. McEwan, eds. 2002. Cost-Effectiveness of Education, Manchester, UK. and Educational Policy. Yearbook of the American http://parentview.ofsted.gov.uk/ . Education Finance Association. New York: Routledge. Orazem, P. F., and E. M. King. 2007. Handbook of Development Lewis, M., and M. Lockheed. 2007. Exclusion, Gender, and Economics 4: 3475–3559. Education: Case Studies from the Developing World . Pal, S., and G. G. Kingdon. 2010. Can Private School Growth Washington, DC: Center for Global Development. Foster Universal Literacy? Panel Evidence from Indian Muralidharan, K., and V. Sundararaman. 2013. “The Aggregate Districts. Discussion Paper 5274. FZA (Forschungsinstitut Effect of School Choice: Evidence from a Two-Stage zur Zukunft der Arbeit/ Institute for the Study of Labor), Experiment in India.” The Quarterly Journal of Bonn, Germany. Economics 130 (3): 1011–66. NBER Working Paper Pandey, P., S. Goyal, and V. Sundararaman. 2009. “Community 19441. NBER, Cambridge, MA. Participation in Public Schools: Impact of Information New York City Department of Education. 2013. Accountability Campaigns in Three Indian States.” Education Economics Handbook for DOE-Authorized Charter Schools: 17 (3): 355–75. School Year 2013–14. NYC Department of Education, Patrinos, H. A. 2002. “A Review of Demand-Side Financing New York. Initiatives in Education.” Draft paper. World Bank, http://schools.nyc.gov/NR/rdonlyres/A9EB5753- Washington, DC. FD77-4B98-88C7- E9F4A0806EA7/0/CSASAccountabilityHandbook2013 ———. 2012. “SABER Strengthening the Quality of Education 14_FINAL.pdf. in East Asia.” World Bank, Washington, DC. Nepal, Government of the Federal Democratic Republic of. Patrinos, H. A., F. Barrera-Osorio, and J. Guáqueta. 2009. The Central Bureau of Statistics. 2011. Nepal Living Role and Impact of Public-Private Partnerships in Standards Survey 2010/2011. Central Bureau of Education. Washington, DC: World Bank. Statistics, Kathmandu, Nepal Punjab Education Foundation. 2014. Education Voucher ———. DOE (Department of Education). 2002. Education System. Punjab Education Foundation, Lahore, Pakistan. Rules. Department of Education, Ministry of Education, http://www.pef.edu.pk/pef-departments-evs- Kathmandu, Nepal. overview.html. ———. 2008a. Final Report—National Assessment of Grade V Reeves, D. B. 2006. The Learning Leader: How to Focus School Students. Ministry of Education and Sports, Kathmandu, Improvement for Better Results. Alexandria, VA: ASCD Nepal. (Association of Curriculum & Development). ———. 2008b. Final Report—National Assessment of Grade Reinikka, R., and J. Svensson. 2005. “Fighting Corruption to VIII Students. Ministry of Education and Sports, Improve Schooling: Evidence from a Newspaper Kathmandu, Nepal. Campaign in Uganda.” Journal of the European Economic Association 3(2–3): 259–67. ———. 2009. School Sector Reform Plan (2009–2015). Department of Education, Ministry of Education, Schmoker, M., and R. J. Marzano. 1999. “Realizing the Promise Kathmandu, Nepal. of Standards-Based Education.” Educational Leadership 56: 17–21. ———. 2012. School Improvement Plan Formulation Guidebook. Department of Education, Ministry of Skoufias, E., and J. Shapiro. 2006. “The Pitfalls of Evaluating a Education, Kathmandu, Nepal. School Grants Program Using Non-Experimental Data.” Policy Research Working Paper 4036. World Bank, ———. 2014. Flash I Report 2070. Department of Education, Washington, DC. Ministry of Education, Kathmandu, Nepal. Swedish Schools Inspectorate. 2009. The Inspectorate of ———. National Planning Commission. 2015. Post-Disaster Educational Inspection of Sweden. Accessed April Needs Assessment: Vol. A; Key Findings. National 2014. Planning Commission, Kathmandu, Nepal. http://www.skolinspektionen.se/PageFiles/1854/Sw OfSTED (Office for Education Standards in Education). 2014a. edishSchoolsInspectorate2009.pdf. The Framework for School Inspection. OfSTED, U.K. United Kingdom, Government of. Department for Education. Department of Education, Manchester, UK. 2013. “Opening a Free School or Studio School.” https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/u Department of Education, Manchester, UK. ploads/attachment_data/file/457194/The_framewo 35 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 http://www.education.gov.uk/a0075656/free- schools-faqs-curriculum#faq3. Western Cape, Government of. 2013. “Plan to Address the Needs of our Underperforming Schools, 24/03/2013.” Press Release. Government of Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa. http://wced.pgwc.gov. za/comms/press/2013/24_24Mar.html Woessmann, L., E. Ludemann, G. Schutz, and M. R. West. 2007. “School Accountability, Autonomy, Choice, and the Level of Student Achievement: International Evidence from PISA 2003.” Education Working Paper 13. OECD, Paris. World Bank. N.d. Burkina Faso Portal. World Bank, Washington, DC. http://www.worldbank.org/projects/search?lang=en&s earchTerm=&countrycode_exact=BF ———. 2003. World Development Report 2004: Making Services Work for Poor People. Washington, DC: World Bank. ———. 2009. Project Appraisal Document—Nepal School Sector Reform Program. Report No: 50157-NP. World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2013. “Nepal Report on Human Development.” Human Development Sector, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2015. Nepal: Overview—Update: 2015 Earthquakes. World Bank, Washington, DC. http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/nepal/overvie w#4. 36 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 Annex I: SABER-Engaging the Private Sector Rubrics The following tables display the indicators and scales utilized for benchmarking an individual country’s policy on private sector engagement in education. Across the four types of private schools, the indicators pertaining to each goal are largely the same; where a certain indicator pertains only to certain school types, this is noted within the table. Table A1.1 Policy Goal: Encouraging Innovation by Providers Indicator Latent Emerging Established Advanced The central government has Regional or municipal Regional or municipal Schools have the legal the legal authority to set governments have the legal governments have the legal authority to set their own minimum standards for authority to set minimum authority to set minimum teacher standards without Teacher standards teachers. standards for teachers, with standards for teachers without final review by central final review by central final review by central authorities. authorities. authorities. The central government has Regional or municipal Regional or municipal Schools (i.e., individual the legal authority to governments have the legal governments have the legal school principals, school appoint and deploy teachers. authority to appoint and authority to appoint and deploy councils, parent Teacher appointment deploy teachers. teachers without review by associations, etc.) have and deployment Appointments are subject to central authorities. the legal authority to final review by central appoint teachers without authorities. review by central authorities. The central government has Regional or municipal Regional or municipal Schools have the legal the legal authority to governments have the legal governments have the legal authority to determine determine teacher salary authority to determine authority to determine teacher teacher salary levels Teacher salary levels. teacher salary levels, with salary levels without review by without review by central final review by central central authorities. authorities. authorities. The central government has Regional or municipal Regional or municipal Schools have the legal the legal authority to governments have the legal governments have the legal authority to dismiss Teacher dismissal dismiss teachers. authority to dismiss authority to dismiss teachers teachers without review teachers, with final review without review by central by central authorities. by central authorities. authorities. 37 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 Table A1.1 Policy Goal: Encouraging Innovation by Providers Indicator Latent Emerging Established Advanced The central government has Regional or municipal Regional or municipal Schools have the legal the legal authority over how governments have the legal governments have the legal authority over how the the curriculum is delivered. authority over how the authority over how the curriculum is delivered Curriculum delivery curriculum is delivered, curriculum is delivered without without final review by with final review from final review from central central authorities. central authorities. authorities. The central government has Regional or municipal Regional or municipal School have the legal the legal authority over how governments have the legal governments have the legal authority over how resources are allocated to authority over how authority over how resources resources are allocated to the classroom (e.g., class resources are allocated to are allocated to classrooms classrooms without final Classroom resourcing sizes). classrooms, with final without final review by central review by central review from central authorities (e.g., class size). authorities (e.g., class authorities (e.g., class sizes). sizes). The central government has Regional or municipal Regional or municipal Schools have the legal Budget autonomy the legal authority over the governments have the legal governments have the legal authority over the management of school authority over the authority over the management management of school (not applicable to operating budgets. management of school of school operating budgets operating budgets without independent private operating budgets, with without final review by central final review by central schools) final review by central authorities. authorities. authorities. Table A1.2 Policy Goal: Holding Schools Accountable Indicator Latent Emerging Established Advanced The national government The national government The national government does The national government does not set standards on does set standards for what set standards for what students does set standards for Student Standards what students need to learn. students need to learn, but it need to learn and also indicates what students need to does not indicate how well EITHER by when OR how learn, by when, and how or by when. well. well. 38 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 Students do not take Standardized exams are Standardized exams are Standardized exams are standardized exams. administered, but not administered annually. administered annually and annually. results are disaggregated by school, socioeconomic Student Assessment background, gender, and other criteria of student disadvantage. The central government The central government The central government The central government does not require schools to requires schools to undergo requires schools to undergo requires schools to undergo inspections. inspections, but no term is standard term inspections. undergo inspections, with specified. the frequency of Inspection inspections depending on the results of the previous inspection. Not applicable if the Inspection reports include Inspection reports include the Inspection reports include government does not require strengths and weaknesses of strengths and weaknesses of a strengths and weaknesses schools to take part in the school. school, as well as specific of the school. Schools are Improvement inspections. priorities for improvement. required to submit a planning school improvement plan with specific priorities for improvement following the inspection. Sanctions are not Sanctions include additional Sanctions include additional Sanctions include administered based on the monitoring and/or monitoring and/or fines, which additional monitoring, results of school inspections warnings; they are are administered based on the fines, and as a final or school performance on administered based on the results of school inspections or measure, school closures; standardized exams. results of school inspections school performance on decisions are made based or school performance on standardized exams. For on the results of school Sanctions and standardized exams. government-funded, privately inspections or school rewards managed, and voucher performance on schools: rewards may also be standardized exams. For used. government-funded, privately managed, voucher schools: rewards are also used. The central government The government requires The central government The central government Financial reporting does not require schools to schools to report on the use requires schools to report on requires schools to report (not applicable to report on the use of public of public funds as a the use of public funds as a on the use of public funds independent private funds as a condition for the condition for continued condition for continued as a condition for schools) continuation of funding. funding, but on an ad-hoc continued funding on a 39 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 basis and not according to a funding according to a standard-term basis, with standard-term schedule. standard term. greater monitoring of schools that have failed to adhere to report requirements in the past. Table A.1.3. Policy Goal: Empowering All Parents, Students and Communities Indicator Latent Emerging Established Advanced No information is provided Ad-hoc information is Regular information is A variety of sources to parents on the results of provided to parents on provided to parents on provide parents regular standardized exams or standardized exam results or standardized exam results or information provided on inspection reports. inspection reports. inspection reports. standardized exam results (disaggregated by school, socioeconomic background, gender, and Information other criteria of student disadvantage.) and inspection reports. Policy specifies information on interventions designed to targeted disadvantaged student groups. Not applicable if the Neither students nor parents Students and/or parents are Student and parents are government does not require are surveyed as part of the interviewed as part of the interviewed as part of the schools to take part in inspection process. inspection process. inspection process. inspections. Voice Selection Schools are allowed to Schools are allowed to Schools are not allowed to Schools are not allowed to select students based on select students based on select students but schools are select students and are (not applicable to both academic performance academic performance or not required to use a lottery if required to conduct a independent private and geography. geography. oversubscribed. lottery if school if over- schools) subscribed. 40 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 Table A.1.3. Policy Goal: Empowering All Parents, Students and Communities Indicator Latent Emerging Established Advanced Contributions Parental choice is restricted Parental choice is restricted Parental choice is restricted by Parental choice is not by compulsory monetary by voluntary monetary voluntary nonmonetary restricted by any type of (not applicable to parent contributions that, if contributions (i.e., contributions (i.e., in-kind required parental independent private not paid, prohibits a child contributions to a school labor or goods) to a school. contributions. schools) from attending the school. fund). The central government The central government The central government The central government Financial support does not provide tax provides tax subsidies to provides tax subsidies and cash provides targeted cash (for independent subsidies or cash transfers families whose children transfers to families, which can transfers that can be used private schools only) to families whose children attend private schools. be used to enable their children by disadvantaged students attend private schools. to attend private schools. attending private schools. Table A.1.4. Policy Goal: Promoting Diversity of Supply Indicator Latent Emerging Established Advanced The central government The central government The central government allows The government allows allows one of the following allows two of the following three of the following types of all of the following types types of organizations to types of organizations to organizations to operate of organizations to operate schools: operate schools: schools: operate schools: Ownership Community Community Community Community Not-for-profit Not-for-profit Not-for-profit Not-for-profit Faith-based Faith-based Faith-based Faith-based For-profit For-profit For-profit For-profit Certification standards, Certification standards, Certification standards, which Certification standards, which are not linked to which are not linked to are not linked to education which are not linked to education outcomes, restrict education outcomes, restrict outcomes, restrict market education outcomes, do market entry. These include market entry. These include entry. These include one of the not restrict market entry. Certification all of the following: two of the three following three following criteria: standards 1. land (undulating, distance criteria: 1. land (undulating, distance from public venues, etc.) 2. 1. land (undulating, distance from public venues, etc.) facilities (separate science from public venues, etc.) or 2. facilities (separate science labs, weather vanes, etc.) 2. facilities (separate labs, weather vanes, etc.) science labs, weather vanes, 41 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 Table A.1.4. Policy Goal: Promoting Diversity of Supply Indicator Latent Emerging Established Advanced 3. assets (ownership of land etc.) 3. assets (ownership of land or or buildings) 3. assets (ownership of land buildings) or buildings) Registration/certification Registration/certification Registration/certification Registration/certification Market entry guidelines are not officially guidelines are not made guidelines are made public, but guidelines are made information outlined. public and available only by a single source. public and by multiple upon request. sources. Schools are able to operate Schools are able to operate Schools are able to operate Schools are able to Regulatory fees while paying four or more while paying two to three while paying one type of fee. operate without paying types of fees. types of fees. fees. The central government sets The central government Schools set fees, but those fees Schools set fees without standardized tuition fees. does not set standardized are subject to review by the any review by the central Tuition fees tuition fees, but imposes a central government. government. (for independent tuition cap (an overall private schools only) amount or percentage increase). Academic operating budgets Academic operating All budgets — academic and All budgets — academic are not equivalent to per- budgets are equivalent to other, such as for facilities and and other, such as for Funding student funding amounts in per-student funding transport — are equivalent to facilities and transport — public schools. amounts in public schools. per-student funding amounts in are equivalent to per- (not applicable to public schools. Schools do not student funding amounts independent private receive targeted funding to in public school. Schools schools) meet specific student needs. receive targeted funding to meet specific student needs. Incentives No incentives exist. Schools are supported by Schools are supported by two Schools are supported by one of the following: of the following all of the following 1. (not applicable to 1. start-up funding similar 1. Start-up funding similar to Start-up funding similar independent private to that provided to public that provided to public schools to that provided to public schools) schools 2. access to government land schools 42 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 Table A.1.4. Policy Goal: Promoting Diversity of Supply Indicator Latent Emerging Established Advanced 2. access to government or unused government 2. access to government land or unused government facilities land or unused facilities 3.exemption from local taxes government facilities 3. exemption from local (i.e., property taxes) similar to 3. exemption from local taxes (i.e., property taxes) that granted to public schools taxes (i.e., property taxes) similar to that granted to similar to that granted to public schools public schools Schools are provided Schools are provided Schools are provided Schools are provided Planning information on the information on the information on the allocations information on the (not applicable for allocations to be transferred allocations to be transferred to be transferred to them allocations to be independent private to them less than 1 month to them between 1 and 3 between 4 and 6 months before transferred to them more schools) before the start of the months before the start of the start of the academic year. than 6 months before the academic year. the academic year. start of the academic year. Coverage of charters is Coverage of charters is Coverage of charters is No restrictions. Charters restricted by three of the restricted by two of the restricted by one of the are not restricted by following: following: following: student numbers, school 1. student numbers 1. student numbers 1. student numbers numbers, or location (i.e., Coverage 2. school numbers and 2. school numbers and 2. school numbers and location certain cities or districts). (for privately managed location (i.e., certain cities (i.e., certain cities or districts). location (i.e., certain cities schools only) or districts) or districts) 3. only new or only existing schools are able to become No restrictions due to charters new/existing school status. 43 NEPAL ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2016 www.worldbank.org/education/saber The Systems Approach for Better Education Results (SABER) initiative collects data on the policies and institutions of education systems around the world and benchmarks them against practices associated with student learning. SABER aims to give all parties with a stake in educational results—from students, administrators, teachers, and parents to policymakers and business people—an accessible, detailed, objective snapshot of how well the policies of their country's education system are oriented toward ensuring that all children and youth learn. This report focuses specifically on policies in the area of engaging the private sector in education. This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. 44