FCA Monitoring Report Education in Emergency (EiE) Project in Nepal, FCA iii Acknowledgement | EiE...

Monitoring Mission Report (Final Draft)

Support to Education in Emergency in Kathmandu Valley

Submitted to:

Finn Church Aid

In collaboration with Loo-Niva and UCEP-Nepal

Submitted by:

Loo-Niva Nepal

Karyabinayak-1, Sainbu, Lalitpur, Nepal

April 2016

Education in Emergency (EiE) Project in Nepal, FCA

ii Monitoring Team | EiE Monitoring Mission Report, 2016

Monitoring Team

Bhola Prasad Dahal, PhD, Team Leader, Educationist and Child Rights Expert

Bishal Kumar Bhandari, PhD Scholar, Team Member- Kathmandu I

Indra Raj Yamphoo Rai, PhD Scholar, Team Member- Kathmandu II

Prabin Raj Gautam, PhD Scholar, Team Member – Lalitpur I

Rupa Munakarmi, PhD Scholar, Team Member- Bhakatapur

Thakur Prasad Bhatta, PhD Scholar, Team Member – Lalitpur II

Field Researchers

Ankit Babu Adhikari

Anusha Lohala

Bidur Ale

Bishnu Magar

Dinesh Regmi

Gunjan Khanal

Niroj Maharjan

Prativa Devkota

Prekshya Basnet

Sangam Chalise

Sanjeeb Khadka

Santosh Pokhrel

Krishna Govinda Maharjan (SPSS Data compilation and Check)

Management and Coordination Team

Bikash Sharma, Project Coordinator, FCA

Arun Bhatta, Engineer, FCA

Narendra Dangol, Executive Director cum Team Leader, Loo-Niva Nepal

Nabin Dangol, M and E Coordinator, Loo-Niva, Nepal

Rajid Sainju, Project Manager, UCEP-Nepal

Citation

Dahal, B. P., Bhandari, B. K., Yamphoo, I., Gautam, P. R., Munakarmi, R., & Bhatta, T.

(2016). Education in Emergency Support in Kathmandu Valley, Monitoring

Mission Report. Kathmandu: FCA-Nepal & Loo-Niva


iii Acknowledgement | EiE Monitoring Mission Report, 2016

Acknowledgement

First of all, we would like to thank senior management of Finn Church Aid and Loo-Niva for

entrusting us a challenging work to do a monitoring mission of the Education in Emergency

Project carried out in 73 schools of Kathmandu valley during 2015 just after the devastating

Earthquake in Nepal in April 2015. We are pleased to record the good works done by FCA and

its partners in resuming the education services to the children affected by EQ to normalize their

daily life and learning opportunities as a means of protection and psychosocial wellbeing.

We received a good support and timely responses from implementing partners and had rare

interfaces with FCA management. It was a herculean task to get data from schools as most of

them were damaged and were not in order with update data and information. I highly appreciated

the efforts of all five researchers backed up by field enumerators and UCEP-Nepal and Loo-Niva

team to collect, compile, verify and analyse the immense field data in a short span of time and

standards templates.

Information backed-up and compilation from Mr. Nabin and SPSS data management work done

by Santa and Krishna ji was of great help. Due to rigorous work and huge data as well as

incomplete information from the field/schools, writing monitoring report became a lengthy and

tiring one for which we apologized with FCA team. The field data from 18 schools of Lalitpur

from UCEP where Loo-Niva used to work was an additional task that was not foreseen.

We are very much indebted to all students (boys and girls) who have entitlement to quality

education during emergency without any interruption and their teachers in providing on their

free, frank and open views, opinions and experiences with monitoring team. We also appreciate

the support and cooperation rendered to us by all 73 schools and three district education offices.

We are inspired by the SMC and HTs‘ genuine efforts and commitment to improve access,

quality and relevancy of school education to all EQ affected children in a child friendly manner.

I enjoyed working with laborious and committed five team leaders: Bishal Kumar Bhandari,

Indra Raj Yamphoo, Prabin Raj Gautam, Rupa Munakarmi and Thakur Bhatta, all PhD scholars

of Kathmandu University, for their timely and unconditional support with thick, rich and depth

data to make this mission a credible one. I also give special thanks to Bishnu, Bidur, Ankit,

Dinesh, Santosh and Gunjan for their hard work on field data collection and also UCEP-Nepal‘s

volunteers under the leadership of Sanjeeb and Rajid.

Narendra Dangol, Executive Director of Loo-Niva contributed as Team Manager of monitoring

team who was so sincere and vigilant from the beginning to end making the team alert on quality

and credibility of the assignment. I admire Mr Bikash Sharma from FCA who was deeply

engaged in the dialogue during the process and keenly witnessed the discussion.

My entire team was conscious for making fact and evidence based analysis and interpretation on

this report. If there are any factual errors, mistake and misinterpretation of the situation that is my

weakness and I highly welcome any constructive feedback and criticism to sharpen the saw of my

professional work and development understanding.

Bhola Pd Dahal, PhD

Team Leader


iv Acronyms | EiE Monitoring Mission Report, 2016

Acronyms ASIP Annual Strategic Implementation Plan

CBOs Community Based Organizations

CC Child Clubs

CDC Curriculum Development Center

DDC District Development Committee

DEO District Education Office

DEP District Education Plan

DoE Department of Education

EFA Education for All

EiE Education in Emergency

FCA Finn Church Aid

FGD Focused Group Discussion

GER Gross Enrollment Rate

GG Good Governance

GoN Government of Nepal

HDI Human Development Index

HSS Higher Secondary School

HT Head Teacher

INGO International Non-Governmental Organization

KII Key Informant Interview

LSS Lower Secondary School

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

MDGs Millennium Development Goals

MDGs Millennium Development Goals

MoE Ministry of Education

NCED National Center for Education and Development (In-service Training)

NER Net Enrollment Rate

NGOs Non-Government Organizations

NPC National Planning Commission

PTA Parent Teacher Association

RC Resource Center

RP Resource Person

SA Social Audit

SDGs Sustainable Development Goals

SIP School Improvement Plan

SMC School Management Committee

SS School Supervisor

SSA Self School Assessment

SSDP School Sector Development Plan/Programme

SSRP School Sector Reform Programme

STR Student Teachers Ratio

SWC Social Welfare Council

UCEP- Nepal Underprivileged Children‘s Education Programme Nepal

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNICEF United Nations Children‘s Fund

VDC Village Development Committee

V/MEP Village/Municipal Education Plan

WVAF World Vision Advocacy Forum


v List of Tables | EiE Monitoring Mission Report, 2016

List of Tables

Table 1 Target Units and Beneficiary of the Project 06

Table 2 Summary of Monitoring Tools and Respondents 10

Table 3 Status of Students and Teachers Attendance 13

Table 4 Average Students per Teacher/School 14

Table 5 Formation of Committees in School 15

Table 6 Membership and Meetings in School 15

Table 7 Functioning of Child Club in School 15

Table 8 Status of Compliance in Schools 16

Table 9 Supply and Usage of Temporary Learning Centers 17

Table 10 Supply and Usage of Semi-Permanent Latrines 18

Table 11 Supply and Usage of Hand Washing Facilities 19

Table 12 Supply and Usage of Water Filters 19

Table 13 Supply and Usage of Hygiene Kits 20

Table 14 Beneficiary Satisfaction on Temporary Learning Centers 20

Table 15 Beneficiary Satisfaction on Semi-Permanent Latrines 22

Table 16 Beneficiary Satisfaction on Hand Washing Facilities 23

Table 17 Supplies and Usage of ECED and Recreational Kits 24

Table 18 Supply and Usage of School in Box and Books in Bag 24

Table 19 Status of EiE Master Trainers and Teachers 26

Table 20 RPs/SSs Satisfaction in EiE Master Training 26

Table 21 Teachers Satisfaction on EiE Basic Training 27

Table 22 Orientation Status on Educational Materials 27


vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | EiE Monitoring Mission Report, 2016

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This executive summary includes background, objectives, methodologies, key findings and

discussion, conclusions and recommendations of the monitoring mission on Education in

Emergency Project implemented in Kathmandu Valley by Loo-Niva, WVAF and UCEP-Nepal

with active engagement and guidance from the FCA.

Background:

The earthquakes (EQ) of 25 April and 12 May 2015 has taken lives of more than 9,000 people,

leaving more than 22,000 people injured and half a million houses collapsed in 14 districts of

Nepal including three districts of Kathmandu valley.

Education is one of the worst affected areas by the EQ. More than 8,240 community (public)

schools have been affected with 25,134 classrooms fully destroyed and another 22,097 partially

damaged. Additionally, 4,416 toilets, and water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) facilities, and

1,791 compound walls were damaged. The damage to ECD centres, furniture, libraries and

laboratories, computers and other equipment made education system none-functional.

With the global commitments towards fulfilling rights of children to education even in

emergency, Government of Nepal (GoN) together with other education stakeholder activated the

education cluster for joint responses to education in emergency (EiE). With this joint planning

and coordination mechanism both at central and district level made a plan to establish Temporary

Learning Centres (TLC), training and support to teacher and schools, and WASH activities with

school sanitation packages and hand washing centres and semi-permanent latrines. Furthermore,

education kits, ECED kits, recreational kits and school in boxes were provided.

Finn Church Aid (FCA) is the largest Finnish development organization and the second largest

provider of humanitarian aid that operates in 20 countries including in Nepal with more than 60

years of work experiences. The FCA has specialization on right to livelihood, right to education

and right to peace initiative worldwide. As an advocate of human rights based approach to

development and emergency, FCA was active together with other INGO and UN Agencies to

normalize the service delivery system in public educational institutions (ECED centres and

community schools) up to grade 8.

Project Aims and Objectives:

The project aims to resume the minimum education services in post-EQ situation for all children

to normalize their daily life thorough regularizing the teaching learning processes in school with

minimum infrastructures and learning materials. The project had the following objectives:

Increased enrolment of both girls and boys especially in basic education;

Increased retention of students particularly of girls; and

Improved learning achievement especially of girls and minority groups.

The FCA in partnership with Loo-Niva, WVAF and UCEP-Nepal jointly made effort to establish

TLC, sanitation packages and counseling programs to teacher, student and parents of 73 public

schools (21 in Kathmandu, 13 in Bhaktapur and 39 schools in remote villages of Lalitpur).

FCA provided both hardware and software interventions to all schools inclusive of educational

materials support from UNICEF. The hardware component includes: i) one to six temporary

learning centres (2-12 rooms); ii) semi-permanent latrines (one to five units); iii) hand washing

facilities (one to two units) with hygiene kits and water filters. The software component consists


vii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | EiE Monitoring Mission Report, 2016

of: i) educational learning kits (school in box, ECED, Recreational); ii) customized teachers‘

training on EiE including child friendly schools and psychosocial care and support; and iii)

interactions, meetings and workshops with teachers, students and parents

Methodology & Approach

With understanding the scope, objectives and role of monitoring mission is to assess the

availability, accessibility and applicability of supplies and materials provided by project to

resume the education services to EQ affected children and communities of Kathmandu valley.

Based on the consultation meeting with FCA and its partners, the study team has applied the

mixed methodology that combines the beauty and quality of both the qualitative and quantitative

nature of the research work. The data was used both from primary and secondary sources based

on the tools and formats developed by the team and finalized in consultation with FCA and inputs

from the field testing.

In addition to desk review, the data collection tools and methods include beneficiary satisfaction

survey, key informant interviews (KII), Focused Group Discussions (FGD) and interactions and

site observations. Project monitoring was done on the basis of guiding questions derived from

rights based approach to development and also considering the EiE as the fundamental rights of

each student and children.

Major Findings and Conclusions

All schools were closed for the first 45 days of the EQ and all humanitarian agencies were

focused to provide relief supplies at household level. Due to infrastructures damaged in schools,

psychological fear among parents and students and repetitive aftershocks, EiE interventions were

carried out from June 2016 to resume education services with activation of education cluster.

The team surprised with the low presence of teachers and students in schools on the monitoring

day, as almost half were absent which raises issues of data reliability. Most of the schools have

school management committee and parent-teacher association (PTA), but very few of them are

functional and active. The team found that activation of schools depends on competency and

commitment of the Head Teacher. Child club exists but are still invisible in school interventions

and management. There is a decreasing trend of compliance in schools including carrying out the

annual school calendar, school improvement plan, social audit, final audit, parents‘ day etc.

The team observed and monitored 170 TLCs with 233 classrooms, 178 SPLs, 83 WASH facilities

with 83 water filters and 178 hygiene kits where all schools had received at least one unit of each

hardware support from FCA and its partners. The 79 ECED centers and 73 schools have received

these materials during June and July 2016. Due to the urgency of supplies, the assessment of need

and priority of school was not done before providing infrastructures and materials. Some supplies

like materials for semi-permanent latrines (SPLs) and WASH facilities were kept into stores.

In addition to these infrastructures, software components like education materials were provided

to schools, which were available from UNICEF. These materials include 248 ECED kits, 450

school-in-boxes, 310 books in bags and 205 recreational kits. Team found that these materials

were appropriate but were not supplied on the basis of need and priority of schools.

Furthermore, FCA and its partners had organized EiE master training to 61 RPs/SSs to provide

training at RC level. These trainers provided a 2-day EiE basic training to 442 teachers of 73

schools at RC level in each district.


viii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | EiE Monitoring Mission Report, 2016

The supplied infrastructures and educational materials are known and accessible in schools

particularly for Head Teacher (HT). The TLCs are accessible to children as good initiative to

mingle with extra-curricular activities for the first one to two months. However, they are not

suitable for regular classes due to noise, dust and cold inside rooms and less light and ventilation.

Stakeholders suggest semi-permanent TLCs to be feasible and appropriate for regular teaching

learning processes, as new buildings may not be made available within 2 years‘ time.

Schools who have installed SPLs are mostly used by teachers or locked off for students as they

have already functional toilets. The WASH facilities are mostly overlapping with existing

facilities, which were not damaged by the EQ. Water filters provided to schools are mostly

accessibility to teachers not for the students as they are kept in office room where students do not

feel welcoming and easy access. There is a need of at least two water filters in each school.

Education materials and kit boxes are appropriate and applicable. Students and teachers to some

extent are using ECED kits and recreational materials; however, project did not focus on

accountability and responsiveness to bring changes on beneficiary, as they are not properly used

with two reasons. Firstly, there was no adequate orientation on ―objectives and how to use these

materials in classroom interventions‖. Secondly, teachers especially Head Teachers want to keep

them for a longer period, as they do not have any plan for replenishment or development of local

materials.

Training on EiE both for RPs/SSs and teachers was the need of the hour but was organized a little

bit late. Due to more theoretical focus, teachers could not bring changes into classroom practices

as they complain that the training was less practical and relevant to their subjects and contents.

Engagement of stakeholders in the planning, implementation and review process of EiE

interventions was not planed and practiced especially on infrastructure development.

Interactions between teachers and between students in child club on the objectives and process of

supplies and materials will improve ownership and better utilization of supplies and materials

objectively. In regard to Acceptability and satisfaction level of beneficiary, team found that:

Overall 68% students, 65% teachers and 68% parents were satisfied on supply and

management of TLCs for resuming the school education with some variation.

About 80% students, 91% teachers and 84% parents are satisfied with supply and

installation of SPLs for maintaining health and sanitation in schools.

Overall 81% students, 92% teachers and 96% parents are satisfied with installation and

management of HWFs in schools where there were no functional existing facilities.

About 82% teachers in Kathmandu, 81% in Lalitpur and 68% in Bhaktapur are satisfied

with EiE basic education with few limitations. However, students do not see changes on

teachers on teaching learning methods and processes.

Recommendations

Based on the findings, discussion and analysis of data with beneficiaries and school stakeholders,

the team recommends:

1. The FCA and its partners to send an official letter to each school giving copy to

concerned DEOs on EiE support (name, number and cost).

2. Strengthen understanding among school stakeholders including students to increase

accountability and responsiveness of authority towards children and their wellbeing and

learning with each component of school support with proper orientation.


ix EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | EiE Monitoring Mission Report, 2016

3. Institutionalize support system within the existing structures and mechanism of schools

(SMC, PTA, SIP or annual/quarterly plan) with an emphasis on school governance and

social audit

4. Mobilize and engage school stakeholders like SMC, PTA, child club, child protection

committee in all phase of project cycle management with result orientation ―what for

children and their learning‖..

5. Use/Capitalize local materials and resources including local expert for ownership and

sustainability of the project with technical training to local mason, teachers on education

materials development and HT/SMC on school governance

6. Focus and prioritize processes and results to children and better management of schools

so that compliance is fulfilled in a transparency and participatory manner for results.

7. Integrate DRR including psychosocial care and support system in school and VDC level

planning process in collaboration with local government so that children and schools are

better prepared to prevent and to respond any future calamity and emergency.


x TABLE OF CONTENTS | EiE Monitoring Mission Report, 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Monitoring Team ....................................................................................................... ii

Acknowledgement .................................................................................................... iii

Acronyms .................................................................................................................. iv

List of Tables .............................................................................................................. v

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................... vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................. x

CHAPTER ONE ............................................................................................................ 1

INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1

Country Context: Education in Crossroad of Diversity ............................................................................ 1

The EQ in Education System: An Opportunity for Redefining Quality .............................................. 2

Education in Emergency: A Rights of Children with High Priority of Parents ............................... 3

FCA in Nepal: EiE as the Means of Visibility ................................................................................................. 4

Project Objectives ......................................................................................................................................................... 4

Implementing Partners .............................................................................................................................................. 5

Target Beneficiaries: Blanket Approach Does not Do Justice to Marginalized ............................... 6

Objectives of Monitoring Mission: Satisfaction and Priority of Beneficiary ................................... 6

CHAPTER TWO ........................................................................................................... 8

METHODS AND APPROACHES ..................................................................................... 8

Preparatory Phase: Sharpening the Saw ....................................................................................................... 8

Preparation of Monitoring Framework ............................................................................................................. 8

Briefing and Orientation: Clarity on Roles and Expectations .................................................................. 8

Preparation of Field Visit Plans: Better Coordination Better Support ................................................ 8

Data Collection Tools and Procedures: Capitalizing Beauty of QualQuan ....................................... 9

Desk Review (documents and literatures) ........................................................................................................ 9

Primary Information/Data Collection ................................................................................................................ 9

Data Analysis and Interpretation: Voice of the Voiceless ..................................................................... 10

Summary of Samples and Tools: Mosaic of Diversity ............................................................................. 10

Validity and Trustworthiness: Traingulation and Peer Briefing (Write-shop) ........................... 11

Limitation and Delimitation: ............................................................................................................................ 11

CHAPTER THREE ....................................................................................................... 12

MAJOR FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ......................................................................... 12

The First 15 days of School Reopening ........................................................................................................ 12

General Findings on School Data: Glorifying Reality .............................................................................. 13

Low Presence of Teachers and Students in Schools: Almost Half ....................................................... 13

More Teachers in Urban Schools than in Rural ........................................................................................... 14

Committees are formed but not functional ................................................................................................... 14


xi TABLE OF CONTENTS | EiE Monitoring Mission Report, 2016

Child Club Exist but Children are still invisible in School ........................................................................ 15

Decreasing Trend of Compliance in Schools ................................................................................................. 16

Status of the Project Interventions (EiE): Acomplishment of Events .............................................. 17

Supply and Application of Hardware Components .................................................................................... 17

Beneficiary Satisfaction on Hardware Supplies: Good for Emergency ............................................. 20

Software Components ............................................................................................................................................. 23

Teacher Training: EiE inclusive of Child Friendliness and Psychosocial care............................... 25

Stakeholders in Project Management ........................................................................................................... 27

Participation of Stakeholders in EiE: Not Well-informed ....................................................................... 28

Stakeholders’ Views on Future Programme: ................................................................................................ 28

CHAPTER FOUR ........................................................................................................ 29

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................ 29

Summary: .................................................................................................................................................................. 29

Conclusion: ............................................................................................................................................................... 30

Almost more than 95% supplies are Available in schools ...................................................................... 30

Mostly all Supplies are Accessible to Beneficiaries .................................................................................... 30

Most of Supplies and Materials Applied with Low Ownership ............................................................. 31

Almost two third Beneficiary are Satisfied .................................................................................................... 31

Recommendations ................................................................................................................................................ 32

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................. 34

APPENDIX .................................................................................................................. b

Appendix 1: Terms of Reference for Evaluation ..........................................................................................b

Appendix 2: Field Plan ............................................................................................................................................ e

Appendix 3: List of Schools under Monitoring Mission ............................................................................. f

Appendix 4: Survey Questionnaire, Formats and Guidelines ................................................................ h

Appendix 5: Cross Tab of SPSS Outcome ........................................................................................................ v

Appendix 7: Case Studies ...................................................................................................................................... y

Appendix 8: People Met and Interacted ....................................................................................................... bb

Appendix 9: Photo Gallery ................................................................................................................................... ff


CHAPTER ONE |EiE Monitoring Mission Report, 2016

1

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

This chapter includes a short description of country context, effect of the EQ in education system,

literature and global learning on EiE, brief information about project and its implementing partners

and the scope of monitoring mission.

Country Context: Education in Crossroad of Diversity

Nepal is a land-linked least developed country located between China on the North and India on the

East, South and West with 26.5 million people (CBS, 2012). Nepal is a mosaic of social diversities

with more than 125 caste/ethnic, 123 languages and 10 religious groups. Having 0.54 HDI value,

Nepal is ranked [157/187] as low human development countries with 69.1 years of life expectancy

and 3.2 years of schooling (NPC, 2014). The overall literacy rate [for population aged 5 years and

above] has increased from 54.1% in 2001 to 65.9% in 2011. Male literacy rate is 75.1% compared to

female literacy rate of 57.4%. Similarly, adult literacy for 15 years plus has increased only by 4%

point. Overall literacy rate ranges from the lowest 41.7% in Rautahat to the highest 86.3% in

Kathmandu whereas adult literacy ranges from the lowest 37% in Mahottari to 84% in Kathmandu

(MoE, 2016).

Nepal‘s per capita income is US$ 762. Agriculture employs 70% of the population but only accounts

for 34% of GDP. The damage caused by the earthquakes in April 2015 is reckoned to have reduced

the growth of the economy from the expected 6% to only 3% growth in 2014/15 with only 2 %, if

not negative growth, projected for 2015/16 due the severe on-going fuel and commodity shortages

after promulgation of the new constitution by the Constituent Assembly on 20 Sept 2015 (NPC,

2016). The share of recurrent government expenditure has increased by more than 10% on average

for the last five years (MoF 2015). With a very weak, if not negative, forecast for economic growth

in 2015 and 2016, the deficit between expenditure and ‗income‘ is expected to increase.

In the last seven years, the government‘s educational expenditure has consistently stayed at around

7% of the annual budget (MoE, 2015). Nepal‘s education is one of the largest government sector

both in terms of size of the population served and the annual government budgetary allocations. The

educational budget has been increasing in absolute terms, despite that its share of government

expenditure has decreased from 21.4% in 2010/11 to an estimated 12% in 2015/16. Education

expenditure has been slightly less than estimated by the School Sector Reform Plan (SSRP) (MoE

2009) during its 2009–2016 periods, although other programmes have increased significantly.

The Government of Nepal bears the largest burden of education expenditure although development

partners significantly contribute to supporting education. Also, the contributions of households to

education amounted to 3.6% of GDP in fiscal year 2010/11, making private spending an important

contributor to education (MoE, 2015). For SSRP, the share of funding from pooled development

partners remained between 20 and 24%. This contribution fell to 15% in 2015/16 partly because of

development partners‘ higher contributions in the first three years of SSRP, and partly because of

the government‘s discouragement of foreign loans for financing education.

According to DOE (2015), school education comprises at least one year of pre-primary/ECED

centres (35, 121 centres for one million children), five years of primary, three years of lower

secondary, two years of secondary and two years of higher secondary education (34, 800 school

units for 7.5 million children). School education is offered through two types of schools—public and

private. With the Seventh Amendment to the Education Act 1971 in 2001, all public schools are

called ‗community‘ schools and private schools ‗institutional‘ schools. The majority of children


INTRODUCTION |EiE Monitoring Mission Report, 2016

2

(85%) attend public schools; however, there has been a dramatic increase in private education

institutions in recent years (10% in 2009 to 15% in 2015) (DoE, 2015).

The vast majority of community schools receive support from the government in the form of

teachers‘ salaries, recurrent grants for school administration and management, student grants for

textbooks and scholarships, and grants for construction of classrooms and toilets. However, only

very few private schools (those that operate as trusts) are eligible to receive such grants. The

majority of private schools are registered as companies and operate entirely through user fees.

The EQ in Education System: An Opportunity for Redefining Quality

The earthquakes (EQ) of 25 April and 12 May 2015 with more than 400 aftershocks, it was biggest

quake after 80 years‘ of interval from the big EQ in 1934 have been a terrible calamity for Nepal as

they affected almost half of its 75 districts, including hard-to-reach isolated mountainous areas

(NPC, 2015). Approximately 9,000 people lost their lives and more than 22,000 people were injured

and more than half a million houses collapsed in 14 districts of Nepal from Gorkha to Okhaldhunga

but none of Terai district (MoHA, 2015).

Education is the worst affected by EQ. More than 8,240 community (public) schools have been

affected with 25,134 classrooms were fully destroyed and another 22,097 were partially damaged

(MoE, 2016). Institutional (private) schools also experienced significant infrastructure damage: 956

classrooms were fully destroyed and 3,983 classrooms were partially damaged. In addition, 4,416

toilets, and water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) facilities, and 1,791 compound walls were

damaged. The damage to ECD centres, furniture, libraries and laboratories, computers and other

equipment was proportional to the damage faced by the schools.

While the effects of the EQ on infrastructure and physical assets are relatively easy to estimate in

monetary terms, it is more difficult to estimate the financial implications of the EQ on teaching and

learning processes. The earthquake and its aftershocks led to the complete closure of schools and

colleges for more than a month (26 April–30 May) in the severely affected districts, forcing more

than two million children and youth to stay out of educational institutions. The standard school

opening days per year is 220, with 190 days for teaching learning and the rest for examinations,

extracurricular activities, and other non-teaching functions (DoE, 2015).

More importantly, the destruction of half million houses and displacement of families has had a

severely negative impact on the learning environment at home. Children reported that they have lost

the motivation and confidence to study as their learning habits have been disrupted. They are

assailed by anxiety that they might have forgotten what they had learnt and so they may find it

difficult to pass their examinations (particularly children in grades 8 and 10 who need to take the

district and national level board examinations). It is, therefore, likely that affected schools might

experience a decline in learning outcomes in the short to medium term.

The Education Cluster under the MoE/DoE leadership was immediately activated on 26 April and

appealed for US$ 24.1 million to enable the set-up of 4,668 TLCs, the provision of essential

education- in-emergencies supplies, and the training of teachers on psychosocial support and life-

saving messages relating to disaster preparedness, protection, sanitation and hygiene promotion,

nutrition and health. FCA from the very beginning became the member of Education Cluster to

coordinate its all interventions both at national and district levels. The immediate needs to resume

the delivery of education services in the various subsectors until reconstruction and rehabilitation of

permanent structures in the EQ affected districts were identified as:

Nearly 15,000 temporary/ transitional learning centres with teaching learning and co-

curricular and WASH facilities (including separate facilities for girls):



3

Debris removal and site clearance of damaged schools to prepare the sites for set up of

transitional classrooms and permanent buildings; and

Provision of textbooks and teaching-learning materials to restore meaningful teaching-

learning processes given the massive damage to textbooks and teaching- learning materials.

The Education Cluster is also supporting the DOE with a structural assessment of 7,800 schools to

designate them safe or unsafe for the resumption of learning (DoE, 2015). The Education Cluster

now consists of over 70 national and international organizations, including 37 International NGOs,

32 National NGOs and 4 UN Agencies. The cluster has not only focused to normalize the temporary

learning centers (TLCs) but also understands and address the broader effects of the disaster on:

access and learning environment;

teaching and learning processes;

teachers and education personnel;

service delivery and governance mechanisms; and

emerging risks and vulnerabilities

Education in Emergency: A Rights of Children with High Priority of Parents

The community affected by conflicts and disasters strongly request education for their children as

fundamental human rights (SCN, 2006). The global community has committed itself to achieve

Education for ALL (EFA) and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030. All state authorities

are responsible to re-establish/resume education institutions for all children as early as possible in

line with their commitment towards the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) especially

Article 28 & 29. Education is a fundamental tool for protection of children from harm, neglect and

exploitation (INEE, 2004; 2010). It is believed that education helps meet psychosocial needs of

conflict/disaster-affected and displaced children.

Education during emergency ensures normalcy of children as well as communities on their

psychosocial wellbeing and better hopes for future. Education allows passage of essential social and

life skills messages, such as health, hygiene, human rights, social solidarity and HIV/AIDS

prevention. Moreover, education helps overcome gender disparities during displacement. Education

promotes economic and social reintegration and reconstruction with appropriate vocation and social

skills to children and adults. Education in emergencies (EiE) is in high demand as lifesaving & life

sustaining means by both adults and children. Agencies working on Education in Emergency

prioritize the following for the first six to eight weeks:

Setup temporary learning spaces with minimal infrastructure;

Resume schooling by reopening schools and starting the reintegration of teachers and

children; and

Supply teaching and learning materials and semi-structured recreational activities.

Based on global learning and experiences, after the initial emergency responses for eight weeks,

humanitarian agencies including will provide the following service from two to six months even a

year for EiE:

Re-establish and/or sustain primary education with education and recreation kits and basic

learning materials and teacher training;

Promote the resumption of quality educational activities for overall development and

protection of children; and

Establish community services around schools (such as water supply and sanitation), where

appropriate.



4

FCA in Nepal: EiE as the Means of Visibility

The Government of Nepal‘s Post Disaster Needs Assessment (PDNA) estimates that over two

million children and youth education was interrupted due to the EQ in April 2015. There is greater

need of education in emergencies for various reasons and long breaks from school can directly affect

and lead to increased dropout rates. Moreover, the psychological impact on children, parents,

teachers and the community needs to be addressed. Girls and boys, and individuals experience

emergencies differently and are exposed to a variety of protection risks if they continue to lack

options to access education and safe learning spaces. A return to school can safeguard youth from

exposure to different forms of vulnerabilities, exploitation and abuse.

With the global commitments towards fulfilling rights of children to education even in emergency,

GoN together with other education stakeholder made a plan to establish Temporary Learning

Centres (TLC), training and support to teacher and schools, and school sanitation packages with

hand washing centres and semi-permanent latrines and also providing recreational material boxes

and school in boxes.

Finn Church Aid (FCA) is the largest Finnish development organization and the second largest

provider of humanitarian aid. FCA operates in 20 countries including in Nepal. The work is based

on human rights approach, which means that operations are guided by UN conventions focusing on

equality, non-discrimination and responsibility. FCA was active together with other INGO and UN

Agencies to active the Education Cluster under the MoE/DoE leadership just after the EQ in April

2015. In the post-EQ situation, FCA was mainly focusing to normalize the service delivery system

in public educational institutions (ECED centres and community schools) up to grade 8.

The FCA in partnership with Loo-Niva, WVAF and UCEP-Nepal jointly made effort to respond the

education in emergency with participation of community in school establishing TLC, sanitation

packages and counselling programs to teacher, student and parents of 73 schools of three districts of

Kathmandu valley. It covered 21 public schools of Kathmandu, 13 schools of Bhaktapur and 39

schools of Southern Lalitpur, areas with similar conditions of Karnali region with lowest HD index.

Project Objectives

The project aims to resume the minimum education services in post-EQ situation for all children to

normalize their daily life thorough regularizing the teaching learning processes in school with

minimum infrastructures and learning materials. With an aim to resuming education institutions and

services to the EQ affected children, the project has the following expected results from the EiE

interventions:

Increased enrolment of both girls and boys especially in basic education;

Increased retention of students particularly of girls; and

Improved learning achievement especially of girls and minority groups.

In coordination with Education Cluster following the SPHERE standards and global guidelines of

INEE on education in emergency (The Sphere Project, 2011), key project interventions in each

school from FCA inclusive of materials support received from UNICEF were as follows:

Hardware components in each school consists of: i) One to six temporary learning spaces

(2-12 rooms); ii) semi-permanent latrines (one to five units); and iii) Hand Washing

Facilities (one to two units) with one to four sets of hygiene kits and one to three units of

water filters

Software Components in each school include; i) Supply of education learning kits (school in

box, ECED, Recreational); ii) customized teachers‘ training on EiE inclusive of child



5

friendly, psychosocial care and support, and DRR; and iii) interactions, meetings and

workshops with teachers, students and parents

Implementing Partners

FCA has thoughtfully selected the competent and relevant partners who were working in education

sector since long for this EiE project. The short profile of FCA partners and their competencies in

child rights and education sector who worked on EiE are as follows:

Loo-Niva child concern center: A Youth Organization on Child Rights

Loo-Niva Child Concern Group (Loo-Niva) has been working on delivery of basic services

especially on quality education, education governance and rights to education from child rights

perspectives to the marginalized children with an emphasis on girls and dalit since its establishment

in 1997. Main thrust of its strategic work is to empower local people especially children, child clubs,

youth and marginalized groups so that they are able to hold the local agencies and governments

more accountable and responsive towards their rights to education including in emergency.

Loo-Niva continuously works to create a link between children, adults and the government agencies

from child rights based approach to development. This approach consists of: i) empowerment rights

holders; ii) sensitization and strengthen duty bearers; and, iii) advocate for child friendly policies

and practices especially on basic service delivery i.e. education, health and social protection. With

its continuous interventions and strong stand for children‘s right in Lalitpur and scaling of its

learning and experiences on education have resulted Loo-Niva as a leading agency for quality

education and social transformation in Dadeldhura in Far West. Being rewarded as the one of the

best NGOs working in quality education in Dadeldhura by DEO, it is an obvious choice as a

development partner for funding and government sectorial agencies in education.

In addition, Loo-Niva is a committed child rights organization dedicated to holistic development of

children as enriched in the UNCRC. As a central player for quality education, Loo-Niva strategically

strengthens the local capacity of NGOs and Education Stakeholders on quality education through

education Network to share each other‘s learning and good practices. In this direction, a project with

FCA has been implemented in EQ affected schools of Lalitpur to resume the basic education

delivery for normalizing the daily life and wellbeing of children. Loo-Niva for increasing access to

quality and relevant education for the EQ affected, vulnerable and marginalized children of

Kathmandu valley was a relevant, timely and appropriate choice for the FCA.

UCEP-Nepal: A Hope for Livelihood of Underprivileged Youth

Underprivileged Children‘s Educational Programs (UCEP) Nepal is a Non-Governmental

Organization (NGO) founded in 1978 to enhance the living condition of underprivileged,

disadvantaged and working children by providing them opportunities for education and job oriented

technical and vocational training. It aims to protect and promote the rights of children firmly

believing children to be gainfully employed or self-employed for them to lead an independent and

dignified life. It has Sano Thimi Technical School, established in 1983 as an autonomous subsidiary

organ for providing technical education and vocational training in different trades to youth to

increase their employability leading to better life and livelihood.

The UCEP in partnership with FCA distributed relief material packages, and later building of TLCs,

providing semi-permanent latrines, WASH materials, education kits and teacher trainings in schools

of Kathmandu, Lalitpur and Bhaktapur districts under EiE in coordination with concerned district

education offices and RCs.



6

World Vision Advocacy Forum (WVAF): A Hope for Livelihood of Underprivileged Youth

World Vision Advocacy Forum (WVAF), a national non-government organization, possesses

expertise on social mobilization to increase access of marginalized communities to education,

capacity development and community organizations, and knowledge generation. The WVAF with

the grant support from the FCA successfully constructed 69 TLCs in Kathmandu and Lalitpur

districts as per the government-set standard at community schools severely damaged by the

devastating earthquake.

In addition, WVAF has distributing educational materials and provided training to the local teachers

on psychosocial and emotional support for students. The WVAF also strengthened capacity of local

people and institutions like Parent Teacher Associations (PTAs) and School Management

Committees (SMCs) to ensure ownership and sustainability of the EiE interventions.

Target Beneficiaries: Blanket Approach Does not Do Justice to Marginalized

The project covers 79 ECED centers and 73 community schools of Kathmandu valley with 1,025

teachers (half female) for 17, 260 students. The district wise ECED centers, schools, teachers and

students in 2072 academic year are as follows:

Table One

Target Units and Beneficiaries of the Project, 2072 Particular Total Kathmandu Bhaktapur Lalitpur

ECED 79 23 15 41

School Units

(G 1 to 12)

Basic 38 2 7 29

Secondary 35 19 6 10

Teachers

(G 1 to 12)

Male 524 263 124 137

Female 501 337 105 59

Total 1,025 600 229 196

% of female 49 56 41 30

Students

(G 1 to 12)

Boys 8,418 5,341 1,369 1,708

Girls 8,842 5,674 1,436 1,732

Total 17,260 11,015 2,805 3,440

% of girls 51 52 51 51

The above table shows that there are more female teachers (56%) in Kathmandu district where as

male teachers are more in Lalitpur (59%) and Bhaktapur district (70%). All three districts have more

girls in community schools (51%) means more boys in institutional (private) schools. There are

equal number of boys and girls in rural areas when there is no choice of private schools available for

boys. This clearly shows a prevalence of gender discrimination in both urban and rural families due

to patriarchal mind-set and socio-cultural practices. It also shows that there is less secondary school

in rural areas as they concentrated in urban areas with more facilities and dense population.

Objectives of Monitoring Mission: Satisfaction and Priority of Beneficiary

The Monitoring mission is an accountability tool to measure responsiveness of the implementing

agencies towards rights-holders and beneficiaries. This is an assessment of effectiveness and

efficiency in service delivery and utilization of it by beneficiaries. The project beneficiaries were

children enrolled in selected 79 ECED centres and 73 schools of the FCA in Kathmandu, Bhaktapur

and Lalitpur districts.

The team was asked to use both qualitative (how good) and quantitative (how much) information

while doing data collection, compilation, analysis and interpretation of the monitoring work to

measure the following:



7

1. Gather and analyse information on the satisfaction of the students, teachers and parents

regarding Finn Church Aid‘s Emergency Response:

o Measure the levels of satisfaction of students and teachers of the temporary/semi-

permanent infrastructure in terms of comfort, space, safety etc.

o Gather lessons learned, success stories and gaps in terms of design, community

involvement and implementation modality.

2. Measure the levels of satisfaction in the teaching learning materials and gather

student/teacher experiences of the functionality of the materials in the Nepali context.

o Collect information from teachers about the relevance, adjustment and

contextualization of the teaching learning materials in their daily classroom work.

o Observe and gather information, if the key messages from the teachers‘ training

program have reached the students and to what degree.

3. Assess the DRR capacity and readiness of the teachers and students and identify gaps for

further intervention in selected five schools in Lalitpur

o Collect information on the current plans for teachers‘ to integrate the teachers‘

trainings themes to their regular classroom teaching.

o Assess the current levels of Awareness, Attitude and Capacity of the School

Management Committee, Teachers and Students to respond to potential risks.

o Assess the School Improvement Plan and other SMC documents based on their

DRR content.

To fulfil the above scopes and focus of the monitoring work, the team developed its tools and

techniques for data collection and interpretation around the following questions on project

deliverables that are presented in detail in the next chapter ―Methodology and Approaches‖:

Availability: What extent does the criterion inform the purpose of the monitoring in term of

existence of infrastructures and materials supplied?

Accessibility: what extent does the infrastructures and supplies including materials and

training were accessible to schools, teachers, students and parents, which were provided?

Applicability: what extent does the infrastructure, supplies; education materials and training

provided to beneficiaries and intermediaries are applied and used?

Acceptability and Satisfaction: What extent does infrastructure, supplies, education

materials and trainings were acceptable to school, teachers, parents and students as well as

to assess their level of satisfaction?

Which criterion will produce the most useful information given available resources?


CHAPTER TWO |EiE Monitoring Mission Report, 2016

8

CHAPTER TWO

METHODS AND APPROACHES

This section covers the information about data collection and analysis methods, tools and

approaches adopted for monitoring process. The methods included for this project monitoring were

desk review, survey through structured questionnaire, interview with selected key informant,

Focused Group Discussions (FGD) and interactions and site observations. The study was under

mixed methodology that applies both qualitative and quantitative data collected both from primary

and secondary sources.

Preparatory Phase: Sharpening the Saw

Preparation of Monitoring Framework

Firstly, the monitoring team developed a monitoring framework based on the objectives and scope

of the monitoring after the review of relevant documents and discussion with FCA and Loo-Niva.

That framework provided specific ways for collecting require information/data from the field level

as well as mapping out the concerned stakeholder were consulted during the monitoring process.

With following that framework, the team further developed different tools to collect

data/information from beneficiaries, stakeholders and partner organization. The developed tools are

as follow:

School data collection questionnaires (quantitative purpose)

Customer/Beneficiary Satisfaction Survey (quantitative purpose)

Focus group discussion guideline and checklists targeted for teachers, students and parents

Key informant interview checklists targeted for trained teachers, RP/SS and HT

Observation checklist for school premises and classroom interventions

Briefing and Orientation: Clarity on Roles and Expectations

A preparation meeting was conducted with Loo-Niva officials before designing the data collection

tools and technique. Similarly, after the finalization of tools and techniques; the monitoring team

again met the key personals of Loo-NIva for sharing the final tools and approach of field visit and

data collection methodologies in Kathmandu. Before visiting the beneficiaries and stakeholder,

during field visit, an informal sharing was done in each district with DEO team. In the meeting, the

monitoring team shared the plan and the process of data collection from field level.

After designing the tools and techniques, a consultation meeting held on 15th

January 2016 with

project Team inclusive of FCA, Loo-Niva and UCEP-Nepal. All monitoring framework and tools

were shared and discussed with entire research team including field researchers to build common

understanding and consistency in data collection. That meeting provided feedback to revise the

survey questionnaire and other tools. The team then organized a field pilot testing of the tools and

questionnaire in five schools of Kathmandu. With the field inputs and comments received from

FCA, field survey questionnaire and data collection tools and checklist were finalized on a

workshop organized on 29 January 2016.

Preparation of Field Visit Plans: Better Coordination Better Support

After having field testing of the monitoring tools and techniques, a day workshop was organized on

22 January 2016 to adjust and finalize the field monitoring tools. The team on the same meeting, the

field visit plan of monitoring team was developed and discussed on the logistic supports that would

be required for monitoring team from Loo-Niva and FCA during field visit process. FCA and Loo-

Niva coordinated with concerned District Education offices (DEO) to issue a letter to each school


METHODS AND APPROACHES |EiE Monitoring Mission Report, 2016

9

informing about the monitoring mission and support required from them. Each field team leader

handed over the letter to concerned school heat teacher and agreed with the visit dates. The field

visit for entire monitoring mission was carried from 26 January to 25 February 2016.

Data Collection Tools and Procedures: Capitalizing Beauty of QualQuan

The monitoring team used both primary and secondary data as well as information collected both

from qualitative and quantitative tools. To have better understanding and clear picture of the field

and project interventions, the team capitalized the beauty of both methods as follows:

Desk Review (documents and literatures)

Relevant documents related to projects that were required for the monitoring mission (both primary

and secondary) were reviewed in the first stage of mission preparation and also in report writing.

The review provided a way to design and develop the overall framework of monitoring as well as

designing the tools/technique for data collection as expected to meet the objectives. Similarly, the

desk review provided the existing status of project‘s interventions and its outputs delivered by

projects among the beneficiaries level through using different tools of information/data collection.

The major documents that have been reviewed in the process were Project proposal, M&E

Framework, work plan and budget, quarterly and half-yearly progress reports of the project.

Similarly, the desk review process also expanded upon reviewing the project‘s periodic reports

submitted to FCA from partners, Partner‘s organizational profile, project updates provided by

partners and their staff.

Primary Information/Data Collection

On the basis of the designed tools and techniques; the data collection process was assisted in field

level to collect both qualitative and quantitative data from different stakeholders and beneficiaries.

Two separate teams were mobilized for data collection process from the field level. The Quantitative

data were collected by mobilizing a team member having experienced in quantitative research

process with using the developed questionnaires; and the Qualitative data were collected with using

different participatory tools as per required with the context of stakeholders and social setting.

Focused Group Discussions (FGDs)

As a participatory data collection process, 54 FGDs in 18 schools were organized in field to assess

the availability, accessibility and applicability of material, supplies and training provided by the

project among the target beneficiaries. There were 206 students, 126 parents and 156 teachers took

part in FGDs in which half of them in each category were female.

Observations

Observation at the field level was carried out in each school premises and three classes of each

school to assess the availability, accessibility and applicability of supplied materials and

infrastructures from the project. For this purpose, all 68 schools office and 204 classrooms‘

interventions including stores were observed.

Key Informant Interviews

Key informant interviews were targeted for specific beneficiaries and stakeholders of the project to

analyse their understanding, view about the project as well as assess the application of supplies and

materials at beneficiaries' level. For this purpose, 12 local resource persons (RPs), 72 teachers, 72

parents and 180 students (half of female) who are involved as beneficiaries of the project were

selected for KII process. Specific questionnaires and checklists were used to conduct KII.



10

Beneficiary Satisfaction Survey

As a process of customers‘ satisfaction, a Likert Scale (rating scale) of 1 to 5 to capture perceptions

of school stakeholders, with ¨1‖ indicating ‗strongly disagree‘ and ―5‖ being ‗strongly agree'. The

survey had 14 questions in each component that was done with randomly selected 540 students, 138

teachers, 158 parents and 12 resource persons (RPs). The scale component attributes a quantitative

value to qualitative information to make the results more conducive to statistical analysis. The

participants were from 18 pre-selected schools as good, moderate and poor performing by FCA and

its partners. It was paid attention to ensure 50% female participation in each group/team.

Data Analysis and Interpretation: Voice of the Voiceless

The monitoring report is based upon both quantitative and qualitative information supported by desk

review and field mission. The quantitative data were analysed with using SPSS (Statistical Package

for the Social Sciences) and specific tables, charts and figure were used in reports to produce

meaningful interpretation of the study. Similarly, the qualitative data were compiled, transcribed and

categorized according to the nature. Then, the data were coded thematically on the basis of three

areas: infrastructures and supplies, availability and use of education materials and usefulness and

application of training and workshop on EiE.

The themes were further sub-categorized according to the objectives of the monitoring in different

sectors and sub-sector for efficiency and effectiveness measuring process. These processes were

substantiated by already established and published information related to the Project. Finally, the

already explored ideas of the area were linked and analysed for innovation and good practices. Such

information was then presented in the format of diagrams, tables and pictorial forms in the report.

Summary of Samples and Tools: Mosaic of Diversity

The team used multiple tools, methods and respondent to get rich, thick and quality data and

information from the field for better analysis and interpretation of the findings. The summary of

samples and tools are as follows:

Table Two

Summary of Monitoring Tools and Respondents SN Particular Total Kathmandu Lalitpur Bhaktapur

01 School Information Sheet 73 21 39 13

02 Record of Supplies and Infrastructures 68 20 35 13

03 Key Informant Interviews (schools)

Teachers

Students

Parents

RPs/SS

18

72

180

72

12

6

24

60

24

4

9

36

90

36

4

3

12

30

12

4

04 Beneficiary Satisfaction Survey (Schools)

Teachers

Students

Parents

RPs/SS

18

138

540

158

12

6

60

180

54

4

9

60

270

80

4

3

18

90

24

4

05 Focus Group Discussions (schools)

Parents

Teachers

Students

18

126

156

206

6

48

60

72

9

60

72

104

3

18

24

30

06 Observation of Supplies and its Utilization

Schools

Classrooms

68

204

20

60

35

105

13

39



11

In addition to the above information, each team and district compiled both quantitative and

qualitative data in a given format (Annex 3) inclusive of six case studies (good, moderate and poor,

ten action photos covering diverse activities and facilities, FGD reflection write up from three

different groups and beneficiaries and narrative field note of school and classroom observations.

Validity and Trustworthiness: Traingulation and Peer Briefing (Write-shop)

There were six field monitoring teams employed both for qualitative and quantitative data collection

and compilation purposes. M and E Coordinator and Executive Director of Loo-Niva with technical

inputs and guidance from Education Advisor as the Team Leader made a surprise visit in two

schools of each team. This surprise visit was useful for spot inputs and feedback to researchers and

filed enumerators.

The data collected from each school was supervised by each team leader and then also verified by M

and E Coordinator. Some teams carried out second visit to few schools and respondents to get their

clarification and verification on data and information. Roles of HTs, SMC Chair and admin staff of

each school was very useful for data confirmation and physical verification of the supplied

materials.

Each team did a debriefing in each FGD with sharing of summarized information and field notes.

School data and qualitative information was shared with RPs and selected SSs to get further

clarification and validation. Each team was asked to write a separate summary report of all

quantitative and qualitative data with their analysis and interpretation in a prescribed format. This

team report was shared in write-shop and plenary discussion in Nagarkot on 27-28 February 2016.

The team report was commented and questioned for clarification and sought more information after

the workshop from few schools and beneficiaries.

The common findings and situation was shared and agreed in the plenary, which has been reflected

in this final report. The quantitative data was compared with secondary data and was explained with

qualitative information. The final draft report was shared with six teams and also implementing

partners and FCA for their inputs and comments. The information collected from multiple sources

and fields were compared and contrasted for meaning making and interpretation process.

Limitation and Delimitation:

This mission team did not explore the sustainability, impact and outcome of the project as it was of

emergency nature. Relevancy, efficiency and effectiveness were measured through quantitative and

qualitative data from all schools and selected beneficiaries. The finding of the monitoring mission is

generalizable as it captures both the urban and rural settings of Nepal. The supported schools are

about 10% of the entire population of schools in Kathmandu valley. As all stakeholders like

teachers, parents, students, authorities and representatives of SMC/PTA shared their views, learning

and opinions which are better due to close proximity and high level of literacy rate in these districts,

the findings of this report are of common nature in all the EQ affected schools of 14 districts.

This report does not include the financial monitoring of the project both at schools and partners

level. The team intended to include value of money perspectives, which was beyond the scope of

this mission. Thus cost efficiency and effectiveness has not been the part of this report. This will not

raise the question of transparency and accountability of the funder and implementing partners.

However the monitoring team found no official communication between school and implementing

partner about the cost of support provided for each school with its objectives and spending criteria.


CHAPTER THREE |EiE Monitoring Mission Report, 2016

12

CHAPTER THREE

MAJOR FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter presents the major findings of the monitoring mission on what was done for EiE and

what is happening in the working schools after project interventions carried out by FCA and its

partners. It includes what was done on the first 15 days of school opening and then presents the

school information on number of students, teachers and their key activities and mobilization of

different committees. This chapter mainly highlights the beneficiary satisfaction in terms of

availability, accessibility, acceptability and applicability and usage of supplies and materials

provided to resume the daily life of school.

The First 15 days of School Reopening

All three stakeholders (teachers, parents and students) shared that Head Teacher was the one who

came to school after the EQ depending on their personal damages at home. In some urban areas,

local community people came to school first to get temporary shelter, as there are not any other

public place for safe gathering and stay overnight.

School was not open with the local initiatives. Even those schools that were not damaged and had

strong infrastructures did not open school before the government‘s announcement for resuming the

schools [Jestha 14 (June 1) after 45 days of the EQ]. Very few teachers and students attended the

first day of school opening where students did chat each other sharing their experiences and learning

where as teachers carried out some simulation and drill for EQ safety as more than 400 aftershocks

continued until 9 months.

There were so many rumours spread after the second EQ in 12 May including by astrologists. The

first two weeks was set for removing fears, anxiety and trauma of the students through extra-

curricular activities, sports, cultural events and psychosocial counselling but none of the teachers

were trained for this purpose. Due to limited knowledge and skills among teachers, textbook

teaching was practiced within a week time. Schools in rural areas had enough public space for

cultural and recreational events so teachers and students jointly organized singing and dancing on

EQ and its effect as well as precautionary measures.

Due to high demand of tarpaulin sheet for temporary shelter for family and group, international

organizations led by Education Cluster started setting up few temporary safe spaces within ring road

of Kathmandu valley by using tarpaulin sheet in few community schools. This happened only after

second week of June. It clearly shows a need of school based disaster risk reduction (DRR)

interventions for safeguarding students and local communities when any disaster occurs in future.

Even in urban area, there was no supply of relief materials on the first week of the EQ. People were

collecting tarpaulin and food items from the local markets by using friends, families and personal

networks. Krishna, SMC chair from Bhaktapur complained that they saw only army and police for

rescuing people on the third day of the EQ but relief works appeared only on the fifth day. Rita, a

female teacher from rural Lalitpur said ―no one came to our village with relief materials within a

week, only few army and police entered into village on 8th day of the EQ‖. Similar views were of

the parents and students in most of the school visited by monitoring team. A head teacher in

Kathmandu said, ―We realized that we ourselves are the first recue and relief worker and first-aider,

we need to build our capacity for future disaster‖. The team did not find any disaster preparedness

activities in any of the visited schools before the EQ.


MAJOR FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION |EiE Monitoring Mission Report, 2016

13

The project had two components inbuilt with education in emergency interventions as agreed in the

education cluster. FCA together with tis implementing partnership carried out EiE interventions in

73 schools of Kathmandu valley. The project consists of the following key activities:

Hardware components consisting of one to six temporary learning centres (2-12 rooms),

semi-permanent latrines (one to five units) and Hand Washing Facilities (one to two units)

with hygiene kits and water filters

Software Components include supply of educational learning kits (school in box, ECED,

Recreational), customized teacher training on EiE and Child Friendly, Psychosocial, DRR

and interactions, meetings and workshops with students, teachers and parents.

General Findings on School Data: Glorifying Reality

The team was monitoring the general school information and its functions from the compliance

monitoring points of view. The team found the following:

Low Presence of Teachers and Students in Schools: Almost Half

Monitoring team carried-out the surprise check the school register and carried out head counting of

students and teachers on the day of monitoring. The monitoring mission found that the presence of

teachers and students in all schools of three districts is very low. The following table shows the

record of students and their presence on the particular day of monitoring:

Table Three

Status of Students and Teachers Attendance

The above table clearly shows that 80% of teachers (79% in KTM, 81.6% in LTP and 80.3% BKT)

are present in school in total where as more absenteeism is seen among male teachers in all three

districts. Only 70% male teachers are present in school with 67% in Kathmandu and 74.5% in

Lalitpur. Interestingly 90% female teaches are present in schools. It substantiates that female teacher

is more responsive and accountable on their duties. Sita, a mother from Lalitpur said, ―Female

teachers are more regular in school as they are less engaged in politics but they are more softer to

students in school‖. This was also proved while going through the attendance register in Bhakatapur

that female teachers were more regular comparing their male counterparts.

It seems there are 85% working teachers in government quota. Schools in Kathmandu valley have

less volunteer and PCF teachers. One of the HT in Kathmandu said, ―We have almost equal number

of teachers and students in few community schools as many teachers engaged in politics or close

relatives of education bureaucrats are transferred with their quota from rural areas to Kathmandu‖.

Furthermore, another HT in Bhaktapur said, ―We have not asked for teachers but DEO send us

Particular Total Kathmandu Lalitpur Bhaktapur

Present Total Present Total Present Total Present Total

No of School 73 21 39 13

Teachers

Male 367 524 178 263 102 137 87 124

Female 453 501 298 337 58 59 97 105

Total 820 1,025 476 600 160 196 184 229

Govt Quota 872 501 183 188

Students

Boys 4,619 8,418 2,765 5,341 1,204 1,708 650 1,369

Girls 4,136 8,842 2,184 5,674 1,178 1,732 774 1,436

Total 8,755 17,260 4,949 11,015 2,382 3,440 1424 2,805

CwD 63 96 24 37 36 54 3 5



14

teachers transferring from rural areas with political or bureaucratic pressure‖. The low student

teacher ratio in Kathmandu and Lalitpur reported in Flash report shows some deficiency in system.

It was disappointing while counting the only 50.7% of students were present in schools. Kathmandu

district had only 44.9% students‘ presence where as 69.2% in Lalitpur and 50.7% in Bhaktapur. The

team could reply flash report data of Kathmandu, as almost 54% students are absent without any

specific reasons. The attendance of students is lower in urban schools than the rural. Girls (53.3%)

are more absent than boys (45.2%) in all three districts. Kathmandu has only 38% girls presence in

classroom where as Lalitpur has 68%. It clearly indicates that there is a tendency of registering fake

students in school to get more funding from government like scholarship, textbook and per-capita

funding especially in urban areas.

There are very few students with disability (96 out of 17,260), very minimal than the average of

population of children with disability (2-5%). However more than 65% CwD are presence in

schools. This means they are more regular and want to come to school as school provides better

protection for them. One of the CwD studying in grade 5 said, ―We feel happy when we are in

school as we can talk, read and play with friends‖. She further said, ―We are left alone at home as

our family members go for work and we are house guard‖. It is the evidence why there is more

presence of CwD in school.

More Teachers in Urban Schools than in Rural

The monitoring team also analyzed the student teacher and schoolteacher ratio as well as school

student ratio. It was interesting that urban schools have more facilities from government than in

rural schools. The following table compares these ratios of each district:

Table Four

Average Students per Teacher/ School

The schoolteacher ratio is very high in Kathmandu (24:1) and the low in Lalitpur (5:1). Student

teacher ratio is the lowest in Bhaktapur (15:1) and the highest in Kathmandu (22:1). However, the

student teacher ratio in all three districts is half than the national average (37:1). This means all most

double teachers in working schools than in schools of Nepal. Similarly school student ratio is very

high in Kathmandu (525:1) where is very low in Lalitpur (88:1). It shows than urban schools have

more students with big infrastructures and more facilities including more teachers and materials.

There are more secondary schools inclusive of +2 in urban areas which makes more number of

teachers and students.

Committees are formed but not functional

The team also looked into different committees and their effectiveness by analyzing their presence

and number of annual meetings. Each school should have SMC (nine members) and PTA (11

members), which will have at least six and four meetings a year respectively. In addition, each

school should have child club and their representatives are invited in the SMC and PTA meeting.

The following table shows the number of school with SMC/PTA that is mandatory in each school

for better school governance and management:



School T Ratio (Govt. Quota) 14 24 5 14

Student T Ratio (Govt. Quota) 20 22 19 15

School student ratio 236 525 88 215



15

Table Five

Formation of Committees in Schools Particular Total Kathmandu Lalitpur Bhaktapur


No of school with SMC 67 17 37 13

No of school with PTA 64 17 34 13

The above table shows that Kathmandu and Lalitpur still few schools do not have SMC (8.3%) and

PTA (12.3%). In absence of these two committees, school governance and management cannot be

assumed as accountable and responsive towards students and their priorities. The following table

shows the membership and functionalities of the schools:

Table Six

Membership and Meeting in Schools Particular Total Kathmandu Lalitpur Bhaktapur

Average SMC Membership Male 6 5 7 6

Female 2 3 2 2

Total 8 8 9 8

Average PTA Membership Male 5 4 6 5

Female 4 4 3 4

Total 9 8 9 9

No of Meetings in 2072 SMC 5.6 6 5.5 5.5

PTA 2.2 1 3 2.5

The above table shows that schools are following the norm of membership while committees (nine

members in each) are formed. There is only 25% female participation in SMC while PTA has almost

45%. However, in most of the schools, PTA does not meet regularly (just twice a year) and does not

have any plan to carry out its functions of improving quality of education. The school record shows

that PTA chairperson is invited in SMC meeting. Each school is organizing SMC meeting (almost 6

times a year) but they do not discuss the classroom issues to improve better teaching learning

environment and children‘s learning achievement in their meetings.

Child Club Exist but Children are still invisible in School

The monitoring team also looked into child club in each school as this is a requirement as per

national children‘s policy 2012 and child friendly schooling national framework of 2010. The

following table shows the school having child clubs and also their membership and meeting status:

Table Seven

Functioning of Child Clubs in Schools Particular Total Kathmandu Lalitpur Bhaktapur


No of school with CCs 48 16 26 6

No of school with CPC 4 2 1 1

Child clubs membership

Boys 496 101 362 33

Girls 647 156 431 60

Total 1143 257 793 93

NO of Meetings in 2072 Child Clubs 212 72 101 39

CPC 7 3 2 2

Out of 73, 48 schools have child clubs (65%). However only 6.6% students are associated with child

clubs. Girls (56.6%) are more in child clubs than boys (43.4%). Kathmandu district has the least

membership in child clubs whereas Lalitpur has more membership. This indicates that child club is

an emerging phenomenon in rural areas. Only four schools have child protection committees that are



16

still non-functional as they have just two meetings a year in average. Thus, child friendly guideline

is not yet reach of the school and implementation is not followed up.

Decreasing Trend of Compliance in Schools

Each school is responsible to make school improvement plan (SIP) showing the current status and

targeted plan for coming five year with annual targets on physical, academic, social, economic and

institutional aspects of school. Similarly each school should have annual academic calendar

prepared in consultation with parents and students. Social audit of the overall aspects and

performance of the school should be done in August (Bhadra) each year and the report is presented

in the parents' day for their information and endorsement. In addition to this, final audit of all

sources and uses of fund of each to be done by registered auditors and the report should be endorsed

by the SMC. The following table shows the progress status of SIP, annual school calendar, social

audit, financial audit and parents‘ day in the last three years of schools in working areas:

Table Eight

Status of Compliance in Schools Particular Total Kathmandu Lalitpur Bhaktapur % Schools


Schools with A/SIP 2070 21 8 10 3 29

2071 31 13 15 3 42

2072 15 9 3 2 21

Schools with annual calendar 2070 49 13 27 9 67

2071 52 13 29 10 71

2072 36 7 20 9 49

Schools with Social Audit 2070 46 11 25 10 63

2071 47 12 25 10 64

2072 33 6 20 7 45

Schools with Final Audit 2070 41 10 24 7 56

2071 36 7 23 6 49

2072 22 3 13 6 30

Parents day in Schools 2070 45 13 22 10 62

2071 39 10 20 9 53

2072 21 1 13 7 29

The above table shows that the number of schools fulfilling the five compliances is decreasing each

year. The schools in Lalitpur are better on it than schools in Kathmandu and Bhaktapur. Less than

31% schools have SIP (29% in 2070, 42% in 2071 and only 21% in 2072). Similarly about 63%

schools (67% in 2070, 71% in 2071 and 63% in 2072) have school calendar, about 58% schools

(63% in 2070, 64% in 2071 and only 45% in 2072) do social audit, 45% schools (56% in 2070, 49%

in 2071 and only 30% in 2072) carry out final audit and only 48% schools (62% in 2070, 53% in

2071 and only 29% in 2072) celebrate parents day. In total only 50% of schools have fulfilled

compliance as per education act and rules.

It clearly shows that governance and management system of the school is poor and none-transparent.

The monitoring and follow up mechanism is also not functioning. Annual plan and budget

implementation guideline of each year issued by DoE does not allow DEO to disburse fund to those

schools who have not submitted the social audit report of the last fiscal year for the first trimester

budget request in September each year. The team found that SMC and PTA members who were part

of FGD and KII did not know about their roles and mandates. The INGOs like FCA may need to pay

attention to institutionalize their support in line with the mandatory provisions and compliance.



17

Status of the Project Interventions (EiE): Accomplishment of Events

FCA together with UNICEF had supported hardware and software components in all 73 working

schools of Kathmandu valley through two partner organizations namely Loo-Niva and UCEP-Nepal.

The support was to individual students and teachers as well as to school as an institution from June

to December 2015. The following section presents the availability, accessibility, acceptability and

applicability of both hardware and software interventions in schools as perceived by beneficiaries

and observed by monitoring mission.

Supply and Application of Hardware Components

For resuming the education services to children affected by the EQ, FCA with its partners on EiE

carried out hardware support to school consisting of temporary learning centres/spaces, semi-

permanent latrines and hand washing facilities. The team‘s findings are presented below in each of

the hardware support:

Temporary Learning Spaces (TLCs): Need of the Hours but Late

Following the SPAER and INEE principles and standards, FCA together with other education

cluster member under DoE leadership supported establishment of temporary learning centres in

working schools. The following table presents the district wise status of TLCs and their use:

Table Nine

Supply and Usage of Temporary Learning Centers

Status Total Kathmandu Lalitpur Bhaktapur


TLC Room TLC Room TLC Room TLC Room

Supplied 161 310 60 116 72 138 29 56

Available 144 267 51 96 66 121 27 50

% Available 90% 86% 85% 83% 92% 88% 93% 89%

Using 119 232 40 76 57 113 22 43

% Use 74% 75% 67% 66% 79% 82% 76% 77%

The above table shows that 161 TLCs with 310 rooms were supplied to 73 schools as per their

request. In average, each school in Kathmandu received three TLCs where as Lalitpur and

Bhaktapur received only two in each. Out of them, monitoring team found 144 TLCs with 267

rooms 90% were available in schools and only 74% (119 TLCs with 232 rooms) were still in use.

The team found that few schools in Kathmandu and Bhaktapur received tarpaulin within a month of

school reopening whereas most of the schools in working areas received TLCs in 2 months‘ time.

While having interview and FGD with teachers, parents and students, the team found that there was

no need assessment and feasibility study before supplying the materials. Basically HTs were active

coordinating with government authorities and other humanitarian agencies. There was not a proper

plan in education cluster on its modality and standards. First few schools based on their networks

and connection received tents or tarpaulin sheet, then, the idea of bamboo tent with tarpaulin on the

roof was arranged. A HT from Lalitpur said, ―We waited for bamboo supply from Terai/plain for a

month where we could make the TLCs with local materials for four walls of the classroom‖. A SMC

chair in Lalitpur said, ―If money and some technical person or training to set up of TLC was

provided from agencies like FCA we could do within a week‖. The team saw few schools in

Kathmandu had not set up TLCs but materials were put on the store. Education cluster could do a

quick assessment first before providing the materials and other support for TLCs.



18

Team also found that there was no any a written guideline or design/map provided to schools or

partners on how to make TLCs. Some HTs utilized local materials and engagement of SMCs

whereas in many schools there was no consultation and discussion even with teachers. Children and

child clubs were not consulted at all while setting up TLCs. Schools did not prioritize for hygiene,

safety and security of the children as TLCs were with dust, no proper light, board and furniture.

Team also observed that few TLCs were built outside the school premise which hinders the safety

and security of children and school materials. For instance, a TLC in Bhakatapur was used by drug-

users. Due to local conflict and not having land, four schools in Kathmandu had installed TLCs

outside the schools that are only used by neighbours for other purpose. Two schools in Lalitpur had

set up TLCs on the top of the hills which are already damaged by winds and storm.

In all our interactions, interviews and FGDs, they school stakeholders suggested to go for semi-

permanent TLCs as the new building construction may start after a year. The team agreed with them

that relief agencies could directly go directly from tarpaulin for 2 weeks to semi-permanent TLCs

for about 2 years period with local ownership and active engagement of SMC and local government.

Semi-permanent Latrines (SPLs): Supplied but not Properly Used

The project aims to set two-roomed semi-permanent latrines (SPLs) in each EQ affected school.

MoE has a plan to ensure priority minimum enabling conditions by July 2016 which includes a

separate toilet for boys and girls in each school. The team found the following status of the SPLs

delivered by FCA through its partners:

Table Ten

Supply and Usage of Semi-Permanent Latrines Particulars Total Kathmandu Lalitpur Bhaktapur

No of Schools 73 21 39 13

Supplied 164 55 82 27

Available 162 53 82 27

% Availability 99% 96% 100% 100%

Using 120 28 70 22

% Use 73% 51% 85% 81%

The above table shows that the project had supplied 164 units of SPLs which are within the DoE

policy to make two roomed toilets in each school. Team found 99% SPLs were available in schools

but only 73% (120) toilets are in use. Almost half of SPLs in Kathmandu are safely locked and are

not used. The main reason was these schools did not have toilets damaged by the EQ. Furthermore,

15% schools in Lalitpur and 21% schools in Bhaktapur are not using the SPLs at all (installed but

locked) as old toilets are functioning well. The team observed that teachers mainly use half of the

SPLs as students are using the existing toilets which were not damaged by the EQ.

The team found that half of the schools do not need toilet if the assessment was done before

supplying the SPLs. As it was supplied after establishment of the TLCs, this duplication could be

avoided. The school stakeholders viewed that SPLs are of better quality and durable than TLCs. One

HT in Kathmandu said, ―We accepted SPLs as we need in future‖. When we enquired, one of the

schools Chairperson in Bhaktapur said, ―We need these new SPLs when we have big gatherings and

meetings in school‖. While interacting with students, one student in FGD in Lalitpur complained,

―iron sheet and hooks are not properly used which made few of us injured‖. While enquired, he

replied five students of early grades were injured while they could not lock the door as lock was

above their height. The team observed, SPLs are less friendly and accessible to ECED and early

grade children due to not considering children‘s age on technical design and physical proximity.



19

Hand Washing Facilities (WASH): Poor Linkages with SPLs and Less Water

The aims of school education is to socialize children on personal health and hygiene for which each

school will have toilet as well as hand washing facilities so that children are safe and healthy. The

WASH Facilities include hand-washing cube, water filter and hygiene kits. The following table

shows the status of hand washing facilities in working areas:

Table Eleven

Supply and Usage of Hand Washing Facilities Particular Total Kathmandu Lalitpur Bhaktapur


Supplied 62 19 35 8


% Availability 100% 100% 100% 100%

Using 45 12 26 7

% Use 72% 63% 74% 87%

The above table indicates that there is no direct relationship between SPLs (164 units) and WASH

(62 units) which in principle should be. Availability of water facilities was not explored before

providing SPLs and WASH. All supplied WASH materials are available in 100% schools but only

72% of them are installed. Almost one third (28%) of WASH materials supplied are kept in storage.

Due to lack of water facilities and existence of WASH facilities, materials supplied are not in use

and operation which could be avoided with a rapid assessment of needs and priority of schools.

The team found that hand washing facilities in few schools are not user friendly for younger children

and the distance of WASH and SPLs are not in close proximity which dilutes the entire objectives of

sequencing of services, SPLs and then to WASH for better health and hygiene.

As a complementarity to WASH facilities, the project had provided water filters and hygiene kits.

The team found the following on supply and usage of water filters:

Table Twelve

Supply and Usage of Water Filters Particular Total Kathmandu Lalitpur Bhaktapur


Supplied 75 25 38 12


% Availability 97% 92% 100% 100%

Using 62 19 33 10

% Use 83% 76% 87% 83%

The above table presents that almost all schools (one school each in Bhaktapur and Lalitpur did not

get) have received one filter each that is well appreciated by school stakeholders. Water filter is set

in office room where early grade students scared to see teachers and higher grader students also fear

to get permission from teachers to get into it. Students complained, ―Water filter is for teachers not

for us, if it was for us, it would have been outside office room‖. Teachers also agreed on it and

concluded that each school needs two filters: one for teachers and guest and another one for

students. A support staff in Bhaktapur further suggested, ―To make better use and maintenance of

water filter, each class should have one‖. However the team do not agree on this demand but

advocate for two filters in each school.

Furthermore, project also provided hygiene kits in each school without any guidelines for its proper

use and replenishment system. The project could coordinate with Red Cross or nearby health post

for its sustainability. The following table presents the status of hygiene kits and its usage in working

schools/districts:



20

Table Thirteen

Supply and Usage of Hygiene Kits Particular Total Kathmandu Lalitpur Bhaktapur


Supplied 134 41 68 25


% Availability 94% 100% 88% 100%

Using 104 29 56 19

% Use 78% 71% 82% 76%

The above table shows that project had provided two sets of hygiene kits in each school. Only 78%

of supplied kits (104 out of 134) are in use. The other sets are kept in office room saying that

children will take these items home. The team surprised none of the child clubs or Junior Red Cross

Circles are made responsible in managing WASH facilities, which they could do easily. The team

could not find any provision for sanitary pads for adolescence girls which have been a cause for

higher girls dropout rate in lower secondary and secondary grades.

Beneficiary Satisfaction on Hardware Supplies: Good for Emergency

The team used likert scale to measure the beneficiary assessment on availability, accessibility,

acceptability and application of hardware supplies to school. The beneficiary satisfaction survey was

carried with randomly selected students, teachers and parents of the three pre-selected schools by

FCA, DEO and Loo-Niva team as low, high and good performing schools. The beneficiary

satisfaction on each hardware component is as follows:

Temporary Learning Centers: Half Satisfied

The team had done random sampling survey with students, teachers and parents of three schools in

each team following the five-scale likert. The beneficiary satisfaction on TLCs is as follows:

Table Fourteen

Beneficiary Satisfaction on Temporarily Learning Centres Particular Total Kathmandu Lalitpur Bhaktapur

Students

(40)

Fully satisfied 16% 20% 18% 11%

Satisfied 36% 32% 33% 44%

OK 18% 15% 23% 16%

Not satisfied 18% 24% 13% 18%

Fully unsatisfied 11% 9% 14% 12%

Parents

(30)


Satisfied 29% 24% 35% 28%

OK 18% 15% 17% 21%



Teachers (30) Fully satisfied 16% 23% 15% 12%

Satisfied 26% 31% 31% 16%

OK 18% 14% 22% 19%



The above table presents the interesting level of satisfaction. Students (55%) are more satisfied with

TLCs then parents (41%) and teachers (28%). Dissatisfaction level on supply and usage of TLCs is

in opposite trends. For instance, teachers (53%) are more dissatisfied than parents (38%) and

students (30%). About one fifth of respondents are neutral, neither satisfied nor unsatisfied. With



21

this finding, team concludes that majority of the day to day users (teachers and students) of TLCs

are not satisfied. The following figures present the satisfaction of each category of beneficiary:

The engagement of stakeholders on need assessment, types and construction process of TLCs is

prerequisite for getting their satisfaction and proper use. Most of the stakeholders except HTs have

little knowledge on the entire process of TLCs. With interactions of stakeholders, team concludes

that semi-permanent TLCs to be explored for any future calamities which are most cost effective

and useful not only for ECA but also for regular teaching learning process for safe, protective and

better learning environment.



22

Semi-Permanent Latrines

The following table presents the beneficiary satisfaction level on supply and usage of SPLs in the

working schools in each district:

Table Fifteen

Beneficiary Satisfaction on Semi-Permanent Latrines Particular Total Kathmandu Lalitpur Bhaktapur

Students

(40)


Satisfied 37% 25% 33% 54%

OK 13% 17% 13% 10%



Parents

(30)


Satisfied 32% 35% 34% 27%

OK 16% 17% 11% 21%




Satisfied 30% 34% 32% 25%

OK 13% 12% 13% 14%



The above table presents the

consistency on satisfaction

level among stakeholders. It

clearly shows that more than

57% of teachers, students and

parents are fully or partially

satisfied to SPLs with less than

30% un-satisfaction.

Comparatively stakeholders

are more satisfied with supply

and quality of SPLs than

TLCs. This has been the

similar opinion in KIIs and

FGDs with stakeholders. Even

SPLs are not in regular use of

day-to-day operation of

schools; parents and teachers

valued SPLs more than

students that SPLs are very

useful for parents meetings, ECA and school gatherings. It is obvious that teachers are using the

newly established SPLs as they had to use the same toilets with students. A child club member said,

―When teachers started using new SPLs, our toilets are cleaned properly as school cleaner pays

attention only on teachers’ toilet and its cleanliness‖. The team also observed the cleanliness and

sanitation situation is not good in students‘ toilet.

Hand Washing Facilities and Filters

The team also carried out beneficiary satisfaction survey on supply and utilization of hand washing

facilities including water filters. The satisfaction level of students, parents and teachers in each

district is presented below:



23

Table Sixteen

Beneficiary Satisfaction on Hand Washing Facilities Particular Total Kathmandu Lalitpur Bhaktapur

Students

(40)


Satisfied 35% 23% 34% 49%

OK 12% 14% 14% 7%



Parents

(30)


Satisfied 26% 32% 19% 26%

OK 9% 14% 8% 4%




Satisfied 28% 33% 28% 23%

OK 12% 10% 13% 13%



The above table indicates that there is consistency among students (63%), parents (61%) and

teachers (59%) on satisfaction level of supply and usage of hand washing facilities including water

filters. Comparing with other facilities this is one of the well received and appreciated by two third

schools of working areas. Less than one third of them (27%) in aggregate are not satisfied.

Interestingly there are less than 5% respondents who are neutral. The un-satisfaction is linked with

unavailability of water in school premises rather than from supply side. However, it shows that need

and feasibility study was not done before supply these facilities in schools.

The students and parnets are also happy having WASH facilities in schools as they see this as

symbol of better school environment and cleanliness.

Software Components

Software component consists of delivery of trainings, workshops and supply of educational

materials. The following section will present the availability, usefulness and application of education

materials and trainings provided by the FCA and its partner organizations:



24

Supply of Learning Kits (ECED and School): Not Used Inclusively and Objectively

With the support from UNICEF, FCA and its partners had supplied ECED kit boxes and recreational

kits to create child friendly learning and play materials. The status of supply and usage of these

materials is as follows:

Table Seventeen

Supply and Usage of ECED and Recreational Kits Particular Total Kathmandu Lalitpur Bhaktapur

No of ECED Center 79 23 15 41

ECED Kit Box Supplied 229 94 107 28

Available 227 94 105 28

% Availability 99% 100% 98% 100%

Using 174 65 87 22

% Use 76% 69% 81% 79%


Recreational Kits Supplied 176 56 94 26


% Availability 93% 98% 87% 100%

Using 120 26 72 22

% Use 68% 46% 77% 85%

The above table shows that almost 99% ECED kits supplied to schools are available physically (227

out of 229 in 79 Centers) however only 76% are in use. Two kits in Lalitpur were reported as stored

in Patan. Kathmandu has low use of kits (69%) while Lalipur has comparatively in better position

(81%). This indicates usage of ECED kits is better in rural areas than in urban.

Similarly, 93% of supplied recreational kits (sports and cultural materials) were available in 73

schools. Again, schools in Lalitpur have not received materials, as they are stored in Patan. In terms

of usage, only 46% of recreational kits in Kathmandu are in use while in Bhaktapur 85% sets are in

use. However, child clubs in schools are not made responsible for proper use of recreational kits in

an inclusive and objective manner to all kinds of children and all grades as they do not have routine

and an assigned teacher for its monitoring and follow up.

Supply of Schools in Boxes and Books in Bags

Humanitarian agencies generally supply the school in box and books in bags for ready reference for

operation of school administration and ready materials for children affected by calamities like April

EQ in Nepal to resume the operation immediately. The supply and usage of these materials provided

from UNICEF is as follows:

Table Eighteen

Supply and Usage of Schools in Box and Books in Bag Particular Total Kathmandu Lalitpur Bhaktapur


School in Boxes Supplied 371 148 157 66

Available 350 146 140 64

% Availability 94% 99% 89% 97%

Using 298 116 123 59

% Use 80% 78% 78% 89%

Books in Bags Supplied 215 96 80 39


% Availability 98% 100% 95% 100%

Using 163 64 60 39

% Use 76% 67% 75% 100%



25

The above table shows that there is no common criterion for allocation of school in box and books in

bag. For instance, schools in Kathmandu received 7 boxes and 4.5 bags per school whereas schools

in Lalitpur received 4 boxes and 2 bags per school. Schools in Bhakatapur received five boxes and

three bags per school. It indicates that there was urban or road-head syndrome in material

distribution as schools have more network and proximity to service delivery agencies got more.

None of the school received any official letter with list of materials and a short description on how

can these materials be used in schools and classroom processes.

Overall Impression on Materials Distribution

Agencies including FCA provided educational learning materials both to ECED and schools from a

top-down approach without having proper need assessment (what do they need how much for how

long?) and orientation to users for its objectives and techniques. Almost two-third schools and

ECED centres are using these materials whereas 1/3 schools have locked all the materials in

cupboard or storeroom without opening the box/kit.

School are happy and satisfied to get educational materials but also worried on who will replace

them as materials are decreasing/tearing day by day. It has obviously increased more interactions

and collaboration among students and between students and teachers to make classroom practices

and school environment more friendly and consultative. However, students and teachers complained

that these materials are targeting to only primary students not for secondary level.

Sustainability cannot be thought during emergency; however, dependency syndrome should not be

promoted. Teachers and parents commented, ―How long can we use these materials‖. Furthermore,

teachers suggested providing the list of the materials with a short guideline/manual on how to use

and develop similar materials. The issue of transparency and accountability was missed in most of

the supplies and materials provided to schools, as they do not know the value and number of items

supplied for official record.

About half of the schools in Kathmandu and Bhaktapur are not using sports materials due to the lack

of playground and none appointment of game /ECA teacher. The level and grade wise categorization

of materials in future operation was suggested by child club members and higher grade students.

Teacher Training: EiE inclusive of Child Friendliness and Psychosocial care

FCA together with its partners and UNICEF-Nepal organized carious trainings, workshops and

interactions focusing on psychosocial wellbeing of children and child friendly teaching learning

process in post-EQ situation. In line with SPHERE standards and INEE guidelines, these training

were inclusive of topic around child friendly school environment, child-centric methods,

psychosocial care and support as well as disaster risk reduction in schools and local communities.

The DRR in school is a new concept in Nepal which was piloted by Red Cross as a school based

disaster preparedness programme in Kathmandu valley in 2010-2012. Following the 2008 national

strategy on disaster management, stakeholders are still waiting to get the new disaster management

act which gives more mandate and responsibility to local government and school. As a part of this

orientation, the following section presents the status of trained teachers and application of EiE

teachers‘ training into classroom interventions:

EiE training to teachers

The FCA provided master training on EiE in all three districts to all RPs and SSs to cascade down

the basic training to teachers hoping that these teachers will apply in classroom practices. The

following table shows the status of EiE training provided to RPs/SSs and schoolteachers:



26

Table Nineteen

Status of EiE Trainers and Teachers



Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female

EiE Trainers

(ToT)

Trained 75 10 26 3 34 4 15 3

Available 75 10 26 3 34 4 15 3

%Available 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Working 19 1 5 0 9 0 5 1

% Use 25% 10% 19% 0% 26% 0% 33% 33%

EiE Trained Teachers

Trained 220 236 53 107 108 51 59 78

Available 176 192 46 94 73 38 57 60

%Available 80% 81% 87% 88% 68% 75% 97% 77%

Working 163 183 40 90 68 37 55 56

% Use 74% 78% 75% 84% 63% 73% 93% 72%

The above table shows that almost all master trainers on EiE are available in field but are not doing

their job (only 25%) as envisioned. In addition to organizing basic training these trainer could scale

up this learning through RC level HT meeting. Out of 202 trained teachers only 176 (80%) are in

schools. Interestingly 74% teachers claimed that they are using it in the classroom. However, none

of our students in FGD refers and agrees with this claim. One child in Lalitpur said, ―We know

teachers have gone for training as they were absent in schools but they have not used new tools and

methods after their training in classroom‖. A PTA member in Bhaktapur said, ―We cannot follow up

teachers as we do not know what trainings they have received and what are they supposed to do‖.

The team observed very few teachers are using training materials and group work in the classroom.

When inquired with teachers, they themselves complained that the training was less practical with

more theoretical classes. During the interactions and FGDs, the team learnt that the training was

organized in July-August and the duration was short to grasp that for classroom purposes.

RPs Satisfaction on EiE Master Training

The team carried out the random sampling survey on RPs satisfaction on EiE Master Training. The

following table shows their level of satisfaction:

Table Twenty

RPs/SSs Satisfaction on EiE Master Training Particular Total Kathmandu Lalitpur Bhaktapur


Satisfied 42% 47% 35% 43%

OK 19% 8% 20% 30%



The above table depicts that almost 74% participant were satisfied with the master training and its

delivery. Interestingly participants from Bhaktapur were less fully satisfied (15%) than other two

districts (above 40%). While interacting with the RPs, they had high expectation from trainers and

organizers on materials, contents, methods and delivery approaches. It has resulted one third

participants in Bhaktapur were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied. The team also felt that few trainers



27

having relevant expertise with few tools related to various subjects and grades could be explored to

make training more relevant and practical for classroom interventions.

Teachers’ Satisfaction on EiE Basic Training

After the master training to RPs/SSs, they organized EiE basic training at RC level. The team carried

out the random sampling survey on teachers‘ satisfaction who had received EiE Basic Training. The

following table shows their level of satisfaction:

Table Twenty One

Teachers’ Satisfaction on EiE Basic Training Particular Total Kathmandu Lalitpur Bhaktapur


Satisfied 36% 49% 40% 21%

OK 14% 13% 11% 17%



The above table depicts that almost 77% teachers are satisfied with the contents and delivery of EiE

basic training. However, students do not see any changes from teachers. While doing interactions

with teachers, they were not happy with the trainers and their quality of delivery as they were

looking for experts who could give them practical tips, tools and methods applicable to classroom

practices. Students had the opinions that teachers were friendly on the first two weeks of school

reopening where they discussed on various life skills, social skills and problem solving skills related

to disaster and post-disaster situation. However, they could not find any significant changes in

classroom practices after the EiE training.

Interactions, meetings and workshops

The FCA and its partners had hoped that UNICEF would provide orientations and workshop to

teachers and parents while distributing education and learning materials. However the team found

that there was no proper orientation on usage of materials while handing over to HTs in district

headquarters. The following table shows that there was less communication with students and

parents including SMCs and PTAs.

Table Twenty Two

Orientation Status on Education Materials Particular Total Kathmandu Lalitpur Bhaktapur

Education Kits & Materials Orientation (F) 188 114 24 50

Working (F) 182 113 19 50

% Use 97 % 99% 79% 100%

Psychosocial care & support Orientation (M) 223 70 92 61

Working (M) 200 70 69/0 61

% Use 90% 100% 75% 100%

While doing FGD with parents, team came to know that none of the school parents including SMC

had received any formal training, meeting and workshop with NGOs and GOs officials but they had

informal discussing while they were observing schools.

Stakeholders in Project Management

The monitoring team had in-depth discussion with key project stakeholders to get their perceptions,

understanding and views on application and usefulness of project interventions. The findings of the

stakeholders‘ participation and priority for future interventions are as follows:



28

Participation of Stakeholders in EiE: Not Well-informed

While interacting with parents, students and teachers in general and in-depth discussion in 18

schools (good, moderate and poor), the team found that parents were not aware about who provided

what support to schools after the EQ to resume the teaching learning processes. Mostly HTs and in

few cases SMC chair knows the support received by schools but even not by teachers. While going

through the minute, we could not see the reflection of agency and their support (both hardware and

software) to schools in their minutes.

ECED facilitators were more aware about educational materials support from FCA and UNICEF.

However, most of the teachers do not know it as HTs have kept these materials either in his/her

office or in storeroom.

Students have seen the materials and supplies delivered to schools. However, this has not been

discussed with students or child club representatives. Children were the opinions that they could

better use some recreational materials by making grade wise and level wise routine.

The team surprised that SMC is the decision making body in school which is not informed. The role

of PTA is to improve quality of classroom processes. Teachers were trained on EiE but do not have

plan how do use those tips and tools in classroom delivery. For us, the participation of school

stakeholders in EiE was from tokenistic perspective, as there are very few formal communications

from service providers to schools.

Stakeholders’ Views on future Programme:

The team had open discussion with parents, teachers and students on how can we do better EiE

interventions in future. Observing the quality and durability of SPLs, stakeholders suggested

introducing semi-permanent TLCs from the very beginning of the EiE response in partnership with

parents and local stakeholders. There was a strong opinion to make arrangement of sufficient water

supply before providing any hand washing facilities and SPLs. The provision of water filter for

clean and safe drinking water is a good intervention but increase number of water filter based on

number of classes and students but a minimum of two in each school.

Teachers had the opinion of promoting open and formal communication with school so that they are

recorded in school system and stakeholders are informed. The transparent and participatory support

mechanism will improve ownership, sustainability and better use and application of infrastructures

and supply materials both for office use and classroom delivery.

Teachers as well as parents argued that humanitarian agencies should introduce some formal

contract with school administration about the support they are providing, roles of both parties and

reporting mechanism. Some of the school they do not know what is the process of getting support as

some schools received support which they had not demanded or there is no need of those support.

For instance, few schools have put SPLs and hand washing materials in storeroom as they have

already those facilities in schools.

Training and orientation just after the EQ or any natural calamities are welcome. These training

could be done in each school with short orientation to SMC and PTA so that they can follow up

whether teachers are practicing them in classroom. Teachers were the opinions that training should

provide more skills and tips rather than theoretical knowledge and explanation.


CHAPTER FOUR |EiE Monitoring Mission Report, 2016

29

CHAPTER FOUR

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS This chapter presents the summary and conclusions including recommendation of the monitoring

mission on EiE interventions supported by the FCA and its partner organizations mainly Loo-Niva

and UCEP-Nepal in 73 schools of Kathmandu, Lalitpur and Bhaktapur districts for more than

17,000 students.

Summary:

The EQ of April 2015 made the entire country in shock even though its major destruction was only

in 14 districts including in Kathmandu valley, a capital city. Education sector was one of the most

hit by the EQ leaving more than 8, 000 schools out of minimal infrastrucutres. All schools and

education institutions were closed officially for 45 days just after the EQ when the new academic

year was just started in mid April.

Nepalese education system is in a cross road on its future direction with duality of education service

delivery. Out of 7.6 million students from grade one to 12, 15% students go to private schools

mainly in big cities and in urban areas from rich and middle class families. Rights to Education upto

grade 12 for each citizen has been recognized as fundamental rights in the new constituion (Article

31) promulgated on 20 Sept 2015.

The EQ has brought a discourse on school safety as well as relevancy of school education to

imrpove the life and livelihood skills among students. Many educationists see this is an opportunity

to redefining and restructure education system and its quality. The EiE has been a basic service as

rights of children and also a prioritized action by parents as a means of protection and wellbeing of

their children. Opening of school gives a hope for future in the entire society.

The FCA in Nepal was very active and visible from the very beginning of the EQ response and early

recovery process in education cluster. They immediately after the EQ started providing child centric

relief materials as well as EiE interventions in schools to normalize the daily life and learning

evnironment for children. The FCA was on the forefont of supporting through its partners i.e. Loo-

Niva and UCEP-Nepal who are pioneers working in education sector since long.

FCA provided both hardware and software interventions to all schools inclusive of educational

materials support from UNICEF which were relevant and practical. The hardware component

includes: i) one to six temporary learning centres (2-12 rooms); ii) semi-permanent latrines (one to

five units); iii) hand washing facilities (one to two units) with hygiene kits and water filters. The

software component consists of: i) educational learning kits (school in box, ECED, Recreational); ii)

customized teachers‘ training on EiE and Child Friendly, Psychosocial, DRR; and iii) interactions,

meetings and workshops with teachers, students and parents.

The project aims, objectives and interventions were relevant and contextual to the local needs and

priorities. FCA and partners paid priority to deliver the infrasructures and supplies but did not focus

monitoring the progress on its objectives and expected results. For instance, whether the project has

contributed to: i) increase enrolment of both girls and boys especially in basic education; ii) increase

retention of students particularly of girls; and improve learning achievement especially of girls and

minority groups. Thus team concludes that EiE interventions were carried out from a blanket

approah in emergency situation with less emphasis on need assessment, local ownership and

resources, accountability and results of the work on children‘s learning and wellbeing.


SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS |EiE Monitoring Mission Report, 2016

30

The First 15 days of school reopening was supposed to focus on psychosocial care and support

where as most of the schools entered into textbook teaching. Generally schools data (flash report)

are glorifying the reality as we found the low presence of teachers and students in chools. As there

are only half students are regular in school it suspects the data inflation for getting more per capita

funding in school. There is low student teacher raito in urban schools than in rural areas.

The SMC and PTA are formed in almost all schools but are not functional. The PTA is less aware

and functional on their roles and mandates. There is a trend of forming child club in each school but

they are invisible in school activities and functions. The EiE project did not have consultation with

children and parents in schools. The HT in each school was engaged in EiE interventions but not the

SMC and PTA. The team found that schools are not fulfilling their minimum compliance as defined

in education rules like school improvement plan, social audit, finacial audit, parents day, annual

education calendar and so on. There is a decreasing trend of compliance fulfillment in schools.

The team noted that none of the school had disaster preparedness and response plan even though

GoN has a policy to work on school based disaster risk reduction interventions. The students and

teachers were not alert on personal and professioal level neither the school as an institution was

prepared for big emergency like the April EQ. The DRR interventions are not part of SIP and their

regular budget system.

Conclusion:

In regard to progress achievement, the team found that most of the supplies and infrastructures

provided by the project are availabile in schools, mostly accessbile and acceptable to beneficiary and

to a large extent are applicable to their daily life. The following summarizes the conclusions of the

stakeholders basically of teachers, students and teachers satisfaction level on sulpplies:

Almost more than 95% supplies are Available in schools

The team found the all supplied materials and infrastructures were availability in schools and ECED

centers. The team observed and monitored 170 TLCs with 233 classrooms, 178 SPLs, 83 WASH

facilities with 83 water filters and 178 hygiene kits where all schools had received at least one unit

of each hardware support from FCA and its partners. It was noted that these materials were not

available to any school within 45 days of the EQ. The 79 ECED centers and 73 schools have

received these materials during June and July 2016. There was no need and priority assessment of

the school before supplying materials. Some infrastructure materials for SPLs and WASH facilities

were kept into stores as they have the existing facilities working well.

In addition software components were also supplied to schools not on the basis of need and priorities

but on the basis of materials available with funding agencies like UNICEF. These materials include

248 ECED kits, 450 school-in-boxes, 310 books in bags and 205 recreational kits. Furthermore,

FCA and its partners had organized EiE master training to 61 RPs/SSs who are responsible to

provide training at RC level. These trainers were supposed to provide a 2-day EiE basic training to

442 teachers of 73 schools.

Mostly all Supplies are Accessible to Beneficiaries

The supplied infrastructures and educational materials are known and accessible in school

particularly for HT. The TLCs are fully accessible to children but they all are not safe and suitable

for regular classes, as it does not control dust, cold and noise. Schools who have installed SPLs are

mostly used by teachers or locked off for students. The WASH facilities are mostly overlapping with

existing facilities, which were not damaged by the EQ. Water filters provided to schools are mostly



31

accessibility to teachers not for the students as they are kept in office room where students do not

feel welcoming and easy access.

Students and teachers are using ECED kits and recreational materials. But most of the school in

boxes, books in bags are not operational at they are locked by HT. Other education materials

supplied to schools are kept in office and are not used to classroom processes. The team argues that

project did not follow accountability and responsiveness of school administration to make access of

beneficiary to each material supplied to school and their application on children‘s learning.

Most of Supplies and Materials Applied with Low Ownership

Obviously, each school stakeholders are using TLCs and SPLs that are installed in school premises

with some limited restrictions. As stakeholders commented, TLCs were very good initiative for the

first one to two months is not feasible and appropriate for regular teaching learning processes. Like

SPLs, students and parents were the opinion of having semi-permanent TLCs in selected schools

that do not have any other buildings and classrooms.

Where there is water and WASH facilities do not exist in school, they are used and applied by

beneficiary properly. Water filters are used in school mainly by staff as these are set up in office

room and less accessible to students. Students demand to have water filter in each class so that they

will have easy access with ownership and management by each class. However team advocates for

supplying two water filters in each school.

Education materials and kit boxes are appropriate and applicable. However, there are not properly

used with two reasons. Firstly, there was no proper orientation on objectives and how to use these

materials in classroom intervention. Secondly, teachers especially HTs want to keep them for a

longer period of time, as they do not have any plan for replacement or development of local

materials. Interactions between teachers and between students in child club on the objectives and

process of supplies and materials will improve ownership and better utilization of supplies and

materials objectively.

Training on EiE both for RPs/SSs and teachers was the need of the hour but was organized a little

bit late. Due to more theoretical focus, teachers could not bring changes into classroom practices as

they complain that the training was less practical and relevant to their subjects and contents.

Engagement of stakeholders in the planning, implementation and review process of EiE

interventions was not planed and practiced especially on infrastructure development

Almost two third Beneficiary are Satisfied

The acceptability and satisfaction of beneficiaries on both hardware and software components of the

EiE interventions are as follows:

1. Temporary Learning Centres: Overall 68% students, 65% teachers and 68% parents were

satisfied on supply and management for resuming the school education with some

comments:

a. Number and classrooms were enough in terms of need and priorities of schools

(53% parents, 60% teachers & 84% students)

b. Parents (58%) and student (53%) did not like the quality and comfortableness

whereas 60% teachers liked it.

c. 74% students, 60% teachers and 89% parents were not satisfied with safe,

supportive, health and sanitation situation.



32

2. Semi-permanent Latrines: Overall 80% students, 91% teachers and 84% parents are

satisfied with supply and installation of SPLs for maintaining health and sanitation in

schools but:

a. 48% students, 80% teachers and 52% parents rated the SPLs was installed very late

during July-August but was separately for boys and girls

b. 77% students, 65% teachers and 71% parents satisfied with its safety, cleanliness

and appropriateness for regular use

c. 53% students, 67% teachers and 71% parents are not satisfied for not making

training for local parents and mason on its repairs and maintenance

3. Hand Washing Facilities: Overall 81% students, 92% teachers and 96% parents are

satisfied with installation and management of HWFs in schools where there were no

functional existing facilities but:

a. 50% each of students and teachers and 62% parents are not satisfied with the health,

hygiene and sanitation due to lack of water

b. 73% of students, 62% teachers and 79% parents are satisfied with two set of WASH

set up close to toilets/SPLs

c. 54% students, 65% teachers and 63% parents are not satisfied with repair and

maintenance as no one in school taught this

4. EiE Basic training: Overall 82% teachers in Kathmandu, 81% in Lalitpur and 68% in

Bhaktapur are satisfied with EiE basic education with few variations. However students do

not see changes on teachers teaching learning methods and processes:

a. 90% teachers feel the selection process for training was fair and transparent.

b. 76% teachers commented the hands-on support was not available when then need

c. 82% teachers are satisfied for coordination and collaboration with DEOs

d. About one third of teachers did not share training with anyone in schools

Recommendations

Based on the findings, discussion and analysis of data with beneficiaries and school stakeholders,

the team recommends the following:

1. Improve information and documentation in each school: The FCA and its partners should

send an official letter to each school giving copy to concerned district education offices

about the support already provided from the project with their value/costing (name, number

and cost). This support if possible should be included in school record and also should be

reviewed by social audit committee and final auditor.

2. Strengthen understanding among school stakeholders including students to increase

accountability and responsiveness of authority towards children and their wellbeing and

learning with each component of school support with proper orientation. Before providing

any support, it is fundamental to inform beneficiary and other stakeholders on the object and

process of using it objectively.

3. Institutionalize support system within the existing mechanism: As SMC and PTA were

less informed and engaged in EiE interventions and was not included in the school reporting

system, any support to school in future should be included in SIP or annual/quarterly plan of

school to institutionalize the support mechanism. The support should be based on need and

priority of schools and its stakeholders within the existing structures and mechanism of

schools (SMC, PTA, SIP) with an emphasis on school governance and social audit

4. Mobilization and Engagement of Stakeholders: Each school has some governance system

like SMC, PTA, child club, child protection committee, social audit committee which needs

to be activated and mobilized for any support provide to school. Child clubs and other local

groups could be mobilized for better understanding and cooperation as well as to ensure

ownership and sustainability on the project interventions. SMC, PTA, child club, child



33

protection committee in all phase of project cycle management with result orientation ―what

for children and their learning”.

5. Use/Capitalize local materials and resources: FCA and its partners should explore the

available human, materials and technical resources available in the school community and

utilize them even in emergency interventions. Teachers and few selected parents could be

trained on local education material development and establishment of TLCs, SPLs, and

WASH facilities. To increase ownership and sustainability of the project technical training

to local mason, teachers on materials development and HT/SMC on school governance can

be done.

6. Focus and prioritize processes and results to children: All school interventions are for

children to improve their wellbeing and learning achievement. The EiE interventions were

for children but the project did not pay attention on process and results of the interventions.

To increase accountability and responsiveness of teachers and SMC, project should look on

what goes to children and their wellbeing. Prioritization to children and better management

of schools increase compliance in a transparency and participatory manner for results.

7. Integrate DRR and Psychosocial Support in School System: The effect of the EQ was

more on schools and children are the most vulnerable on any future disaster. School is also

source of information for parents and community institutions. Integration of DRR including

psychosocial care and support system in school and VDC level planning process in

collaboration with local government so that children and schools are better prepared to

prevent and to respond any future calamity and emergency.


REFERENCES |EiE Monitoring Mission Report, 2016

34

REFERENCES

CBS. (2012). National Population and Housing Census, 2011. Kathmandu: Central Bureau of

Statistics, National Planning Commission, Government of Nepal

DoE. (2015). Flash Report 2015-16. Kathmandu: Department of Education

INEE (2010). Minimum Standards for Education: Preparedness, Response, Recovery. New York:

Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergency Coordinator for Minimum Standards,

UNICEF - Education Section

INEE. (2004). Minimum Standards for Education in Emergencies. Paris: Inter-Agency Network for

Education in Emergency.

MoE. (2009). School Sector Reform Programme, 2009-2016. Kathmandu: Ministry of Education.

MoE. (2015). Annual Strategic Implementation Plan, Annual Work Plan and Budget for FY 2015-

16. Bhaktapur: Department of Education

MoE. (2016). Joint Evaluation of Nepal’s School Sector Reform Programme 2009-2016, Final

Report. Kathmandu: Ministry of Education, Government of Nepal.

MoE. (2016a). Nepal Education Sector Analysis. Kathmandu: Ministry of Education.

MoE. (2016b). School Sector Development Programme, 2016-2022 (First Draft). Kathmandu:

Ministry of Education

NPC. (2014). Human Development Report of Nepal. Kathmandu: National Planning Commission

and UNDP-Nepal

NPC. (2015a). Nepal Earthquake, 2015: Post Disaster Need Assessment, Vol. B: Sector Reports.

Kathmandu: National Planning Commission, Government of Nepal

NPC. (2015b). Sustainable Development Goals 2016-2030, National (Preliminary) Report.

Kathmandu: National Planning Commission, Government of Nepal.

The Sphere Project. (2011). Sphere Handbook, Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in

Humanitarian Response. United Kingdom: Practical Action Publishing, Schumacher

Centre for Technology and Development,


APPENDICES |EiE Monitoring Mission Report, 2016

b

APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Terms of Reference for Evaluation

TERMS OF REFERENCE TO CARRY OUT THE MONITORING TASKS IN 55 SCHOOLS OF

THREE DISTRICTS LALITPUR, KATHMANDU & BHAKTAPUR

This ToR is a guide to monitor the education responses made by the FCA education in emergencies in Nepal.

1. Goals of the Monitoring Exercise.

1.1 Gather and analyze information on the satisfaction of the students, teachers and parents regarding

Finn Church Aid’s Emergency Response (see attached Appeal, pages 24-32) in Kathmandu,

Lalitpur and Bhaktapur.

1.1.1 Hard Component:

1. Temporary Learning Spaces

2. Semi-Permanent Latrines

3. Hand washing Facilities

Measure the functionality and usability of the temporary/semi-permanent infrastructure

a) Right after the Earthquakes and

b) In medium term (up to 1.5 year)

Measure the levels of satisfaction of students and teachers of the temporary/semi-permanent infrastructure in

terms of comfort, space, safety etc.

Gather lessons learned, success stories and gaps in terms of design, community involvement and

implementation modality.

1.1.2 Soft Component:

1. UNICEF Learning and Teaching Materials

2. 2 day ToT in Basic Education in Emergencies Issues for Resource Center Staff.

3. 2 day teachers training in Basic Education in Emergencies Issues

Measure the levels of satisfaction in the learning & teaching materials distributed ( UNICEF School in a Box,

Early Childhood Development Kit, Recreational Kit) and gather student/teacher experiences of the

functionality of the materials in the Nepali context.

Measure the teachers‘ satisfaction on the teacher training program. Disaggregate the findings by themes.

Collect information from teachers about the relevance, adjustment and contextualization of the themes of the

teachers‘ training program in their daily classroom work.

Observe and gather information, if the key messages from the teachers‘ training program have reached the

students and to what degree.

Collect information on the current plans for teachers‘ to integrate the teachers‘ training‘s themes to their

regular classroom teaching.

1.2 Assess the DRR capacity and readiness of the teachers and students and identify gaps for further

intervention in selected schools in Lalitpur

Assess the current levels of Awareness, Attitude and Capacity of the School Management Committee,

Teachers and Students to respond to potential risks.

Assess the School Improvement Plan and other SMC documents based on their DRR content.

2. Preparation

2.1 Develop detailed Plan of Action for effective monitoring in consultation with Bikash Sharma and

Arun Bhatta from FCA for the targeted schools and in cooperation with Under Privileged Children‘s

Learning Program (UCEP).



c

2.2 Develop and finalize monitoring tools including Data Collection sheets, Structured Interviews

Questionnaires and Focus Group Discussion templates to measure teacher/student satisfaction,

functionality/usability of the TLCs and Latrines, Impact of Teachers training and potential gaps and

the DRR needs assessment.

2.3 Develop a detailed budget and timetable for the monitoring

2.4 The digital cameras and recorder will be provided and managed by the Loo Niva for the Team

members

2.5 Develop simple JDs for Monitoring Team members

2.6 Organize and orientation workshop for field researchers from Loo Niva on data collection & analysis

tools.

2.7 Prepare official letter for respective District Education Offices and to all targeted schools separately

to gain necessary support in coordination with UCEP.

3. Quantitative Data collection

3.1 Collection and verification of basic data from each school, including enrolment data (boys/girls), no.

of disabled/marginalized students, disaggregated by ethnicity from ECD to grade 12, number of

teachers, GPS coordinates of the schools etc. ( see draft data collection sheet attached)

3.2 Collection of beneficiary data of FCA‘s and partners orientation of UNICEF teaching/learning

materials in May-June.

3.3 Collection of basic infrastructure data from the Schools (Water source, commitments by other actors

for permanent construction etc.)

3.4 Methods: Data sheets, key-stakeholder interviews and observation

4. Qualitative Data Collection

4.1 Collect information of teachers and students experience with the temporary and semi-permanent

infrastructure, priority to the students and teachers using (or having used) the infrastructure.

4.2 Collect lessons learned, success stories and identify gaps related to design, community involvement

and implementation modality.

4.3 Collect information of the reasons behind NOT using the infrastructure.

4.4 Verify and ensure the condition and usage of distributed school kits (ECD kits, Recreational kits,

School in a box and Book bag).

4.5 Collect information on information of the teachers‘ and students‘ experience and satisfaction with the

materials.

4.6 Measure the teachers‘ satisfaction on the teacher-training program. Disaggregate the findings by

themes: Disaster Risk Reduction, Psycho Social Support, Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Promotion,

Inclusive Education and Learner Centered Methods.

4.7 Collect information from teachers about the relevance, adjustment and contextualization of the

themes of the teachers‘ training program in their classrooms. Map out the positive experience and

gaps that the teachers identify.

4.8 Observe and gather information, if the key messages from the teachers‘ training program have

reached the students and to what degree.

4.9 Methods

Classroom/ school yard observation

Specific questions to key stakeholders

Focus Group Discussions

Structured individual interviews

Compiling case studies

Game/play based information collection from the students.

Analysis of the feedback forms from the ToT /EiE (UCEP)

Photographic evidence

5. Analysis and Reporting

5.1 The reporting should clearly indicate the overall levels of satisfaction of the beneficiaries ( students,

teachers, School Management Committees, Parents ( to a limited degree) and District Education



d

Office staff members, where applicable. Is the response appropriate, functional, timely, cost effective

and safe?

5.2 The report should indicate the shortcomings, challenges and problems encountered and the reasons

behind these shortcomings. The analysis should however, move beyond perceived explanations and

analyze the needs/rights based causes of dissatisfaction.

5.3 The report should also indicate success stories and the reasons behind these successes and

satisfaction. The analysis should move beyond perceived explanations and analyze the needs/rights

based causes of satisfaction.

5.4 The report should analyze the relationship between community involvement/ownership and levels of

satisfaction and functionality. What are the reasons behind strong or weak community ownership?

5.5 In case the monitoring team comes across specific complaints, these complaints should be catalogued

in the reporting.

5.6 Statistical analysis tools shall be used where applicable.

5.7 The report should include recommendations for the second phase of the response in relation to

community involvement, usability and design of temporary/semi-permanent infrastructure. The

interventions in the second phase are limited to a) Semi-Permanent Learning Centers and Latrines

(Loo Niva) b) Education in Emergencies Teacher training Content (UCEP) c) Awareness and

Capacity building around Child Protection issues (UCEP) d) School Based DRR development

(UCEP). Ideas outside of these four themes should not be in the recommendations, but should be

recorded in a separate document.

5.8 The report should include 4-6 short case studies to illustrate successes and failures of the project.

5.9 Loo Niva is responsible for compilation of the ‗Hard Component‘ section of the reporting.

5.10 Loo Niva is responsible to include the UCEP findings of ‗Hard Component‘ in their assigned schools

5.11 Loo Niva is responsible for providing all information and analysis of the ‗Soft Component‘ in their

assigned schools to UCEP for report writing.

5.12 The Final report should be Joint report by Loo Niva and UCEP and Loo Niva will compile the whole

report for final report.

6. Dissemination of the Results

6.1 Loo Niva will present the preliminary analysis in results verification/dissemination

event/meeting/workshops with District Education Offices prior to finalizing and publication of the

report with relevant input included in the Final Report. (Organization is UCEP responsibility)

6.2 The monitoring report shall be printed and publicized after approval by Finn Church Aid

6.3 The report shall be distributed to the project donors, target schools, District Education Offices,

National Education Cluster and Department of Education

7. Other conditions of Implementation of this ToR.

7.1 Duration of activities under this ToR are planned to take place between January 8th

2016 and

February 28th

2016.

7.2 The human resources necessary for these activities should include at least one senior level

advisor/consultant to develop the tools and analysis methods for appropriate time and one full time

coordinator for the minimum of 1.5 months to ensure the quality of the process.

7.3 The entire monitoring exercise including development of tools, data collection, analysis, reporting

and dissemination shall be done in close cooperation and communication with UCEP.



e

Appendix 2: Field Plan

Monitoring Schedule, FCA Education in Emergencies (EIE) 2015

Loo Niva Child Concern Group, Lalitpur

S.

N

Tasks Jan-16 Feb-16 Responsible Persons

2nd Week 3rd

Week

4th

Week

5th

Week

1st

Week

2nd

Week

3rd

Week

4th

Week

1 Concept & questionnaire

designing and other preparations

Advisor/Team

Leader/Monitoring

Coordinator

2 Final meetings, recruitment of

Field researchers and MOU,

Orientation to researchers

Orientati

on,

15

Advisor/Team

Leader/Monitoring

Coordinator

3 Schools visit and data collection

and observations

Researchers

4 Mid Term Review meeting with Field researchers

29th Advisor/Monitoring Coordinator

5 Continued Schools visit and data collection and observations

Researchers

6 Random School visits monitoring

team

Advisor/Team

Leader/Monitoring Coordinator

7 Data entry process Researchers

8 Submit entered data to Loo Niva 8-12Feb Researchers

9 Compile the collected data 9,10,11 Monitoring Coordinator

10 Write - up Workshop 27-Feb Advisor/Team


11 Final report preparations Advisor/Monitoring Coordinator/Research

ers

12 Final report submission to Finn

Church Aid

March Advisor/Team


13 Financial Reports and settlements

to FCA

March Finance Officer



f

Appendix 3: List of Schools under Monitoring Mission

List of schools in Bhaktapur District

S.N School Name Address

1 Shree Padma H.S.S. Bhaktapur N.P

2 Saradha H.S.S. Bhaktapur N.P

3 Vidhyarthi Nikitan H.S.S. Bhaktapur N.P

4 Bhim Adarsha L.S.S. Bhaktapur N.P

5 Gyan Vijaya L.S.S. Bhaktapur N.P

6 Janasewa Primary School Bhaktapur N.P

7 Samaj Sudhar S.S Bhaktapur N.P

8 Hansha Bahini Primary Bhaktapur N.P

9 Dhaula Primary Bhaktapur N.P

10 Baradayani L.S.S. Bhaktapur N.P

11 Changunarayan H.S.S. Duwakot

12 Ganesh Lakila Primary Jhaukhel

13 Adarsha H.S.S Madhyapur Thimi Np

List of schools in Lalitpur District

UCEP team list of schools in Lalitpur

1 Bagmati Primary School Thuladurlang

2 Shree Shovani Primary School Gimdi -09 Shovani

3 Kaushe Primary School Gimdi-01 Katua


1 Jana Jagriti Pra Vi Kaleswor-3

2 Baghbairav UCCHA Ma. Vi Kaleshwor-7

3 Navodaya Pra. Vi. Kaleshwor

4 Trikhande Pra V Malta

5 Balchandra Pra V Malta 1

6 Kalidevi HSS Malta

7 Gyan Jyoti Pra Vi Malta 2

8 Chandeswori Pra V Malta 3

9 Shree Nagdevi PS Malta-04, Chokharpakha

10 Shree Kalidevi PS Malta-04, Pakhakhola

11 Bhumeshwor Ni Ma V Malta4

12 Shree Furke Danda Pra V Pyutar-2

13 Shree Deurali Pra V Pyutar-3

14 Shree Khaireni Ni Ma V Pyutar-6

15 Kalidevi Higher Secondary School Pyutar-1

16 Chandeswari Secondary School Pyutar-4

17 Shree Gadhi Bhanjyang Pra V Pyutyar

18 Shree Dhandada PS Pyutyar

19 Shalghari Primary School Chandanpur-7

20 Saraswoti Secondary School Chandanpur-8

21 Kalidevi Primary School Chandapur -5




g

4 Shahumara Primary School Gimdi-01 Katua

5 Narayani Higher Secondary School Gimdi-01 Katua

6 Tnumki Primary School Gimdi-01 Katua

7 Bal Bhairav Primary School Gimdi- Shikharthu

8 Janak Secondary School Gimdi- Katuwa

9 Manakamana Primary School Gimdi - Nagtar

10 Shree Bidhyadshori Higher Secondary School Ashrang-6

11 Shree Balkalyan Primary Schoo Ashrang-7

12 Bal manorama Secondary Schoo Ashrang-3

13 Shree Navajoti Primary Schoo Ashrang-5

14 Shree Om Shanti Primary School Ashrang-4

15 Shree Bhagabati Primary School Ashrang-1

16 Mahendra Secondary School Thuladurlang-4

17 Gunrang Lower Secondary School Thuladurlang-7

18 Jwalladevi Primary School Thuladurlang-6

List of schools in Kathmandu District


1 Dhumrabarahi SS Dhumbarahi

2 Sarada HSS Tillganga

3 Vijaya Symarak HSS Dilli bazaar, Kathmandu

4 Sidheshor Secondary School Santinagar

5 Mahankal SS Mahaboudha, Ktm

6 Halchowk SS Halchok Kathmandu

7 Gitamata HSS Dallu Kathmandu

8 Jan Sudhar LSS, Swoyambhu Kathmandu

9 Nepal Yubak Ma Paknajol

10 Shitala HSS Balaju kathmandu

11 Bal Bikash SS Balaju kathmandu

12 Tarun SS Balaju Kathmandu

13 Buddhajyoti Bal Uddhyan Balaju

14 Bishwoniketan HSS Tripureshwor

15 Tej Vinayek HSS Gothatar

16 Jana Jagriti Gyan Rasmi MV Balaju kathmandu

17 Padma Kanya Uchha MaVI Dilli Bazzar

18 Pamodaya Ucha Mavi Putalisadak, Kathmandu

19 Ratna rajya U Ma V Mid baneswor

20 Nandi MA V Naxal

21 Sahid Shukra Ma V Bagbazaar, Kathmandu



h

Appendix 4: Survey Questionnaire, Formats and Guidelines

Finn Church Aid (Loo-Niva and UCEP)

Education in Emergency Support

Monitoring Mission

Monitoring Format A: General Information of School

(For each School, look SIP, Flash Report, Social Audit and Discuss with HT)

Name of Researcher: Date of Visit:

1. Name and Address of School:

2. Name of HT and contact address:

3. Teacher and student information of 2072: School Code:

Category ECED Primary LS S SS (9-10) HSS (+2)

Year of Approval Total

Govt Teacher Quota

All types

Teacher

Male

Female

Today(M/F)

Student Boys

Girls

Today(M/F)

CwD Boys

Girls

Today(M/F)

4. Formation of Committee and their meetings:

Category of Committee Child

clubs

SMC PTA CPC EiE/DRR Staff

Formation

Members Male

Female

Total

Meetings No of in 2071

No of in 2072

X presence

5. Does school do the following? If yes when it was done (Current SIP:

Category A/SIP Annual

Calendar

Social

Audit

Final

Audit

Parents

day

Result Out

Date of Event in 2070



6. Student Enrolment, Promotion and Average Mark in the last 2 years:

Year Enrolled Retained Promoted High Low Average



i

Flash II 2070 PS

LSS

Flash II 2071 PS

LSS

7. Observation of Supply of Materials, Availability and Uses (Numbers/Dates)

Category Supplied Available In-Use Remarks

Temporary Learning Spaces No:

Room:

Semi-permanent Latrines

Hand-washing facilities

Hygiene Kits

Safe drinking water facilities (water

filter)

ECD Kit Boxes

School in Boxes

Recreational Kits

Book Bags

If any………………………….

8. Training and Orientation and its Application in School

Category Sex Trained Available In-Use Remarks

Education in Emergency ToT (2

day)

M

F

Basic Training to Teachers

(2day for 2 teacher/school)

M

F

Orientation on use of education

materials

M

F

Psychosocial Care M/F

If any………………………….

9. Please write what is the current status of above supplies and infrastructures:

a) Temporary Learning Spaces

b) Hand-washing facilities

c) Hygiene Kits

d) Safe drinking water facilities (water filter)

e) ECD Kit Boxes

f) School in Boxes

g) Recreational Kits

h) Book Bags



j

Monitoring Format B: Clients Satisfaction on Supplies


(Please fill out one set of this form with four students, three teachers and three parents in each school separately)


2. Name of respondents (category): Parents or Teachers or Students

a. Ms. c. Mr.

b. Ms. d. Mr.

3. Availability, Appropriate and Usefulness of Temporary Learning Space (TLS): (1-5 Strongly

Disagree, Disagree, Neither agree nor disagree, Agree and Strongly Agree)

Statements 1 2 3 4 5

TLS was set up on time just after the EQ (within 45 days)

Raw materials and suppliers for TLS were of good quality

TLS (numbers and rooms) was quite enough for our need

TLS was of good quality and comfortable

TLS is safe and supportive for us (students and teachers)

Design and installation of TLS was done with high standards

Set up, repairs and protection of TLS was taught to us

TLS was appropriate and useful for continuing education

TLS has kept health and sanitation intact – no cold/no dust

TLS is useable for entire class and for all subjects

TLS is very useful for ECA and Psychosocial care

TLS is not appropriate for regular class

TLS was useful and durable only for one to two months

Students are fully satisfied with TLS and its services

4. Availability, Appropriate and Usefulness of Semi-permanent Latrines (SPL): (1-5 Strongly Disagree,

Disagree, Neither agree nor disagree, Agree and Strongly Agree)


SPL was set up on time just after the EQ (within 45 days)

Raw materials and suppliers for SPL were of good quality

SPL was installed separately for teachers and students

SPL was installed separately for both boys and girls

SPL has enough water and good management of septic tank

SPL is safe, clean and appropriate for regular use



k

Design and installation of SPL was done with high standards

Set up, repairs and protection of SPL was taught to school

SPL has kept health and sanitation intact – no germs/dust

SPL is useful for short period of time (1-3 months)

SPL is used regularly by students without hesitation

SPL was not needed for school

Students are fully satisfied with SPL and its uses

5. Availability, Appropriate and Usefulness of Hand Washing Facilities (HWF) with water tank and

hygiene kits: (1-5 Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neither agree nor disagree, Agree and Strongly Agree)


HWF was set up on time just after the EQ (within 45 days)

Ram materials and suppliers for HWF were of good quality

HWF was installed in appropriate place close to SPL

HWF was installed separately for both boys and girls

HWF is available and appropriate for all ages and grades

HWF has enough water and soap facilities regularly

HWF is safe, clean and appropriate for regular use

Set up, repairs and protection of HWF was taught to school

HWF has kept health and sanitation intact –dirty water uses

HWF was not needed in this school

HWF is properly used in school

Students are fully satisfied with HWF in schools

6. General Observations while doing group interview and grading of their satisfaction

a) Who spoke and who did not speak?

b) How did they grade? Who dominated the grading?

c) Level of information and understanding?

d) Level of their engagement and participation?

e) Was it really the needs of the school or push by organization?

f) Level of usefulness and applicability



l

Monitoring Format C: Training and its Applications (Set A)

(Four forms for each team)



2. Name of the Respondent: Sex Age:

3. Relevancy, Appropriate and Usefulness of EiE ToT: (1-5 Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neither agree

nor disagree, Agree and Strongly Agree) (only selected 4 trained RPs/SSs (2 female) from project in

each team)


EiE ToT training was very relevant and practical

Trainers of the EiE ToT were competent and knowledgeable

EiE ToT was useful and appropriate for our need

EiE ToT contents and learning materials were sufficient

EiE ToT delivery and discussion were active and learnable

EiE ToT made us competent to run similar training

NCED Training Handbook for Basic Training is very useful

EiE ToT was timely and with enough time/duration

Trainees are fully satisfied with EiE ToT

There was good communication between DEO and Organizer

Observation (if any)

Monitoring Format C: Training and its Applications (set B)

(Ten forms for each team)



2. Name of the Respondent: Sex Age:

3. Relevancy, Appropriate and Usefulness of EiE Basic Training (Teachers): (1-5 Strongly Disagree,

Disagree, Neither agree nor disagree, Agree and Strongly Agree) (only selected 10 trained teachers (5

female) from project in each team)


Selection of participants was fair and transparent

Basic training was very relevant and practical for classroom

Trainers of the training were competent and knowledgeable

Training contents and learning materials were sufficient

Training delivery and discussion were active and learnable

Training made us competent to apply in our class/students

Hand-on-support was available on our request in school

The training was timely with enough time/duration for topics

Teachers are fully satisfied with the overall quality of training

There was good coordination between School, DEO and FCA



m

Trainers made the training relevant to our context/need

Trained teachers shared contents of the trainings to other teachers, SMCs

and students

Observation (if any):



n

Monitoring Format D: Qualitative Data (Set A)

(Please do this in predefined Good, Moderate and Poor School)



Key Guidelines for FGD with Teachers

(Please do at least three FGDs with teachers (all of a school) in each team)

a) Introduction:

1. Who did come first in your school after the EQ? What did they do? When the school was reopen?

2. What did you do the first 15 days of school reopening? What did you discuss? How were children

during that time?

b) Facilities and supplies:

3. What facilities and supplies did your school receive from FCA or Loo-Niva or UCEP or WVAF?

Category When How Many Where are they? Accessibility?

Temporary Learning Spaces

Semi-permanent Latrines

Hand-washing facilities

ECD Kit Boxes

Hygiene Kits

Clean Drinking water facilities

School in Boxes

Recreational Kits

Book Bag

If any………………………….

4. What types of teaching learning materials did you receive from FCA or Loo-Niva or UCEP or

WVAF?

5. How often do children use those materials and for what purpose? Are they useful for children with

disability?

6. Which ones are useful and appropriate? Why? How are you using them?

7. Which materials are irrelevant and are not in use? If so why?

8. Durability of the educational materials? Alternatives after they are damaged/finished/used up?

c) Training and workshops

1. What types of trainings that your school received? Who were organizers?

2. How were these trainings? Contents, methods, materials and trainers? Are you satisfied with them?



o

3. Which ones are very effective and relevant to you in your classroom teaching? Why?

4. Have you shared training materials and methods with other teachers? Did you develop any new

learning materials locally?

5. Did teachers receive enough support from SMC, PTA and HT including RP on their issues and needs

of classroom practices?

6. What would you like to suggest making these training more effective and relevant in future? Why?

d) Engagement and Participation

1. How schools, teachers and participants for supplies and training were selected? Was it your interest

and need?

2. Who were engaged at the beginning of preparing infrastructure and supplies for schools? Parents?

Teachers? Students? Head Teacher?

3. Who will do repair, maintenance, cleaning and replacement of materials and supplies? How do you

do?

4. Are you organizing the regular meeting of teachers, SMC, PTA and also interaction with all

stakeholders? Why and how often do you do? Do you know what support was from where?

5. How do you consult with students about their wellbeing, interest and issues? How do you address

them?

6. Does your school have SIP, Education Calendar and Emergency Response Plan? Who were engaged

in its preparation? How do you do follow up and monitoring of its implementation?

e) Any suggestions for future programmes:

1. What are their future needs and requirements?

2. Are they focusing on children‘s well-being and learning?



p

Monitoring Format D: Qualitative Data (Set B)




Key Guidelines for FGD with Students

(Please do at least three FGDs with 6-10 students of different grades in each team)

a) Introduction:

1. How did you feel when EQ occur? Where were you? What did you do first?

2. How did you get information about school opening? How did you feel coming on the first day? How

did you teachers behave?

3. What did you do the first 15 days of school reopening in your class? What did you discuss? How

were teachers during that time?


1. What facilities and supplies did your school receive after the EQ? Do you know who supplied to your

school?

2. What types of teaching learning materials your teachers used in your classroom?

3. Are these materials available and accessible to you? Do all grades children use them? How about

girls and children with disability?

4. Which ones are useful and appropriate? Why? How are you using them?


1. Are your teachers teaching differently in your class after the HQ? Why? How are they doing

differently?

2. Which materials are relevant and useful to you and your learning?

3. What new information and skills did you receive in your school outside the textbook?

4. Did you students receive enough support from parents and teachers on your difficulties and

problems? How do teachers maintain discipline?

5. Do you have child club in your school? What did they do after the EQ? Did you take part in any

social work?



q

6. What would you like to suggest making school opening after the EQ?


1. Were materials, infrastructures and suppliers were of your interest and need? Were you asked for

this?

2. Who were engaged at the beginning of preparing infrastructure and supplies for schools? Parents?

Teachers? Students? Head Teacher?


do?

4. Are you participating in the regular meeting in school? When and on what topic?

5. How do you consult with your teachers and parents when you have difficulties and problems in

school and in your learning?

6. Does your school has SIP, Education Calendar and Emergency Response Plan? Who were engaged in

its preparation? Do children take part on any disaster related work and drill?

e) Any suggestions for future programmes:


2. Are they focusing on their well-being and learning?



r

Monitoring Mission

Monitoring Format D: Qualitative Data (Set C)




Key Guidelines for FGD with Parents/SMC and PTA

(Please do at least three FGDs with 6-10 parents/SMC/PTA in each team)

a) Introduction:

1. How did you feel when EQ occur? Where were you? What did you do first with your family and also

in school?

2. How did you decide about school opening? Were you welcoming the students in school on the first

day? How did teachers and students behave?

3. What did you do the first 15 days of school reopening in your school? What did you discuss? How

were teachers during that time?


1. What facilities and supplies did your school receive after the EQ? Do you know who supplied to your

school?

2. Did you arrange any extra and new materials for schools and classrooms?? Do all grades children and

teachers use them?

3. How do you repair and maintain all infrastructures and supplies provided by various agencies and

authorities?

4. Are these materials also for villagers? How are you managing and communicating with parents?


1. Did school organize any new training, workshop and interactions with parents and students? Were

they useful and relevant?

2. How are you dealing children after the EQ? What new information and skills did you receive from

school and agencies to work on post-EQ time?

3. Did students receive enough support from parents and teachers on their fear and difficulties? How do

you maintain discipline at home and in school?

4. Did you interact with child clubs in school? What did they do after the EQ? Did you take part in any

social work?



s


1. Who were engaged at the beginning of preparing infrastructure and supplies for schools? What was

the roles of parents and SMC?


do?

3. How do you consult with your teachers and children to address various difficulties and problems in

school?

4. Does your school has SIP, Education Calendar and Emergency Response Plan? Who were engaged in

its preparation? Do parents take part on any disaster related work and drill?

e) Any suggestions for future programs:


4. Are they focusing on their well-being and learning?



t

Monitoring Format E: Checklist for Observation

(Please do observe and write your reflection of each school)


Name of School:

Observation Points/demonstration

1. School Premises:

a. School compounds and their cleanliness

b. School Buildings (including Temporary Learning Centers/Spaces) and their accessibility,

safety, inclusivity and child friendliness

c. School Toilets (both permanent and semi-permanent): Availability, Accessibility,

Protection, Cleanliness and proper utilization

d. Water facilities (both for drinking and cleaning)

e. Sports and its utilization by each grade, sex and ability

f. Availability and use of science lab, library and e-library and computers

g. Hand washing facilities: quality, application and replacement system

h. Wall painting and fencing walls: safety, security and child friendly

i. Students action on ground during tiffin and playtimes

j. Whispering in school (walk the talk…look collaboration or bullying)

k. Others….

2. Classroom Premises

a. Sitting arrangement: furniture, allocation, mobility

b. Light, height, temperature and air

c. Blackboard and white board location and accessibility

d. Classroom decoration

e. Cleanliness and waste management (paper, dust)

f. Book corner and students write up/work

g. Classroom discipline and code of conduct

h. Teaching-learning process

i. Others….

3. Office rooms/premises

a. Office set up

b. Meeting arrangement

c. Wall painting and documents display (charts, graphs…

d. Record keeping and storage

e. Availability and accessibility of school records and files

f. Teacher room environment and walk the talk

g. Division of roles and supervision

h. Meeting minutes and quality of discussion and presence

i. Others…

4. Observation on FGD and interaction

a. Who talks and who listens? Male/female

b. Who dominates or inspires

c. Who takes leadership and why?

d. Who has information and who has not? Why?

e. Tone and body language of discussion and dialogue

f. Shyness, openness, frankness

g. Complain or complement or constructive feedback

h. Others….



u

Monitoring Format F: Checklist for DRR

(Only for five schools of Lalitpur, 3 for Loo Niva)


Name of the School:

Checklist for Monitoring the DRR Specific work

Themes Key areas of concerns Remarks

DRR - Does school has Contingency Plan? How was it prepared?

- Identification of risk factors (Y/N) Why/ why not?

- Safe Space (Y/N) Why/ why not? Any drill?

- Mitigating measures

- Location map for school and its facilities

- Integration of DRR into SUP?

Inclusion and Disability Disability Friendly Infrastructure in new construction plan? (Y/N)

Why/ why not?

- Measures for their participation

- Disability database

- Inclusion policy with disability component

- Inclusive Methods/ techniques used

Psychosocial Care and

Support

- Any assessment done by school after earthquake? (Y/N)

-Does school have a focus teacher? Are they trained?

- Database and care record

- Nature of PS problems and challenges

- PSS resource mapping

- Referral mechanism

Child Centered Learning - Use of kits provided by UNICEF

- Use of creative learning techniques

- Development of new learning materials

WASH and TLC - Use of hygiene kit

- Condition of latrines

- Maintenance of WASH facilities



v

Appendix 5: Cross Tab of SPSS Outcome

Count Lalitpur Kathmandu Bhaktapur

Count

Parents Teachers Students Parents Teachers Students Parents Teachers Students

0 0 0 0 0 7 6 6 19 0 0 0 0

Strongly

Disagree11 12 8 31 1 3 1 5 3 1 2 6

Disagree 1 5 4 10 3 1 0 4 2 7 0 9

Nither

agree nor

disagree

4 1 2 7 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0

Agree 2 2 8 12 3 2 2 7 1 0 10 11

Strongly

Agree6 6 4 16 3 2 4 9 0 4 1 5

24 26 26 76 18 14 14 46 6 12 13 31

Types of RespondentTotal



HWF was installed separately for both boys and girls * Types of Respondent Crosstabulation

HWF was

installed

separately

for both

boys and

girls

Total

Count


Strongly

Disagree1 4 4 9 3 0 1 4 1 2 0 3

Disagree 7 7 6 20 4 6 2 12 3 2 3 8

Nither

agree nor

disagree

9 13 8 30 2 2 1 5 2 0 0 2

Agree 14 7 14 35 5 7 7 19 5 4 8 17

Strongly

Agree4 6 5 15 5 5 8 18 2 5 2 9



TLS (numbers and rooms) was quite enough for our need * Types of Respondent Crosstabulation


TLS

(numbers

and

rooms)

was quite

enough for

our need

Count


Strongly

Disagree18 16 16 50 6 3 4 13 12 9 3 24

Disagree 6 8 3 17 3 6 8 17 1 0 1 2

Nither

agree nor

disagree

2 3 5 10 5 3 5 13 0 2 0 2

Agree 7 7 12 26 2 4 1 7 0 2 9 11

Strongly

Agree2 3 1 6 3 4 1 8 0 0 0 0

35 37 37 109 19 20 19 58 13 13 13 39



Set up, repairs and protection of TLS was taught to us * Types of Respondent Crosstabulation

Set up,

repairs

and

protection

of TLS

was

taught to

us

Total




w

Count


Strongly

Disagree0 0 0 0 2 1 3 6 2 0 2 4

Disagree 6 8 8 22 5 6 7 18 1 2 3 6

Nither

agree nor

disagree

4 3 4 11 2 2 0 4 1 3 1 5

Agree 9 12 16 37 5 7 6 18 6 3 6 15

Strongly

Agree16 14 9 39 5 4 3 12 3 5 1 9

35 37 37 109 19 20 19 58 13 13 13 39

Count


Strongly

Disagree0 1 0 1 2 2 0 4 1 2 0 3

Disagree 4 8 2 14 1 2 2 5 0 2 4 6

Nither

agree nor

disagree

8 8 8 24 3 3 4 10 6 4 3 13

Agree 16 15 14 45 7 8 9 24 3 3 1 7

Strongly

Agree7 5 13 25 6 5 4 15 3 2 5 10

35 37 37 109 19 20 19 58 13 13 13 39



Students

are fully

satisfied

with TLS

and its

services

Total

Students are fully satisfied with TLS and its services * Types of Respondent Crosstabulation



TLS was useful and durable only for one to two months * Types of Respondent Crosstabulation



Students

are fully

satisfied

with TLS

and its

services

Total

Count


0 0 0 1 1 4 4 4 12 0 0 0 0

Strongly

Disagree12 14 8 34 1 1 1 3 3 1 2 6

Disagree 2 1 2 5 1 0 1 2 1 1 1 3

Nither

agree nor

disagree

2 4 3 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Agree 6 4 5 15 5 2 1 8 1 1 8 10

Strongly

Agree8 11 13 32 4 7 5 16 4 7 0 11



SPL was installed separately for both boys and girls * Types of Respondent Crosstabulation

Total

SPL was

installed

separately

for both

boys and

girls

Types of Respondent



x

Count


0 0 0 0 0 7 6 6 19 0 0 0 0

Strongly

Disagree2 0 1 3 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0

Disagree 0 1 2 3 0 1 1 2 0 2 2 4

Nither

agree nor

disagree

0 3 2 5 1 0 1 2 0 2 0 2

Agree 5 12 10 27 2 2 3 7 3 3 6 12

Strongly

Agree17 10 11 38 5 5 3 13 4 5 4 13

24 26 26 76 18 14 14 46 7 12 12 31

Count


0 0 0 0 0 7 6 6 19 0 0 0 0

Strongly

Disagree1 0 1 2 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0

Disagree 0 2 0 2 1 0 1 2 0 2 0 2

Nither

agree nor

disagree

0 0 4 4 0 1 1 2 0 2 2 4

Agree 4 11 9 24 4 2 0 6 3 3 3 9

Strongly

Agree19 13 12 44 4 5 6 15 4 5 7 16

24 26 26 76 18 14 14 46 7 12 12 31





Students are fully satisfied with HWF in schools * Types of Respondent Crosstabulation

HWF is properly used in school * Types of Respondent Crosstabulation


HWF is

properly

used in

school

Total


Students

are fully

satisfied

with HWF

in schools

Total



y

Appendix 7: Case Studies

Students’ responsiveness: Uphold TLC

In Shree Aadarsha Higher Secondary School, Bhaktapur Grade 4, 5 and 6 were studying in TLC for their

regular classes. They seemed to be happy and secured staying there as most often there come aftershocks. All

the students were encouraged to maintain TLC.

During the monitoring period, the TLC of grade 4 was cleaner than others. The students said that it is all done

by the students of grade 4 themselves. Though the desk and chairs were in the floor with soil it was clean and

there were hanging few drawing papers with the students painting. One of the senior student reported that the

students of that grade take very good care of their class and when anybody tries to kick or throw dirt, they not

only complain but protest, cry too. There were also few numbers of flower vase (both of clay and plastic bags),

which they have brought from their own. They have also dispatched plastic when they see hole in their TLC.

Students seemed to be aware and responsive towards their learning centre.

Welcome to Recreational Kits and School in Box: No need of TLCs

The environment of Gyan Bijay LSS was very clean and calm and with good decoration. Most of the school

structure is made up of wood in this school, so it was least affected by the earthquake, and was ready to be

used immediately after the earthquake after minor repair and maintenance. There is no much space for

constructing TLCs so as an immediate action it was made in an open space without compound where anyone

can come after school hours from locality. There is no security of that part. Therefore, the teachers

complained that the TLCs were being used for taking drugs during nights by some youths of locality. So, they

were planning to destroy the TLC soon.

This showed TLCs was provided as blanket approach not in a targeted approach based on priority needs and

ownership of schools. The teachers said they were not in need of any TLCs, but were thankful to all the other

box materials that were provided to the students as with the help of those the teaching learning has become

more effective.

Are we doing things rightly?

Shree Ganesh Primary school is located on the outskirts of Bhaktapur i.e. Jhaukhel. The school has new good

infrastructure which is under construction and the old one is currently doing repair works to mend the

damages of earthquake on its main building which is few minute walk from the existing school premise. The

TLC was built where two halls are under construction, out of which one is in use without proper finishing.

Two TLCs with four rooms were built just between the two halls by which the students lost their playground, a

very few space was left for playground.

We asked the HT and other teachers why they did not use the hall which was already semi constructed and

only partition was needed. HT said, “I had talked about it but they said that it is out of their project and they

cannot support like that. So we had no option rather than accepting whatever is given to us in any form.”

There would have been better utilization of fund and sustainable building if the money used to construct TLC

was used for that under constructed building.

The brick kilns kids: Some children are not equivalent to others

The fourth graders brothers Prakash Manandhar and Dipak Manandhar lives in Jhyauli (temporary houses

where the families of seasonal migrants at the brick kilns of Bhaktapur live),

Every year, their family lives at the brick kiln for about six months in the winter and they attain school as

seasonal students. They go back to Ramechhap to get enrolled in the next grade before coming back to the

brick kiln for another six months in the winter.

After the earthquake could not attend classes this year back home, as they had no TLCs and classes, “we are

finding it very difficult to catch up with all subjects here,” Prakash said. “I don’t think I will pass to the next

grade this year.”On the other hand, Dipak is worried about something else. According to him, their Jhyauli is

too cold and he lacks warm clothes. “I can see that all the other students have received clothes, dresses,

shoes, books and bags,” he said. “But we have not got anything at all. It was pretty bad back home this year.



z

Things are not better even here.” This shows that seasonal students are more affected by earthquake and there

is less concern and use of relief by the school as some get many where some with empty hand.

Teacher –Students Rapport after the Devastating Earthquake among Schools of Lalitpur

“I don’t want to go back to my cracked house, I wish I could stay in this TLC more with my teacher who

makes me laugh, sing and dance” says Kumar Bika class 8 student along with his classmates at Shree Deurali

Lower Secondary School , Pyutar. Kumar and few wanted to stay at his school even after class were over for

the day. The teacher said that the recreational activities and teachers openness behavior and sharing their

experiences with their friends and teachers. This was something new for the students here.

Kumar’s daily life was full of hard work and struggle. He wake up early, has to walk done Besi for 2 hours to

fetch grass for 3 goats and 2 buffalos. Sometimes it would be late, and can’t make it to school on time.

However he loved to study. After the devastating earthquake, they were living in the cracked mud house which

was not safe at all to live. His family got some steel roofs as relief material for reconstruction but they did not

have enough space to build one more house. They had been living in that wreckage with a constant fear for the

last 9 months. This was the reason he wanted to stay in TLC at his school. Perhaps, a lot of students like

Kumar have a wrecked house in Kaleshwor, Pyutar, Malta and Chandanpur of Lalitpur.

More need of attention and care

Mr Sriram (name changed) from Ashrang studying in grade 9 don’t like to come school. His both parents are

daily wage earner. His father comes home late drunk mother is busy with household works when come back to

house. Post-earthquake family is in hardship with basic necessities and he started to become irregular in

class. He has started having conflicts with his teachers and his brother and some friends. He has also started

arriving home late and hanging with dropouts and youths from locality. He doesn’t have motivation to come

school. The teachers also don’t understand him. There are few cases which are having trouble with the

adolescent like him and more care and counseling need.

TLC at the top of the hill far away

It takes 6 -8 hours off road vehicle journey to reach Gimdi VDC of Lalitpur. Shree Sahumara Primary School

named after the place Shahumara again takes 6 hours steep uphill downhill walk from Gimdi motor road.One

TLC with two rooms has been built and was really beneficial but now not more usable. SPL has been used in

the school but HWF has been not used properly as inadequate supply of water. Water Filter, ECD and

recreational kit, school in box, books bags has been used. It is wonderful to see all the material availability

and adaptability and so meaningful at the top of hill so isolated. The flash reports, SMC formation, SIP,

school cleanliness however was not in good condition. Students and teachers walk from far and are difficult to

be on time and regularity but it amazes how the services are much needed and harder work done f place like

this. They too were amazed at us for reaching out as they rarely have visits and outsiders.

Father and Daughter openness

A father after training has been much friendly with the daughters and their need. The girl children use to be

absent frequently during the menstruation time. After Parent got training, “I myself arranged and managed

those pads. I have opened up much and encourage them to tell everything about their problem and not to hide

me and teachers at school.” There has been good bonding like never before.

'TLC and Learning Materials bring hopes

Halchowk Secondary School was running in only Temporary Learning Center (TLC) as the main building

which was declared as unsafe due to the devastating earthquake. There was no enough and comfortable

places for the students to study. The learning environment was less conducive. The dusty flour and unrepaired

furniture were likely to threatening the health safety of children and TLC. The head teacher was really

anxious and expressed, "It is difficult to manage school building, the classes and other infrastructure

including learning materials as the summer and rainy season is approaching near." He further noted, "I have

no alternative with me other than closing the school at this situation. If we are not provided alternative

management of infrastructure development of school



aa

They felt that the materials provided such as TLC, Semi-Permanent latrine, Hand-Washing facilities, ECED

Kit boxes, Hygiene Kits, Clean Drinking Water Facilities, Recreational Kits, Book Bags were useful but

without proper infrastructure it can’t be maintained. They felt that these training were provided a bit late and

the delivery of training was not that effective. It should be provided immediately after the EQ not later period.

The trainer should be proficient and training methods should be more participatory.

Students expressed that they got learning materials including ECD kits and recreational kits. According to one

of the students, "We conducted recreational activities such as quiz contest, singing and dancing for only one

week and we started our course book learning.

TLC multipurpose use

The Teachers of Shitala Higher Secondary School Balaju were proud of themselves as they have maintained

conducive learning environment in TLC and well managed. They have painted the walls of TLC made up of

bamboo split canes and were safe. Well-managed furniture and separate rooms were good for learning. A

teacher said, "We conducted activities that were aimed at healing the EQ trauma on students. Playing, singing

and dancing among other recreational activities were conducted in an effort of brining the mental states of the

children to normalcy. We also conducted counseling for the students".

The TLC, Semi-permanent latrine, Hand-Washing facilities, ECED Kit boxes, Hygiene Kits, Clean Drinking

Water Facilities, Recreational Kits, and Book Bags have been used and are stationed near the school and

have easy access of the students. We understood that they used for the purpose they were intended to it was

very insufficient. The teachers noted that the water filter was the most used one and effective for them.

Teachers played the proactive role while constructing TLC and the students were mobilized to assist the

construction work. However, the parents were not participated for constructing TLC as they had to engage for

their livelihoods engaging for their labor works. The School Management Committee (SMC) was active and

hence supportive to school management.



bb

Appendix 8: People Met and Interacted SN Name of Participants Name of Schools Designation

1. Shyam Prasad Adhikari Shree Jawala Devi P.S Head teacher

2 Gita, Surya Bhadhur, Sardha and Lal Bahadhur Shree Jawala Devi P.S Parents

3 Rashmita Timalsina, Bimala Basnet, Kungsang Thokar,

Sunil Thokar

Shree Jawala Devi P.S Students

4 Urmila Jamakatel, Bhola Prasad Acharya Shree Jawala Devi P.S Teachers

5 Sushila Ghimire, Bhola Prasad Acharya Shree Jawala Devi P.S Teachers

6 Kalpana Mahat(Ghimire) Shree Sovani P.S Head Teachers

7 Kalpana Mahat(Ghimire), Khum kumari Baral Ghimire,

Jaya Bahadur Bhulum

Shree Sovani P.S Teachers

8 Jaya Bahadur Bhulum Shree Sovani P.S Teachers

9 Khum kumari Baral Ghimire Shree Sovani P.S Teachers

10 Sarmila Bhulun, Bina Bhulun, Anish Golle, Aite Nyasur,

Bir Bahadur Bhulun

Shree Sovani P.S Parents

11 Nisa Timalsina, Bishal Singtan, Rupa Ghimire, Sumna

Singtan

Shree Sovani P.S Students

12 Rajan Kumar Basnet Thumki P.S Head Teachers

13 Kabita Basnet, Rasmita Timilsina, Dev Raj Timilsina,

Sushant Nembang

Thumki P.S Students

14 Rajan Kumar Basnet, Pabitra Bajagain Dulal Thumki P.S Teachers

15 Menuka Timilsina, Ambika Timilsina, Goma Basnet Thumki P.S Parents

16 Mahesh Shah Shree Bagmati P.S Head Teachers

17 Sun Kumar Thing, Sarita Rumba, Manoj Syantang, Anil

Moktan

Shree Bagmati P.S Students

18 Tul Bahadur Palchrin Shree Bagmati P.S Parents

19 Sita Syangtan, Mahesh Shah Shree Bagmati P.S Teachers

20 Anish Neupane Shree Bagmati P.S RP

21 Ramji Dahal OM Shanti P.S Head Teachers

22 Indra Kumar Jimma, Ramji Dahal, Ramila Syangtan OM Shanti P.S Teachers

23 Indra Kumar Jimma, Ramji Dahal OM Shanti P.S Teachers

24 Ishwori Moktan, Subash Lo, Manish Jimma, Subash

Jimma

OM Shanti P.S Students

25 Bir Bahadur Jimma, Bhakta Bdr Moktan, Chandra Bdr

Moktan

OM Shanti P.S Parents

26 Lal Bahadur Bhumjun Shree Balkayan P.S Head Teachers

27 Anita Pokhrel, Bibek Bomjan, Sujana Bomjan, Suman

Bomjan

Shree Balkayan P.S Students

28 Youg Bahadur Bumjun, Sangli Maya Dhintol Shree Balkayan P.S Parents

29 Laxmi Ghising, Ram Lal Ghising, Lal Bahadur Bhomjan Shree Balkayan P.S Teachers

30 Laxmi Ghising, Lal Bahadur Bhomjan Shree Balkayan P.S Teachers

31 Agni Kumar Timilsina Shree Bhagwati P.S Head Teachers

32 Kamala Ghimire, Bharat Sapkota, Mithumaya Moktan Shree Bhagwati P.S Parents

33 Sangita Bhulon, Raj Kumar Moktan, Santalal Neagi Shree Bhagwati P.S Students

34 Suntali Ghimire Dahal, Agni Kumar Timalsina, Bishnu

Maya Magar MOktan, Shiva Prasad Dhimal

Shree Bhagwati P.S Teachers

35 Agni Kumar Timalsina Shree Bhagwati P.S Teacher

36 Thala Prasad Timilsina Shree Vidyadishwori H.S.S Head Teachers

37 Sarita Ghimire, Bishwaram Sanjel, Raju Prasad

Timalsina

Shree Vidyadishwori H.S.S Teachers

38 Bishwaram Sanjel, Raju Prasad Timalsina Shree Vidyadishwori H.S.S Teachers

39 Sushila Dahal, Gyan Prasad Sanjel Shree Vidyadishwori H.S.S Parents

40 Karuna Dahal, Binod Sangel, Sampoda Ghimire, Sumsa

Sangel

Shree Vidyadishwori H.S.S Students



cc

41 Aashita Tamang, Rabin Rai, Sanu Rai, Pooja Shahi Buddha Jyoti Bal Udhyan Students

42 Sita Karki, Mikky Dahal, Sasikala Wagle Buddha Jyoti Bal Udhyan Teachers

43 Renu Karki Buddha Jyoti Bal Udhyan RP

44 Sudip Khanal Buddha Jyoti Bal Udhyan RP

45 Ram Bahadur Singtan Shree Sahumara P.S Head Teacher

46 Lal Bdr Bhomjan, Tara Lama, Kail Singh, Anil Lama Shree Sahumara P.S Parents

47 Kushma Lo, Ram Bdr Singtan Shree Sahumara P.S Teachers

48 Minu Bhulul, Biraj Bhomjan, Anusha Lo, Sharmila

Thakar

Shree Sahumara P.S Students

49 Rudra Prasad Sapkota Shree Sahumara P.S RP

50 Gokarna Bdr Phuyal Shree Janak S.S Head Teacher

51 Shardha Aryal, Milan Kumar Sardar, Govinda Prasad

Ghimire

Shree Janak S.S Teachers

52 Saraswoti Dhadari, Anjana Sapkota, Raju Sapkota Shree Janak S.S Parents

53 Sarita Sanja, Sardha Dahal, Naran Rana, Krishna Rana

Magar

Shree Janak S.S Students

54 Gokarna Bdr Phuyal Shree Janak S.S RP

55 Jay Shankar Mandal Shree Narayani H.S.S Head Teachers

56 Ashmita Dahal, Devraj Timilsina, Bishal Magar, Deepak

Dulal

Shree Narayani H.S.S Students

57 Bhimsen Ghimire, Pashupati Gyami Magar, Amir K.

Thapa

Shree Narayani H.S.S Teachers

58 Bhimsen Ghimire Shree Narayani H.S.S RP

59 Krishna Prasad Timalsina Shree Manakamana P.S Head Teachers

60 Sabitri Dhodari, kabita Dhodari, Urmila Magar Shree Manakamana P.S Parents

61 Sabina Jarga Magar, Jiban Gollee, Anil Lopchan Shree Manakamana P.S Students

62 Krisha Prasad Timalsina, Raj Kumar Rana Shree Manakamana P.S Teachers

63 Raj Kumar Rana Shree Manakamana P.S RP

64 Rashimi Ali Shree Manakamana P.S RP

65 Ram Prasad Ghimire Shree Pancha Mahendra H.S.S Head Teacher

66 Renuka Sunuwar, Nabin Baskota, Ram Krishna Acharya,

Ram Prasad Ghimire

Shree Pancha Mahendra H.S.S Teachers

67 Ram Prasad Ghimire Shree Pancha Mahendra H.S.S RP

68 Asmita Dhakal, Ashis Chaudhary, Prasun Acharya Shree Pancha Mahendra H.S.S Students

69 Deepa Ghimire, Amkunda Acharya, Saraswoti Basnet,

Sarala Acharya

Shree Pancha Mahendra H.S.S Parents

70 Sita Kumari Poudel Jana Sudhan L.S.S Head Teacher

71 Prerana Tamang, Simson Lama, Muna Shrestha, Aswin

Adhikari

Jana Sudhan L.S.S Students

72 Durga Adhikari, Dipak Raj Kattel Jana Sudhan L.S.S Teachers

73 Ganga Lama, Durga Adhikari Jana Sudhan L.S.S RP

74 Rupesh Syangtan Shree Bal Bhairav P.S Head Teacher

75 Amrita Bal, Nirajan YOngan, Ranjana Santang, Bijaya

Negi

Shree Bal Bhairav P.S Students

76 Rupesh Syangtan, Bhim Bdr Ghalan Shree Bal Bhairav P.S Teachers

77 Bhim Prasad Ghimire Shree Navajoti P.S Head Teacher

78 Sakuntala Ghimire, Jete Lo, Prem Bdr Neagi Shree Navajoti P.S Parents

79 Geeta Neagi, Deepesh Lo, Ram Ghimire Shree Navajoti P.S Students

80 Indira Ghimire, Bhim Prasad Ghimire, Indrawati Ghimire Shree Navajoti P.S Teachers

81 Bhim Prasad Ghimire, Indrawati Ghimire Shree Navajoti P.S RP

82 Bidur Dahal Shree Gumrang L.S.S Head Teacher

83 Karuna Sunwar, Biwash Dulal, Sangita Gole, Kushal

Dulal

Shree Gumrang L.S.S Students

84 Minuka Dulal, Bhim Prasad Dulal, Sabitri Bhagain, Shree Gumrang L.S.S Teachers



dd

Machendranath Dulal

85 Pabitra Timalsina, Binod Ghimire Shree Gumrang L.S.S RP

86 Binita Dahal, Raman Banjora, Ashok Dulal Shree Gumrang L.S.S Parents

87 Raj Kumar Timilsina Bal Manoroma L.S Head Teacher

88 Bhoj Kumari Sanjel, Asmita Dulal, Sarosati Sanjel Bal Manoroma L.S Parents

89 Goma Adhikari, Narayan Prasad Timilsina Bal Manoroma L.S Teachers

90 Meena Ghimire, Rabin Dulal, Sujata Sanjel, Gyanae

Gautam

Bal Manoroma L.S Students

91 Menuka Timilsina, Narayan Timilsina Bal Manoroma L.S RP

92 Biman Singh Nyasur Shree Kause P.S Head Teacher

93 Thuii Maya Ghwan, Sunil Thokar, Nirmala Timalsina Shree Kause P.S Parents

94 Deuaki Bajgain, Shreejana Dulal Shree Kause P.S Teachers

95 Sukra Bdr Thokar, Sunil Thokar Shree Kause P.S RP

96 Susmita Thokar, Anusha Golle, Rajin Thokar, Ginesh

Thokar, Samundra Timalsina

Shree Kause P.S Students



ee



ff

Appendix 9: Photo Gallery

Date post:	21-May-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	5 times
Download:	0 times

FCA Monitoring Report Education in Emergency (EiE) Project in Nepal, FCA iii Acknowledgement | EiE...

Documents