REVIEW OF THE 2007 EDUCATION SECTOR EARLY CHILDHOOD
DEVELOPMENT POLICY AND OPERATIONAL STANDARDS
Project Milestone 2 Report
Report on the existing ECE models and implementation status of the
ECD policy provisions
Submitted to the Ministry of Education and Sports
By Cambridge Education
August 2017
Page 1 of 66
Contents
Contents ...................................................................................................................................... 1
List of Acronyms .......................................................................................................................... 1
Nomenclature .............................................................................................................................. 2
The Problem Statement ............................................................................................................... 3
The Project Objectives ................................................................................................................. 3
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... 4
Section 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................. 8
Section 2: Analysis and Findings ................................................................................................. 14
Section 3: The Research Methodology for Data Collection and Management ............................... 48
Section 4: Reflections on the Status of Implementation of the 2007 Policy and Opportunities for
the Way Ahead .......................................................................................................................... 56
List of Attachments – Specialist Reports ..................................................................................... 61
List of Training and Research Tools ............................................................................................. 61
Endnotes ................................................................................................................................... 63
List of Acronyms
CAO Chief Administrative Officer (head of a district)
CCCP Community Childcare Programme
CCT Centre Coordinating Tutor
CE Cambridge Education (the implementing agency)
CMC Centre Management Committee
CSO Civil Society Organisation
DEO District Education Officer
DES Department for Education Standards
DHS Demographic and Health Survey
DIS/SI District Inspector of Schools
ECCE Early Childhood Care and Education
ECD Early Childhood Development
ECE Early Childhood Education
FBO Faith-based Organisation
FP ECD Focal Point
GPE Global Partnership for Education
LABE Literacy and Basic Education (a NGO working with home-based centre groups)
MoES Ministry of Education and Sports
MoGLSD Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development
NDP National Development Plan
NGO Non-government organisation
NIECD National Integrated Early Childhood Education Policy
QF & AS Qualifications Framework and Accreditation System
RTI Research Triangle Institute
SDG Sustainable Development Goal
ToR Terms of Reference
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation
UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund
UPE Universal Primary Education
Page 2 of 66
Nomenclature
Throughout this Report, Cambridge Education uses both the term Early Childhood Development (ECD)
and Early Childhood Care and Education (ECCE). ECD is prominent in reference either to international and
regional practice (where services are often integrated across sectors) and also in reference to the current
context in Uganda where ‘ECD Centres’ have been set up in response to the 2007 Policy. ECCE is referenced
both in line with the proposed scope of the revised policy (i.e. defining the future scope of Ministry of
Education and Sports interventions), as well as to focus the attention on early learning, early years
stimulation and education, and educational elements of packages for pregnant mothers, future mothers,
parents and communities.
The decision to use the acronym ‘ECCE’ was determined both by the use of this term in the Project ToR,
and also as a result of the inception phase discussions, where the MoES and other partners clarified that
the policy must address the needs of children from conception to the age of 8. As a result of this
determination, a broader focus on care and education is more appropriate than a restricted focus on
education alone (i.e. encompassing ECCE, not just ECE). While the policy recommendations will aim to be
complementary to the role of other government ministries and to align with the National Integrated ECD
Policy, it is not the intention of this process to provide policy and standards in relation to early childhood
health, social development, etc. These are clearly the responsibilities of the other relevant line Ministries.
Page 3 of 66
The Problem Statement
− An ECCE policy aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals’ framework should enable better
quality early childhood care and education opportunities for all children up to the age of 8, in an
equitable and inclusive manner, using trained and qualified teachers.
− Uganda has an ECD policy and education law which focuses on regulation of the provision of Early
Childhood Education (ECE). Under this policy, the provision of ECE is in the hands of private providers
and NGOs. The effect of this policy and approach has been:
• limited access to ECE since not all children are given ECE;
• underage enrolment under UPE;
• an expensive ECE system;
• and poor learning outcomes for learners in later stages.
− Uganda lags behind her East African region counterparts in ECD delivery. Kenya has 53.5% access,
Tanzania has 35.5% access while Uganda only had 9.5%1 access by 2014.
− The Sustainable Development Goal (SDG 4) considers ECCE as a key aspect of broadening inclusion for
all learners in education. While the National Development Plan (NDP 11) proposes public investment
in ECCE, this proposal is in line with the 2016 NIECD Policy and Uganda Vision 2040.
− In order to address the above gaps, there is need to reconsider both the policy and legal stance on the
delivery of ECCE. This calls for the review of the 2007 ECD Policy and the Education (Pre-Primary,
Primary and Post-Primary) Act of 2008, to provide for standardised quality training and support of ECCE
teachers and caregivers, and greatly improved access.
The Project Objectives
The Ugandan Ministry of Education and Sports (MoES) under the Global Partnership for Education
(GPE) has contracted Cambridge Education (CE) to review the Ugandan education sector’s 2007 policy on
Early Childhood Development (ECD). The project has the following objectives:
1. To generate evidence to validate implementation of the current ECD policy.
2. To draft an ECCE policy and operational guidelines.
3. To draft an annualised 10-year costed action plan for the proposed ECCE policy.
4. To develop a Qualifications Framework and Accreditation System for ECD training with a costed
implementation plan.
Page 4 of 66
Executive Summary
The Stages of this Project’s Implementation
The project is divided into the following stages:
• Milestone 1 which was the inception phase when CE established working procedures with the
Ugandan MoES, agreed on a revised Problem Statement and Project Objectives, and laid out its
plans to deliver recommendations for a realistic Early Childhood Care and Education (ECCE) policy
and implementation guidelines.
• This phase, Milestone 2, has focused on the delivery of primary baseline information on the
processes and practices, provisions, models, costs and capacity in providing ECCE services across
Uganda; and on producing a detailed documentary review (secondary data) that complements the
findings of the primary research, to be able to make independent assessments on the status of
implementation of the education sector ECD Policy. This will provide a situational analysis and map
the current status of ECCE services and training in Uganda.
• Milestone 3, is the phase will commence in September, following approval of Milestone 2, and will
emphasise the process of consultation and consensus-building to conclude with recommendations
for a revised ECCE Policy, Guidelines and Qualifications Framework and Accreditation System.
• Milestones 4 and 5 will then culminate with the revised Policy package.
Navigating this Report
The report is structured as follows:
• Section 1 provides an overview of the main learnings that can be drawn from International, Regional
and Ugandan literature and experience.
• Section 2 summarises the findings of the research undertaken under this project.
• Section 3 outlines the research methodology adopted and provides comprehensive information on
the approach and limitations.
• Section 4 highlights the conclusions on the current status of the policy implementation and possible
opportunities for how the ECCE sector could develop in the future.
Page 5 of 66
Key Findings
Page 6 of 66
Page 7 of 66
Page 8 of 66
Section 1: Introduction
In this section, we draw from secondary literature sources to summarise the rationale for investing in ECCE
and to provide some examples of good global practice in ECD policy frameworks and service provision
(related to Project Objective 2), costing and financing of ECCE (related to Objective 3), and training of ECCE
practitioners (related to Objective 4).
1.1 The Rationale for Providing Good Quality Early Childhood Education Services and
Training
Early childhood development is internationally defined as the provision of health and nutrition, stimulation
and care, safety and protection, and education for children from conception to eight years old. There is
now a wealth of research to prove the importance of investing in ECD in order to:
• Ensure children’s brains develop to their full potential. Evidence shows that in the first 5 years of
their lives, the physical and cognitive development of children’s brains proceeds at a rapid
pace that will not be repeated again during their lifetime. At this absolutely crucial stage of brain
development, poor health and nutrition, inadequate care and stimulation, and a stressful
environment can lead to a trajectory of poor health and schooling outcomes for the rest of a child’s
life, and thus perpetuate the poverty cycle.2 The response must be to stimulate and encourage
cognitive development through play, interaction and non-formal, flexible and innovative learning
approaches, and not through formalised and organised settings that are traditionally associated
with formal education.
• Reduce inequality, increase wages, and ultimately, increase economic growth.3 According to
economic research, investing in ECD is ‘one of the smartest investments a country can make’4 and
the sooner the investment is made, the greater the returns.
• Improve the efficiency of primary schooling by improving school readiness. There is a close
statistical link between low levels of pre-primary participation, inefficiencies in early primary
grades and poor cognitive skills. Underage admissions in already overcrowded and poorly
resourced primary schools lead to low achievement, grade repetitions and systemic inefficiencies
and so costly wastage5.
The introduction of pre-primary classes can increase children’s readiness to learn, reduce pressure
on early grade teachers and improve children’s chances of progressing through the school
curriculum.6 A recent RTI pilot study in Uganda suggests that early entry into Primary 1 (and the
possible resulting repetition) is being used as a substitute for pre-primary education due to the
lack of pre-primary schooling options. It also indicated that children who attended pre-primary
were less likely to repeat in Primary 1.7
• Increase gender parity by freeing older siblings (most often girl children) to attend school, allow
young mothers to complete their education, and enable women to take up jobs and generate
income for their family. 8
The benefits of quality ECD extend well beyond the child alone. Societies also gain from improved school
performance, stronger economies, reducing inherent disadvantage and inequality, and a safer and more
inclusive society. 9 10 11 12 13
These benefits are recognised in global commitments, most notably through the Sustainable Development
Goals (SDGs), which state in target 4.2 that:
Page 9 of 66
By 2030 ensure that all girls and boys have access to quality early childhood development,
care and pre-primary education so that they are ready for primary education.’
The indicators for Goal 4.2 include:
• participation in organised and supported learning environments (one year before the official
primary entry age); and
• number of years of free and compulsory pre-primary education guaranteed in legal frameworks.14
However, gaps in pre-primary enrolment have continued to exist not only among, but also within countries,
especially between urban and rural areas. A key reason for such inequality is that despite the broad benefits
to society and the economy, many countries, including Uganda, have yet to expand provision of pre-
primary education and ensure its universal access.15 Furthermore, the evidence is clear that in a private
system of provision, poor children tend to receive either no ECCE provision, or at best, provision of much
poorer quality of pre-primary education than their peers.16
The 2007 ECD policy of Uganda is based on the recognition that early childhood education is part of the
basic education cycle and that all children have the right to basic education. It also indicates an
understanding of the benefits of ECCE for success in school and perpetuation of national heritage and
values for the future. However, this report will highlight the ongoing bottlenecks and shortcomings that
are ultimately hampering Uganda from realising a quality ECCE system and from also achieving the
country’s human capital development needed to support Vision 2040.17
1.2 Drawing Evidence and Experience from Good Global Practice
There are five key instances of global best practice in ECCE that emerge from the evidence we have
examined and which are relevant to Uganda. These are:
1. Policies should encourage an empowering, interdisciplinary and child-centred approach to the
provision of services (including health, nutrition, hygiene, social protection and early stimulation).18
2. The role of parents, families and other caregivers19 should be emphasised in interventions in order to
support early child development (including building on positive traditional child rearing practices and
cultural beliefs).20
3. Stakeholders must recognise that quality is essential and that poor quality ECD services will not deliver
positive child outcomes21 and may even be detrimental to the development of the child; that there is
a need for common agreed standards and in-built mechanisms for monitoring and assuring quality;
and that there is a balance to be achieved between expanding access and not sacrificing quality. As
stated in Uganda’s Constitution the aim is ‘to provide quality educational services to all children
including those under the age of compulsory schooling in the country’.
4. The sector should use and build upon existing entry points and delivery platforms (health and nutrition
services, social protection systems, community structures, primary schooling).22
5. The Government of Uganda should prioritise the most disadvantaged and hardest to reach to ensure
equity and maximum value for investment.23
Practice 1: Taking an interdisciplinary and child-centred approach
In Uganda, Kenya, Rwanda, South Africa, Malawi and Lesotho ECD policies have been adopted that
integrate services across different sectors, in recognition of the need for a wide range of services in many
diverse settings. As well as being interdisciplinary, the needs of young children change as they progress
through different developmental stages. The ECD services map in Table 1 below shows the essential
interventions across all domains of development, following an age-based continuum. The developmental
stages align with those used in the Ugandan National Development Plan life-cycle approach to human
capital development, splitting the 0 – 5 years age range into two ranges recognised internationally as
differentiated in terms of services. As recognised by the 2007 ECD Policy and the National Integrated Early
Page 10 of 66
Childhood Development (NIECD) Policy of 2016, progress in one domain is a catalyst for development in
others.24
Table 1: Essential interventions across the ECD age continuum
Pregnancy 0 – 2 years 3 – 5 years 6 – 8 years
Early
Childhood
Care &
Education
Protective and
supportive
environment
Early stimulation
(caregivers touch, talk,
listen and respond to
children)
Access to play materials
and books Access to quality
education in early
grades Group programmes
to develop social skills
Development of early
literacy and
mathematics skills
Care and support
services to address
barriers to learning
Food Security
& Nutrition
Micronutrient
supplements
Promotion of exclusive breastfeeding (0 – 6
months) and optimal feeding support thereafter Nutrition education
Prevention of low birth
weight
Growth monitoring and treatment of severe
malnutrition
School nutrition
programme
Child
Protection
Access to social services
to prevent and address
risk factors
Birth registration
Child protection services
Primary
Health Care,
Sanitation &
Environment
Early antenatal care Postnatal care
School health services
(health promotion,
screening and referrals
Prevention of mother-
to-child transmission Routine immunisation
Birth preparation Screening for developmental delay
Mental health
screening and
information to reduce
substance abuse
Integrated management of childhood illness
Access to safe water and environmental sanitation
Family
Strengthening
& Support
Maternity and family
responsibility leave Child care services for working or work-seeking caregivers
Preparation for
parenting
Parenting education
Appropriate referral and other social support (including socio-economic
strengthening)
Source: Adapted from Berry, L. (2013)25 and National Integrated ECD Policy Action Plan of Uganda (2016-
2021)
In each of the countries mentioned above, there is a lead ministry, which has overall management and
governance responsibility for the delivery of the ECD policy, a coordination structure that is replicated at
regional and local levels, and the necessary resource to realise policy goals. In terms of both service and
training provision in Uganda, there is a lack of clarity over the coordination and leadership of ECD services
as a whole and a lack of reliable information about exactly what organisations are available, who is
accessing them, and how these are monitored. Structures need to be in place to address these bottlenecks
in information and be able to support a fully integrated approach.
Practice 2: The roles of parents, families and communities
ECD policies generally recognise the primary responsibility of the family for childcare and development but
also the public sector duty to support the family in this role, especially in situations of rapid socioeconomic
change including changing family structures, urbanisation, poverty, political instability and disease.
Building on local understandings and priorities for child rearing is essential for contextually appropriate
programming and achieving the commitment needed for service take up and for engaging parents in
activities that promote their children’s development. Home environment is the strongest predictor of
educational outcomes.26 27 In Uganda’s case, there is a need for assessing the most appropriate model for
prenatal and 0-to-3 services. As the findings of this report highlight, formalised, organisational settings for
the stimulation of children under the age of 3 is expensive and not as appropriate or as effective as investing
Page 11 of 66
in the education and support of parents, families and communities to take care of their children
independently and at home.
Practice 3: Ensuring quality delivery
While increasing access to ECD has been the primary policy goal for many nations, evidence has shown that
the quality of provision is often inadequate. For example, when ECD centre programmes lack qualified
teachers, an effective curriculum, and a supportive learning environment, child learning gains may not be
realised or sustained into longer-term learning outcomes.28 29 Improving quality is a major challenge, at all
levels of education. For instance, Cambodian children who had attended state pre-schools with better-
trained staff and more educational resources performed better on developmental measures than children
in either community pre-schools or home programmes. But even where programmes might be regarded
as being of poorer quality by standards used in higher income countries, children in disadvantaged
circumstances benefitted.30
Since quality has been found to be associated with qualifications and training of teachers/caregivers, and
structured and child-appropriate curricula and instruction,31 there is a need to improve the provision of
training, support and mentoring,32 assessment and monitoring, and the currency of qualification and
accreditation standards.
Countries such as England, New Zealand and the United States (with the National Association for the
Education of Young Children - NAEYC), have developed professional standards for early childhood workers,
which are usually brief statements describing levels of experience, scales of competence, and ultimately
what the practitioner needs to know and be able to do. In these countries, while there are age-specific
areas of focus, the profile is on a continuum with other parts of the teaching profession and thus attract
similar parity of esteem for early childhood teachers.
In Latin America, many countries have adopted intensive processes of monitoring trainees’ progress once
they are practicing professionals, which is passed on to employers after a set period and then becomes
part of continuous professional development and staff planning processes. In Honduras, the education of
children from birth to six years old is generally carried out in non-formal or non-academic programmes,
where the ECCE teacher, facilitator or coordinator is a member of the community. ECCE teachers are
somewhat akin to community workers, specialising in work with rural communities. They are normally
supported by senior ECCE Professionals assigned to provide them with mentorship and to guide their
development.
In the case of Uganda, the ECD Caregiver Training Framework (2012) already contains a set of profiles for
each level of qualification. These profiles outline the desirable knowledge and application of knowledge,
but, as the findings will indicate, more needs to be done to ensure both the quality of initial training, as
well as the practice of ongoing support, monitoring and professional development, to fully realise the
potential of these profiles. In turn, until such issues are addressed, the value of qualifications, the status of
ECD practitioners in the work-place as a whole, the ability to attract high calibre candidates to the
profession, and the opportunities for building career pathways, are all hampered by the perception that
training in ECD is of poor quality.
Practice 4: Building on existing platforms
A key consideration for rapid scale up of ECCE services within contexts of competing demands on the fiscus
is the use of existing delivery platforms and institutional infrastructure for this purpose. In the context of
ECCE for older children and in line with the indicator for SDG 4.2, a Grade Zero has been introduced in a
both in in Sub-Saharan Africa and elsewhere in the world. For younger children (0 – 2 years) education of
parents in ECCE practices has been included in health sector initiatives, maximising contacts with the health
sector.
Page 12 of 66
In resource-constrained contexts work towards addressing equity issues is necessarily one of progressive
realisation towards a comprehensive national system. In some countries the growing, often incompletely
regulated, private sector leads to increasing inequities. Strategies often employed to address this involve
having equitable government policies targeting the most disadvantaged groups; more effective governance
including of the private sector; integration of ECCE initiatives within national policy alleviation strategies
and with health and social development strategies33, and building upon existing training and capacity
enhancing efforts.
Practice 5: Prioritise the hardest to reach
UNESCO data indicates that across all regions except South Asia, children in the richest households are at
least twice as likely – and in some regions three times as likely – to be enrolled in pre-primary school than
children from the poorest households.34 These disparities have implications for government policies,
pointing to the need to target ECD interventions, and specifically pre-primary schooling, to those children
most in need. Current unequal outcomes are problematic not only from a child rights and fairness
perspective, but also with regards to economic efficiency. The economic value of ECD programmes is often
highest for those least likely to receive services.
In Uganda, as in many other countries in the region and beyond, while policy is guided by the principle of
equitable access to ECD services for all children, there are significant challenges in achieving this. While
access increased significantly between 2007 (when there was a net enrolment rate of 2.5%) and 2011 (NER
23%), it was unequally distributed with 20% of children in rural areas having access, compared with 52% in
urban areas.35 International evidence indicates that in Uganda, as elsewhere, investment in ECD needs to
simultaneously address three key aspects: the information deficit, affordability and accessibility. The ECD
Policy 2007 and NIECD Policy 2016 have committed Uganda to more effective governance as a strategy and
integration of ECCE with health and welfare services. However, there is no clear targeting strategy for the
most disadvantaged, even though this group is most likely to benefit from state-driven ECD interventions 36.
1.3 Examining Expenditures on ECCE around the world
Surveys of spending37 on ECCE suggest that such expenditures are funded from a variety of sources.
Businesses, NGOs, FBOs, community organisations and the public sector all play a part in funding ECCE
programmes, although the mix of these funding sources varies across countries. In almost all countries
across the world, parents pay at least some fees, but there is considerable variation in the proportion that
this constitutes of overall cost.
The public sector can play four principal roles to varying
degrees. They are:
1. As an ECCE service provider. Providing some ECCE
Centres/infrastructure/places directly, although not
necessarily bearing the full cost of this provision: of the
twenty countries for which Levin & Schwartz (2006)38
provide consistent information, twelve have national or
local government providing 50% or more of the total
number of ECCE places. However, of these, five
countries are identified as charging fees while the
balance between public funding and fees is undefined
in five other cases. Only Cuba has no private sector
involvement in ECCE provision.
2. As an ECCE funder. Providing grants/subsidies to parents and/or providers to reduce the costs that
they would otherwise have to cover from other sources: These may take the form of universal benefits
that provide free provision for all children usually for a limited number of hours39 or they may be
Research indicates that the wealthier
countries of Western Europe and
North America have public sector
expenditures on ECCE amounting to
approximately 0.7% of GDP1 ‘while
low and lower middle-income
countries spend 0.08% of GDP on
pre-primary education’1 – nearly ten
times less as a proportion of GDP.
Page 13 of 66
targeted, as in Sweden, where parents pay fees according to a sliding scale.40 The public sector may
also use such payments to encourage behaviour to support children’s development. Of particular
interest is a randomised controlled trial in Karamoja, which showed a positive impact on cognitive
development of cash transfers linked with pre-school enrolment.41
3. As an ECCE training provider. Delivering and/or subsidising training for ECCE professionals (either
provided free or at some cost).
4. As an ECCE regulator. Developing and implementing a regulatory framework within which ECCE
providers must operate.
Page 14 of 66
Section 2: Analysis and Findings
2.1 Service Delivery Types
Key Findings on Service Delivery Types:
1. The majority of ECD Centres surveyed were nursery schools.
2. Differentiation into the five types of ECD education centres is often confused by ECD
professionals and service providers. Day care centres are not commonly available,
particularly in rural areas, which, when supported by international evidence, signifies a
greater need for educating pregnant mothers, parents and communities than for
providing formalised centres for 0-3 year olds.
3. Where ECD classes are attached to primary schools, in many cases they are not currently
conforming to MoES standards and are not appropriately structured and resourced for
young children.
The sample that informs the quantitative research in this study consisted of 143 ECD Centres spread across
ten districts. Additional respondents were interviewed at National, District and Sub-County levels, as
illustrated by Figure 2 below.
Of the 143 ECD Centres included in the sample, 69% (99) were located in rural settings and 31% (44) were
in urban settings. The ECD centres that were sampled fall under the five categories of service provision as
defined in policy, as highlighted in the Chart below where the overall sample was constituted by 39% (56)
nurseries schools/kindergartens, 24% (35) by classes attached to a primary school, 24% (34) community-
based centres, 8% (11) day care centres, and 5% (7) home-based centres.
Figure 1: Modes of Service Delivery in the Survey
Page 15 of 66
Figure 2: Stakeholders and Geography covered in the Research
Page 16 of 66
Here we briefly profile the five different types (or modes) of early childhood education delivery that are
specified in the 2007 ECD Policy.
1. Nursery Schools are the most common form of service. They fall into two categories, which
were sampled separately:
(a) 24% of the sample were those based in lower primary schools (both private and public);
and
(b) 39% of the sample were those sited independent of a primary school which were found to
be all privately owned.
Respondents indicated that parents often prefer nursery schools which are part of primary
schools as then “children mostly go with their brothers and sisters” (DEO). Co-location also
“secures transition to the lower primary in the same centre” (CAO). It is worth noting that some
of the private nursery schools also have a day care function as well. Respondents indicated that
there is a limited amount of formalised after-school care but that children often stay anyway
in school in the afternoons, especially if they are travelling home with siblings. Where nursery
schools are based in lower primary schools in the sample these were often privately run as a
private enterprise.
From the findings of this research, it appears that when nursery schools are part of a primary
school the infrastructure is often unsuitable for their age group (and would not conform to the
MoES standards) because these centres had not been designed for such young children. In
addition, there is a tendency not to differentiate the children by age, but include all the ECD
children in a single classroom. Equally, the curriculum used is often what is familiar to the
teachers – that is the P1 curriculum – which is inappropriate for pre-primary children. This was
also the case in some, but not all, of the privately run independent nursery schools.
However, this aside, when interviewed about their impressions of the various types of centres,
the Researchers said stakeholders indicated a preference for attaching ECD Centres to public
primary schools, albeit with physical autonomy. For example, in Moroto, preference is given to
primary schools as the children can access the feeding schemes and it is claimed to be easier
to transition between ECD and primary phases; in Arua, many people live a long distance from
urban centres (where most private ECD facilities are sited) and thus primary schools can
provide better access as well as existing structures upon which to develop an ECD Centre; and
in Kabale and Nakasongola respondents raised issues around the fact that young children need
to be with their older siblings, and the prohibitive cost of fees charged by private ECD Centres.
2. Community-based ECD centres are often started with the support of an NGO or FBO and over
time become community led. Most of the researchers indicated that community-based centres
tended to have more child friendly settings and provided a better-quality service than many of
the nurseries, though there were examples of poor quality community-based centres as well.
An important feature of this form of provision is that there is more engagement of parents in
the centre management than in other types, particularly through their engagement with the
Centre Management Committee structures. CMC members are selected by parents but are
self-managed. They usually consist of nine members with a Chairperson. In faith-based
supported centres, the board will regulate and support the CMC.
3. Home-based centres, which consisted of only 5% (7) of the sample, are often actually private
nursery schools based at an individual’s house and opened in response to the lack of services
and infrastructure in that community. Therefore, they are often wrongly assigned by the
authorities as home-based centres. A good example of genuine home based ECD centres in the
sample were those established and operated by the Literacy and Basic Education NGO (LABE).
LABE inspired centres worked closely with groups of women in rural areas who open their
Page 17 of 66
houses, often in turn, to house an ECD centre for their children. LABE trains the parents to be
effective.
4. Day care centres cater for the youngest children but were also uncommon in the sample (8%,
11). This is because caring for young children is more costly than older children, and thus
parents can be unwilling to pay the extra costs, and also because there are few women working
in formal jobs in rural districts. More significantly it seems that community members see little
value in ECD services for under 3s because of the more common practice of caring for very
young children in the home. As one rural-based official explained “Communities are ordinary
and not elites so they see no reason to waste money on ECD as they can take care of their own
children” (CAO). Day care centres are more common in town because “in town someone cannot
go to work with a child”.
2.2 Ownership of ECD Centre Premises
Key Findings on Status of Ownership of ECD Centres
4. A large majority, 70%, of ECD Centres sampled were under private ownership, with only
8% sited on public land and 22% in community centres.
Of the 143 centres sampled, 42% (60) were accommodated in privately owned structures, 22% (31) were
housed in community centres, 17% (24) in a faith-based organisation facility, 8% (11) in a public facility
(mostly public primary schools), and 9% (13) in a personal or family house. 2% (3) centres were classified
as ‘other’ meaning their ownership status may have been denied or unknown by the respondent. Using
the categorisation of ‘private’ used in the policy, this means that 97 of the centres would be considered to
be privately run and owned, 31 community owned, and only 11 fall into the category of public ownership.
However, those in public primary schools were often run as an income-generating project by the school or
by an individual (often a member of staff). See Figures 3, 4 and 5 below for an illustration of this split of
public and private ownership of ECD Centre premises overall, in rural areas, and in urban areas. These
charts also illustrate that there is a broadly similar pattern of provision when comparing rural and urban
areas, although proportionately rural areas are more likely to have ECD provision through community
centres and public facilities than urban areas which were more likely to have privately owned centres.
Figure 3: Public and Private Ownership of ECD Premises
Page 18 of 66
Figures 4 & 5: Types of ECD Sites in Rural and Urban Areas
This indicates that the private sector has responded to the challenge to provide ECD Centres across the ten
districts surveyed, while the basis from which to build the public sector development of ECCE capacity is
very limited. This finding is confirmed when we consider the payment for the premises of the ECD Centres,
with only 7 (5%) being paid for by government, while the remainder either do not pay for their premises
(31%, 44) or are paid for by parents, the owner, the community or an NGO – particularly faith based
organisations.
This is further confirmed by the fact that only 7 (5%) of the centres were reported to have been set up by
government, all the rest being set up by communities, NGOs or particularly individuals, with fully two thirds
(66%, 94) of the centres established by an individual or group of individuals.
Page 19 of 66
So, a large number of the ECD Centres sampled were nursery schools, most often established by individuals,
and usually sited in a privately-owned structure or community centre. Given that there are no reliable
national statistics for types and ownership of pre-schools, and given that the sample districts were selected
on a stratified randomised basis from all the districts in the country, we can extrapolate that this split
between different types is probably reasonably representative of the split nationally across Uganda.
2.3 Profile of Senior Members of Staff in ECD Centres
Key Findings on the Profile of Senior Members of Staff in ECD Centres
5. 40% of the most senior people in the 143 ECD Centres were untrained.
6. Over two thirds of Senior Staff were between 26 and 50 years old.
7. 41% of respondents were male.
Below, Figure 6 supplies an overview of the statistics gathered profiling the respondents to the survey
questionnaire delivered in the ECD Centres. The researchers were instructed to target the most senior
member present on the day of their visit to the Centre, and, as illustrated in Figure 6, the majority of these
were Head Teacher/Head Caregivers (78% of the 143 respondents). Of these respondents 116 reported
that they are responsible for the management of the centre, often alongside teaching (115), caregiving (63)
and administration (107) responsibilities.
The fact that a minority of respondents (22; 16%) were aged between 18 and 25 may indicate that in an
environment with low pay and high levels of volunteerism, young people can rise rapidly to head up such
a centre. Furthermore, given how genderised working with pre-school children is internationally, it is
perhaps surprising that 58 (41%) of the respondents were male. This runs counter to views expressed by
respondents in the universities who train ECD teachers who asserted that the field is dominated by women
as it is under-paid and job security is generally poor. However, the relatively high proportion of males
holding these positions in the centres may relate to the seniority of the position that they hold (as owner
or head teacher) as well as the relatively secure employment profile of the respondents, with 51% (73) of
the respondents being permanent staff (or owning the centre), while a further 30% (43) were on fixed term
contracts which were in many cases renewable annually.
When asked what their next job would be after leaving their current job, of the 139 who responded 66%
(92) of the Heads indicated that they would like to continue serving in the ECD sector, albeit, in different
capacities. Of that 66%, a 38% (35) would like to teach, 22% (20) plan to open up their own ECD centre,
16% (15) wish to continue as Centre managers, and a few (would like to revert to providing medical/health
support, caregiving and social support.
Page 20 of 66
Figure 6: Profile of the Senior Members of Staff interviewed at the ECD Centres
Page 21 of 66
2.4 Human Resources: Teachers, Training and Qualifications
Key Findings on Teachers, Training and Qualifications
8. Senior members of staff at ECD Centres are under-qualified for their positions by
international standards.
9. 62% of teachers / caregivers, distributed across both rural and urban areas, claim to have an
ECD Teacher’s Certificate. The exact nature and quality of such certification is unclear.
10. In-service training, and even much of the initial training for ECD teachers, is conducted by
private institutions, often for profit.
11. Career pathways are not well understood and accessed by practitioners, and the current
pathways are peppered with dead-ends and bottlenecks.
12. The quality of applicants enrolling on certificate and degree courses in ECD is often poor.
ECD Staff Qualifications and Training
As also highlighted in Figure 6 above, Heads generally exhibited low qualification levels. 29% had no further
education, 35% had a one-year certificate, 22% had a two-year diploma and only 12% had a degree. Given
that the respondents are senior members of the ECD teaching fraternity, they are generally under-qualified
for their position, by international standards. Further just over a half possess no qualification in ECD, with
only 3 (2%) respondents having a degree specifically in ECD. Furthermore, the training and qualifications
of teachers/caregivers who were part of the focus group interviews varied widely. 62% (89) across both
rural and urban sub-counties reported that they had an ECD Teacher’s Certificate. However, when this was
triangulated with data from the colleges and data on the institutions that the teachers had attended, it
became clear that many had been trained on short courses which do not lead to a qualification, often in
private colleges which are not subject to quality control. Further, the research indicated that some ECD
lecturers and college principals were not clear about what constitutes qualification to be an ECD teacher.
Fully 18% of teachers had no training. There were hardly any with the Community Child Care Certificate
and Child Care Certificate qualifications, and relatively few with diplomas. What the data does show is that
a majority of ECD teachers in the sample have experienced some training, albeit much of it is in the form
of short in-service courses. Furthermore, the data indicates that teachers/caregivers in the rural sub-
counties were as likely to have experienced some ECD teacher training as their urban counterparts. This
finding may have been influenced by the purposive sampling process.
Irrespective of the training that teachers have accessed, observations of inadequate and sometimes
abusive teaching practices suggest that the quality and standardisation of training are key problems. This
is likely to stem, in part, from the fact that much of the training available to ECD teachers is in the form of
short courses which are more about imparting large amounts of information using a lecture mode, rather
than about building skills and capacity in ECD teaching. As one national ECD NGO official commented,
All are trained, but don’t know ECD. Some institutions are training with no system. They are not
professional. University based courses are too academic. Training should be done at Primary
Teacher Colleges – we need specialist courses there and linked to a career.
Although largely privately driven by NGOs and private colleges, there is an active in-service training scene
prevailing in most districts reviewed, with 59% (84) of Heads of centres reporting that their staff have
received in-service training over the last two years, and a quarter of the centres reporting having staff on
training at the time of the review. Most training takes place during school holidays and only 26% of the
training reported was through government or public entities.
Page 22 of 66
Training Needs
The Learning Framework was most often mentioned by national and district respondents and Heads of
centres as the focus of capacity building. Training on the ECD curriculum, play-based learning, how to
motivate children and use of resources, in descending order, were also mentioned by Heads. In focus
groups, teachers identified their own training needs as being ‘how to use the Learning Framework’, lesson
planning and scheming, record keeping, development and use of play materials, handling disabled children,
and training in phonics. The demand for training in handling children with disability is well-judged, as only
four teachers in the 143 centres have been trained in handling disabled children, while 50% (70) of the
centres reported having at least one child with disability amongst their enrolment.
In reference to their own training, Heads indicated a need for training in leading and managing staff and
administrative skills, particularly accounting and handling resources.
It was reported that training often depends on funding support from NGOs. Support and training strategies
employed by CCTs to improve teaching, in addition to one-on-one support and coaching, included
organising ‘cross’ visits to share good practice, and peer group meetings to help centres in remote areas to
keep up to date with policy and new developments.
Some of the CCT respondents feel that they have achieved some success through training, as one stated,
(The centres) have very good discipline and I can see them planning on a daily basis. Their
classroom environments were ‘talking’ with lots of play materials for the children.
Indeed, the observation by researchers of a session at 131 of the ECD Centres recorded relatively positive
interactions between teachers/caregivers and children. See Figure 7 below.
Page 23 of 66
Figure 7: Observations of ECD Centre sessions
These findings must be treated with caution given that the researchers are not ECD specialists and that
they observed only one session at each Centre. Furthermore, the evidence on underage enrolment and
repetition at primary schools (refer to section 2.6 below) is indicative of lack of access and ongoing poor
quality delivery at ECD Centres. Particularly on the issue of quality, much closer monitoring, and ongoing
training and supervision is necessary.
Accessing Training
Among the 187 teachers who sat in focus group interviews, 62% (116) reported that they have a
qualification in ECD, with the research showing that this proportion of ECD teachers have received some
sort of training from CSOs, school owners and training institutions. However, only about 30% had
certification from formal training institutions. While some of these were trained by reputable universities,
such as Kyambogo and Makerere, or by effective CSOs, such as the Aga Khan Foundation, or at public
teacher training colleges, many cited their training institution as being ones that are apparently private and
unregistered with TIET and not affiliated to either Makerere and Kyambogo Universities. Among the heads
of the ECD centres 50% (70 of the 141 who responded on this question) had some ECD qualification, with
39% (56) of the overall sample having a certificate in ECD. Taking both the heads of institutions and the
teachers together a slight majority (51%) report having some qualification or training in ECD. This is perhaps
higher than anticipated, but it also means that nearly half of the ECD teachers/managers in these districts,
Page 24 of 66
which were purposively selected based in many cases on the intensity of their ECD provision, have no ECD
qualification at all.
Based on data provided by the 83 ECD Centre heads who indicated their staff had received in-service
training in the last 2 years, it appears that ECD education personnel depend on a wide range of institutions
for capacity building. NGO/CBO are the leading providers/facilitators of in-service courses, followed by
public training colleges, private training colleges, government, and centre owners.
Table 1: ECD In-service Training Providers (n=83)
Type of Trainer Provider Frequency Percent
NGO/CBO 29 28%
A public training college 18 17.5%
A private training college 14 14%
Local expert 10 10%
Government 8 8%
Owner of the centre 4 4%
A member of staff 3 3%
Other (specify) 16 15.5%
*Multiple responses permitted
For teachers/caregivers in the survey who were not upgrading or participating in any in-service courses,
lack of funds was cited as a barrier to additional training. Several had wanted to upgrade their certificate
to the diploma. However, there is little incentive to invest in further training as interviewees reported that
it does not normally lead to career progression, such as promotion to primary school teacher or an
opportunity to head the pre-school (as this is a private enterprise).
A number of respondents made observations about training supply. At the district level, some districts are
well provided with training institutions and have been targeted by the MoES for training. There are also
several training programmes conducted by NGO partners in all the districts visited. Training providers are
mostly urban based (only Wakiso has a number of rural-based institutions) and some sub-counties and the
whole of Kalangala and Buyende districts have no institutions at all so that teachers/caregivers have to
travel to other districts for training.
The absence of training institutions in the district is a significant setback in trying to implement the
policy guidelines. (DE0)
Many of the training institutions are private and apparently, although unregistered, charge a lot of money
for training, even though their adherence to acceptable standards is limited, so that as one DEO asserted,
All the teaching institutions available are privately owned, are located in urban areas and
expensive. Most of the ECD teachers in this district can’t afford to pay for themselves since they
earn little money (DEO)
Attempts to engage the ECD centres in training are sometimes met with resistance. Some CCTs reported
that teachers and owners will not attend meetings if there is no lunch or transport for them. This limits
where and when they can meet and train.
In the public teacher colleges, the training of ECD teachers, which is conducted in holidays, was observed
to be mainly lecturer-centred. While being based on the Learning Framework and adhering to the policy,
it is not well-resourced, which means the lecturers are challenged in modelling the methods which they
Page 25 of 66
are describing. There was also a lack of innovatory methods observed, with limited or no knowledge of
action research (with a focus on such methods as Child Study42). There is also a lack of peer review and
critique, so expected levels of self-reflection and peer evaluation are absent. In addition, there is no
evidence of a vibrant, well-resourced intellectual community researching ECD and thus very minimal levels
of thought leadership and academic publishing.
ECD Educator Career Pathways
Many of the respondents in the ECD Centres, in teacher training colleges and in government positions at
district and national levels and those working for NGOs commented on the lack of clear career pathways
for ECD teachers. As Report 4 in Attachments illustrates hands-on experience cannot currently be assessed
for the award of credits and even ECD teachers with a certificate or diploma in ECD education find that
they may be blocked from progressing to a degree or to accessing more senior positions.
College lecturers found that the training of ECD teachers is undermined by the absence of a clear career
path. College staff proposed that there should be two qualification routes (i) an academic path and (ii) a
competence-vocational career path. These would be two distinct but parallel paths, and would require that
every qualification/stage of the pathway links into the next step, with no dead-ends or bottlenecks. Once
well-established, it may then also become feasible for these routes to ‘talk’ to each other through
articulation based on parity of esteem.
These same lecturers struggle with the quality of the students that enrol in their training courses, as many
of the trainees are involved in ECCE by default i.e. because their poor marks did not permit them to enter
into other teaching or more prestigious courses. University lecturers of ECD indicated similar frustrations
and explained that a degree in ECD is only taken up by students with low passes resulting in the generalised
view that a) this is professional career for low achievers and b) the ECD degree pre-service award does not
offer the same professional status as other university degrees.
The colleges also find the stipulation that their college must be affiliated to a university for certification
and have to have their students examined by that university as restricting, and they express frustration at
the limited service and support that universities are able to provide due to low capacity themselves.
ECD Teacher Motivation
The research and literature also identifies challenges with regard to motivation of ECD teachers/caregivers
who face difficult working conditions and are paid very little. Respondents reported that low salaries and
difficult working conditions mean that qualified people are not motivated to become ECD practitioners.
Teachers’ motivation is very low. They receive little salary, schools don’t offer them
accommodation and those in ECD centres wish that they could be put on the government pay roll.
(Councillors)
If government decides to pay the caregivers/teachers from the centre it would motivate them and
service quality would improve. (DEO)
Teachers are ‘0 level’ drop outs with no training in ECD. And the ones that are qualified prefer the
better working conditions in private schools. (Councillors)
Getting qualified teachers is not easy and payment by parents is not necessarily good or reliable.
(CAO)
The low level of motivation can be deduced from the fact that on the day of the research visits, 80% of the
centres had at least one member of staff absent. Given that most centres have a very small number of staff,
this could indicate serious problems.
Page 26 of 66
2.5 Remuneration
Key Findings on Remuneration
13. Salaries of ECD practitioners are low by Ugandan standards, averaging between Ushs
100,000 and Ushs 150,000 (US$27 and US$41) per month.
14. Generally, salaries increase with seniority, but there is considerable variation between
similar types of centre with only nurseries and community-based centres paying staff in the
higher wage ranges.
15. Lack of bargaining power (no unions/significant professional associations) and being off the
government payroll means that there is no minimum or standardised salary level.
16. All the centres in the sample paid a salary, with 81% paying this in cash, not in-kind. Of those
paying cash, only 19% pay formally into bank accounts or through mobile money transfer.
The academics and officials interviewed asserted that teaching in ECD Centres in Uganda is considered a
low status job. In 2012 the ‘Status of the ECD Policy in Uganda’ report 43 recommended a minimum basic
payment or remuneration of caregivers who work in different ECD programmes. This has not been
implemented – there are no minimum salary levels applied to the ECD sector as a whole. Therefore,
because most service providers are private, profit-driven businesses, most caregivers are paid very little
and so, in turn the profession fails to attract quality staff. Most of the ECD centres surveyed pay
teachers/caregivers between Ushs 100,000 to 150,000 (US $27 – US $41) per month (see table below).
Only 5% earn over 300,000 (US $80) and none earn over Ushs 450,000 (US $122) per month. This compares
very badly with public primary school teacher pay where the basic salary is just under Ushs 800,000 per
month. On the official scale, even ‘Non Formal Education Teachers’ on ‘Trial Terms’ receive Ush 198,793
per month. The lower payments may be attributed to the lower levels of qualifications of the teachers (the
qualitative work revealed that the highest qualification for most ECD teachers is an ECD Teacher Certificate
and some teachers have none) or it could also be because teachers have less market power in the ECD
sector.
Table 2: Caregiver/Teacher Salaries by ECD Centre Type and Location
Monthly Payment
Urban Subcounties
Primary
School
Nursery Day
Care
Home
-based
Com-
Based
Total
None 1 1 2 (3%)
Varies 2 1 3 (4%)
<50000 4 4 (6%)
51000 - 100000 5 6 2 1 14 (20%)
101000 - 150000 15 4 2 1 3 25 (35%)
151000 – 300000 8 5 6 19 (26%)
301000 - 450000 3 1 4 (6%)
Rural Subcounties
None 3 3 (3%)
Varies 3 3 (3%)
<50000 3 2 5 (5%)
51000 - 100000 8 11 1 4 1 25 (26%)
101000 - 150000 19 10 7 6 42 (44%)
151000 – 300000 3 10 3 16 (16%)
301000 - 450000 1 2 3 (3%)
There appears to be a clear hierarchy in salary structures as reported to the researchers. This is illustrated
in Figure 8, below. The numbers in brackets refer to the number of ECD Centre staff in each category.
Page 27 of 66
Figure 8: ECD Centre Salary Levels
(NB: blue columns represent ECD Centre staff and other colours comparative job salaries)
All the sampled centres reported paying their staff salaries, with 93% (133) paying staff on a monthly basis
and 81% (116) paying in cash. Few Heads report paying into bank accounts (11%, 16) or by mobile money
(8%, 11), which may reflect determination to avoid being noticed by the authorities and having to pay tax.
In 60% (86) of the centres the salary levels vary between staff at similar levels of responsibility, reflecting
the bargaining skills of the individual teachers and their experience and seniority. These salary levels are
mostly set by the owner or the head teacher and appear to be fairly opaque.
In community-based centres, payment is dependent on when or whether parents pay but some
community-based centre staff often receive stipends from NGOs. Additional incentives include lunch and
transport, and in some rural communities teachers are offered land for cultivation, others are given bicycles
and a few are given soap and sugar (Tororo) and food (Moroto). While some teachers/caregivers indicated
a desire to leave due to low pay and lack of support, the majority stated that they would not leave teaching
in the ECD sector.
2.6 Coverage, Access and Enrolment
Key Findings on Coverage, Access and Enrolment
17. We estimate that some 70% of the 4 – 6 age group are not accessing pre-school education in
age appropriate classes.
18. Family income is the main determinant of whether a child accesses a pre-school.
19. The poorer and more rural the area, the less likely it is to have private provision and the
more likely it is to have community based organisations providing pre-school education.
20. ECD centre enrolment is increasing in most communities sampled.
Page 28 of 66
21. The vast majority of Centres are targeting the 3 – 6 years age group, while nearly half also
include children in the 6 – 8 age group, but only 13% cater for the 1 – 3 years old group and 6%
the birth to 1 year old group.
Well over 50% (80) of ECD centres surveyed were not registered or licensed and only about half of those
that were registered or licensed (25%) were formally registered with MoES. If we extrapolate this
information and assume that enrolment is the same in registered and unregistered centres then the ‘true’
participation rate could be more than twice that estimated by EMIS, which only records data from
registered centres. This would give an estimate of the ‘true’ participation rate of 22%, which is close to the
23% of 3-6 year olds attending pre-school that was estimated by the national household survey (DHS 2011).
However, the study indicates that this estimate may also be under-counting children between the ages of
4 and 6 who are in pre-schools. Recent EMIS data indicates that 563,913 children are enrolled in 6,798
registered pre-primary schools, although this figure ignores the substantial number of this age group who
are already in P1 as under-age learners. The 2014 census counted 3,569,223 children aged between 4 and
6. If we divide the number of children by the number of centres, then it appears that each centre has an
average of 83 children. Assuming that the vast majority of children in these centres are aged 4-to-6 years
old (and our research supports this) then we can extrapolate that 16% (563,913 ÷ 3,569,223) of that age
group are enrolled in registered ECD centres. If a further 55% of centres that are unregistered account for
at least the same number, then that mean over 30% of children of that age group are accessing ECD
services. In addition, this is probably still an under-count as it does not include under-age enrolment in
primary schools, which has been shown to be significant44 . This suggests there is a participation rate in pre-
schools which is considerably higher than the MoES estimates, albeit that the majority of children of the 4
– 6 years age group are still not accessing age appropriate classes. These statistics indicate that for
complete coverage allowing all Ugandan 4 – 6 year olds access to age appropriate classes would require
another 29,000 ECD Centres to be built.
Based on the enrolment percentages over a number of years, a large proportion (64%; 87) of the ECD Heads
considered the ECD/school enrolment to be on the increase. Only 21% (29) of Heads considered enrolment
to be decreasing, while 15% (20) considered the trend to be constant.
Higher enrolment in ECD centres than MoES figures suggest, does not necessarily relate to improved levels
of school readiness. Indeed, the estimates by Crouch and Kibombo (2016) of very high repetition rates in
lower grades in public primary school suggest a lack of school readiness still prevails. Their evidence also
suggests that there is still a high rate of underage enrolment in Primary 1 that results in these children
receiving an education that is inappropriate to their age. This point was also made by district officials in
interviews, who related this phenomenon to lack of appropriate ECD Centres and the cost of those pre-
schools that were available (while enrolling in Primary 1 is fee-free), which together form a perverse
incentive to enrol underage children in Primary 1 in public primary schools. This has detrimental effects on
the educational future of these children and they tend to repeat grades more and achieve worse outcomes
than children who experienced proper pre-primary schooling.
Furthermore, even if the higher (extrapolated) enrolment figure of over 20% is correct, it still means that
about 80% of under 6 year olds do not access any form of ECCE.
Table 3: Type of Age Group Served by the ECCE/ECD centre
Age group Frequency Percent
Kindergarten (approximately 3-6 years) 138 97%
School-age children (approximately 6-8 years) 63 44%
Toddlers (approximately 1-3 years) 18 13%
Infants (approximately birth to 1 year) 8 6%
*Multiple responses possible
Page 29 of 66
The survey evidence (see Table 3) indicates a small minority of existing ECD Centres cater for children under
the age of 4, with only 18 out of the 143 catering for the 1 – 3 years old group and of these 8 cater for the
birth to 1 year old group. A combination of factors is likely to be contributing to the relatively low enrolment
rates. The focus groups with parents, undertaken as part of the survey, revealed that although they
recognised the value of ECCE they could also predict many reasons why other parents did not send their
children to the centre. As well as difficulties in paying the fees, they identified issues such as ignorance,
negligence, poverty, the importance of child labour and parents’ belief that their children are not ready to
benefit, particularly those under 4 years old. These results are consistent with the belief of Plan
International45 that to participate effectively, parents need to be convinced of the benefits of ECCE for their
children.
The enrolment data, the responses to questions on access and the proportion of parents who the Centre
Heads indicate are struggling to pay the fees for the Centres, combine to confirm the assertion made by all
the focus groups of parents – that many 3 – 6 year olds do not access pre-schools because their parents
cannot afford the fees. This finding is not surprising as information from the DHS 2011 and Brunette et al
201746, suggests that participation in ECD centres is considerably lower for children in poorer areas. This
may also affect some of the types of provision available and the distribution of types of centres, with higher
intensity of provision in urban areas, and private centres being mainly found in urban areas, while ones set
up by NGOs and communities being mainly in rural areas, where incomes are lower. The research was not
able to assess the relative quality of rural and urban provision. Some NGOs working with rural communities
are reported to provide relatively good quality provision in rural areas, albeit their coverage is limited.
Figure 9 below shows the types of provision available in each District surveyed arranged by the poverty47
of the District. As expected, the poorer the area, the less likely it is to have private provision, presumably
because parents are less able to pay fees, as already discussed. Similarly, the poorer the area the more
likely it is to have ECD education services provided by a Community Organisation. More surprising is the
finding that poor areas are less likely to have centres based in a personal house. There appears to be little
association between poverty and the likelihood of having a centre owned by the public sector or a Faith
Based Organisation.
Page 30 of 66
Figure 9: Centre Ownership by District and Poverty Ranking
Source: ECD Survey and UBOS
Page 31 of 66
2.7 Compliance to Ministry Regulations
Key Findings on Compliance to Ministry Regulations
22. 44% of the Centres surveyed were not licensed or registered.
23. 58% of the Centres achieved an overall score that does not meet the MoES’s minimum
criteria for running a Centre.
24. The majority of centres that are not licensed or registered indicate that this is because it is
too complicated, there are too many requirements, or is too expensive. There is also a lack
of awareness about the need to register, as well as resistance to the need to pay ‘back-
handers’ and taxes.
25. Access to land title is a major concern undermining ECD Centres’ ability to register.
Numbers of Registered and Unregistered Centres
All ECD Centres are meant to register (Guidelines for ECD Centres 2010: Chapter 5) after two years of
existence, and after having applied for licensing within 3 months of opening. However, of the 143 sample
centres only 19% had been licensed, with another quarter of the Centres being registered – see Figure 10,
below. This was despite the fact that all of them have been open long enough (at least 3 months) to have
applied for a license and most have been open for more than 2 years (with the average length of time being
7 years), so they should all have initiated the registration process.
Figure 10: Proportion of Sample ECD Centres which are Registered and Licensed
When the 56% (80) which are not licensed or registered, were then asked why they have not registered,
the responses in Figure 11 below, were elicited.
Page 32 of 66
Figure 11: Reasons given by ECD Centres for not Registering or Licensing
*Multiple responses were permitted to the above reasons
The only positive that emerged is that all the ECD centres saw some value in being registered. Indeed, quite
worryingly, a quarter (35) of Centres say they have applied but had heard nothing back, which implies that
the centre verification and registration process at local government level is not working as planned and its
importance is being undermined.
District officials who were interviewed were aware that most centres are neither licensed nor registered.
For example, in one district there are nearly 150 known centres (with the implication that there will be
other centres which are not known by the authorities), and of these 67 have applied but only 7 are
registered. However, district officials counter accusations of slow registration processing by reporting that
centres only come forward and apply when they are threatened with closure.
Page 33 of 66
Requirements for Registration
Behind the need to register are a host of requirements that government has put in place which ECD Centres
are required to adhere to. Implementation of some of these requirements was checked during the survey
both through the interview and through a physical observation process by the researcher using a checklist.
The requirements for setting up an ECD centre that were assessed included: 1) Buildings, 2) Staffing, 3)
Sanitation and hygiene facilities, 4) Emergency facility, 5), Furniture, 6) Storage, 7) Meals, 8) Outdoor
spaces, and 9) Roles and responsibilities of the caregiver (during care/teaching session). In order to come
up with interpretation of the data, the percent for each indicator was rated along a range of ‘excellent’ to
‘poor’, and the count under each of those ratings was converted into percentages.
Table 3: Performance rating on Ministry of Education and Sports Requirements
Categorical Indicator No. of
Requirements
Assessed
Rating of condition/Presence Based on Percent
Results
Excellent
100%-
80%
Very
good
79%-
60%
Good
59%-
40%
Fair
39%-
20%
Poor
20%-0
Buildings 14 0 3 3 8
Staffing 2 1 1
Sanitation and hygiene facilities 10 3 6 1
Emergency facility 2 2
Furniture 7 1 1 5
Storage 4 1 2 1
Meals 4 1 1 2
Outdoor spaces 7 1 5 1
Caregiver's Role 5* 1 2 2
Sub-total on MoES Requirements 55 0 7 (13%) 16 (29%) 24 (44%)
8
(14%)
*Scores whose data were analysed/analysable
The overall outcome of the analysis suggests that of the 55 requirements for establishing an ECD Centre
that were observed, only 13% of the requirements were adhered to by ECD centres in the range of ‘very
good’. 58% of criteria for adherence to standards are poorly or fairly met by Centres on average. So, this
implies that most of the centres are not meeting with a large number of the requirements and thus overall
they are not adhering to minimum standards that the Ministry has put in place to try and ensure that ECD
centres provide a quality service to children. The challenge that the Ministry faces is further compounded
by the finding that 37% (53) of the Heads of centres reported that they do not even try/see the need to
adhere to MoES guidelines. Indeed, there was awareness in some, but not all districts, of the guidelines,
especially the Guidelines for Establishing ECD Centres. In some districts, copies of such key documents were
not available.
As illustrated in Figure 12 below, there are a variety of stronger and weaker elements in the Centres’
adherence to standards.
Page 34 of 66
Figure 12: Compliance of ECD Centres to key requirements
Challenges with Implementing the MoES Requirements
It was widely reported at all levels in the system that there are too many and too rigorous requirements
for licensing and registering, and it is ‘too costly’ a process. The application process is long and feedback
takes a significant time to be delivered and received. At the same time, the centres have to meet the
requirements within set time frames which are tight. A major problem that many centres face is that they
do not have a land title, which is central to the application process. Concern about the guidelines was
expressed by officials who said,
(There are) inadequate national standards and operational manuals and guidelines for centres. (SI)
(It is a priority) to revise the registration and licensing laws as it’s a process which stops centres
from registering. (SI)
Page 35 of 66
Respondents in every district commented on the large number of centres that would be unable to meet
the infrastructure standards, especially in rural areas.
To alleviate some of the challenges Kalangala District reported making information more readily available
and also finding a more practical approach to the requirements:
We have gone out to the centres and in trying to standardise we have developed tools and looked
at those minimum requirements and tried to disseminate. For example, at least the structures must
be safe. (District Official)
There is also greater need for effective advocacy warnings and reminders. Some centres are simply
unaware of the need to follow such guidelines – they assume, for example, that they are automatically
registered if attached to a Primary School. Other owners use lack of access to the policy document as an
excuse to avoid registering. It is also reported by district officials that privately owned centres feel it is their
job to monitor their own centres so they do not see the government as having any role in this and need to
be sensitised to the child protection responsibilities of government.
Some proprietors may not think that licensing and registration is important but think it is just a
waste of time and torture of red tape by the government. (DEO)
Interestingly, this view did not come out in the survey of the sampled centres.
In the district and NGO interviews, there was mention of under-the-table payments required to move
processes along. In addition, district and sub-county officials reported that the influence of people in power
is a source of corruption/lack of due process being followed, which undermines the role of the officials with
responsibility for monitoring ECD centres. For example,
You go to a school without requirements and the next time you go back you find they have
reopened. In one case, as soon as we left the chair of the LC3, he told the owner to continue to
operate and he would speak to district authorities. (CCT)
A few of the mushrooming centres don’t have licences to operate and I believe there are some
influences from top officials. You close up a centre today and the next day you get a phone call
from someone influential instructing you to open it as soon as possible. (LC3 Chair and Councillors)
Another barrier to registration which was noted in some of the sampled centres is that applying for
registration makes them visible to the government and so they ‘have more trouble’ – there will also be an
issue of taxation. The sampled centres in some instances indicated an advantage in staying ‘below the
radar’ so as to avoid being taxed. Local revenues are minimal in many districts and there are many sectors
that need support, which means there is pressure to register and be taxed. As one group of councillors with
the LC3 chair put it,
Because most of the centres are not registered and licensed this makes our work difficult when it
comes to taxing them.
The centres themselves feel they should not be taxed as they are providing a service that the government
should be providing. In one district the DEO indicated that licenses are free, however the researcher in that
district found that officials implementing the process demanded registration fees.
Page 36 of 66
2.8 Infrastructure
Key Findings on Infrastructure
26. Most Centres lack adequate access to toilets, clean water and proper food storage.
27. Very few ECD Centres grow their own food.
28. 32% lack a properly constituted Centre Management Committee.
As indicated above, infrastructure was identified as a major challenge by all centre respondents, previous
research studies 48and the researchers. This includes overcrowding, unsuitable buildings that do not meet
standards, inadequate sanitation and water, or in a few cases, no structures at all.
The policy recognises that compliance to hygiene standards are important when dealing with young
children. For water supply, 24% (34) of the centres use a chlorinated water source (including standpipe and
mains water supply), while 63% (90) use pump/borehole, well, lake/river, and rainwater sources. The
researchers ascertained that 69% (99) of the centres provided their children with access to relatively safe
water. However, a majority of the centres report facing challenges with their water supply, including
distance to the source, gaining access, the source drying up and the cost of the water. Once collected 56%
(77) of the centres keep the water in jerry cans; only 2% (3) have access to a fridge.
Toilet facilities were also assessed during the research, and it was found that only 55% (79) of the centres
have the correct ratio of toilets to children. Although 13% (19) of the centres provide children with flush
toilets, the majority (61%, 88) only have access to pit latrines which are shared by boys and girls, and in
some cases the teachers too. 64% (92) had separate toilet facilities for the teachers. Two of the centres
had no toilet facilities at all. 68% (97)of the centres had handwashing facilities.
The policy prescribes the storage, preparation and provision of meals at ECD Centres and the way that
children’s food containers should be stored. In the sample, 103 (74%) centres provide meals for the
children. Nearly half of the centres hire cooks to prepare the food. Surprisingly, under 5% have community
members or parents preparing the meals even though many are community based centres, while a quarter
have their own staff prepare the food. 76% (78) of the Centres which provide food (and most that do,
provide breakfast and lunch) buy the food with an average spend of between Ushs 600,000 to Ushs
1,560,000 on food per month.
Perhaps surprisingly, only 10 of the centres grow their own food, while 21 get some form of food aid –
either from their community or NGOs. The majority of schools which offer meals have a specific storage
facility for food, although the researchers assessed only 68% (97) of centres as having a hygienic store for
the food. 78% (112) of the centres were observed to have some form of dedicated/separated kitchen area.
The regulations also state (Guidelines for Early Childhood Development Centres 2010, Chapter 6) that every
ECD Centre should have a Centre Management Committee (CMC). The specific conditions are laid down
for each type of centre and the CMC it requires. Of the 139 ECD Centre heads who responded to the
question on CMCs, 32% (44) admitted to not having a properly constituted CMC, although even those with
a CMC complain about lack of motivation by members making it difficult to hold regular meetings of the
CMC, and the fact that in many cases members expect to be paid for attending meetings.
Although not prescribed in policy, the provision of electricity is key to maintaining a healthy environment.
However, only 48% (69) of centres have access to either mains or solar electricity, while 62% rely wholly or
partially on charcoal for power and fuel, but most worrying is that 13% (18) of centres had no access
whatsoever to fuel or lighting.
Page 37 of 66
Infrastructural Problems
A few quotes from sub-county and district level officials provide some idea of the sort of infrastructure
problems that ECD centres face.
Current structures are in a very bad state, the roof is leaking, no shutter on the windows, doors
can’t be locked and most of the classrooms, baby to top, share a room and an instructor.
(Councillors)
Buildings are not fit for children, poorly constructed and most of them do not meet the standard
that we need. (CAO)
Infrastructure is a problem. We use timber; floors are not cemented and become muddy when it
rains. Children then use benches and are not comfortable. (CCT)
In the focus groups held with parents and CMC members, infrastructure such as fencing and construction
of classrooms and toilets were mentioned as priorities, as well as the construction of zebra crossings and
speed humps on main roads close to centres.
Access to land, as well as getting the title to the land, has also been identified in the research as a major
problem for ECD centres.
The community doesn’t fully give land. After Plan (an NGO) constructed centres land owners took
back the land for themselves. (Councillors)
Because of inadequate land and structures the only public facilities are Lower Primary classes
attached to UPE schools. The ones who can manage to own land and set up structures are the ones
who start ECD centres. (DEO/SI)
2.9 Monitoring Compliance and Providing Support
Key Findings on Monitoring and Support Provision
29. There was no example of a dedicated district-level ECD budget in the sample.
30. No district had any dedicated ECD staff – even the ECD Focal Point is not dedicated, full-
time to ECD.
31. 78% of the Centres had been inspected in the last 2 years.
32. Government officials require significantly more dedicated training in ECD.
While the ECD Centres are severely challenged in meeting registration requirements, district and local
officials face a number of constraints in fulfilling their own responsibilities to ensure compliance and to
provide support and mobilisation. These relate to the lack of a specific ECD allocation in their budgets and
to staff capacity.
None of the 10 districts had a specific allocation for ECD within its education budget. Education budgets
are mainly spent on district and primary school teacher salaries and the balance is used for construction,
supervision and registration of primary schools. Therefore, it is the inspection grants that are used in most
districts for expanding monitoring to ECD centres as well. Part of ECD money comes from local revenue but
this is marginal in many districts due to low levels of revenue collection. In one district, there had been a
small ‘paper’ allocation for ECD but this had not been forthcoming. Not having a ring fenced ECD allocation
makes support for ECD services vulnerable to other priorities in the education system and dependent on
the interest of the district officials. As there cannot be a plan without a budget, no district had a separate
ECD plan or had mainstreamed ECD into their District Plan.
Page 38 of 66
We don’t get resources for ECD so it [the budget] is actually zero. In truth the focus is on primary
but we encourage all schools to have a wing for ECD. (CAO)
There are rigorous standards (for ECD centres to follow) but a small financial allocation. (DEO)
The funds from the government for inspection are earmarked for primary schools and therefore
visiting the pre-schools is by private arrangement. (Councillors)
ECD is an unfunded priority by the government. It is not allocated for. We have the desire but we
are limited by finances. (DE/SI)
How often district officials are able to visit ECD sites and schools depends on the availability and payment
of facilitation and inspection grants. In some districts NGOs assist with site inspections and encourage
registration. Logistical issues like transport and fuel allowances can limit what can be achieved. Accessibility
in terms of the condition of roads, distances and weather also affects efficiency.
Imagine it’s the third week since schooling resumed and there is no money for inspection from the
government. (DEO)
Transport and fuel to reach schools has helped. But this may be insufficient for quarterly visits. (SI)
Given this lack of funds and the low priority ECD is given at district and sub-county levels, it is perhaps
surprising that 78% of the surveyed centres reported that they had been inspected by district or urban
authorities in the previous 2 years, with the mean time since the last inspection being only 3.4 months.
However, only 28% reported getting any feedback from the inspection visits, which severely undermines
the purpose of conducting inspection and supervision. Half (70) of the centres had also been visited by the
local CCT in the last year, with the mean period since the last visit being 4.3 months. The implication of
these findings is that officials do visit ECD centres when they can, even when the centres are not registered.
As there were no dedicated ECD staff at district level, the knowledge and experience needed for ECD
responsibilities can be inadequate. For example, a national ECD expert outlined the challenge of officials
who are not conversant with ECD,
The ECD Focal Point should link with parish chief who is in charge of children and go to the village.
But this person is often not well conversant with ECD – they are nominated. We need training for
government officials... The standards for example are not high but the enforcers do not know them,
neither the space nor the ratio. One may go in and find one teacher with over 80 students and not
do anything. Inspectors may also look for more academic work not a play based approach with
materials.
A CCT indicated how motivating specialised training had been.
Before I trained with Aga Khan University in early childhood development I never cared but now it
has become my passion.
Not only are staff not ECD specialists but it was reported that workloads are large and there are often
unfilled posts even if there is a post allocation:
A substantive ECCE focal person is important for following up on ECCE services. All positions need
to be filled by government. (DEO/SI/FP)
There are inadequate personnel to carry out inspections though the post structure is full… there
are too many ECD centres for regular inspection. (DEO)
Page 39 of 66
It is not easy to take care of them (ECD Centres) as a sole person hence effectiveness is not good.
(CCT)
2.10 Quality of Learning and Teaching
Key Findings on Learning and Teaching
33. Most ECD teachers have access to the Learning Framework but struggle to understand it
and so cannot use it effectively to inform the learning of the children.
34. The Learning Framework for 0 – 3 year olds needs to be finalised and distributed as it is
needed.
35. The majority of ECD Centres are not offering a full package of appropriate play materials,
and nearly half lack basic teaching and learning materials.
Key to achieving the promise of early learning achievement is implementation of a good quality learning
programme. Research shows that this is related mostly to qualification and training of the teachers and use
of structured and child appropriate curriculum and teaching. An appropriate curriculum involves a balance
of many ‘free choice’ activities with carefully selected materials, engagement with peers, and interactions
with teachers in adult-led group activities. Engagements based on child-initiated activities are associated
with better child learning outcomes49. The 2005 National Curriculum Development Centre Learning
Framework for ECD (3 – 6 years of age) is the guiding document for a holistic activity programme for
children in this age group, broken into bottom, middle and top groups. It promotes a child-centred learning
approach and stresses that there are ‘no lessons to be taught by the adult, but there are developmental
activities to be done by the children’.
In the survey, the ECD centre Heads were asked about their knowledge of the Learning Framework. 119
(83%) of the Centre Heads indicated that they are aware of the framework (those who did not would mainly
be in ECD centres catering for the under 3s, for which the Learning Framework has yet to be released).
However, as only 12 of the respondents work in centres specifically focusing on under 3s, it follows that
some 12 (10%) of those heading up ECD centres catering for the over 3s were not aware of the curriculum
that is to be used in them.
ECD specialists interviewed at national level expressed concern that the 0 – 3 Learning Framework is not
available to guide implementation of ‘baby’ programmes. It was also suggested that there should be guides
specific to different forms of provision including home–based groups. They indicated that the Learning
Framework provides for an excellent programme and that community-based centre practitioners had been
successfully trained to apply it. Generally, however,
Teachers have failed to interpret the learning framework. (It) calls for someone who is intellectually
smart. They need more training and support. Teachers have the learning framework and the guide
but they don’t know how to plan, pass over the knowledge and skills. So, many companies have
come up with lesson plans, schemes of work. This kills creativity. (ECD NGO)
Officials in all districts referred to challenges with implementing programmes according to the Learning
Framework attributing the problems to “half-baked” and unqualified ECD caregivers/ teachers.
Teachers lack a critical understanding of the learning framework. (CAO)
Caregivers are not trained so they teach with a lot of difficulty because they cannot interpret the
Learning Framework. (CCT)
Page 40 of 66
The ECD Learning Framework was not broken down into terms so the teachers do not know which
content to give the children. (CCT)
Although there were many reports that teachers/caregivers did not have access to the Learning Framework
and could not afford to purchase it as the districts do not supply it, in fact only 18 (15%) of the surveyed
centres catering for the 3 – 6 year age group denied having a copy of the Learning Framework.
District officials indicated that faced with a lack of the Learning Framework, ECD centres resorted to buying
commercial workbooks, with Prime and SIPRO being named. For example,
The Learning Framework copies are not enough, to get one someone has to buy it or go all the way
to Kampala. (SI)
Most centres use Prime Framework which doesn’t fit the curriculum. The use of different learning
frameworks is common. (SI)
As a result of lack of access, training and familiarity with the Learning Framework but also because of
parental expectations,
Some centres start the academic part so early, local languages should be used first, but they start
on the curriculum early which could delay the intellectual growth of the child. (DEO)
Teachers only concentrate on the academics in terms of reading and writing leaving out other
developmental stages of a child. (ECD FP)
Many teachers are not yet conversant with the framework and they mix ideas and tach what is
meant for primary in top class and middle class. (CCT)
Lack of learning materials contribute to the inability to implement the Learning Framework or follow a play-
based approach. This was frequently referred to by all groups of respondents and confirmed by the
researchers from site observations. The Learning Framework encourages the use of local materials for
teaching and development partners train on materials making as part of their capacity building. As a result,
the community-based centres generally had learning materials made out of local materials.
The sampled ECD centre classrooms that were visited exhibited a variety of play and learning materials,
which are exhibited in Figure 13, below. This indicates that most of the classrooms lacked basic teaching
and learning materials appropriate to early learning environments. The only items which a majority of the
classrooms had were children’s books and materials for fine motor skills. Nearly half of the centre
classrooms lacked even these basic items.
Another challenge in providing quality teaching in the centres was that in 7 of the 10 sample districts, a
single teacher teaches all classes at different periods. The exceptions were in Arua, Kabale and Nakasongola
where there were designated teachers for each class (baby class, middle class and top class). This may
indicate the impact of NGOs working in the district or district officials with knowledge of how to implement
ECD.
Page 41 of 66
Figure 13: Percentage of ECD Centres providing each type of play materials
2.11 ECCE session observations
Key Findings on the Session Observations
36. 40% of the 143 early learning sessions observed involved no play-based learning.
37. Researchers observed forms of corporal punishment being used.
As part of the data collection process, an early learning teaching session was observed at each of the
sampled centres. In total 143 observations were conducted. Researchers ensured that they conducted
observations at different times during the morning at their different centres, so that the topics observed
could not reflect a standard curriculum slot. Figure 14 summarises the topics observed. In a few instances,
more than one topic was covered in the 30 to 40 minute period. 47% (67)of the lessons were language and
Page 42 of 66
literacy lessons and 32% (46) were numeracy lessons. The remainder were science, social science and
health habit lessons. Only 12% (17) of the lessons were music and ‘play’.
Figure 14: Content of Observed Early Childhood Care and Education Sessions
For more information on the lessons observed, refer to Report 2 in Attachments.
It should be borne in mind that the researchers are not ECCE experts and may therefore have rated certain
items, such as the adequacy of the interactions and materials, more favourably than a trained ECCE
practitioner. However, there are clear indications from the information gathered of a very academic
approach in the centres, which was also mirrored in the comments of many of the district and national
interview respondents. 79% (113) of all sessions observed concentrated on literacy and numeracy and it is
likely that quite a lot of this was delivered via formal instruction (children had reading books, sat at desks
and tables, referred to charts etc). This is despite the approach of the Learning Framework and that these
observations covered the baby through middle and top class, although few 0 – 3 classes were actually
observed. 40% (57) of the activities were reported as not involving any play at all. Key factors associated
with good learning outcomes include strategies which help children to be creative and question, so the
very low observation of children asking questions is also a concern.
A very worrying observation, given that corporal punishment is rightly prohibited, was the amount of
harsh discipline practiced by teachers and caregivers. The researchers gave numerous examples of age
inappropriate discipline, often because children got the wrong answer rather than for misbehaviour. For
example, there were several instances where they witnessed children being hit with sticks, board dusters
or rulers, and children who didn’t get the correct answer were shamed with orchestrated songs and
laughter. A child’s head was banged on the table when she didn’t seem to understand the Prime
Examination taking place. There was a lot of aggressive shouting at the children by the teachers. In one
school children were threatened that they would not receive their porridge if they did not do as the teacher
ordered them.
43%
32%
8%
4%
4%
4%3% 2%
Language and Literacy
Numeracy
Music
Arabic/English
Science
Social Development
Play
Health Habits
Page 43 of 66
2.12 Language Use
Key Findings on Language Use
38. 73% of ECD Centres are reported as teaching in the learners’ mother tongue.
39. 15% of ECD Centres teach in English and 12% teach in a variety of languages.
The Ugandan curriculum reform of 2007 recommended that children’s mother tongue or ‘familiar
language’ be the language of instruction for the first three years of primary school, across all subjects, with
English taught as a subject. The education sector ECD Policy supported this primary school language policy
(Section 47) by making the local language the medium of communication/instruction in ECD centres. The
rationale behind this policy is that use of indigenous language promotes identity and cultural maintenance
and also improves literacy acquisition and learning in general.
The survey found that of the 141 ECD Centres which responded, 85% (121) of Centre Heads reported that
they use the same language during instruction as that spoken by all or the majority of children. However,
of the lessons observed a smaller proportion (73%, 104) were in the local language. Overall, the level of
use of the local language in lessons is a positive finding as it appears pressure from parents for English
teaching, which was noted by many district and national officials in their interviews, has not diverted the
majority of centres from using local languages, in both urban and rural contexts. In a significant number of
the classes observed (about 25%) there was also some use of English alongside the local language, with
researchers reporting that in some cases English was introduced for ‘fun’. The challenge of linguistically
diverse pupils, particularly in an urban environment, meant that several languages might be used by
teachers in a single session. However, the observations indicate that in over a quarter of the sampled
schools the children were being taught in a language other than their familiar or home language, which in
most cases was English.
The issue of teaching in the children’s mother tongue is complicated by the attitudes of many parents in
relation to ECD. Many respondents reported that parents’ understanding of early learning programmes
was often inappropriate, with expectations that children would learn to read, write and speak English. As
a result, private schools with nursery schools attached, use English throughout, and use it as a ‘selling point’
to attract higher enrolment, as observed by CCTs,
Private schools use English so parents take their children away (from nursery schools in public
primary schools) because they are speaking the vernacular. (CCT)
However, where there had been sensitisation there were examples such as the following:
Parents attitude towards ECCE services has kind of changed. Though parents don’t like the idea
of teaching the children in their local languages, they are starting to appreciate … after
intensive sensitisation. (CAO)
Teachers/caregivers, if they can access the Learning Framework and training materials, find these are in
English, and thus they not only have to ‘translate’ them into session planning, but actually first ‘translate’
them into local language. This is also an issue in recruiting Caregivers, who must have a primary pass in
English to enter into a Primary Teachers’ College. In one district the Learning Framework had been
translated into a mother tongue, but it was not the language that most of the ECD teachers speak.
Page 44 of 66
2.13 Provision for Children with Disability
Key Findings on Provision for Children with Disability
40. Although half of the centres have at least one child enrolled with a disability, such
children are seriously under-represented in ECD Centres.
41. Only one teacher in the 143 ECD Centres had been professionally trained in managing and
teaching children with disability.
Of the 141 Centres which responded to the question on enrolment of disabled children, 50% (70) reported
that they have at least one child with disability enrolled in their centre. The most common form of disability
reported by the Centre heads is physical disability, with impairment of sight and hearing coming next in
descending order of mention. Children who are intellectually challenged was the next most mentioned
category of disability and finally the least mentioned was compound disability.
The average number of children with disability per centre was between 1 and 2 children, with
approximately equal numbers of boys and girls being enrolled with a disability. UBOS reports that based
on the 2014 national census 12.5% of Uganda’s population have some form of disability. Other surveys
have put the number at nearer to 16%50. Whichever figure is more accurate, the sample of ECD Centres in
this study shows that children with disability are much less likely to be exposed to early childhood
education than their peers. This early marginalisation is likely to create a long-term learning impediment
for those children, and indicates that even if they are enrolled in primary school later they will face a
struggle to cope. Thus, such children are doubly disadvantaged.
This disadvantage is compounded by the lack of ECD teachers trained in disability education. Although 50%
of the ECD Centres had enrolled at least one child with disability, only 13% of these (that is in 7% of the
total centres, or 10 centres in total) have a staff member who has been specifically assigned to be in charge
of the education of their disabled children. Of the 10 teachers, only 1 teacher had actually received
specialised training in disability. The other 9 were trained as ordinary caregivers, although 3 had received
some in-service training to work with disabled children. Of the other six, one had developed an interest in
supporting disabled children, while 5 had no special training or interest in working with disabled children
although they had been assigned that task.
2.14 Costs
Key Findings on Costs
42. 80% of the ECD Centres rely on user fees for income.
43. Paying daily instead of termly for ECD services leads to a huge increase in overall cost.
44. A small number of ECD Centres receive large external grants from various sources.
45. Costs of providing ECD services for under 3s is much greater than for over 3s.
46. 52% of the ECD Centres report that many parents/guardians struggle to pay the fees.
47. 45% of the ECD Centres offer defaulting parents alternative ways of paying for ECD services.
The biggest concern related to making provision privately controlled is the user costs. The Heads of the
ECD Centres and parent focus groups indicated that user costs are a major disincentive for community
members in accessing ECD for their children. This supports evidence found by Brunette et al (2017)51 in
two eastern districts where parents reported using public primary schools as an alternative to pre-schools
as they were free, even though they realised that their children might have to repeat P1 or that they would
learn less.
Page 45 of 66
Most of the centres surveyed charged their users in some way and the most frequent – and highest –
charges were for teaching/caregiving. There was a considerable variation in such charges ranging from
Ushs 0 to Ushs 500,000 per term for the over 3s. A few centres (fewer than 5%) charge daily but these are
much more expensive pro rata; it can be as much as ten times more expensive to pay daily rather than
termly. However, for poor households with sometimes erratic incomes and limited access to credit, paying
daily may be the only way that they can provide their children with ECCE.
115 (80%) of the ECD centres rely on user fees for their income, and 108 of these indicate that their
cumulative annual income from fees in 2016 was Ushs 17,438,000.
The reliance on fees brings with it problems of collection of fees, with almost 90% (122) of centres saying
that some parents found it hard to pay the fees, and 52% (70) of the centres reporting that many
parents/guardians struggle to pay the fees. CMC and parent focus groups reported that the cost of
accessing ECD centres is a major disincentive to those who are not presently sending their young children
to pre-school.
Other sources of funding for the ECD centres were:
• four centres reporting grants from a public source ranging from Ush 6,479,576 to Ush 45,000,000
per year;
• one centre reporting a grant from a Ugandan NGO of Ush 3,000,000 per year;
• nine centres reporting grants from a private source with eight centres reporting amounts ranging
from Ush 500,000 to Ush 10,000,000 per year;
• eight centres reporting grants from an international NGO with four centres reporting amounts
ranging from Ush 300,000 to Ush 128,180,000 per year;
• seven centres reporting grants from a Faith Based Organisation with six centres reporting amounts
ranging from Ush 180,000 to Ush 30,000,000 per year;
• thirteen centres reporting grants from other unspecified sources with ten centres reporting
amounts ranging from Ush 100,000 to Ush 42,000,000 per year.
The disparity in access to income is indicated by the above list, with 4 centres alone receiving a total of
over Ushs 38m from international donors, and another centre receiving Ushs 3m from a local NGO. The
other major source of income reported was from government with 4 centres cumulatively receiving Ushs
17,282,000 last year. These are most probably ECD centres in public schools or community centres. The 13
centres which receive external funding are obviously in a very different financial space than those centres
which rely for their continued existence on user fees.
The ECD centres were asked to break down their fee structure. 93 reported on their teaching fees. If we
take the cost of teaching/caregiving as the most widely paid item, the average fees per term charged were
Ush 188,000 and Ush 62,000 for caregiving for the under- and over-threes respectively, with feeding costs
being three times higher for the younger age group. This may be another reason why the vast majority of
centres identified in each of the 30 sub-counties sampled, only service the over 3s. Persuading parents to
pay more than double for care and feeding of their toddlers compared to their under 6s must be difficult
to explain and justify. The reasons for the higher unit cost for the lower age group are that babies and
toddlers require much more individual attention, infrastructure and specific foods. As one CCT stated, “day
care centres are delicate and need more attention and also need more requirements”.
Table 4: Mean Charge per Term (in Ushs) Type of Services Frequency Mean Charge
for below 3
years old
Frequency Mean Charge for
above 3 years olds
Food 7 153,142 51 44,134
Teaching/care-giving 13 140,769 80 67,998
After-care 4 78,250 7 50,429
Cleaning 3 113,333 11 45,636
Water 1 100,000 6 18,800
Page 46 of 66
Type of Services Frequency Mean Charge
for below 3
years old
Frequency Mean Charge for
above 3 years olds
Washing soiled clothes/nappies 3 86,667 4 59,000
Trips 1 50,000 5 30,000
Other (specify) 9 131,777 32 34,890
*Multiple responses permitted
It should be noted that the standard deviation for each variable was big, suggesting that there is a large
amount of variation in the payments made per ECD item or service.
In 45% of the centres, when parents cannot pay fees, the heads of centres report that they offer
alternatives, with the most common being payment in kind and payment through physical work, rather
than debt cancellation, or through providing a grant or loan. Where grants are offered they tend to cover
more children per centre, but only a few centres have access to such support.
Aftercare (staying open for those children who stay in the centre the whole day) is only offered by a
minority of centres and is also expensive. Such a service is mainly offered by urban centres to cater for
parents who are working in full-time office based work.
2.15 Parenting programmes
Key Findings on Parenting Programmes
48. District and local officials support the roles of parents as key stakeholders in improving
access to ECD centres as well as in improving learning outcomes.
49. There is a demand among parents for more training programmes focusing on their care of
their children.
The 2007 ECD Policy refers to parents as a policy outreach target (Section 3.4.2a) in order to provide
services for children. Much of the focus is on sensitising parents to take up ECD opportunities or mobilising
them to start ECD centres. As highlighted by one of the CAO’s interviewed:
Families need to be strengthened and supported if the ECDs are to grow.
Parents are seen as key stakeholders by district and local officials. National interview respondents indicated
that the MoES has developed a parenting programme and that it is currently being integrated with
parenting programmes offered by the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social
Development as part of the NIECD policy implementation process.
Parents in the focus groups identified the need for further information on parenting including nutrition,
handling children with special needs, discipline, growth and development, hygiene and managing children’s
illnesses. Some had received training from development partners, the local health centre or community
development office, but there was no evidence of consistent content packages across these.
District and local officials had been engaged in parent sensitisation and the use of local radio to pass on
information was often mentioned but mostly in relation to mobilising parents to take children to school. In
one district where the NIECD Policy implementation is more advanced due to the efforts of development
partners, the District Education Officer explained that they “educate how mothers should care for children
from conception”.
As indicated in the international evidence, the effectiveness of parenting programmes can be very strong.
The Early Literacy and Maths Initiative of Save the Children led to nearly equal outcomes of children,
Page 47 of 66
despite starting from a significantly lower baseline, and furthermore, ongoing gains upon entry into
primary school, whereas children from targeted centres then began to stagnate.52
Page 48 of 66
Section 3: The Research Methodology for Data Collection and
Management
This research study builds upon existing evidence and data in the field of ECCE, with focus on the
implementation of the 2007 education sector ECD Policy. The study seeks to provide rich verifiable primary
data on present ECCE delivery modes and types (in ECD Centres), which is set within regional and
international literature on effective ECCE implementation. The study has taken a deep, broad and hybrid
approach to delivering evidence that will underpin the efforts to develop a revised ECCE policy and
associated guidelines, standards and costs.
The research study was structured around the five main types (or modes) of ECD centre delivery that are
defined in the 2007 ECD Policy. Using a mixed method approach, a team of researchers gathered both
quantitative data (using a questionnaire and site observation schedule) and qualitative data (from
interviews and learning process observations) to gain a triangulated understanding of how each model of
ECCE service provision delivers its programme. 143 ECD Centre sites were studied, catering for 0-3 year
olds, 4-6 year olds and 6-8 year olds. The breadth of delivery possibilities was studied, including parenting
programmes, home-based care and education, nurseries, kindergartens, and school-based sites, both
private and public, and both urban and rural. The target respondents were the owners, managers,
teaching practitioners and users of the ECCE sites, including parents, community members and
management committee members. Therefore, the study profiled existing ECCE programmes for children
up to the age of 8, according to type53, provisions and geographical location. Furthermore, the survey
provides information on cost, provider and delivery mode54 with the aim of assessing the relevance,
effectiveness, sustainability and efficiency of these models of delivery.
The process commenced with a desk research of all the 2007 Education Sector policy related documents
and guidelines to inform the scope of the study survey and the development of tools. The desktop research
also informed the approach that the Project team undertook to provide analysis of existing ECCE models
and practices. All key Government of Uganda, MoES and MGSLD documents dealing with ECCE were
reviewed in the desktop review.
3.1 Development of Research Instruments
A rigorous approach was taken to the development of the survey instrument and the various interview
tools, which would be used during the research process to gather data from national, district, sub-county
and ECD Centre levels. The survey instrument and site observation tool underwent fifteen iterations as
they were developed by the team of ECD experts, senior social researchers and statisticians, before
eventually being loaded on the Samsung Android tablets by GIS Mapping specialists. Every question was
tested against the requirements of the ECD Policy and its supporting guideline documents, as well as the
NIECD Policy to ensure that the data collected would provide adequate explanation of how the various
elements of the policies are being implemented at every level in the education system and with what level
of success. The final check on the contents of the survey was conducted by the project management and
lead social researcher, who together checked every question against the policy to ensure complete
coverage.
Alongside this, the ECD specialists in the project team developed qualitative interview tools based on
international best practice and to ensure that the data that would be collected would be adequate to
respond fully to the research questions posed by the project terms of reference. These covered areas such
as preparation and in-service training of ECCE teachers, qualifications of practicing teachers, accreditation
processes for those qualifications, employment conditions of pre-primary teachers, and the costs
associated with delivery of the policy and of training.
These tools were then reviewed by the project management team to ensure that they covered all relevant
aspects of the policy, were phrased appropriately for Ugandan respondents, and that they were not too
Page 49 of 66
long or onerous. Most interviews eventually took about one hour, although some with key officials and
focus groups took considerably longer, as did delivery of the survey questionnaire (averaging around 1 to
2 hours). Although this is not preferred practice the project team were well aware that the complexity of
the topic, the range of knowledge that certain respondents would have and the lack of later opportunities
to undertake follow-up research, all merited such extensive interviews.
3.2 Scope and Approach
The data collection at District, Sub-County and Local level was conducted using a mixed methods
approach, culminating in investigation of:
(a) the current status of ECCE in 30 communities in 10 districts across Uganda;
(b) processes and practices in 143 ECD Centres;
(c) documentation on the skills, abilities and qualifications of Teachers and Caregivers;
(d) the nature and capacity of key training and support institutions;
(e) types of networks and associations available;
(f) costs involved in delivering and accessing ECCE services;
(g) compliance with government requirements; and
(h) challenges that the ECD Centres are facing.
3.3 Sampling Strategy
A purposive sample of ten districts was drawn with two from each of the (traditional four) regions of
Uganda, namely the Central Region (including one with island communities), Western Region, Eastern
Region, and Northern Region (of which one District was in Western Nile with provision for refugee
communities), as well as an additional two districts (Kampala and one from among the Karamoja districts).
These ten districts were selected to represent a cross-section of Ugandan districts.
The process of selecting the ten districts was undertaken based on the following process. The potential
pool of districts for selection included:
•••• All districts which were included in the Uganda National Early Childhood Development Service
Provider Inventory (2016), which were stratified by region (based on the traditional four regions)
and then by intensity of ECCE service provision extrapolated from data sources (including districts
with high, medium and low intensity of documented ECCE provision).
•••• The provisionally selected districts were cross-checking against other indicators such as wealth,
including urban and rural districts, intensity of interventions and educational performance – to
ensure a cross-section across these variants, as in Table 5 below.
Table 5: Criteria used to determine the District Sample: No. Criteria Reasoning
1. In each region,
• A district with high numbers of ECCE services
• A district with few ECCE services
To understand the drivers and barriers to access and quality
ECCE services. Regional differences are known to be
important determinants of access to ECCE55
2. GPE/QEI/MoES priority districts and other CSO
supported districts
Draw lessons from ongoing interventions in terms of what is
working and not working such as GPE CCCP interventions, so
as to inform ECCE models
3. Districts with minority populations such as
refugees, pastoralist and fishing communities
Document and consider unique needs and dynamics of use
specific to these subpopulations
4. Rural vs urban districts Document contextual enablers, inhibitors and resources that
impact ECCE provision
5. National examination results in Primary Leaving
Exam (PLE) and National Assessment of Progress in
Education (NAPE)
Document high performing and less well performing districts
to help understand the relationship between ECCE and later
performance
Page 50 of 66
The final selected list of Districts for the study was:
No. Region District
1 North Arua
2 North Oyam
3 East Tororo
4 East Buyende
5 West Kabale
6 West Bushenyi
7 Central Kalangala
8 Central Nakasongola
9 Central/Capital Kampala/Wakiso
10 North-East/Karamoja Moroto
Finally, the modes of service delivery for study were stratified according to those outlined in the Policy:
I. day care centres for children aged 0 - 3
II. home-based centres for children aged 0 - 3 and 3 - 6
III. community-based centres for children aged 3 - 6
IV. nursery schools/kindergartens for children aged 3 - 6
V. lower primary classes for children aged 6 - 8
3.4 Data Collection
Quantitative Data Collection: Quantitative data collection involved a survey conducted among ECD Centre
Head teachers/Head caregivers using a highly structured questionnaire, administered by the team of 10
researchers, each attached to one district of Uganda. The structure of the questionnaire was based on the
project terms of reference, with the indicators and variables obtained from the MoES’s 2007 ECD Policy
and Guidelines for Early Childhood Development. The key themes (concepts and dimensions) that were
included in the questionnaire are aligned to the interpretation of the terms of reference, presented in 12
sections of the questionnaire, namely: Characteristics of the Head Caregiver/Respondent; Characteristics
of the ECD Centre; ECCE Service Provision and Practices; Compliance to Establishment Procedures for
Establishing Day Care Centre; Enrolment, Dropout, and Attendance; Human Resource Capacity;
Administration and Management; Curriculum; ECCE Centre Inspection; Collaboration and Networking with
stakeholders; Access Related Issues; and Budgetary Issues.
Qualitative Data Collection: Qualitative interviews were implemented to explore the perspectives and
experiences and feelings of key policy implementers and stakeholders. The qualitative data collection
entailed 4 sub-activities: Desk-top reviews; In-depth interviews; Focus Group Discussions; and Site
Observations.
3.5 Implementation of the Research Study
A letter of introduction and contact with District Education Officers were established by the Pre-primary
Department of MoES to inform them about the survey, introduce Cambridge Education and ask for their
participation in the survey. A pre-test of the tools was conducted with the intention to assess the relevance
of the questions, adequacy of variables, skip patterns, establishing the duration of interview session, as
well as testing the functionality and application of the tablets. The results of the pilot study were analysed
and interpreted, some questions modified.
On arrival in each district, the researcher conducted introductory meetings with the Chief Administrative
Officer (CAO) and the District Education Officer (DEO) to present the letter from the MoES, to seek their
approval to commence the survey, and to gain assistance in setting up interviews with the CAO, DEO,
Community Development Officer (CDO), District Inspector of Schools (DIS), and the District ECD Focal Point
Page 51 of 66
as well as Centre Coordinating Tutors (CCT). Semi-structured interviews, were then conducted. The main
purpose of these interviews was to collect views and data on knowledge of the 2007 ECD policy, the
implementation status of the policy and related guidelines especially in regard to practices and adherence
to establishment and registration of ECD Centres, ECD budget allocation, support supervision and
regulation, capacity building, and to ascertain roles and responsibilities in the implementation of the policy.
Then, in each district, with the assistance of the DEO and other district officials, three sub-counties were
identified. Two of these needed to be predominantly rural sub-counties, while one should be an urban sub-
county – generally the sub-county within which the district headquarters is situated. The researchers were
tasked with identifying sub-counties which would have different ECCE provision and patterns of use.
Following the selection, the researcher visited each sub-county in turn and working with the LC3
Chairperson and Counsellors identified up to five ECD sites representing each of the types or modes of
service delivery (i – v) in a particular parish or locality. Where the LC3 Chairperson and Counsellors were
unable to identify a particular type in the selected parish then the researcher was to replace that type with
an extra example of the predominant type. By so doing the study would gain a rapid overview of the types
which are under-developed and those which are common across the 10 districts.
Following the selection of the five ECD sites, each would be visited by the researcher, spending a full day
at each site. Data was collected over the course of the day, including structured observations of the physical
site, a questionnaire for the Head (or most senior member of staff present) of the ECD centre, and separate
focus group interviews with Centre Management Committee members, teachers/caregivers and parents.
Focus Group Discussions were conducted in order to obtain enlisted discussion, important points of
departure, cross-checking of information provided by the Head, and eventually a joint construction of
meaning or consensus among ECD policy stakeholder.
Structured Observation was also part of the ECD centre Surveys, implemented with the aim of establishing
the levels of compliance to MoES procedures and Guidelines for Establishing ECD Centres, as well assessing
the quality of caregiving among the ECD centres. The researcher would observe between 30 and 40 minutes
of the learning process in a live session and assess the quality of the learning process using a carefully
calibrated set of variables in an observation tool. A structured checklist was used to observe the social
context and physical settings in the form of: 1) Buildings, 2) Staffing, 3) Sanitation and hygiene facilities, 4)
Emergency facility, 5), Furniture, 6) Storage, 7) Meals, 8) Outdoor spaces, and 9) roles and responsibilities
of the caregiver (during care/teaching session), and any other necessary facilities/equipment/play material
(which are not mandatory but essential).
The questionnaire and site observation data were coded and entered onto Android Samsung Tablets that
each researcher carried, with individual password-protected access. The interview scripts were analysed
using analytical induction. Analytic induction is a research strategy aimed at systematically developing
causal explanations for types of phenomena. Meanwhile, the learning process observations were also
analysed by the early learning specialists in the team using an analytical framework that was developed for
this purpose based on the MoES’s Early Learning Standards, local conditions and international experience.
Collectively, this data was triangulated and supplemented with data from the interviews with sub-county,
district and national officials; NGO/CBO providers involved in ECD; and ECCE teacher training providers.
At national level, semi-structured interviews were also conducted. These entailed talking to policy
implementers and stakeholders to explore and grasp their point of view on ECD policy formulation,
implementation, outcome, challenges, key lessons and new priority interventions.
The overview of stakeholders involved in the research and their geographic levels is depicted in Figure 2 in
Section 2 above.
Page 52 of 66
3.6 Management and Supervision of the Research
A total of 14 researchers were selected from applications from over 20 potential researchers. Each
submitted their curricula vitae for review, assessing their existing research experience, knowledge of ECD,
experience of using Android tablets in research, and language skills. A shortlist of 14 candidates was
generated and invited for training. During the one-week training course, the 14 candidates were narrowed
down to the 10 best, using inter-rater reliability tests across use of a number of the tools and further
verification of language skills. Two researchers were then assigned to be deployed in each of the 4 regions,
one per district, with Kampala metropolitan and Moroto North added.
The week-long training was conducted by the core management team and lead social researcher in June
2017. The training focused on understanding of the ECD sector and the types of service provision, survey
and interview techniques, use of the tablets, and observation of learning events. The training was very
practical involving structured micro-interviewing sessions both with and without the tablets, as well as use
of a video of an ECCE class to practice using the learning event observation schedule. A training pack
comprising 15 different instruments was compiled and distributed to the researchers. Finally, the research
protocol was carefully explained so that all the researchers were clear as to what process they would follow
in the districts and sub-counties, as well as at each ECD Centre, and what the expectations there were
around confidentiality, their security and use and the security of the tablets.
A pilot pre-test of the research tools was conducted in two ECD Centres on 12 June 2017 in Kampala,
leading to some adjustments in the interview tools and the tablets in response to the experiences and
findings. The main changes related to rephrasing particular questions in the survey which were difficult for
the respondents to understand, reordering questions in the survey which failed to flow, removing some
repetition, and reprogramming the tablets where the skip logic was wrongly calibrated.
Each researcher was then deployed to their District, and provided with hands on support and supervision
from the core project team and lead social researcher. Daily check-in processes were initiated, involving
calls with each researcher to ask an agreed set of short questions, to resolve any challenges and to provide
guidance on next steps. Each researcher called back in once they had selected their sub-counties and the
ECD Centres to ensure that they were following the correct procedure and were selecting an adequate
range of centres. Where a particular type of provision was missing in a sub-county this information was
shared with the team. This system also allowed researchers to feed back any queries that they had
concerning typology of a particular centre and selection of centres to be researched as the process they
followed in selecting the ECD Centres at district and sub-county levels was complex and was likely to yield
some unexpected results, which would require intervention from the core team to resolve. In addition, the
Project Administrator kept a log on Excel of the number of ECD Centres that each researcher had visited
and uploaded. This ensured that adequate numbers of centres were visited and that data was unloaded
timeously. This system worked well and ensured that no researcher fell behind in collecting and uploading
data. The tracking systems on the tablets were also used to verify the position of the researchers and to
ensure that they were following their agreed schedule of visits.
As a further level of quality assurance and support the lead social researcher and a senior member of the
core team visited each of the researchers in the field to review their output and process during the first
two weeks of the data collection process. This picked up some minor anomalies of practice which were
rapidly corrected.
During the 18 days of data collection in the field, 143 questionnaires were collected from 143 ECD Centres
across Uganda in over 8% of the districts. None of the ECD Centres selected refused access and all were
happy to cooperate, however, in Karamoja, three selected centres were not completed due to closure
owing to termination of the World Food Programme. Four of the questionnaires collected were lost as they
were being transferred from the tablets. In some cases the potential respondents had to be reassured that
the name of their centre and their own names would not be shared with anyone and would not be specified
in the report. This was because many of the centres are not registered and are not paying tax. They were
Page 53 of 66
also told that the data they would share was to be used to improve the policy and delivery of ECCE services
in Uganda.
At the end of the 3 weeks of fieldwork the researchers were required to spend two days in the project’s
Kampala office inputting the interviews they had yet to transcribe and sharing their experiences in a
debriefing exercise. The Lead ECD Policy Specialist came from South Africa to lead some of these debriefing
sessions so that she was able to get a first-hand feel of what the situation is in the ECD Centres and the
experiences of the researchers.
3.7 Data Analysis
The data from the study was analysed to understand the key variables and those variables were cross-
tabulated to better understand the effectiveness and efficiencies of the various types of delivery. In
addition, this data was compared with data that the MoES collects at district and national levels to better
understand the strengths and weaknesses of existing data collection processes and draw out the gaps in
these processes. The data loaded on the tablets was converted into Excel and exported to SPSS, and
analysed to generate statistics - mainly descriptive (frequencies, percent, mean) and some inferential.
Inferential statistics was derived using Pearson’s Chi-Square tests to assess the relationship between key
independent variables/predictor and dependent variable/outcome (rural/urban) and establishing the
statistical significance based on the probability value (p=< 0.005), and drawing up conclusions about
relations. Cross-tabulation between rural/urban, mode of service provision and other variables indicated
no statistically significant relationship.
Overall a maximum of 15 sites was planned to be profiled in each district, making a potential total of 150
profiles, with up to 30 profiles of each mode of service delivery. Due to technological and Karamoja specific
access challenges (see section 3.8), only 143 out of 150 planned sites were profiled. As highlighted in
Section 2 on findings, there was an imbalance in the modes of service delivery visited, which is significant
as the researchers were aiming to visit equal numbers of each type or mode of service provision in each
sub-county they selected. However, as outlined above, if through consultation with the local councillors
and LC3 they were unable to identify a particular mode or type of service provision in that sub-county, they
were instructed to visit any other mode available in order to ensure overall coverage of 5 Centres per sub-
county, or the 15 Centres per Researcher.
The site profiles were then analysed using correlational statistical tests to isolate and relate key variables.
From this analysed data, a set of themes were developed based on the policy and the data used to better
understand these themes, and the way that they play out in each type of ECD Centre. This allowed the
team to understand how well the various ECD types care for and stimulate children, the staffing approach
used, the infrastructure provided, and the costs associated with each type. This analysis and measurement
of how variables correlate and function in existing modes of service delivery will help determine the
proposed changes in the policy and the most effective types and approaches for use in the national scale
up of ECCE programmes.
The data collected and analysed during the research process is summarised in Section 2 above, to highlight
key information that can be used to inform the development of a revised Policy. Analytical induction
approach was used to analyse the qualitative data collected through observation, semi-structured
interviews, Focus Group Discussions. Analytical induction approach involved derivation of conclusions
(abstract concepts) from the specific data (empirical indicators) under the framework of the study
objectives. The emergent themes (regularities and commonalities) across ECD sites and stakeholder
supported the formulation of conclusions (hypotheses).
3.8 Study Limitations:
Every research study has certain limitations, with this one being no exception. Here we describe the
limitations of this study and where appropriate indicate the methods used mitigate them and limit
Page 54 of 66
negative impact.
Geographical Scope:
The Research Study was conducted in 10 out of 112 districts of Uganda. Although the selection of the ten
districts was purposively drawn to be representative of a range of Criteria (see Table 5 above), it is
acknowledged that the sample may be viewed as small and therefore not able to provide a complete
picture of the country. However, given the sampling process we believe we can make assertions which
will allow the findings to tentatively talk to the national situation. Certainly, the triangulation through
focus groups and in-depth interviews with stakeholders at all levels and across different organisations, has
helped to underpin the research findings, while indicating and verifying their veracity and relevance.
The broad geographical focus and the requirements for visiting deep rural sub-counties led to one
researcher failing to complete all 15 ECD centre visits. This is because the researcher encountered many
centres which were closed due to a food crisis in the area. This led to that district failing to produce the
data from the full number of centres, but is an indication that Centres may struggle to operate due to both
climatic/environmental conditions but also where feeding is threatened.
ECD Delivery Modes:
The study found that a majority of the existing ECD services fell under the Nursery/Kindergarten category.
There were very few Day Care Centres and Home-Based Centres across the ten profiled districts and
therefore most of the lessons and findings are drawn from Nursery/Kindergarten and Community-Based
Centres. This is not a limitation of the study insofar as it highlights this finding, which is important for
MoES’s consideration, but it is important to be aware that the lack of a depth of information through the
study about Day Care and Home-Based Centres will make it hard to provide concrete recommendations
for their improvement. Recommendations for these improvements will therefore be sought from other
programmes in the East African Region and beyond.
Participation of Centre Management Committees:
The participation of Centre Management Committees was limited in some ECD centres due to distances
to the schools and expectations for financial incentives. Although every effort was made to conduct
interviews with CMC members, in some centres only a few members of the CMC were interviewed. This
is in itself a finding.
Sub-county Selection Bias:
In each district, one of three sub-counties selected was an urban sub-county and two had to be rural.
Therefore, the bulk of the study findings necessarily relate to rural contexts. Again, this is justified as
Uganda is a predominantly rural country and previous data have tended to focus more on urban ECD
Centres, with national understanding of the dynamics of ECCE delivery in rural areas being less well
developed.
Selection of Researchers:
The researchers were selected on the basis of a number of criteria, of which their language capacity was
key. This was because without having a shared language with the respondents the researchers would not
have been able to conduct basic data collection with parents and CMC members. However, as ECD is a
relatively new area of research, few of the researchers had experience of the sector. Few of the
researchers were trained educators, so understanding of classroom dynamics for the learning event
observation had to be developed during the training, as described above. On the other hand, this also
means that they come to the research task without preconceived ideas about ECD, which could be a
benefit.
Use of Education Technology and Loss of Data:
Quantitative data collection was planned and conducted using Samsung Android tablets to allow for
uploading data in real time and to enhance the efficiency for ongoing data analysis. However, given the
weak internet connectivity in the rural districts, and the length and complexity of the questionnaires and
Page 55 of 66
observation schedules loaded on the tablets, the use of technology potentially became a hindrance.
Inconsistent electricity supply often caused delays and lack of strong internet connectivity meant that data
was not readily uploaded onto the database. As a result, four completed questionnaires were lost and
were irretrievable. More would have been lost but other researchers had followed instructions and
maintained parallel hard copy records. In fact, having to keep parallel hard copies defeats the purpose of
adopting technological strategies for data collection. Therefore, future research studies should consider
the type of data being collected, the depth of the tools being used (and thus their relative size on a tablet),
and the capacity in the areas being visited for upload. In addition, the training of those using technological
tools must be rigorous in ensuring their complete confidence with the process and introduce fail-safe
mechanisms to better guarantee data is not lost. Finally, the use of technology of this nature opens
individuals up to security risks as devices may be attractive to thieves. While paper is usually a more
laborious approach, for smaller sample sizes such as involved in this study, it also has significant
advantages that may outweigh technological approaches.
Page 56 of 66
Section 4: Reflections on the Status of Implementation of the 2007
Policy and Opportunities for the Way Ahead
4.1 ECD Policy: What is Working and what is Not Working?
The survey and supporting research indicates that:
1. The private sector has responded to the call to set up ECD centres, which have been established in
all but the most remote districts, even in deep rural areas.
However:
Although the private sector has established ECD centres, the overall coverage is poor, uneven and
does not cater for pro-poor concerns. Furthermore, the quality of the service is often poor and
may be causing more damage than good since research indicates poor quality early learning
environments can actually hamper a child’s cognitive development. As a result, most children in
Uganda under the age of 6 are still not accessing early childhood education and care in an
institutional setting, and many of those that are accessing such, are not experiencing quality play-
based education. For children under 3 years old parenting programmes may anyway be of more
value, but for those who are aged 3 – 6 low access and quality is a real concern. Enrolling under-
age children in P1 of UPE primary schools continues as access to pre-primary remains relatively
expensive and lack of access to local pre-schools is often a disincentive.
2. Most ECD Centres sampled reported that they had received visits from Government officials, in
the form of inspection, in the past few months.
However:
There is no dedicated capacity and budget at the District and Sub-County levels for ECCE; there is
a reliance on inspection grants to fund ECCE activities; and any capacity that does exist is over-
stretched and under-trained.
3. A registration system has been established and generally ECD centre owners are not against
registering if the process was made more user friendly and it was not aligned to identification of
institutions for tax purposes.
However:
The registration process and system appears punitive, lengthy and unfair. Such mechanisms
encourage evasion and presentation of excuses to avoid compliance. Furthermore, there are
currently limited and weak mechanisms for keeping track of registration and compliance data, and
a lack of capacity for follow-up and feedback loops surrounding such data.
4. The present classification system for ECD education centres is in place and most ECD centres could
place themselves in that system.
However:
When examined closely most ECD centres are just some variety of nursery school. The
classification tends to divide and confuse practitioners and can be used as a way of avoiding
registration and adherence to minimum standards. In turn, such confusion further undermines the
(already limited) capacity of District and Sub-County officials to monitor and support existing
Centres in the appropriate way.
5. There is some capacity to train ECD teachers and trainers.
However:
While training facilities and programmes exist for both ECD teachers and trainers they are of mixed
or unknown/unmonitored quality and some are based on profit making by private colleges so are
deemed expensive. Training programmes in private institutions are not quality assured by any
Page 57 of 66
external body so do not adhere to any minimum standards. While the public sector courses in
teacher training colleges do adhere to certain standards, there is limited capacity for delivery and
no culture of research and reflection, so the teaching and learning modalities are often old-
fashioned and over academic.
6. There is a nascent hierarchy of qualifications in ECD teaching, with a certificate as the base
qualification, advancing through diploma to degree and then higher degrees.
However:
While the hierarchy of qualifications exists, in fact there is little articulation of competency and no
parity of esteem between levels, leaving candidates frustrated with qualifications which lead
nowhere and a lack of portability between private and public institutions. There is also no
mechanism in place to recognise proven prior experience (RPL) against a qualification and limited
recognition also of vocational routes into ECCE. The prevalence of dead ends and closed pathways
means that career planning is not often observed, and advancement is often not based on skills
and experience.
7. There are some good examples of all five types of ECD education service providers in the ten
districts sampled. These are generally offering at least an acceptable level of early childhood
education and care to their children. A number of these are profiled in Report 2 in Attachments.
However:
Although there are some good examples of each of the types of service provision, most of the
centres visited – of all types – failed to meet with the required minimum standards set by the MoES
and, more important, would not be able to provide a good educational grounding for young
children, or act as an effective route to school readiness.
8. The sampled ECD Centres charge a very wide range of user charges, which are adequate to
maintain the services they provide, with a minority being subsidised by either international or
national NGOs, or the state.
However:
The majority charge monthly amounts which are out of range for most poor people, and daily
payments are even more expensive, even though it is the most financially insecure and the poorest
who would generally have to resort to this means of payment. Furthermore, the majority of
parents indicate that it is fees that hold them back from sending their children to ECD Centres,
while further available research also supports this by showing that many parents are enrolling their
children in Primary 1 classes underage to ensure they are in an educational setting, but a free one.
9. Most ECD Centres are run by people who have a proper regard for the safety of the children in
their care.
However:
Teachers in a small minority of centres were observed mistreating children, including unacceptable
forms of physical and psychological abuse. Such abuse would be prevented if proper inspections
of these sites was undertaken by district officials trained in ECD provision.
10. There is increasing parental and community commitment and support of ECD and understanding
of what it entails. This has begun to help ECD Centres tackle parents’ concerns that the medium of
instruction in ECD Centres is the learners’ mother tongue.
However:
Low levels of parental engagement with their children’s ECD Centre was consistently mentioned
as a challenge and parents are still observed moving their children from ECD Centres which teach
in the mother tongue to private ones teaching in English.
11. There is some ECD centre networking already and a few associations which claim to represent the
interests of those involved in ECE.
However:
Page 58 of 66
These associations have very limited coverage and seem unknown outside the major urban
centres. As part of professionalising ECD teaching as a legitimate career option, it is essential that
teachers have representation at national and regional levels and can advance their interests in a
collective manner. The present structure of stand-alone private centres does not encourage
teachers associating with each other, but such associations are a key aspect of a profession and
need to be developed. Teachers will need assistance in this regard. The MoES could foster this by
insisting that there should be one body that it will deal with representing ECD teachers and then
leave the teachers to form such a body or advance an existing association to expand and play that
role. Once such a body is formed the MoES should meet with it regularly and use it to help shape
the future of the sector and the profession.
4.2 What are the Opportunities?
The present system and infrastructure presents a number of opportunities for increasing enrolment and
equitable coverage. As per the international/regional experience, policies should encourage an
empowering, interdisciplinary and child-centred approach; the role of parents, families and other
caregivers should be emphasised in interventions in order to support early child development;
stakeholders must recognise that quality is essential and that poor quality ECD services will not deliver
positive child outcomes; the sector should use and build upon existing entry points and delivery platforms;
and the Government of Uganda should prioritise the most disadvantaged and hardest to reach to ensure
equity and maximum value for investment.
So, the opportunities include:
• Build on existing parenting programmes for parents of the 0 – 3 year olds to reach all communities
which require such support, particularly in rural areas. Where appropriate the LABE model of
community supported home-based care and education should be adopted and mainstreamed.
• Build the capacity of existing ECD departments in the ECD qualification accrediting universities
such that they can provide real support and quality assurance services and mechanisms to colleges
which train ECD teachers and whose qualifications they accredit, and extend their reach to include
private colleges which train ECD teachers. Also ensure that these universities can act as centres of
research and thought leadership in the ECD field nationally. At the same time build the capacity
of the vocational colleges such that they can offer more practice-based qualifications in ECD
teaching which can be quality assured by DES and the TiET units of the MoES.
• Assist the existing CSOs and centres involved in ECD network more effectively and help them in
developing an association of ECD education providers and of ECD teachers, to better represent the
interests of these two groups at national level.
• Build on the present capacity in public primary schools and private centres to increase enrolment
of 3 – 6 year olds. This must be done incrementally based on both public primary schools and
private centres proving that they can provide a reasonable quality service, which does not harm
the children in their care. Experience in other African countries of a single modality, particularly
building all provision into Grade 0 in public primary schools, indicates that it is problematic unless
adequate funding is made available for suitable infrastructure and learning materials, adequate
numbers of trained teachers and quality is monitored closely. This solution generally advantages
those attending better urban primary schools which tends to perpetuate the advantage of the
already advantaged children.
• Use the pro-poor focus that the government has in ensuring that the children aged 3 – 6 in the
most marginalised communities have access to pre-primary education in a way that works for
them and their community. This will involve different modalities in different communities, with
pastoralist communities being particularly sensitive to the appropriateness of the sort of ECD
provision on offer. Where possible this should be multi-dimensional, able to offer food support,
medical and hygiene assistance as well as education and care.
Page 59 of 66
4.3 Priorities for the MoES
The research indicated there is a lack of government leadership in the ECE space. This is illustrated by the
lack of targeting of the poor for access, lack of dedicated budget and specific role players at district level
driving ECE, lack of accurate data and information flows, varied and unmonitored training and lack of clear
career paths for ECE teachers, and provision through private providers who may put the profit motive
before providing quality early education. Most immediate is the need for the MoES, with the partner
government departments, to provide a clear vision of where early years education is going in the country,
so building on the statements in the current ECD Policies and the Education Act. In addition, to help rectify
the present situation the MoES could consider:
1. Putting in place a single, user-friendly ‘one stop shop’ approach to registration of ECD Centres with
no dual system of licensing and then registering. The registration service should be free and should
aim to prioritise the minimum standards that are relevant at different stages of a Centre’s maturity
towards a gold standard reached within a set period. The requirements must not be overly onerous
or expensive, albeit that they should ensure children’s needs are being met. This could also enable
the MoES to introduce a conditional registration process (possibly for a fixed time) allowing
unregistered ECD Centres to come in from the cold and register based on less rigorous criteria. Once
these centres have come forward they will be on the database and can be supported and monitored.
2. Removing the current categorisation of ECD Centres which is both confusing and meaningless in
practice. Focus instead on setting agreed sectoral minimum standards for children through an
interactive process involving communities, schools, and centres which provide ECE services.
3. Surveying ECD education sites annually and adding the data to EMIS so that in future EMIS data
collection processes include ECD centres. Also add categories to demographic and household
surveys and any other national surveys that would enable a better oversight of early years
education.
4. Establishing model ECD centres in each region as ‘champions’ of effective ECE delivery, and identify
and promote model teacher training colleges offering ECD courses. Use both model ECD centres and
colleges as an inspiration and guides for other centres and colleges.
5. Putting ECD teachers and caregivers on the government payroll and increase their salaries, along
with strengthening their training to come into line with similar professions. This would need to be
undertaken gradually and incrementally as it will have a long-term impact on the government wage
bill.
6. Regulating and continuing to encourage private sector involvement in ECD education provision. The
private sector will continue to play a key role, as any national, publicly-led alternative would be
prohibitively expensive.
7. Motivating for the appointment of at minimum one dedicated ECD Focal Person (rather than Point
Person) in every district. If possible, they should be managed by the Ministry of Gender, Labour and
Social Development to deliver the full range of services required by the NIECD Policy. This person
should have no other responsibilities beyond ECD leadership and oversight.
8. Putting in place a fast track process to get already-practicing ECD teachers and caregivers onto
accredited qualification programmes. These should be vocational and have limited academic
demands. They should be conducted across the country during weekends and school holidays and
should be subsidised by government. They should enable a series of smaller, discrete training
elements linked to credits that build up to a full qualification, so that trainees can adopt different
paces in achieving certification.
Page 60 of 66
9. Setting up a system of registering ECD teachers and incentivise them to register with a ‘golden hand-
shake’ i.e. a one off cash payment.
10. Strengthening career pathways through colleges and universities, as well as examining options for
vocational pathways and options for structured (properly assessed) recognition of prior learning and
experience to be factored against qualification credits.
11. Assisting public primary schools to offer ECD places to children in their community as part of their
service to the community, without user fees. A primary school should not be able to offer ECD classes
until it has met the same standards as private ECD centres, with a focus on the quality of delivery,
the staff and learning materials, rather than excessive focus on the infrastructure, which should be
adequate but does not need to be ‘first-world’ at this stage.
12. Providing all registered ECD centres with a package of policy and guideline documents, good practice
CD/DVD, some guidelines on local materials, and some equipment e.g. for playgrounds and play to
address the shortage of materials found in ECD Centres, as according to the survey.
13. In addition, motivating for the appointment and training of at least one dedicated ECE Inspector in
every district. These could be managed by the Ministry of Education and Sports but should liaise
very closely with the ECD Focal Person in ensuring overall quality of ECD services in their districts.
One of their key roles would need to be the oversight of registration and compliance processes, as
well as ensuring feedback loops between data and information gathering, and support and training
provision.
14. Putting in place incentives and subsidies for providers who can prove that they are targeting and
catering in a real sense for the poorest members of their community. Also bolstering PPP policies to
encourage growth of the sector overall.
15. Simplify the Learning Framework for 3 – 6 year olds and translate it into main national languages.
Publish a user-friendly Learning Framework for 0 – 3 year olds. Distribute both documents widely
and support their use with adequate and targeted training.
16. Encouraging communities and CSOs to provide parenting programmes and foster the LABE model of
home-based provision for 0-3 year olds, rather than encouraging institutional based provision.
Support this with stronger advocacy of the benefits of ECD and use of the mother tongue in ECD
classes. The advocacy campaign should target fathers as well as mothers.
17. Encouraging parents, communities and local officials to participate in forms of monitoring and
evaluation that enable better oversight and information feedback loops into the Centre e.g. through
the creation of guidelines for participatory M&E, provision of funding to ECD Focal Persons to
conduct outreach and host training platforms, and encouragement of (existing and new) NGO
initiatives in training and community mobilisation.
Page 61 of 66
List of Attachments – Specialist Reports
Annex 1 – Specialist Report of the Senior Researcher: Quantitative Analysis of the District-Level
Research Study
Annex 2 – Specialist Report of the ECD Policy Adviser: Qualitative Analysis of National and District-
Level Research
Annex 3 – Specialist Report of the Economist: Costing the Action Plan
Annex 4 – Specialist Report of the ECD Qualifications Framework and Accreditation System Expert:
Qualitative Analysis of National and College-Level Observations and Research
Annex 5 – GIS Map of ECD Centre locations visited during the research
List of Training and Research Tools • List of Districts and Researchers representing each District
• Field Research Protocol
• Coding Instructions
• CAO, DEO, Inspector & ECD Focal Point Interview
• District Data Sheet for DEOs
• CCT Interview
• CSO/Private Sector/NGOs Interview
• LC3 and LC3 Councillors Interview
• Mapping Protocol
• ECCE Questionnaire (for Owner or Head Teacher) – PAPER VERSION
• Site Observation Checklist – PAPER VERSION
• Datasheet for ECCE Owner/Head Teacher
• Session Observation Tool
• ECCE Questionnaire for Teacher/s
• ECCE Questionnaire for Parent/s
• ECCE Questionnaire for CMC Member/s
• Datasheet for CMC FGD
• ECCE Focus Lists to Inform Interviews
• Interview Tools of the ECD Policy Expert for National, District and Centre Level Interviews
• Interview for Lead Trainer
• Interview for Principal of Primary Teacher College
• Debrief with Trainers
• Observation of Caregiver Training
• Research Training Presentations x 5
Page 62 of 66
Page 63 of 66
Endnotes
1 Figures extracted from BMAU/Ministry of Finance Briefing Paper no 7/16 ‘Quality Pre-primary Education in Uganda: How can universal
access be achieved?’ On p27 in section 2.6 we provide an estimate of the proportion of children aged under 6 and between 4 and 6 in pre-
schools in Uganda.
2 De Haan M, Gunnar MR, eds. Handbook of developmental social neuroscience. New York: Guilford Press, 2009. 3 Heckman, J. 2012. Invest in early childhood development: Reduce deficits, strengthen the economy. [Available from:
http://heckmanequation.org/content/resource/invest-early-childhood-development-reduce-deficits-strengthen-economy] 4 World Bank, 2015. Early Childhood Development: Context.
[Available from: http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/earlychildhooddevelopment/overview#1] 5 Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development (2016) Quality pre-primary education in Uganda. How can universal access be
achieved? Budget Monitoring and Accountability Unit Briefing Paper 7/16. 6 Crouch, L. (in press 2017) Stumbling at the first step: efficiency implications of poor performance in the foundational first five years. Cited
in M Woodhead, J. Rossiter, A Dawes & A Pankhurst (2017) Scaling-up early learning in Ethiopia: exploring the potential of 0-Class. Young
Lives. 7 Brunette, T.;Crouch, L., Cummiskey, C. Dick, A., Henny, C et al (2017) Repetition of Primary 1 and Pre-primary education in Uganda.
International Development Working Paper 2017-2 RTI International. 8 MoESTS (2015) The Gender in Education Strategic Plan: 2015-2020. Kampala: Ministry of Education, Science, Technology and Sports and
Plan International. 9 Shonkoff, J. (2009) Investment in early childhood development lays the foundation for a prosperous and sustainable society. In Templay
R.E, Boivin M, Peters R. Dev (eds) Encyclopedia of Early Childhood Development : Montreal: Centre for Excellence for ECD. 10 Engle, P et al (2011) Strategies for reducing inequalities and improving developmental outcomes for young children in low and middle-
income countries. The Lancet, 378 (9799): 1339-1353. 11 Rubio-Codina M, Attanasio O, Meghir C, Varela N, Grantham-McGregor S. The socioeconomic gradient of child development: cross-
sectional evidence from children 6–42 panel in Bogota. J Hum Resour 2015; 50: 464–83. 12 Walker, S, Wachs, T& Grantham McGregor S. 2011 Inequality in early childhood: risk factors for early childhood development. The Lancet,
378: 1325-1338. 13 Moffit t, T. et al (2011) A gradient of childhood self-control predicts health, wealth and public safety. Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences of the USA 108 (7) 2693-2698.
14 Unpacking Sustainable Development Goal 4 - Education 2030 - www.unesco.org. 15 UNESCO (2015) Global Monitoring Report EDUCATION FOR ALL 2000-2015: achievements and challenges. Paris: UNESCO. 16 Biersteker, L, Dawes, A, Hendricks, L & Tredoux C (2016)
Penn, H. (2005) Unequal childhoods: Children’s Lives in Developing Countries. London: Routledge. 17 National Planning Authority (2007) Uganda Vision 2040. 18 Walker, S. P., Wachs, T. D., Meeks Gardner, J., Lozoff, B., Wasserman, G. A., Pollitt, E. et al. (2007). Child development: risk factors for
adverse outcomes in developing countries. The Lancet, 369, 145-157. 19 In Uganda, the term caregiver is commonly used to refer to ECD centre teachers who do not have a teaching qualification. In the
international literature, the term refers to anyone who takes main primary care of the child. 20 Evans, J (2005) Evans, J. L. (2006). Parenting programmes: an important ECD intervention strategy. Paper commissioned for the EFA
Global Monitoring Report 2007 Paris: UNESCO.
Forehand, R., & Kotchick, B. A. (1996). Cultural diversity: A wake-up call for parent training.
Behavior Therapy, 27, 187-206.
Walker, S & Chang, S (2013) Effectiveness of parent support programmes in enhancing learning in the under-3 age group. Early Childhood
Matters, 45 -49
Richter, L. & Naicker, S. (2012). A review of published literature on supporting and strengthening child-caregiver relationships (parenting).
Washington, DC: USAID/PEPFAR AIDSTAR-One. 20 http://www.fhi360.org/sbcc 21 Baker-Henningham, H, Boo, FL (2010) Early childhood stimulation interventions in developing countries: A comprehensive literature
review. Bonn, Germany: Inter-American Development Bank. Retrieved from
http://idbdocs.iadb.org/wsdocs/getdocument.aspx?docnum=35349131 21 Rao N, Sun J, Wong JMS, Weekes B, Ip P, Shaeffer S, Young M, Bray M, Chen E, Lee D (2014) Early childhood development and cognitive
development in developing countries: a rigorous literature review. London: Department for International Development. 22 Britto, P., Lye, S, Proulx, K. Yousafzai, A Matthews, S Vaivada, T et al (2016) Advancing Early Childhood Development: from Science to
Scale 2 Nurturing care: promoting early childhood development The Lancet
October 4, 2016,http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31390-3 23 Woodhead, M (2014). Early Childhood Development Delivering inter-sectoral policies, programmes and services in low-resource
settings. Topic Guide. The Health & Education Advice & Resource Team (HEART). www.heart-resources.org 24 Nadeau, S.; Katoaka, N, Valerio, A, Neuman, M and Kennedy Elder, L. (2011) Investing in Young Children An Early Childhood Development
Guide for Policy Dialogue and Project Preparation. Washington DC: the World Bank. 25 Berry, L.(2013) Stepping up national development: prioritising essential services for young children. Presentation at the Launch of Child
Gauge 2013. 26 Belsky, J., Vandell, D. L., Burchinal, M., Clarke-Stewart, K. A., McCartney, K., Owen et al. (2007). Are There Long-Term Effects of Early
Child Care? Child Development, 78, 681-701. 27 7 Center on the Developing Child, “The Foundations of Lifelong Health Are
Built in Early Childhood,” accessed January 5, 2017, http://www.developingchild.harvard.edu 28 Sanchez, C, Turner, C. What Exactly Is 'High-Quality' Pre-school?
http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2014/04/22/304563233/what-exactly-is-high-quality-pre-school 29 http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2016/07/19/486172575/a-harsh-critique-of-federally-funded-pre-k
Page 64 of 66
30 Rao, N., Sun, J., Pearson, V., Pearson, E., Liu, H., Constas, M. A., & Engle, P. L. (2012). Is something better than nothing? An evaluation of
early childhood programs in Cambodia. Child Development, 83(3), 864-876. 31 Rao et al (2014) Above 32 Fukkink, R. G. & Lont, A. (2007). Does training matter? A meta-analysis and review of caregiver training studies. Early Childhood
Research Quarterly, 22, 294-311.
Eurofound. (2015). Working conditions, training and quality of services: A systematic review. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the
European Union. 33 Woodhead, M; Ames, P., Vennam, U., Abebe, W & Streuli, N. (2009) Equity and Quality: challenges for early childhood and primary
education in Ethiopia, India and Peru. The Hague, Bernard van Leer Foundation. 34 UNESCO (2015) Global Monitoring Report EDUCATION FOR ALL 2000-2015: achievements and challenges. Paris: UNESCO. 35 Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS). (2012). Uganda demographic and health survey 2011: Preliminary report. Kampala: UBOS. Cited by
Ejuu, G. (2012) The Status of Implementation of the Education Sector Early Childhood Development Policy in Uganda. Kampala: UNESCO. 36 Engel, P. L., Black, M. M., Behrman, J. R., Cabral de Mello, M., Gertler, P. J., Kapiriri, L. et al. (2007). Strategies to avoid the loss of
developmental potential in more than 200 million children in the developing world. The Lancet, 369, 229-242. 37 For example, Levin & Schwartz (2006), Results for Development (2016) 38 Although they provide some interesting information, it is unwise, as the authors themselves argue, to treat these figures as anything
other than indicative because they are derived from sources that do not use a consistent methodology. 39 For example, all 3- and 4-year olds in England can receive 570 free hours per year. There are also provisions for some targeted support.
https://www.gov.uk/help-with-childcare-costs/free-childcare-and-education-for-2-to-4-year-olds 40 Levin & Schwartz (2006) 41 Gillian and Roy (2016) 42 Child Study involves teachers using a set of pre-determined indicators to observe and monitor their learners both in school and in the
community. The aim is to use this form of action research to improve and target their own teaching to the needs of the children. 43 Ejuu, G (2012) The Status of Implementation of the Education Sector Early Childhood Development Policy in Uganda. Kampala: Uganda
National Commission for UNESCO 44 Crouch and Kibombo (2016). Foundational first five years of education: Lessons from the data, cost to the system, and approaches to
improve. Unpublished technical background paper. 45 Plan Uganda (2013) and Plan Uganda (nd) 46 Brunette, T., Crouch, L., Cummiskey, C., Dick, A., Heeny, C., Jordan, R., Merseth, K., Nabacwa, R., Pressley, J. and Weatherholt, T. (2017).
Repetition of Primary 1 and Pre-primary Education in Uganda. International Development Working Paper 2017-02. North Carolina: RTI. 47 Poverty in this case is measured by the percentage of people living below the poverty line 48 Ministry of Finance, Planning & Economic Development (2016) Quality pre-primary education in Uganda: How can universal access be
achieved? BMAU Briefing Paper [7/16], Kampala 49 Bracey, G.; Montie, J. E.; Xiang, Z & Schweinhart, L J. (2007). The IEA Pre-primary Study: Findings and Policy Implications. Ypsilanti, Michigan:
High/Scope Educational Research Foundation. 50 See www.saflii.org/za/journals/ADRY/2014/12.pdf 51 Brunette, T., Crouch, L., Cummiskey, C., Dick, A., Heeny, C., Jordan, R., Merseth, K., Nabacwa, R., Pressley, J. and Weatherholt, T. (2017).
Repetition of Primary 1 and Pre-primary Education in Uganda. International Development Working Paper 2017-02. North Carolina: RTI. In
this paper based on research in 2 districts the authors found that repetition in P1 is a substitute for pre-primary education. In cases where
the parents are poor and/or where there were few pre-primary education options available, some parents said they enrolled their children
in P1 at an earlier age. They also used this as a free option compared to paying for pre-primary schooling. Parents expected that doing this
meant that their under-age children might have to repeat P1 or that they would learn less. 52 Save the Children, 2015, Early Literacy and Maths Endline Evaluation Report 53 Types would include: Public referring to Government-run UPE schools with income-generating ECCE classes attached; Not-for-Profit
provision by NGOs, FBOs and CBOs; Private referring to for-profit provision by individuals and companies; Community and Informal
referring to voluntary contributions within the community, including positive parenting initiatives 54 The delivery modes refer to day care centres; home based centres; community based centres; nursery schools or kindergartens; and
lower primary classes 55 See Education Statistical Abstract 2011 for regionally varied spread of ECD sites.
