| General Information |
Project/Program |
Project |
| Project Name |
Cambodia Basic Education Project |
| Duration |
2004-Feb.17- 2007 August.16 |
| Donor |
United States Agency for International Development (USAID) |
| Implementiong Organization |
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports |
| Sector and/or Subsector Classification |
Education |
| Region |
Rattanakiri, Siem Reap, Kompong Chhnang, Kampot, Kompong Cham, Prey Veng, Phnom Penh; this later was extended to include all provinces of Cambodia. Please check Cambodia Basic Education Project Final Report pg.6 |
| Financing |
The Cambodia Basic Education (CBE) Project Final Report did not have detailed information regarding the amount for financing. |
| Analytical Information |
Stakeholders |
Asian Development Bank, Child Friendly Schools, Cooperation for a Sustainable Cambodian Society, Community Trainer, Cognizant Technical Officer, District Education Office, Education Materials Approval Board, Educational Support for Children in Underserved Populations, Handicap International, Japan Fund for Poverty Reduction, Japan International Cooperation Agency, Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports, Non-governmental organizations, Primary Education Department, Provincial Education Office, Pedagogic Research Department, Provincial Teacher Training Center, Save the Children (Norway), Technical Group Leader, Teacher Training Center, Teacher Training Department, United Nations International Children's Fund, United States Agency for International Development, Voluntary Service Overseas, World Bank, Affected People, Target Group, Civil Society |
| Cross-cutting Issue |
Environment |
This project was different in that it did not have any district and provincial education offices compared to other organization projects like UNDP. |
| Gender |
No information was found regarding gender issues in the report. |
| Impact Analysis |
The project aligns with the Curriculum Development Policy (which was in the stage of drafting) and the USAID/Cambodia: Interim Strategic Plan (2002-2005). |
| Effectiveness |
Ownership/Partnership |
Evaluation |
The frequent parallel commitments toward the project led to the success by tying up individuals and key stakeholders. In addition, the policy had seeked to receive agreements from all concerned departments for education standards for the project implementation. |
| Rating |
4/5 |
| Policy Coherence/Harmonization |
Evaluation |
There was lack of synchronization among the donor funding and MoEY's priority pipelines rarely occurs. These caused delays for the project as it took a long time to agree on a mechanism; however, the final curriculum materials were praised due to collaboration, quality and relevance. The overall outcome had been a success. The report has a list of key CBE partners projects and organizations in detail regarding description and collaboration. The NGOs were criticized to have more open sharing of information and to be more systematic with the partners and MoEYS. |
| Rating |
3/5 |
| Evaluation Framework |
Evaluation |
The project had monitoring visits, surveys, workshops for staff and reports that focus on school-based measure of implementation of the new curriculum and standards. According to the report, provinces and districts wrote consolidated reports and plans based on reports at field trials. |
| Rating |
3/5 |
| Alignment/Composition of Finance |
Evaluation |
There is no information regarding the alignment of the project budget. |
| Rating |
N.A. |
| Other Remarks |
This final report was written by the RTI International (winning contractor) to be reviewed by the USAID. The report explains in detailed reasons of why the project selected the two Non-governmental organizations. |
