Attachment 2: Review of Key Elements Community Education Grants: Monitoring, Management Education Planning Evaluation and Approach/Interface approach Plan Adjustments: with DepED: Key Questions Key Questions Key Questions Key Questions What are the Is there evidence to What are the Is the current significant suggest that there is strengths and management contributions of merit in continuing to weaknesses of approach/interface the PRIME provide grants to all the quarterly with DepED community levels within DepED to MEPA as a effective and education support access to mechanism for efficient in planning approach quality basic education monitoring providing funding that may be for disadvantaged IP progress and support and sustained and Muslim adjusting plans technical /institutionalized to communities? for basic assistance to improve education DepED? education Is access to quality basic nationally? planning at the education being community level? improved through the What are the grants mechanisms? strengths and What evidence is weaknesses of available to Are better education the MEPA as a support the outcomes being mechanism for hypothesis that achieved by providing achieving the community grants to schools? better education outcomes for planning approach How are grants disadvantaged improves access channelled to IP and Muslim to quality basic proponents communities? education for IP performing in and Muslim boys supporting improved and girls? access to quality basic education? How important is planning at the Are the strategies, community level policies and processes to the piloted by PRIME for achievement of grant management better education (Guidelines, outcomes? Audit/Reviews, GMIS) effective and efficient for adoption/adaptation by government or AusAID?
Attachment 2: Review of Key Elements Community Education Planning approach Education Grants: Monitoring, Evaluation and Plan Adjustments: Management Approach/Interface with DepED: Key Questions What are the significant contributions of the PRIME community education planning approach that may be sustained /institutionalized to improve education planning at the community level? What evidence is available to support the hypothesis that the community education planning approach improves access to quality basic education for IP and Muslim boys and girls? How important is planning at the community level to the achievement of better education outcomes? Key Questions Is there evidence to suggest that there is merit in continuing to provide grants to all levels within DepED to support access to quality basic education for disadvantaged IP and Muslim communities? Is access to quality basic education being improved through the grants mechanisms? Are better education outcomes being achieved by providing grants to schools? How are grants channelled to proponents performing in supporting improved access to quality basic education? Are the strategies, policies and processes piloted by PRIME for grant management (Guidelines, Audit/Reviews, GMIS) effective and efficient for adoption/adaptation by government or AusAID? Key Questions What are the strengths and weaknesses of the quarterly MEPA as a mechanism for monitoring progress and adjusting plans for basic education nationally? What are the strengths and weaknesses of the MEPA as a mechanism for achieving better outcomes for disadvantaged IP and Muslim communities? Key Questions Is the current management approach/interface with DepED effective and efficient in providing funding support and technical assistance to DepED?
prime-independent-sustainability-review.docx