A Review of The Day Care Centre Programme, AKES (I)

Prepared for

The Aga Khan Educational Services, India
and
The Aga Khan Foundation

by

Robert G. Myers
Consultative Group on Early Childhood Care and Development

February 1990

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

It was a pleasure and privilege to work with the dedicated and capable group of people who make the Day Care Centre Programme a success.

I am particularly grateful to the DCC supervisors (Malek, Zarina, Zubeda, Naina, Chaya and Noorbanu) for their willingness to share their wisdom, for their hard work during long hours while we were together in Rajkot and the field. They were very patient with me, a non-Gujarati speaking foreigner, and they made me feel very much at home and part of a team, despite my own frustration at not being able to communicate directly.

The staff of the Rajkot office (Mrs. Batavia, Munir and Anwar) were efficient in all local arrangements (including the translation and production of interview schedules under a very tight schedule). But they did not stop with administrative matters; rather, they participated fully in the discussions and field work, adding their insights, and folding in a sense of humor. That was also true of Ila from CHETNA, without whom I would have understood very little during the field visit.

The guidance of Nirupa Bhangar and of Hina Hallani from the Bombay office of AKES was invaluable. A large share of the burden of translations fell on their shoulders. I appreciate both their substantive inputs into the process and their gracious hospitality.

I owe thanks to Rajni Khanna and Judith Evans for asking me to carry out this consultancy and for making the administrative arrangements necessary to set it in motion.

Finally, I am grateful for the kindnesses shown by the villagers of Sangodhra and Chitravad who invited me into their homes and who answered our many questions in spite of time pressures and social conventions that could have kept them from participating in the survey. The visit to Sangodhra was particularly memorable: we were fed and housed and made a part of the Community's January 19th celebration honoring the 1983 visit of His Highness.

In short, this was an exciting and rewarding experience

INTRODUCTION

The Charge

The general charge set out in the terms of reference of my consultancy was:

In addition, it was hoped that I might shed some light on functioning of "coaching classes" at the primary school level and comment on the replicability of the experience.

Organization of the Report

This report is presented in five sections. The remainder of this introductory section will set out sources of information, describe the method followed in carrying out the survey of DCC children, parents, teachers, and other programme participants, and comment briefly on the changing context within which the review has been carried out. Section II will focus on the coverage, quality and impact of the services delivered through the DCC programme, with attention specifically to education, health, nutrition, and adult education. In Section III, comments and recommendations will be made about management, administration, and organization. Included in the section will be a discussion of costs and finances as well as comments on the process of administrative decentralization. A fourth section will be devoted specifically to looking at coaching classes and the idea of beginning AK primary schools. The final section will present more general conclusions and recommendations. A fuller description of the DCC survey and of results obtained can be found in Attachment B.

Method and Sources of Information

Background reading for the consultancy included a review of (1) previous evaluations, (2) recent quarterly reports detailing DCC activities, (3) the original and revisions of the 1986-1990 Five Year Plan, (4) training reports, and (5) my own consultancy report written in July, 1986. (See Attachment A for a list of the documents consulted.)

It was also possible to draw upon (6) an evaluation of the DCC centres completed during 1989 by CHETNA. This evaluation examined the effectiveness with which teachers were implementing the new project method, introduced by CHETNA in a series of training sessions carried out during 1988 and 1989. Results of the CHETNA evaluation were made available upon arrival in Rajkot.

(7) A "Programmewise Review" written in December 1989 by Nirupa Bhangar was very helpful in providing background and setting the issues. The main source of information for the programme evaluation, however, came from (8) a survey of DCC centres carried out between January 15 and 23, 1990, and from (9) field-based discussions of the survey. Participating in the survey were the six DCC supervisors, AKES staff from the Bombay and Rajkot offices, and members of CHETNA. The main purpose of the survey/review was to generate information useful for planning and programming. A secondary, but nevertheless important purpose was to provide a learning experience for all involved through active collaboration in a process of formulating questionnaires, choosing samples of centres and children, systematically collecting data based on the questionnaires, and analyzing the data as a group.

An assumption behind the approach taken was that the supervisors, who spend a great deal of time in the field and who are in a crucial intermediate position, are most knowledgeable about how the DCC programme actually functions. The participatory review was in large part an attempt to draw out supervisors' insights, based however on current information collected in a systematic way, and reflecting the condition of the entire programme rather than of particular villages or a particular supervisor. As might be expected, the qualitative observations and specific comments of participants in the survey proved to be as important (or more so) than the descriptive totals arrived at quantitatively. Group discussions at the outset of the process, leading to the formulation of questions, and group discussion at the time of the analysis provided, independently, a rich source of general and detailed information about the operation of the DCC project and excellent suggestions for improvements.

Details of the methodology followed in the survey and a summary of results are provided in Attachment B. Here, it may be sufficient for the reader to know that a random sample of 12 DCCs was selected and that 6 children within each DCC were randomly chosen (3 from the youngest of the three age groups in the centre and 3 from the oldest) to give a general picture. Separate schedules were created to collect information about the children , and to guide interviews with parents of the selected children, as well as interviews with teachers and members of local Management Committees (LMC). In addition, an attempt was made to follow DCC graduates into primary schools. And, in the two villages where coaching classes were being carried out, these classes were observed and the teachers were interviewed.

Finally, (10) discussions were held, after the field visit, with AKES and AKHS staff in the Bombay office, and (11) some time was spent going over budgets, finances and costs.

The Context

The organizational separation of programmes dealing with education, health, rural development, housing and construction, and women helps to set programme planning, implementation, and review tasks, as do several basic guidelines. From my reading and conversations, I understood the most important of the programme guidelines to be:

These principles have led to an approach that requires a long-term commitment and a broad, altruistic perspective by participants at all levels. They also suggest that a labor-rather than capital-intensive approach is needed, without which both broad participation and sustainability are difficult to achieve. The principles dictate progressive movement toward decentralization within a "Partnership in Social Development"

The ease or difficulty of applying these principles is affected by extra-organisational concerns that also form a critical part of the context for the programme and for this evaluation

The economic hardships introduced by drought during the period from 1985-1988 have made it more difficult than originally envisaged to think in terms of self-sufficiency. At the same time, these conditions have probably facilitated the growth of a more labor-intensive approach (rather than the wholesale construction of expensive premises, for instance). And, with few occupational alternatives available as a result of the drought, it was easier to attract and maintain good teachers during the drought period than at present. The status of teachers was enhanced.

The passing of the drought and the (at least temporary) upturn in economic activity brings new challenges even as it opens new possibilities. With the economic upturn, the potential for local support has increased; however, that potential is not uniform among communities or between Ismailis and non-Ismailis, with non-Ismailis often unable to contribute economically at the same level as Ismailis. How to increase and sustain Ismaili contributions when non-Ismailis constitute an increasing portion of the DCC participants becomes an issue. In addition, the changing economic conditions make it more difficult to select and retain good teachers who now have more lucrative work options.

Since the DCC programme began, government programmes have expanded (particularly the Integrated Child Development Service and the Primary schooling) providing new options for villagers. These options compete with the AKES offerings, making attainment of self-sufficiency more difficult for DCCs. At the same time, this expansion increases the possibility of, and need for, collaborative efforts and, perhaps ironically, also increases the demand for better-quality service of the kind AKES can provide ("Programmewise Review", pg.4).

Now that the DCC programme is more than 10 years old and has grown to include centres in 49 locations, its needs have changed from what they were at the outset. The programme must now contend with such problems as maintaining motivation (time erodes motivation and the incentive for involvement has shifted with the success of the programme in including ever higher percentages of non-Ismaili participants), of turnover in personnel, and of other problems related to continuity and to sustainability. Programme successes change the context and bring new problems.

Against this background of organizational guidelines, extraorganizational changes and a maturing programme, we turn now to look at the coverage, quality, and impact of the DCC services.

SECTION II

DCC SERVICES: COVERAGE, QUALITY AND IMPACT

Coverage and Participation

Over the period since 1987, the DCC programme has shifted from a programme catering to a limited number of Ismaili children in facilities within prayer halls to a programme for all village children in premises outside prayer halls.

Since 1985, the programme has almost doubled in size -- from 25 to 49 DCCs, and from 1,108 children to an estimated 2,200. With the opening of only one more centre in 1990, the quantitative target of the five-year plan will have been reached. However, the number of total students falls far short of the 3,384 figure set in the original five-year plan, and does not reach the revised figure of 2,500 set in 1987. One reasons that the enrollment may be lower than originally estimated is that ICDS centres have been opened in many of the locations where DCC centres exist, creating some competition.

Of the 49 DCCs, only four still operate in prayer halls. And, since 1985, the percentage of non-Ismailis participating has increased from 16 percent to 41 percent. These results surpass the targets of 36 upgraded or consolidated centres (centres outside Jamatkhanas), and of 30% non-Ismailis participation set in the original 1986-1990 plan. The figures suggest that the principle of involving both Ismailis and non-Ismailis in the programme has been taken seriously and pursued vigorously.

Quality

At the outset, the DCC programme was essentially a "Day Care Programme", as its name suggests. An early childhood education component was based on free play and the provision of some materials, but was not guided by a particular methodology and teachers had received little training. In 1982, an attempt was made to upgrade quality by formulating and applying "performance objectives" and by beginning systematic training of teachers. Objectives were set for the health, nutrition and early education of the children and for the involvement of parents and older siblings. Heavy emphasis was placed on the cognitive development of children. Additional equipment and play materials were provided. With these developments, the centres began to shift from being "day care centres" to being "pre-school centres".

An evaluation of the DCCs in 1985, (by NIPPCD), was very positive and it was decided to expand the number of centres. However, quality was to be improved as well, through changes in content, in training of teachers, and by strengthening the supervisory process. Both 1983 and 1985 evaluations noted that the nutrition and health component was weak, and efforts were made within the five-year plan to bolster that component. CHETNA was contracted to help. In 1987, a decision was made to shift to a more active curriculum, based on "projects". In 1988 and 1989, training in the new curriculum was provided by CHETNA. A new set of activities to involve parents was projected. With these shifts, the DCCs began to change from being "pre-school centres" to becoming "integrated child development centres"

But has the quality of the DCC programme improved as a result of these efforts? Although lack of baseline data and a clear definition of what constitutes quality do not allow a systematic and objective view of changes over time, it is possible to examine the present quality of the service delivery, as requested in the terms of reference. That will be done in three ways: first by offering a very subjective assessment based on my own experience with a variety of similar programmes; second, by looking at the quality of various inputs to the programme (staff, buildings, materials and equipment, and the curriculum); and third, by drawing on observations of the DCCs in operation, examining the education, nutrition, health and parental education components.

Quality is a relative concept.

Comparing the DCCS with ICDS centres I have visited, I have no hesitation in saying that the quality of DCC teachers, supervisors and plant and equipment in higher, and that the organization of DCC centres to incorporate an educational component into the centre is far superior.

Comparing DCCS with private pre-school centres I have visited that are run for the elite in New Delhi, the DCCs do not have teachers trained at the same level, nor can they expect to have the same kinds of expensive and abundant equipment and materials as the New Delhi private pre-schools. However, the curriculum is as good in concept (and in the best DCCS, probably in practice) as that of elite schools.

Comparing the DCCs with similar programmes in similar settings throughout Asia, Africa, and Latin America, they would more than hold their own, and some of the DCCs would have to be classified as among the best of these centres I have been privileged to visit. The worst of the DCC centres are no worse than the average pre-school centre elsewhere being run by a para-professional.

First, a general comment: looking across the DCC centres, one cannot help but be struck by the huge differences in quality from one centre to another. Leveling up these differences by bringing sub-standard centres up to par is a major challenge.

Quality in the DCC programme depends on the quality of the teacher more than on any other element (except, perhaps, the quality of the children when they enter the programme). Teacher quality is a product of the teacher's personal and social characteristics, training and motivation.

Selection. Personal and social characteristics of the teacher can only be controlled through the selection process. Once selections are made, it is difficult to make any fundamental change, although training and organisational adjustments may help to compensate for deficiencies. For instance, a teacher who is an outsider to the village and who does not relate well personally to parents will have a difficult time carrying out at least part of her job. No training can change her status in the village. Training in inter-personal relations is unlikely to make much of an impact on villagers' perceptions of that teacher. Therefore, selection is crucial.

There is no reason to believe that the present group of teachers are better in terms of the characteristics they bring to the job than pervious DCC teachers. Indeed, there is some reason to think that the availability of good teachers might have decreased somewhat because, following the drought, other jobs have become available that compete with the teaching position. The appointment of some younger teachers, with better educational levels, could be taken as an improvement in quality, but that is not necessarily the case.

Training. A concerted effort has been made over the last two Years to train teachers. Attention has been given to health and nutrition as well as to introducing an active education curriculum. In addition, the strengthening of the supervisory structure has allowed on-the-job training for teachers. In this sense, the quality of the teaching input has been improved (performance will be discussed below). Improvements have, however, been eroded by an increase in teacher turnover.

Motivation. The service motivation that attracted some teachers to the DCCs at the outset of the programme has declined as centres have shifted from Ismaili centres to mixed centres and as more non-Ismaili teachers have been selected. Monetary and non-monetary incentives related to work satisfaction have become more important sources of motivation. Recognizing this shift, the programme has, in my opinion, done a good job of looking for new ways to keep teacher motivation high and, therefore, to maintain and improve the quality of teacher performance. These include the introduction of a standard pay scale with increments, the strengthening of personal attention through a good supervisory system, offering them possibility of promotion within the system, and instituting a teacher's day award. In spite of these efforts, teacher turnover is running at about 20%, and a feeling was expressed during the review that the salary received is not commensurate with the workload. Additional ways must be found to rationalize the workload, to adjust the salary schedule, and to provide additional non-monetary incentives for teachers. If this is not done, teacher performance will suffer and the turnover rate will continue to be high, affecting quality. Several suggestions of ways to maintain and improve motivation are made in Section V of this report.

In brief, changing attitudes and conditions have required new actions in order to maintain the quality of teacher inputs. While the quality of the system as a whole has probably been maintained as a result of these actions, the quality of particular centres has fluctuated with the coming and going of teachers. Creative ways will be required in the future to strengthen both the abilities and the motivation of teachers if the quality of DCCs is to be improved and differences in quality are to be reduced.

Provision of a training programme for Masimas represents a step forward, recognizing the importance of the Masima's contribution to the quality of a DCC.

Although the role of the Masima was not examined specifically in this evaluation, it became clear during the review that centres occasionally closed because the Masima was not present, and that some Masimas carried a very heavy workload and additional help was needed. In addition, the definition of the Masimas role simply in terms of cooking and feeding needs to be re-examined; she can provide a greater input into the quality of the centre than at present.

Perhaps the greatest improvement in the quality of the inputs to the DCC system has been in the development of a supervisory structure, the selection of supervisors from among teachers, and the provision of training for supervisors. These accomplishments should not be underestimated. A recent review of "successful" programmes in India concluded that success was directly related to development of a good supervisory system (Heaver, 1988).

The CHETNA evaluation had this to say about supervisors:

During the review, supervisors noted a number of concerns, beginning with the salary level. As with the teachers, there is a feeling by supervisors that the salary is not commensurate with the workload. If one compares the amount and quality of the work-for-salary of DCC supervisors with work-for-salary of the ICDS supervisors (including their travel allowance), the DCC supervisors seem to have a legitimate complaint.

Other problems or needs mentioned by the supervisors included: the problem of where to stay when visiting some centres, the lack of time required to do the reporting and self-evaluations requested, the lack of authority with respect to some matters (particularly matters within the jurisdiction of the LMCs) that also makes it difficult for them to offer solutions, a need for training focused on inter-personal relationships, a need for exposure to other organisations (in addition to CHETNA) that provide training assistance), and a need for additional literature.

Within financial limitations, all that can be done should be done to maintain the motivation and dedication of the supervisors, to up-grade their skills and to guard against turnover. If the supervisors continue to improve and are highly motivated, the quality of the DCCs will continue to improve.

The facilities within which one must work have an influence on programme quality. Although having fancy facilities does not indicate or guarantee quality in a programme, poor facilities can make it difficult even for a good teacher to do her job properly. Although I have always felt that facilities are a secondary consideration, one could not help but be impressed by the concerns related to facilities that were expressed during the review by teachers, LMCs, and supervisors. Space limitations, or the need to share premises with another group (at different times of day), for instance, can make it very difficult to honor the particular method and curriculum teachers have been trained to use. (There is no space for "corners" or the corners and posters must be put away each day.) Changing locations can disrupt and drastically change how a centre functions. Unsanitary or unsafe locations create major problems. In addition, rents paid for poor locations represents money that simply disappears instead of being applied toward construction or acquisition of a permanent location of better quality.

For these reasons, an effort to help communities help themselves by building or purchasing a permanent location should be encouraged. Several suggestions to this effect are included in the final section.

In general, AKES has been generous in its supply of equipment and teaching materials. The DCC centres, when compared with similar centres elsewhere, seem to be well equipped. However, as with premises, the provision of adequate toys and materials does not guarantee programme quality. Indeed, it may inhibit quality work by the teacher by cutting down on the need to be creative. Although some comments on the need for additional play materials came out in the evaluation, this was not a major concern. In some of the older centres, toys and materials need to be replaced because of heavy use over a long time. Locally-made replacements are appropriate in some instances.

In general, a visitor to a DCC centre will find children actively engaged. Most children seem to enjoy the DCC, and some even want to continue participating after they have entered primary schooling. The extent to which this is so seems to depend as much on the enthusiasm and creativity of the teacher as it does on other considerations.

Over the past two years, a change in methodology has been introduced into the DCCs. During the review, it was difficult to determine whether this change has been for the better, but responses from both teachers and supervisors exposed to both methods would indicate that the change does mark an improvement. In addition, responses to questions about what children like best and least suggest that the children have accepted the new approach.

Parental awareness of the change does not seem to be high but there is apparently some feeling that the new method is not as good because it does not put sufficient emphasis on the alphabet and on learning English.

Visitors to the 12 centres selected for the review were asked to make subjective assessments of several characteristics of the DCC environment and process. For the most part, these were favorable (see Attachment B). Most classrooms were characterized as attractive and well organized, with adequate equipment and materials, and a teacher who encourages rather than orders children and who allows children to ask questions. However, in about one-fourth of the centres, these positive characteristics were not found. And, with respect to some specific aspects of the new methodology (the proposed organisation of "corners" in accordance with a particular project), failure to meet standards was higher.

An evaluation by CHETNA provides similarly hopeful conclusions, and also identifies a number of centres and some specific areas where additional work is needed. Although most teachers were found to make a plan, following the plan and implementing the project method was more difficult. This was particularly so in cases where teachers manage three age groups. The evaluation indicates that teachers need to learn to identify easily available resources from the environment that can be used in project implementation. Also, the idea of field trips needs to be strengthened because a relatively low percentage of teachers were using field trips. Further:

The need for additional work on the project method is reflected also in teachers comments made in response to questions about what they like least to do and about problems encountered.

In brief, although the quality of the educational component of the programme has been helped by attention to planning and by a new emphasis on an active project method, additional reinforcement and motivation and practice, spiced with more attention to creativity by the teacher, will be necessary to take proper advantage of the method. The supervisors will have a major role in making this happen, through on-the-job training.

The nutrition component of the DCC programme seems to have improved over the years. In general, feeding of the children is regular, the diet is relatively nutritious, and the quantity is adequate. Malnutrition does not seem to be a serious problem among DCC children (see results from the evaluation in Attachment B). Whether this is because of the programme or because the general economic situation of these children has improved is not clear.

Again, however, the quality of the programme varies from place to place. CHETNA indicated that the snacks given to children were sufficient in only two-thirds of the centres and added the impression that the snacks do not really provide one-third of the daily requirements of calories and protein that an ideal programme should provide.

While there have been improvements in the ability of teaches to weight and use the growth chart, supervisors comments, the CHETNA evaluation, expressions by teachers of the need for further instruction, and the results of our survey all suggest that continuing attention to learning how to weight and chart is needed. Moreover, although the diagnostic ability which handling the growth chart provides, seems to have improved, follow-up nutritional counseling still needs emphasis. "Teachers have to be guided in the method of giving nutritional counseling to mothers." (CHETNA, p.19)

Problems encountered initially with the shift to the use of CARE food seem to have been taken care of, for the most part, by making policy adjustments to cover cases in which food does not arrive or is spoiled, and by providing recipes to make the food more attractive and varied.

Children have relatively few major health problems. According to our evaluation, medical check-ups, immunization, and the administration of Vitamin A and deworming tablets, are occurring as they should in most centres. Severe anemia is, apparently, very rare. Although there is need for continuing attention to the personal hygiene of children, most are clean when they come to the DCC. We found no children who could be classified as "very dirty". (This overall picture is somewhat more positive than that found in the CHETNA evaluation done several months ago. Since then, a number of measures have been taken to improve the health situation, including some additional training and provision of first aid kits to all centres.)

In spite of this relatively positive picture and the apparent improvement in this component over time (see earlier evaluations), there are a number of measures that can be taken to improve the health situations in centres that lag and to improve attention in all centres. One of these is to pay greater attention to environmental hygiene, and particularly to the lack of bathroom facilities and to the bathroom habits of the participating children. Improvements can be made also In the coordination with AKHS and public health personnel, as well as in working with parents to improve the health environment at home.

The quality of this programme component is not high; of all the programme components, this is probably the weakest. The survey and discussion of results brought out a long list of reasons why this seems to be so. These include:

It is my impression from the survey and from conversations that annual events and occasional outings stimulate participation. Involvement in Vali meetings is somewhat less successful. Participation by parents in the DCC, or even observations of activities of the children, rarely occurs.

Home visiting by teachers is not seen as an educational opportunity, rather it seems to be carried out only when necessary to recruit new children, to inform parents about a Vali meeting, or sometimes to inquire about absences or inform parents about results of weighing or the medical check-up.

A number of excellent suggestions were made for improving parental involvement. These are included in the concluding section of the report.

Impact of the Programme

The most challenging and difficult of the terms of reference given for this evaluation is that requesting an assessment of programme impact and cost- effectiveness. Strictly speaking, it will not be possible to measure programme impact. To do so would require baseline data that are not available. It would also involve looking at a comparison group, something that was not possible to do within the time available for the evaluation. Nevertheless, it is possible to provide reasonably grounded opinions about the programme's impact on children, parents, and the communities based on observations of supervisors, parents, primary school teachers and others.

Nor can the cost-effectiveness of the programme be determined in a strict sense. That is because the measures of effectiveness and impact are weak. However, costs can be assessed (see Section III) and, when put together with judgments about effectiveness, reasonable conclusions can be drawn.

Although no baseline data were available, we thought it would be possible to get an idea of the programme impact on children by asking a sample of parents whether they saw improvements in the child as a result of their participation in the DCC. As explained in Attachment B, this question brought an almost unanimous response of "yes" to questions about improvement in health, food habits, mental and social development, and self-confidence. (In some cases, a "no" answer was given, but because parents said the child was already healthy or self-confident.) This consistent response would seem to provide strong evidence that parents think the programme has had an impact. The results must be qualified, however, because not all parents were clear about what was meant by the terms used, and there is a tendency to tell interviewers what one thinks they want to hear. Nevertheless, we have one piece of evidence.

Another attempt to get at programme impact was to be made by asking parents to compare older siblings who had not participated in the DCC with younger siblings who had. Unfortunately, this question was mangled in translation and did not provide the intended comparison.

In several earlier evaluations, programme impact was inferred from anecdotal evidence about children's primary school records. It was said that DCC children were often placed ahead, in second grade, upon entering primary school, because they were more prepared for school than others. It was also common to quote principals or teachers as saying that DCC children seem to be brighter and sometimes helped to teach other children. Similar comments were made by supervisors at the outset of our evaluation exercise.

To try and obtain a more objective assessment of these claims, the evaluation attempted a small pilot study -- following into the primary school 10 children from each of the 12 DCCs in the sample, who were in the upper age group in 1987, into the primary school. (Information about the methodology used, the problems encountered, and the results are described in Attachment B.) It was possible to locate a high percentage of the children.

From the exercise we learned that none of the 1987 children followed had been placed forward upon entrance. But we also came away with the distinct impression that DCC children do better in primary school than non-DCC children. This impression is based on (1) an unsystematic look at the marks given to children in two primary schools (we did not expect to find marks recorded because a system of automatic promotion is in effect and so had not asked surveyors to look at marks), and on (2) responses to a question asking primary school teachers whether or not the children were in the upper 20% of the students. Although the DCC students were found to be disproportionately in the upper 20%, we do not know whether that is because they come from favored backgrounds or because they passed through the DCC.

The encouraging part about these various hints at programme impact is that they are generally consistent with each other. The only information that did not stand up to expectations was the finding about forward placement. We discovered that some children from the 1987 group were indeed in advanced grades, but found that to be a matter of their age and of simultaneous attendance in 1987 at the DCC and a primary school.

In the final section, a recommendation is made for a more careful and comparative examination of the school-going behaviour of DCC graduates.

As commented on above, the general nutritional and health status of the DCC children is relatively good. Severe malnutrition seems to be absent and major health problems occur but are not widespread. The present condition of the children cannot be compared with past information, but the clear implication is that improvements have occurred over time related to the presence of the children in the DCCs. This is made more plausible by the fact that in many of the places in which the DCCs function, there is no primary health care centre; a main vehicle for preventive health care has been the DCC.

In the survey of parents, questions were asked about the educational and occupational expectations for their children. In general, expectations were high. There was a difference between the expectations for boys and girls, but not as great as might have been expected. Because we have no baseline data with which to compare, there is no way of saying whether these parents have raised their expectations since enrolling children in the DCCs.

From discussion with supervisors came a number of suggestions regarding the cumulative effect of the DCC programme on parents and families. The following statements were made that cannot be verified, but which would be interesting to pursue:

In several communities, Mahila Mandels have been formed in conjunction with the DCCs.

The DCCs put pressure on both the primary schools and the primary health system to improve. There is no evidence regarding the effect of that pressure, but it exists.

The decision to include non-Ismailis in the DCCs provides a space in which to work out issues regarding the relationship between Ismailis and non-Ismailis.

Clear evidence that the DCC programme has had a specific impact on children, families, and other social institutions remains elusive. However, the consistent observations of people who have watched the programme grow over time, positive testimonials from a range of people at the community level, the continuing participation of families in the programme, and the suggestive evidence from the pilot follow-up study of DCC graduates all point in the same direction. Taken together, they provide a reasonable basis for concluding that the DCC programme has had an impact and that continuing efforts to improve the programme should be pursued with vigor.

SECTION III

MANAGEMENT, ADMINISTRATION AND ORGANISATIONS Major advances have been made in the organisation and management of the DCC programme over the last five year period and particularly in the last two years. AKES can point with some pride to:

These accomplishments should be recognised and kept in mind as problems are discussed.

The programme has been less successful in dealing with:

Decentralisation

The Rajkot office. With the transfer to a district office of some functions formerly carried out by Bombay, a major step has been taken toward successful decentralisation. Measures currently being taken, such as the relocation of quarters, with space for meetings, should reinforce that process.

I found the staff of the district office to be capable and knowledgeable. The administrative problems that were reported were, for the most part, minor and amenable to solution. These include occasional delays in grant payments (sometimes because they have not received the funds themselves on time), failing to respond in a timely fashion to correspondence, and failing to provide letters acknowledging contributions made at the local level.

As the office become more established, it should be possible for it to play a more active role, developing budgets, helping to motivate LMCs, calling regional meetings of political and religious leaders from the DCC communities to strengthen their understanding and backing, and providing participating communities with assistance in developing local plans for long term financing.

Local Management Committee

It is clear that the IMCs have played an important role in the success of DCCs. Where the committees have taken a strong interest, development has gone well. The committees have made considerable contributions in terms of fund raising and the collection of fees, handling the procurement of food, dealing with the problems of premises, and the payment of salaries. They have sometimes made direct financial contributions and have helped to organise annual events.

However, the dedication and force of management committees varies widely from place to place. With the passage of time, there has been turnover in the chairmen of LMCs. In a number of cases, the change has been from those who helped to get the DCC going and took it as a personal project to newly appointed individuals who are not as involved or dedicated. Ways must be found too strengthen and support LMC members in their work (see suggestions in Section IV).

When IMC members were asked in the survey whether they thought they had sufficient authority, almost all answered that they did. There was little desire to take on more. Still, it seems possible, with a division of tasks, to place additional responsibility with the LMC, in a continuing process of decentralisation. "The more responsibility LMCs are given, the more they will take."

Linkages

As indicated above, strides have been made in developing links to between the AKES and the AKHS. However, additional effort is needed. Linkages with other parts of the AK structure are weaker and need to be strengthened.

Supervisors commented on what at times to be competitive attitude among parts of the AK structure, centering around a need to receive credit for successes. This is a difficulty that needs attention at the highest levels of coordination.

Supervisors also commented on the need to make other institutions more aware of DCC activities. These include the Gran Panchayat.

The linkage to primary schools has, to date, been a one-way affair. Apparently, primary school teachers are invited to DCC events, but the reverse is not true.

Costs

Per student operating costs for the period 1984 through 1988 have been calculated and are presented in the document by Nirupa Bhangar titled "Programmewise Review." These are respectively:


		1984	Rs 251		1987	Rs 459
		1985	Rs 173		1988	Rs 308
		1986	Rs 181

The calculations were made by adding together costs of supplies (mainly food), support and administrative costs, salary costs and development costs (including training), and then dividing by the number of children enrolled in the programme. This basis seems to me to be adequate, but might be modified slightly because training and development activities have an extended life, so can be treated as a capital cost and spread out the cost three or more years. This would reduce the per student figure for operating costs only slightly.

The sizeable jump in costs in 1987 reflects an increase in efficiency, but also results from postponing some 1988 activities until 1989.

Translating the 1988 per student figure into US dollars (at a rate of 15 which is about the exchange rate at the time), gives a per student figure of SUS 20.53 per year or SUS 1.71 per month. This figure compares very favorably with a figure of $1.49 per month that has been calculated for the ICDS programme (Berg, 1988). The quality of DCC programme is clearly much higher than that of the ICDS programme and the benefits, although not quantifiable, can be presumed to be higher as well. This suggests that the DCC programme is cost-effective when compared to be ICDS.

A calculation of per student costs was carried out for 1989. During that year, the operating costs of the programme increased because salaries, development costs, and training costs all increased. The comparative figures for 1988 and 1989 are as follows:

					       1988	       1989
					       (000)           (000)
	Supplies 			    Rs  144		270
	Support and Administration		110		230
	Staff costs				287		509
	Development costs			  6	 	 86
	Training				 60		141

If the 1989 total of Rs 1,236,000 is divided by 2200, the estimated number of enrolled students, the operational cost per student for 1989 is Rs 562. This is, however, an inflated figure.

The following adjustments seem to be justified. An adjustment downward of the salary figure by Rs 22,000 reflecting the fact that part of the time of Nirupa Bhangar was devoted during 1989 to other programmes. An adjustment downward of the development cost by Rs 21,000, by assuming a 5-year life of the audio-visual materials developed during 1989 and spreading the cost out over five years. a reduction of Rs 47,000 from the training costs, assuming that these should be spread over a three-year period. When these adjustments are made, the per student cost decreases to Rs 479.

This figure is still inflated in all likelihood because the figures used for the calculation were estimated end-of year expenditures rather than real expenditures. Judging from past experience, several of the items projected at the actual budget level will come in under budget (the actual cost of rent, for example). For illustrative purposes, let us assume that another reduction of approximately 50 is justified. that would bring the per student cost down to Rs 457.

The figure that we have used includes an amount of Rs 125 that was not expended by the AKES but represents the CARE contribution of food to the programme. If this amount were subtracted out to estimate the per student operating cost for AKES, the figure would be Rs 400 per student.

The point of these various calculations is to establish an approximate range within which we can say the per student operating costs for 1989 will fall. This range is between Rs. 562 (Rs 47 per month), making no adjustments, and Rs 400 (Rs 33 per month), making all the adjustments listed, including the adjustment for costs borne by CARE. Translating these figures into US dollars (using a mid-year exchange rate of about 16 rather that the year end rate), gives costs of $US 35 and $US 25, respectively. Taking the mid-point of these two, we can estimate the per student cost for 1989 at about $US 30, or $2.50 per student per month. That seems to be a reasonable estimate.

Whether this is considered a high or low cost is in the eye of the beholder. I do not have a figure for the Indian minimum wage at hand, but, taking one dollar per day as the approximate minimum wage depending on the area of the State), and figuring 25 working days in a month, the cost per student would be roughly equivalent to one-tenth of a minimum wage. That means if the DCC charged full fare, a laborer, under the assumptions made, would have to spend one-tenth of his/her total salary for pre-school, an amount that seems unlikely. From this it follows, again assuming the rough calculations made are more or less realistic, that some subsidy must be sought for poorer families who would like their children to participate in the DCCs. This leads us to the next topic, "financing and self-sufficiency."

Financing and Self-sufficiency

It is estimated by the Bombay office that approximately 20% of the costs to AKES of the DCC programme's operation are covered by fees. This corresponds roughly to the calculation we have made above. The lowest per student cost figure (which takes out the CARE contribution) is Rs 33 per month and 20% of that is between Rs 6 and 7. Fees run between Rs 5 and 10 per month.

In the survey of parents, a generally positive response was given to a question asking whether they would keep their children in the DCC if fees were raised. That would mean, however, a considerable sacrifice, and is probably beyond the means of many who now participate.

The almost inescapable conclusion is that AKES will have to continue to subsidize the DCC programme if it is to include children from economically disadvantaged families; or that a way must be found to build a capital fund that can make up the difference between the ability of individual families to pay and the total costs. Suggestions for building such a fund are made in Section V.

Although it has been suggested that external donations might be captured to cover the difference in costs, this is a short term solution -- unless the external resources are put into a capital fund.

At present, two centres are self-sufficient. a more careful study of what it means to be self-sufficient needs to be carried out. In at least one of the cases, self-sufficiency has meant a considerable sacrifice in quality.

SECTION IV

COACHING CLASSES (RPE), AND AK PRIMARY SCHOOLS

Coaching classes

Information about the functioning of coaching classes was gathered in two villages -- Sangodhra and Chitravad -- from the RPE teachers, children in the classes, parents and IMC members. In addition, classes were observed in action. Opinions were also gathered from supervisors.

In Sangodhra, the teacher was dealing with 12 children (of 23 enrolled, with the rest scheduled for another hour). These children were divided into two groups according to their primary school level. The instruction, dealing with subtraction, was very effective and the children were engaged. A "roll-up" chalk board was the main prop.

We visited Chitravad on a Saturday morning. The RPE class was functioning with two teachers and about 40 students (of the 50 enrolled), but on Saturdays, we were told, the class is very informal. Children were outside, singing songs and playing games as a group. One game played was a kind of mathematics game. The rest of the time, several children (the stars of the group) performed a traditional song, with actions, in the centre of the circle of children. It was difficult to judge the ability of the teachers.

The teachers thought the curriculum of the coaching classes was adequate. They said that parents were generally cooperative (although fee payment was a problem in some cases), and that the LMCs were supportive, but taking little interest. Children attended regularly and seem to show progress, as determined by their improving responses to questions and on tests. Primary school teachers, they said, have a good opinion of the coaching programme, although in Chitravad they were skeptical at the beginning.) In another village, not visited, the coaching idea has apparently been adopted by primary school teachers.

When asked about problems, the Sangodhra teacher said she had no basic problems, but the work with more than 20 children is demanding and she thought another teacher was needed. Also, she said the pay was too low.

The Chitravad teachers had a number of concerns. They are using the DCC premises, but would like their own premises, where they could have cupboards and files. They also wanted additional teaching aides -- particularly alphabet charts, story charts, and library books. The main concern, however, was their responsibility for collecting fees. This has indeed caused problems, as we heard from a parent who was upset because her child had been sent home, without warning, when the fee was not paid promptly at the beginning of the month. In Chitravad, we found that the teachers were also holding classes on their own for 4th and 5th standard children, using DCC premises in the afternoons. This has caused some friction with the DCC Masima and the teachers.

Children seemed to be enjoying the classes and expressed that when asked. They also said the coaching was helping them in school. Parents also felt the coaching was helping their children with school work and even suggested that the coaching should be extended to the 4th and 5th standards. One parent said English should be taught in the coaching classes.

Because the RPE is to be a self-sufficient programme, some children are being enrolled who have less need. On the other hand, the fee is high enough that many children who would like to attend and could profit from the classes, cannot afford to do so.

When LMC members were asked whether they thought the RPE was a good idea, 17 out of 24 said "yes" and 15 of those 17 said the ZMC should be willing to take responsibility (the two who did not think the LMC should take responsibility were from Chitravad). Those who said "no" gave as reasons that there were too few children in their village or pointed to the problem of fees.

Comment. Although there are obviously problems to be sorted out, the idea of holding coaching classes seems to be well accepted and to be helping children in school. It seems unfortunate that the classes are divorced totally from the primary school and do not seem to take into account as a criterion help for those children who most need the help.

Primary Schools

When LMC members were surveyed regarding their opinion about starting primary schools, most (17 out of 23 who replied) said it was a good idea, 2 of whom suggested that a joint primary school be started with a neighboring village because there would not be enough children otherwise. However, when asked about possible problems that might arise, the list was lengthy, including the contracting of good teachers, the problem of competitive pay scales, creating ill will with existing primary schools, premise problems, the need for a good administrator, and possible problems with governmental permissions. The probability of high fees and a related problem of obtaining sufficient enrollments were mentioned along with the difficulty of self-sufficiency. The clear impression was that it would be extremely difficult, and probably too costly, to set up the primary schools.

These reactions and others raise a question about the advisability of establishing separate primary schools.

SECTION V

SUGGESTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Service Delivery

1. Selection. Where possible, look for a mix when selecting teachers, married with younger, Ismaili and non-Ismaili.

This suggestion is made because the review revealed that whereas more mature, older women seem to be better equipped to run Vali meetings, the younger, unmarried girls are sometimes better accepted for home visits because they are local girls. An Ismaili teacher is better equipped to deal with some problems in the community, but a non-Ismaili teacher can help to deal with and attract non-Ismaili families to the DCC. Obviously, other features such as personality and educational level and the ability to work with children will be as important or more so than age or marital status or Ismaili/non-Ismaili status; but recognizing that, a mix should be sought.

2. Increasing teacher contact with supervisor and peers. Institute one-day group meetings every three months, of each supervisor with her specific group of teachers.

This device would reinforce the sense of group, provide opportunities for group discussion of common problems, allow the supervisor to draw on the special talents and ideas of individual teachers in a peer-to-peer way, and increase the contact of the supervisor with her charges without having to increase the number of visits to individual centres.

The venue for these "circle" meetings would depend on logistics. If centres are relatively close, the venue might be rotated so that teachers have an opportunity to see the conditions in which others are working. Or, the group meetings might be held in the proposed “model” centres. Every attempt should be made to avoid the necessity for teachers to stay over night, avoiding that logistic problem where possible.

3. On-the-job Training. The group meetings suggested above, together with the periodic visits by supervisors and a yearly "refresher" training, should be seen as constituting a system of on-the-job training (rather than simply as a system of monitoring).

The training to occur in conjunction with the "circle" meetings should include the following steps:

A number of the topics for these sessions can be anticipated -- indeed, were suggested by the teachers during the interviews done as a part of the review. For instance, it is clear that additional attention is desired and needed in the area of planning, particularly in planning projects so that the project method can work well. Material supporting a discussion of the project method can be sought in advance.

In addition, it would be possible to introduce an occasional theme where, in the supervisors judgments, that particular theme needed to be treated -- even though the teachers did not choose the topic. For instance, if difficulties continue with weighting, completing the growth chart, and following up the results, a session might be assigned for that. Or, just before the rainy season, the topic of diarrhoea (or another health topic linked to the changing season) might be introduced, with discussions of oral rehydration therapy.

Over time, a set of pamphlets, one for each theme, could be built up -- either by creating pamphlets or by looking for existing materials that serve (and translating them into Gujarati where that is necessary). For instance, the Mobile Creches programme already has created a set of such pamphlets (Mina Swaminathan) that could be reviewed for their relevance. And, UNICEF has a wealth of materials that might be called upon in support of such on-the-job training efforts. Indira Swaminathan's booklet (COPPC Manual) could be used for several sessions. CHETNA material is also useful.

Also, over time, the experiences with this system could be built into a training guide, emphasizing more the process than a fixed syllabus.

Once teachers had participated in a certain number of refresher courses and "circle" training sessions, and had successfully carried out agreed-upon tasks in their workplace, they might be provided with a certificate -- say after two Years (or having participated in 6 sessions plus two refresher courses). This certificate might entitle them to an increment in salary.

4. Rationalizing the workload.

This suggestion would not only help to rationalize the work load, but would recognize that some tasks may have to be done outside regular hours, and create an increment for teachers serving as an incentive for them to stay on the job so that turnover might be reduced.

5. Creating non-monetary incentives. Provide an opportunity for teachers to gather together, perhaps once a year, for awards and to demonstrate such skills as story-telling, song, dance, toy-making, with prizes for teachers judged best. This might be combined with refresher training. The monthly circular could be used to publish suggestions from teachers.

Behind this suggestion are two ideas. First, people are more apt to work well if they feel they are part of a group of people. Second, non-monetary as well as monetary recognition is important to individuals in their work. Such recognition may help to cut turnover and increase work satisfaction.

6. Monetary incentives. At a minimum, pay should be competitive with the ICDS honorarium. The system of increments should be continued. The possibility of introducing pay differentials related to differences in the cost of living between urban and rural areas should be explored. The system of yearly increments should be continued.

Pay differentials might be set using as an adjustment figure, a certain percentage of the differences in the labor wage. For instance, if the daily labor rate is 10 Rs. in one area, but 15 in another, one might take, say, 40% of the difference as the basis for adjusting the salary where costs are higher. In this case, that would mean adjusting by a factor of 20% (15-10 = 5); 5/10 = 50% x 40% = 20%). That would mean that if a teacher was paid 250 rupees per month in the area of the lower labor rate, the teacher in the areas of the higher labor rate would be paid 250 + 50 =300 Rs.

7. Facilitating transition when turnover occurs. When turnover is anticipated, a new appointment should be expedited, so that the new teacher is hired before the old leaves, allowing some time of overlap. Periodically, training sessions for new teachers will have to be organized.

The system of periodic circle meetings should help to socialize new teachers more quickly.

8. Relating to and involving parents. Additional training is needed for teachers related to their interactions with parents -- both in Vali meetings and in home visits. This might be taken up in refresher courses or circle meetings.

Given the positive responses by many parents in the review to the idea of assisting with the DCC, ways should be explored for obtaining direct parent participation in the DCCs regular activities, This can include help in the classroom (as is done in Manpura through the Mahila Mandels) or with cooking, or on outings. (See also suggestion 4.)

Occasionally providing teachers with a set of brief questions that they should ask parents would provide a reason for going to homes to talk and observe. Teachers should also be trained to use a set of home visiting materials such as the cartoon set developed in Indonesia. These materials are useful for stimulating discussions in Vali or other group meetings as well as during home visits.

9. Monitoring teacher's health. When they are hired, and at the time children have a check-up, teachers should have health check-ups as well.

1. Equipment. Efforts should be made to assure that the Masima has adequate cooking utensils. In several locations this did not seem to be the case at the time of the review.

2. Monitoring Masima's health. The Masima should have a health check-up before she begins to work and at the time of the periodic check-ups given to the children.

3. Help for the Masima. Other village women can be asked to help the Masima on a rotating basis or to fill in when the Masima is not able to make it.

4. Training. Training for the Masima should include some information about interaction and play with children. Included in that instruction might be ways in which children can be actively involved in the feeding process. Eating time can be a learning time. Children can assist with serving the food and with washing utensils. Selected children might even be asked to help in the preparation. As servings are dished out, a counting ritual might be instituted, or a song might be sung.

1. Training. Provide supervisors with additional opportunities for self-improvement.

2. Travel. Regularize the arrangements for supervisors to stay overnight in villages so that it will not always be necessary to stay with the teachers.

Establish circle meetings so that, once every three months the teachers will come to the supervisor.

3. Reinforcing the training role of supervisors. See Suggestion 3 for teachers that sets out a process of on-the-job training in which supervisors serve as trainers. Note also the suggestion that materials be created or provided that the supervisors could use in this process, mostly in pamphlet form and dealing with individual themes.

4. Advancement. Pursue the idea of hiring supervisors as AKES staff -- as additional decentralisation of AKES occurs.

1. Bathrooms. Adequate bathroom facilities should be present on premises. An arrangement should be sought with AK Rural Development (or whatever the most appropriate AK arm) to help with construction of proper latrines where that can be done.

2. Matching funds for construction. The AKES should consider offering matching funds -- up to a certain level for the construction of permanent premises. Matching funds could be collected locally or from outside sources. This process might be linked to project savings in rental costs so that the first several months of savings are put into a fund to be used for maintenance.

Setting a limit on the amount of the matching funds available would discourage villages from building an overly expensive building.

If the building to be constructed is seen as a community centre, the amount of matching funds might be raised somewhat (see following recommendation).

The system of matching funds would encourage communities to declare the contributions that can be drawn from the community rather than "hiding" them, as is apparently done in some instances, for fear that help will not be forthcoming from AKES if local assistance is identified.

3. A "Progress Centre". When permanent premises are considered that should be done in the context of more general use by the village -- including a meeting hall and, perhaps, other facilities. The idea of a "Progress Centre", (rather than simply a DCC) is attractive, as has been done in Sangodhra.

Construction of a community building could be done in stages, with the DCC being built first and other parts being added over time as funds become available to complete the overall plan.

Incorporating DCCs into a community centre should encourage parental and community participation in the DCCs.

4. Cooking. Every effort should be made to remove the cooking process and cooking materials from the classroom areas of the DCCs. (This would, of course, be made easier if permanent facilities could be located or built.

Improving the Quality of Programme Components

1. Education.

2. Health and Nutrition

3. Adult education and parental involvement

Management and Administration

1. Assign specific duties to each LMC member. Include assignment of duties in the policy and procedures manual.

2. Give greater importance to the position of Secretary. Consider providing a small honorarium to secretaries, charging them with the responsibility for seeing that members get notified of meetings, that minutes are recorded, etc. The Secretary should be a person who is likely to stay in the position for at least three years.

3. Include two women on the LMC.

This seems to be important because the lone woman now serving on the committee seems to be isolated; she needs moral support.

4. Empower the LMC to spend up to a certain amount each year (Rs. 500- 700?) without first obtaining permission from outside, but with the obligation to account for expenditures.

5. When a new committee is formed (or a new chairman selected) arrange an orientation meeting involving outgoing members, incoming members, and, if possible, a member from the Rajkot office. That meeting should, among other things, include going over the policy and procedures manual.

6. Include information in the manual about how to calculate the pre-child amounts for food under different circumstances (when no CARE food, when CARE food, when CARE food is available, but spoiled).

7. The amount on deposit locally upon which the LMC can draw to pay teachers should be increased to at least two months so that delays in payments at the local level will not occur as a result of delays at the district or higher levels.

8. The fund- raising role of the LMC could be helped by creating a matching fund (see above) and by giving responsibility for handling a small lean fund (see suggestions below under "financing").

1. Additional effort is needed to assure that grant payments arrive on time (but see above suggestion for increasing the cushion available at the local level).

2. The office should give greater attention to motivating LMCs, for instance, by responding promptly to correspondence, writing letters of recognition and appreciation to local donors, and through occasional visits to the field.

3. A meeting of Mukhis and/pr Mukhi-cameras should be organized to inform and discuss the DCCs. This should be done by the District Office, but with support from Bombay.

The reason for recommending this measure is that support for DCCs is still very dependent on the support of these individuals. They need to give their firm backing to the activities of the LMC and assure that good people will be appointed.

4. Appointments need to be expedited.

5. The idea of additional District officers seems to be a good one to pursue. In each office, attention should be given to the coordination of programme efforts at the District level.

1. More direct responsibility might be taken for training.

2. Additional efforts can be made to coordinate activities among the various committees, with, for instance, joint circulars going to the field.

1. Establish matching funds to support the local construction of premises.

2. Experiment with developing a capital fund.

One way of doing this would be by AKES (or another) providing money for small loans which, on repayment, would go into capital funds to be managed by the LMC.

After several years, interest from the capital fund could be used to supplement fees, to support the basic operating costs of the centre, and, hopefully, achieve self- sufficiency.

This method has been used successfully by the Christian Children's Fund in similar villages of Northeast Thailand.

1. Within the Aga Khan system

A committee on Child and Family Welfare should be formed in Bombay and should meet regularly to effect programme coordination. a parallel committee might be formed at the district level. Consideration should be given to forming one village, or Child and Family Welfare committee at the local level in order to foster integration at that level as well.

2. With other organisations

Coaching Programmes

1. Additional effort might be put into improving coaching classes before moving to establish alternative primary schools.

2. Link programmes more closely to progress/performance of children in primary school, with special attention to children who are having problems.

3. Unburden the coaching teachers from the need to collect fees.

Primary Schools

A very cautious approach should be taken toward establishing Aga Khan primary schools. Such schools would be even more difficult than DCCS to put on a self- sufficiency basis and would create a continuing burden. Recruitment of good teachers would be difficult. Competition with existing primary schools would be created. In all probability, the primary schools would serve only those with the ability to pay.

Research and Evaluation

1. To facilitate the monitoring and evaluation of the DCC programme, a "Readiness Profile" (RP) for children who are age 5 should be developed. The profile would incorporate indicators of health and nutritional status, of reading and writing readiness skills, of a child's self- esteem and of parental expectations. The profile could be administered each year to a random sample of DCC children to see what improvements occur over time. In addition, the RP could be administered to a sample of non- DCC children (probably in villages where no DCC exists, and to a sample of children matched on social, cultural and economic criteria.)

2. A systematic follow- up study of children should be undertaken using the two samples defined above. The study should include attention to performance in primary schools as well as to progress through the system.

3. Questions about who cares for preschool children and about parental beliefs about early learning should be included in the primary health care survey to be carried out with AKHS funds.

Attachment A

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

1. Previous Evaluations

2. Quarterly Reports

3. Five-Year Plan Documents

4. Training Reports

5. Other

Attachment B

A SURVEY OF DAY CARE CENTRES AND RELATED ACTIVITIES

January 15-23, 1990

0bjectives:

Methodology

Selection of the DCC Sample. The survey was limited to the 32 DCC centres in Gujarat that had been started before January 1, 1987. These 32 centres were classified according to the following variables:

Given the time available for field work (4 days) and the number of participants in the evaluation (6 teams of 2 people each), it was decided to choose a sample of 12 centres. That would provide variation and allow each team to spend 2 days in each of 2 villages. a stratified random sample was chosen by taking 3 centres from the 8 classified as of "a" quality, 5 of the 15 centres classified as "B", 3 of the 8 centres classified as both of "C" quality and not self-sufficient, and 1 of the 2 self-sufficient centres classified as "C". The resulting sample (see attached listing) included 2 of the 5 villages in which an RPE programme had been started, and provided a mix of villages in terms of population site (with a slight bias toward smaller villages), in levels of development, and in the age of the centre (with a slight bias toward older centres). The centres were geographically dispersed, and included one centre in the Kutch.

Formulation of Questions. Following a day of general discussions focussing on problems of organisation, operation, and participation as perceived by the supervisors, and on changes observed in DCC centres and villages, a preliminary set of schedules was written out to guide collection of data on children and from parents, teachers, and Local Management Committee (LMC) members. On the second day, the schedules were discussed. As each question was translated into Gujarati, adjustments were made in wording as well as in categories to be used for answers where that was appropriate. The adjusted results were then typed up. No back translation into English was done, causing problems in three or four questions were the sense of the question somehow got lost when the final Gujarati version was set.

Choosing a sample of children. Given time constraints, it was decided to choose only 6 children from each DCC -- 3 from among children ages two and one-half to three and one-half, and 3 from children ages four and one-half to five and one-half. No children in the intermediate age group were included. To make the selection, names of children in each see group were written on slips of paper. The papers were folded, mixed up, and 3 names were drawn from each age set. If all three children were the same sex, the last name drawn was put back and a new name drawn until a member of the opposite sex was chosen. The total number of children selected was 72. If enrollments are approximately equal between boys and girls, the sample was biased toward girls, with 41 boys vs. 31 girls.

Information was collected about the health, nutrition and attendance of the selected children.

A sample of parents and the home interview. The sample of parents was derived directly from the sample of children. When visiting the homes of these children, the first choice for interview in the home was the mother. In most cases mothers could be interviewed, often in the evening, however because they worked in the fields during the day. When this was not possible the child's caretaker (usually the grandmother of mother-in-law) was interviewed. In summarizing results, no special treatment has been given to sorting out the results by the source of information (although that could be done).

Teacher interviews. All teachers in the DCC were interviewed. Two centres had 3 teachers; four had two teachers, and four had only one teacher, making a total of 21 teachers.

Choosing LMC members. Two of the six LMC members were to be selected for interview. One of the two was to be either the Chairman or the Secretary. Preference for the second interview was to be given to the female member of the committee, but if that was not possible, any other member could be interviewed.

Primary School follow-up. From the 1987 "graduates" of each DCC, 10 children were randomly selected. These children could be expected to have entered primary school in 1987. In the normal course of events, such students would be expected to appear as enrolled in the third standard of primary school. However, evaluators were asked to rook for records of students for Ist, 2nd, and 3rd standards (or more, if necessary). Anticipating a certain level of migration among the graduates, it was decided to choose additional names so that information would be available for 10 students. The process would also provide a general idea of the degree of migration.

Analysis and Discussion

Upon return from the field, the information gathered was brought together in a group process which, although somewhat laborious, gave each team an idea of answers obtained by others and allowed for some discussion of each question.

Again, given limits on time, it was not possible to tabulate responses to every question, but, as will be evident from the summary sheets that follow, most questions were tabulated. That task was facilitated in some cases because the questions were not very discriminating. There was a tendency for those interviewed to give "yes" or positive answers so the tabulation could be done by simply asking for those who responded "no." Open-ended questions were obviously much more time consuming.

No cross-tabulations were done (except for parental expectations). Had there been more time, it would have been interesting to sort the condition of the children and some of the parental answers by gender and by comparing Ismailis and non-Ismailis. (That would be possible for the Bombay office to do, if interested.)

It will be evident that many of the results need to be interpreted with caution. The qualitative observations of the interviewers (and of the those interviewed) often turned out to be more interesting and revealing than the quantitative results. In the following pages, we present summaries of results from the various questionnaires, qualitative observations will be included where they seem particularly appropriate.

DATA FOR EXTERNAL EVALUATION DAY CARE CENTRE (STARTED BEFORE 1-1-87)

 Criteria for Grouping			Name of the Village		General Information

Eval   Enroll Figures    Self-Suff.   With DCC       Yr.of    Name         Level       Pop. Size    
       ment   Ismaili    Status Pr.                  Star-    of           of Dev      Pr. of AKRSP
                         of RPE                      ting     Dist.

A      106     60      25      +     Ranavav(3)      1979    Junagadh     Developed  25,000   -       
                                                                                              
 A      74      91      49      +     Methan(1)       1978    Mehsana      Developed   4,000   -       
                                                                                              
 A      88      76      30      +     Chitravad(3)    1978    Junagadh     Developed   5,000   +       
                                                                                              
 A      88      35      22      +     Malia Hatina(3) 1978    Junagadh     Developed  15,000   -       
                                                                                              
 A      57      56      24      -     Mundra(1)       1981    Kutch        Developed  12,000   -       
                                                                                              
 A      55      48      23      -     Amrapur(3)      1986    Junagadh     Under dev   5,000   +       
                                                                                             
 A      20      100     31      -     Junagadh(3)     1978    Junagadh     Urban        -      -       
                                                                                                 
 B      76      39      41      -     Meloj(1)        1980    Mensana      Under dev   3,000   -       
                                                                                             
 B      62      87      36      -     Manpura(1)      1979    Banaskatha   Developed   2,200   -       
                                                                                              
 B      43      26      51      -     Raval(2)        1979    Jamnagar     Developed  15,000   -       
                                                                                              
 B      58      41      31      -     Samada(1)       1986    Mehsana      Under dev   2,200   -       
                                                                                             
 B      48      46      37      -     Timpi(2)        1981    Amreli       Under dev   7,000   -       
                                                                                             
 B      48      58      29      +     Sangodha(3)     1978    Junagadh     Under dev   1,500   +       
                                                                                             
 B      46      74      20      -     Jivapur(2)      1980    Jamnagar     Under dev   2,500   -       
                                                                                             
 B      43      53      16      -     Bhalcael(3)     1981    Junagadh     Under dev   2,000   +       
                                                                                            
 B      37      19      45      -     Kera(1)         1984    Kutch        Developed   5,000   -       
                                                                                              
 B      33      61      34      -     Versilla(1)     1978    Mehsana      Developed   3,000   -       
                                                                                              
 B      32      69      34      -     Punasan(1)      1980    Mehsana      Under dev   8,500   -       
                                                                                             
 B      32      100     31      -     Babra(1)        1979    Amreli       Developed  10,000   -       
                                                                                              
 B      36      100     25      -     Badoder(2)      1980    Junagadh     Under dev   2,500   -       
                                                                                             
 B      40      28      12      -     Bhod(3)         1986    Junagadh     Under dev   2,500   -       
                                                                                             
 B      22      36      13      -     Kennedypur(3)   1986    Junagadh     Under dev   1,500   -       
                                                                                            
 C      21      86      39      -     Gundarna(2)     1980    Bhavnagar    Under dev   6,000   -       
                                                                                             
 C      24      58      21      -     Gangecha(2)     1986    Junagadh     Under dev   2,000   -       
                                                                                            
 C      18      67      21      -     Nagalpur(1)     1980    Kutch        Under dev   5,000   -       
                                                                                             
 C      22      73      16      -     Lathodra(3)     1981    Junagadh     Under dev   2,000   +       
                                                                                             
 C      22      36      16      -     Haripur(3)      1986    Junagadh     Under dev   1,500   +       
                                                                                             
 C      23      30      14      -     Balambhedi(2)   1981    Jamnagar     Under dev   1,500   -       
                                                                                             
 C      17      29      18      -     Jesar(2)        1986    Bhavnagar    Under dev  10,000   -       
                                                                                             
 C      20      55       6      -     Ghunada(2)      1981    Rajkot       Under dev   2,500   -       
                                                                                             
 C      53      13      Self-   -     Botad(2)        1986    Bhavnagar     URBAN    CENTRES   -       
                        Suffic                                                                   
                        ient                                                                     
 C      31      29              -     Surendranagar(2)1986    Surendranagar                    -       
                                                                                          
                                                                                                
        80      33      45      -     Mohada          1982    MAHARASHTRA  Developed   5,000   -       
                                                                                              
        46      22      56      -     Kinvat          1982                 Developed   5,000   -       
                                                                                             


Numbers
to denote proximity - (1), (2) and (3)  (II) * Jamatkhana based centres.  (III)
Grading methodology - subjective in nature.


DCC CHILDREN: SUMMARY

Comments on the information

There is a need to check the information obtained from records against current measures and observations for each child. There was doubt, for instance, that the growth chart provides an accurate basis for indicating the nutritional status of children; some of the teachers are still not confident about the weighing and recording process. Nevertheless, we used growth chart data as the nutrition indicator for children in the 2 and 112 - 3 and 1/2 age group; an anemia check was used as the nutrition indicator for older children. The anemia information was gathered by looking at eyes, fingernails and palms of each child, and making a, judgement. This provides only the roughest of indicators.

Information summary

from: http://www.ecdgroup.com/archive/akes.html