EVALUATION OF GIRL CHILD EDUCATION
INTERVENTIONS IN GHANA
NATIONAL CENTRE FOR RESEARCH INTO BASIC EDUCATION (NCRIBE)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduction
In September 2011, the GES with support from UNICEF, contracted the National Centre for
Research into Basic Education (NCRIBE), based at the University of Education, Winneba to
conduct an investigation into girl-child education interventions in Ghana.
Methodology
In general, the study design involved a cross-sectional survey which was approached from the
qualitative standpoint. Target population consisted of public JHS and upper primary pupils, girlchild dropouts, teachers, head teachers, parents and GES officials. Multi-stage sampling
techniques employed for the study included simple random, purposive and snowballing sampling
techniques. Twenty-three schools from eight districts in four regions in Ghana, namely,
Northern, Volta, Ashanti and Brong Ahafo were randomly selected for the study. Eight of the
study schools came from the urban areas of Ghana whilst fifteen came from the rural areas, thus
meeting one of the inclusive criteria for selecting the schools involved in the study.
We used interview guides and employed a variety of data collection techniques including focus
groups that provided rich, in-depth qualitative data. We also employed a variety of data
analytical techniques. Data were subjected to factor, thematic and grounded theory analyses.
These techniques allowed for structuring, categorising and interpretation of the transcribed data.
For example, the purpose of the Consensual Focus Groups (CFGs) was to develop the data
gathered from pupils in order to develop a thematic matrix of cross-school analysis of pupils’
experiences. Our aim here was to provide results that were meaningful and upon which practical,
sustainable interventions and review of existing GES policies regarding girl-child education can
be based.
Findings
Summary of Univariate findings
Among our findings from the univariate analyses were that:
(a) There was not much difference between the sexes regarding the number of daughters that
they have and the proportion of school-going age that are not at school.
(b) Surprisingly, the urban parents tended to report more daughters but with less attending school
than their rural colleagues.
(c) The highest number of daughters not attending school in one household based on the number
of daughters in the household came from the Northern region.
(d) Parents in the Ashanti and Brong Ahafo regions tended to have a higher proportion of their
daughters in school than that of the other two regions.
(e) It would appear that 16.75 years may be the most popular age at which the girls in our study
sites drop out of school. This is supported by the fact that out of the 16 girl dropouts
interviewed, a good 75% (12) of them dropped out of school when they reached the older
classes.
Types of intervention
We found that types of interventions provided for the girl-child generally took two forms,
namely, material and non-material.
The material interventions could further be classified into two groups, namely, Learning
materials, and what we may call ‘Get to school’ materials. The learning materials that were
frequently reported by participants included exercise books, pens, pencils and maths set, while
the ‘Get to school’ materials employed as interventions included school uniforms, sandals,
school bags, bicycles, financial assistance and food. Almost the same type of material
interventions were provided across the study sites, although the girls in the Northern and Volta
regions appeared to receive more material interventions than their counterparts in the Ashanti
and Brong Ahafo regions. It was also noted that at times the primary girls did not receive the
same materials as their JHS counterparts. This seemed to come out clearly in their statements.
For example, one JHS pupil from the Northern region said during the focus group interview
“bicycle, school bags, books, maths sets, food, sandals and other school needs are given to us”,
while the following statement from a primary pupil in the Volta region is typical of the
statements coming from the primary girls, “We get textbooks, exercise books, school uniforms
and financial assistance”
While most of the interventions appeared to be material in nature, it emerged from the interviews
that there were also some that could be classified as ‘non-material’. These took the form of
formation of girl-child clubs, sensitisation programmes, counselling, reproductive health and
STD education. NGOs, for example CAMFED Ghana, provided ‘Reproductive health education
and school sensitisation programmes, ‘Women and Development Project’ provided ‘bursary and
safety net fund’ for girls and World Vision concentrated on scholarship schemes for girls and
rehabilitation of schools.
Implementation of Interventions
The present study also investigated how the girl-child education interventions were implemented.
In particular, we wanted to know how beneficiaries were selected, who did the selection, and
who actually implemented them. As our findings below suggest, the implementation of girl-child
interventions is quite a complex process in that different people did different things at different
times.
With regards to the selection of beneficiaries and distribution of material interventions, it
emerged that selection and implementation was done by various officials. These include district
education officers, the PTA, District Assembly, circuit supervisors, girl child education officers,
teachers, head teachers and NGOs. For example, on the selection of beneficiaries, some of the
participants said: ‘Beneficiaries are selected with the help of the PTA’.(Head teacher for JHS,
Northern region), CAMFED Ghana mentioned that ‘the regional directors for GES are asked to
identify deprived and needy districts to benefit from the intervention’. World Vision Ghana
notes: ‘The selection is done by our national office, when we then come to the districts; children
are selected from the poorest households in selected communities with the help of the District
Assembly’.
In response to the question on who was the responsible officer that distributed intervention
materials to the beneficiaries, it appeared that in some cases, there were some line officers
responsible while in others, items were directly distributed by the sponsoring agency. For
example, on the one hand, the circuit supervisors with the assistance of teachers were
responsible, while on the other hand, the district education office was directly doing the
distribution. For instance one Head teacher said: ‘The school authorities do the distribution’
(Primary School Head teacher, Ashanti region). Another said: ‘The items are given to the circuit
supervisors who go to the schools to distribute to girls where teachers and the head teachers
help in the distribution’ (Basic School Head teacher, Ashanti region).
In terms of how districts and schools were selected to benefit from interventions, the NGO’s
interviewed gave an extensive method for the implementation of the intervention. Several of
them mentioned the GES as the implementers of the intervention. For instance one mentioned
that: ‘the regional directors for GES are asked to identify deprived and needy districts to benefit
from the intervention’ (CAMFED Ghana). Another noted: ‘The selection is done by our national
office, when we then come to the districts; children are selected from the poorest households in
selected communities with the help of the District Assembly’ (World Vision Ghana notes).
Interviews with the District Girls Education Officers also revealed that they part in the selection
and distribution of interventions. One of them said: ‘By prioritization. We look at schools with
low enrolment and retention of girls and schools with high teenage pregnancy and select them
first’ (DGEO, Volta region). Also, in response to what was given as intervention and how they
determine who benefits, one officer said: ‘Bicycles for girls who commute long distances and
food for girls who are regular and punctual to school’ (DGEO from Northern region). It also
appeared that some NGOs came with their own prescription of who benefit from their
interventions, while others did the distribution themselves. ‘The UNICEF intervention was
selected for districts with low gender parity index (GPI)’ was the response from one DGEO from
the Brong Ahafo region. According to one JHS teacher from the Northern region, ‘It was
implemented by the NGO’s themselves’.
The non-material interventions, such as girl child clubs and sensitisation programmes were either
given or initiated by GES officials including teachers and DGEOs or by NGOs. For instance, one
teacher said: ‘The intervention is implemented by giving them a talk on teenage pregnancy and
their effects every two weeks’ (Primary Teacher, Volta region). Another noted that ‘we meet
every Friday for discussion and reading’ (Primary Teacher, Volta region).
Monitoring
Since monitoring of interventions is important for its effectiveness and sustenance, we also
interviewed participants on how the interventions were monitored. It emerged from the
interviews that monitoring was done by different category of officials which included DGEO,
Circuit supervisor, school heads, SMCs and NGOs. The monitoring of some interventions was
done by collaborative efforts from these team members.
We enquired from the teachers the specific role the DGEO plays by asking them who monitored
the interventions. A teacher mentioned that: ‘from time to time, Girl Child Education Officers
from the District Education Office inspect projects or programmes (Primary Teacher, Northern
region). However, the teacher was not able to tell us how this was done. In some instances, it
appeared monitoring was done by a collaborative team comprising circuit supervisors, school
authorities and SMC members. For instance a school head noted: ‘The circuit supervisors find
out whether the beneficiaries come to school always and the SMC’s also monitors to find out
whether the girls are really using the bicycles themselves’ (Primary School Head, Northern
region). Also, it was mentioned that: ‘they (school) were monitored by the head teacher, girl
child coordinator (GES) and the NGO’s’ (Primary school Head, Volta region). The comments
from the teachers were consistent with those from the head teachers, although they were not able
to detail which form the monitoring took.
Interestingly, the DGEOs were able to tell us how they monitored the interventions when they
were interviewed. One DGEO mentioned that monitoring was mostly their work and so they
visited schools to check the interventions and checked performance and attendance. They
mentioned some form of collaborative monitoring which involved the C.S., head teachers and
SMC/PTA. For instance one of them said: ‘we check attendance and performance. Again,
monitoring and evaluation forms are being used to collate the information of activities of the
programmes’ (DGEO, Ashanti and Brong Ahafo regions). Also, another commented that:
‘through the involvement of the schools SMC/PTA, we track the usage of the bicycles in the
school communities’ (DGEO, Northern region).
The NGO’s interviewed also mentioned that they did monitoring in collaboration with the
DGEO and the school authorities. For instance, one NGO stated: ‘through reports from the
District Girls Education Unit, we visit schools to check on girls’ enrolment, retention and
performance and obtain baseline information from the District Education Office’ (NGO,
WUSC). Another also mentioned that: ‘The organisation has put in place monitoring and
evaluation resource teams that goes monitoring quarterly’. The staff members also go into the
districts to interact with beneficiaries and stakeholders’ (NGO, CAMFED Ghana).
It may be concluded that, while the monitoring of interventions was a collaborative effort from
NGOs and officials from district education office and school authorities, the DGEOs seemed to
claim responsibility for monitoring and although they are able to detail how they do it, the
teachers and the head teachers were not able to support the DGEOs accounts.
Challenges in implementation of the girl child education interventions
The following is a summary of findings from the challenges reported by the people whose job it
was to implement the girl-child education interventions.
According to some DDEs, lack of fuel for monitoring interventions was the main challenge.
Considering the long distances district officers have to travel to visit schools and also children
from benefiting rural communities, unavailability of fuel for travelling posed a great challenge.
As the DGEO from the Volta region puts it: “difficulty in reaching some communities and lack
of adequate funds and logistics are also challenges” (DGEO,Volta region).
Interestingly, some of the head teachers felt that they were not prepared adequately to deal with
the interventions. They explained that with the practice of regular transfer of teachers and school
heads from one school to another, the new head teachers who were transferred from nonintervention schools to intervention ones found it difficult working with the interventions. The
heads further explained that since they were transferred to their new posts, they did not receive
any training on girl child education and interventions. Also, they mentioned that no proper
documentation of the interventions was kept by their predecessor thus making it difficult for
them to track progress on the interventions. One head teacher of a Primary school highlighted
this challenge clearly when he stated: “due to the transfer of the former head, no training has
been given to me the present head, even no proper documentation to direct me on how to
continue the programme”.
Surprisingly, some NGOs who participated in the study mentioned uncooperative attitudes of
some stakeholders. For instance one of the NGOs noted that: “cooperation from key holders
(district assembly, chiefs, even teachers and parents) to be responsive to their needs was
sometimes a problem”. Interestingly, almost all the parents interviewed with respect to the
intervention stated that they have not encountered any problems as far as the interventions for
their wards were concerned. However, a few stated that maintaining the bicycle was a challenge.
One parent noted that “maintaining the bicycle for the girl is always a problem”.
Challenges faced by the school in educating the girl-child
It emerged from our interviews that responses to the problem of educating the girl-child could
be rationalised into two groups namely, the problems that are personal and those that are
impersonal. According to most of the teachers and head teachers interviewed the girls’ personal
problems included shyness, timidity, loss of concentration, low performance and slow in
learning. Teachers listed a cocktail of problems ranging from, “inability to openly share their
problems”, “low performance, shyness, timidity and absenteeism” (JHS Teacher Northern
region); “low concentration and assimilation” (Primary Teacher Volta region) to “sleeping in
class and inattentiveness in class” (Primary Teacher, Volta region); “Not able to openly share
their problems and frequent teenage pregnancy” (Ashanti region).
The impersonal problems were summed up by one head teacher, she said: “Regular supply of the
girl child’s needs to enable her attend school, lateness to school, absenteeism and lack of
parental support are the real challenges we face” (Basic School Head, Volta region).
Some of the head teachers explained some of the challenges by saying “the girl pupils report to
school late due to long distances” (Northern region). Others hinted that parents are a big
challenge to the implementation of the girl child education interventions. It emerged that parents
appear to rely on their children’s labour for the daily subsistence of the household. Often, such
demands on girls resulted in absenteeism, coming to school late and or sleeping during lessons.
Some of the teachers and head teachers told our interviewers, “Parents engage children to work
during farming seasons”; “absenteeism of the girl child on market days” and “lack of parental
interest in girl child education, explains some of the challenges we face”.
Lack of learning materials were also seen by the teachers and head teachers as challenges.
One
teacher from a JHS in the Volta region said: “lack of basic learning materials, such as exercise
books, pens and sitting space’ are challenges for the girls.
Observations from the DDEs also affirmed that parents and inadequate materials were major
challenges with regard to girl-child education. For instance, views such as: “parental
irresponsibility is a major challenge” (DDE Volta region). “Child labour, teenage pregnancy
and truancy is a major challenge” (DCD, Northern region) were expressed freely. In particular,
participants from the Northern region mentioned the lack of role models to inspire the girls as
well as tribal and cultural differences and seasonal migration as some of the challenges they
faced.
Challenges faced by the girl child
From the focused group discussions with the girls they mentioned intimidation, lack of toilet
facilities, portable water and inadequate classrooms as some of the challenges confronting them
at school. For example some pupils mentioned “lack of toilet facility, portable water and food”;
(JHS, Northern region). In another instance some girls said: “boys disturbing the girls with sex,
and intimidating us in the classroom” (JHS, Brong Ahafo). Also, “inadequate classrooms for
effective learning” (Primary, Northern region) was mentioned.
Interestingly, the challenges listed by the girls as hindering their education appear to be at odds
with those listed by the teachers. For example, while the girls’ problems are impersonal or
external in nature, such as lack of toilet facilities, and harassment from boys, the teachers listed
personal factors such as shyness, lack of concentration, low performance and timidity as
hindering their education.
Challenges faced by dropout girls if they want to get back to school
We investigated the challenges that according to the girls who have dropped out of school, have
hindered their return to school. For most of them, it emerged that lack of basic needs, being over
aged, poverty and lack of parental care were some of the problems.
The older girls in the group were particularly concerned about their age. One of them said: “I am
over aged and my current and past classmates will be making fun of me” (JHS, Northern region).
Issues about poverty emerged as a challenge to the dropout girls’ efforts at returning to school.
From the views of some of the dropout girls, it appeared that although some of them might be
willing to return to school, there was no clear provision for their basic school needs. This may be
related to the fact that when we asked the girls whether they have received any help since
dropping out of school, of the 16 girls who were interviewed, only 10 representing 62.5% said
‘yes’, they have received help to go back, while surprisingly, 6 girls representing a good 37.5%
said they had not received any assistance. As reported earlier, one older girl among the six
mentioned that: “I am over aged and my current and past classmates will be making fun of me”
(JHS, Northern region).
Changes in Enrolment and GPI – Have the Girl-child education interventions
worked?
We compared the GPIs from 2006 to 2011 (i.e. over the five year period) to assess whether
changes have occurred nationally, regionally and in the ten deprived districts in Ghana including
those where the study was conducted. However, before we report our findings, care should be
taken not to make causal relationship between the changes in GPI in the study communities over
the 5 year period and the interventions.
Comparative analyses of the yearly GPI in the primary schools showed that generally, there have
been significant gains made towards improvements in GPI in all the 10 regions of the country.
The northern region which had the biggest gender gap in 2004/5 still remained the region with
the biggest gap in 2010/11. Although the trend appeared to be improving, the gains were not
much in some regions when compared with previous years considering that several interventions
have been implemented. For instance, using EMIS data, between 2004/5 (65.4% of girls
compared with 77.6% of boys in the primary schools) and 2010/11 (87.4% of girls compared
with 99.9% of the boys) there has been about 22% increase in girls enrolment compared with
22.3% for boys in the primary schools.
The analysis of GPI at Primary and JHS levels for the year 2006/7 to 2010/11 in 10 deprived
districts also showed improvents in the various disticts.
Interestingly, we found that while
there have been some signficant gains in GPI at both the primary and JHS levels over the years,
the trend also showed some degree of unsteadiness characterised by stalification and negative
growth. For the year 2010/11, the primary school GPI of seven of the selected district in the
northern region where interventions were implemented was below the regional GPI of 0.88
except for Tamale district. Equally at the JHS level only Tamale and Tolon Kumbungu had
GPIs the same as the regional GPI of 0.85. Although there has been some achievement in GPI in
the 4 regions that was selected for the study. It appears the northern region still requires
sutainable implementation of interventions in order to close the gender gap in the region.
It may be concluded from our analyses that trends in gender gap in gross enrolment and GPI
showed positive gains. Although the study did not seek to establish the cause of change in
enrolment to the implementation of the girl child interventions in the study communities, they
might have contributed in a way to closing the gender gap. As reported earlier, teachers’ views
on the effectiveness of girl child interventions in their areas showed that 64.3% perceived the
interventions to be effective. Additionally, 64.2% of the teachers interviewed rated the
attendance of the girls who were receiving interventions as fair. In summary therefore we can
assume from the teachers’ perceptions that the interventions have been effective.
Recommendations
Among the recommendations made were the following:

Although our analyses show that there have been some achievements in GPIs in the 4
regions that were selected for the study, it would appear that the northern region still
requires sustainable implementation of interventions in order to close the gender gap in
the region and therefore it is recommended that future research should investigate why
the Northern region show more resiliance in relatively improving the gender gap depite
the interventions.

What emerged from our findings with regard to how the interventions were implemented
and who implemented them was a complex picture without any laid down procedures or
general policies that everyone should follow. Therefore we recommend that the GES
should clearly define the District Girls’ Education Officer’s role which should include the
role of coordinating all interventions in the district. This should include interventions
from NGOs.

The GES should set up a monitoring and Evaluation group dedicated to monitoring girlchild education interventions. Membership of this group should not include any of the
officers involved in the implementation of the interventions.

The older girls in the group who have dropped out of school were particularly concerned
about their age and saw that as a hindrance to them going back. Therefore the District
Girls’ Education Officer should investigate the possibility of assisting the girls to attend
non-formal education or adult education classes.
Study Limitations
1. The methodological problem of clearly identifying Ghanaian towns and areas as rural and
urban might have affected our results.
The study sites were limited to only four regions, seven districts and twenty-three schools in
Ghana and therefore caution should be exercise regarding generalisations.