TERMS OF REFERENCE
FINAL EVALUATION of the project “TELENOR PAKISTAN SCHOOL REHABILITATION AND IMPROVEMENT PROJECT”
1.
Background
1.1 About Plan 1
Plan is an international, humanitarian, child centred development organization without any religious, political or governmental affiliations. Plan is committed to achieving a world in which all children realize their full potential in societies that respect people’s rights and dignity. Pakistan is one of the 50 programme countries in which Plan operates. Plan International’s operations in Pakistan commenced in 1997 and the organization currently implements programmes in the districts of Chakwal, Vehari, Rajanpur, Rahim Yar Khan, Layyah, Multan, Bahawalpur & Muzaffargarh in
Punjab, Nowshera, Charsada, Mardan, D.I Khan, Sawabi, Peshawar, and Haripur in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Thatta, Hyderabad, Badin, Kashmor,
Sanghar, Ghotki and Khairpur in Sindh, Ziarat, Jaffarabad & Naseerabad in Baluchistan, Gilgit, Astore, Hunza Nagar, Guanche, Skardu & Ghizer in
Gilgit Baltistan and Neelum, Bagh and Kahuta in Azad Jammu & Kashmir. In addition Plan Pakistan also works in the squatter settlements of
Islamabad, the capital city of Pakistan. Plan International, Pakistan is actively engaged in disaster risk reduction and its management and has played important role in saving life during the 2005 earthquake and remained actively engaged in providing response to the population affected by 2010 super floods and 2011 floods.
Plan International Pakistan is implementing its fourth country strategic plan which is developed around an overarching country goal that states,
“All girls and boys and young women and men realise their full potential in a protective, stable and resilient environment without any discrimination or exclusion” . The country goal is supported by six strategic objectives. One of the main objectives is Increasing access of children and their families to equitable and inclusive WASH services and demonstrates adoption of improved WASH practices.
1.2 Project brief
The goal of this project is To increase access of children of flood affected areas to education in safe and child friendly environment .Plan international Pakistan with the financial support of Telenor is currently implementing this project under title “Telenor Pakistan School
Rehabilitation and Improvement Project” in four districts Muzaffargarh and Vehari in Punjab, Nowshehra in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Thatta in Sindh province. Pilot phase of the project has already been completed, from February 2014 to December 2014, in 4 elementary schools in Tehsil Kot
Addu District Muzaffargarh of Punjab province.
1
Detail information are available on www.plan-international.org
Page 1 of 19

Pilot followed by Scale up phase from July, 2014 to June, 2015 with an extension period of six more month (July, 2015 to December, 2015) The project activities under scale up phase covered 40 government schools Collectively this project (pilot phase 4 schools + scale up phase 40 schools) directly benefited 10,080(3,528 boys and 6,552 girls) as well as 88 teachers from 44 schools. In two districts (Vehari and Thatta) all project activities were managed by Plan project staff. While in districts Nowshera and Muzaffer garh all activities were managed by partner organization. Successful implementation of the project will ensure SRCs, PTCs, SRCs, parents and local government leading the coordination and delivery of IT and WASH activities. Mid term project evaluation had been carried out during piolet phase at Muzaffer garh district from Feb 2014 to June 2014. These four schools are also being included under final evaluation process.
1.1 Project Objectives
1.
To rehabilitate and create a child friendly and resilient environment for 10,080 children in 30 partially damaged government elementary schools for girls and 14 partially damaged government elementary school for boys by implementing a school improvement program in 4 flood-affected district of Punjab, Sindh and KPK in 1.5 years.
2.
To promote disaster resilience for 10,080 children in the 44 schools by ensuring that child-centred Disaster Risk Reduction is incorporated into schools’ rehabilitation and development planning and its implementation.
3.
To enhance the quality of the learning experience through the provision of IT labs and capacity building of teachers on use of ICT for education and m-learning.
1.2 Project Results
1.
Resilient and improved physical infrastructure and WASH facilities at the 44 selected schools thereby providing a safer and protective learning environment for 10,080 students (incl. 3,258 boys and 6,552 girls).
2.
Improved knowledge and understanding about disaster resilience and child protection amongst 10,080 students and 88 teachers at the
44 selected schools and the local communities.
3.
Improved quality of education at the 44 selected schools through access to ICT for education and m-learning and pedagogical skills enhancement of 88 teachers.
Page 2 of 19

4.
Improved governance and accountability in the 44 selected schools due to the active engagement of key stakeholders, including children, parents and school management committees, in project implementation.
Actual progress from July 2014 to December, 2015:
Progress of activities under scale up phase is mentioned under following headings;
Construction work (school building, boundary wall & WASH facilities) in 40 schools (14 at Nowshera, 11 in Vehari and 15 at Thatta) has been completed. One separate room for ICT has been constructed in 39 Schools out of 40. In one school at Thatta there is spare room and school management of said school allocated this room as ICT room. Similarly 28 new toilet blocks were constructed. In each ICT lab, 08 laptop along with internet stick (Dongle), 08 laptop locks, 04 mobile handsets along with SIMs as well as 04 mobile Handsets frames were provided to ensure the ICT as well as mobile learning in each school. 40 Solar panels were installed at IT lab in all project area schools so that these panels to ensure supply of electricity during electricity load shedding. 25 Water purifiers along with stands were provided in 25 schools (07 Schools from Vehari,
08 from Thatta and 10 from Nowshera) where water is not fit for drinking. First aid kits have been distributed in 44 schools (04 kits for piolet phase schools at Muzaffargarh Schools). Learning and teaching material as well as Audio & visual aids material have been Provided as per need by
School management in each project location. School furniture (Desk benches, teacher’s chairs/tables, Almireh) and play equipment’s (Swings and slides) were also provided in all 40 schools. All these interventions played a vital role to increase enrolment at school level, reduced absenteeism, developed conducive environment for students as well as teachers for learning and sharing knowledge.
Series of capacity building initiatives have been carried out for Student representative council (SRCs), School Management Committee members/Parents teacher association (SMCs/PTCs) and local community members i.e. Training of SMCs and SRCs on participatory needs assessment, School Development Planning and contingency planning, Training and refreshers of teachers and non-teaching staff on first aid and disaster risk reduction/school safety, including psychosocial care, Hazard Vulnerability Capacity Assessment and development of school safety action plans and reviews, Mock drill exercises, SMCs conduct sessions on DRR with school children, Training of SRC/SMC members on maintenance of solar panels and DRR techniques, Teachers Training/Refreshers in the use of ICTs for improved pedagogy.
Objectives of final evaluation including Piloet phase as well as Scale up phase.
The overall objective of end evaluation is to assess and gauge the immediate outcomes / change the project created in the targeted schools, children, teachers, education officials, communities, parents and partnering CSOs Specifically to:
Page 3 of 19

1)
2)
3)
4)
Outcomes: To assess the degree to which the projects’ stated objectives and outcomes have been achieved
Sustainability : Gauge the sustainability of the outcomes and measures that can be taken to improve it in future.
CCCD Standards: To what extent the programme is consistent with key aspects of Plan’s CCCD approach
Learning: Identify lessons learned for future development of Plan´s School Safety work in Pakistan and propose recommendations to develop direction and program design.
Some of the key questions:
Relevance – are we doing the right things in the right places?



How much the activities and outputs are in line with local government priorities, capacities, and approaches?
How many children (boys and girls) as well as teachers targeted by the project?
Did the objectives and activities of the project addressed priority needs of the target population?


Effectiveness – (How well an activity has achieved its purpose, or can be expected to do so on the basis of existing outputs.)



Are there gaps in services, in terms of availability and/or quality that still need to be filled?
What are the major lessons from the project design?
How well project interventions remained successful in achieving the project results to date?
Analysis about drop out and absenteeism ratio either increased or decreased after project interventions?
To what extent focal point IT teachers knew about the importance of ICT for education and m-learning and have they teach computer as a

 subject in all project area schools?
How many students have knowledge about internet and mobile learning?
How many teachers and SRC members knew about disaster resilience and child protection?
Are health and hygiene practices improved while providing WASH facilities in schools? 


Up to what extent computer lab contributed in improvement of learning methodologies and how students benefitted.
Was project interventions strengthened the government while in the promotion of quality education especially information technology for all children (girls and boys)?
Was playground equipment contributed in making school environment child friendly? 
Efficiency - (A measure of the outputs, qualitative and quantitative, achieved as a result of inputs)
 To what extent the outputs delivered according to plan?
 To what extent project utilized resources efficiently?
Page 4 of 19

 What were the self-initiatives of School management or SRC in the implementation of the project?
Sustainability and impact – will what we are doing remain after we depart?


According to beneficiaries, what were the main outcomes/emerging impacts of the project, both positive and negative?
What needs to be done differently to achieve and maximize a positive outcome/ impact on children’s lives and the fulfilment of their rights?
What have been the outcome/ emerging impact on govt. and CSOs capacity and coordination as a result of the project? 
 What have been done to ensure that project is owned by the local institutions [CSOs and community members? Could you give us a few evidence that suggest that your programme may sustain beyond its formal life?
Equity and Non-discrimination – are we missing anyone?
 Did project possess any specific intervention that targeted disable children’s and The excluded categories of people at school level?


 How People with disabilities (PWDs) are benefited from project activities?
 How Plan or partner supported in making positive contributions for tackling issues faced by women, girls and other excluded groups at school level? Or any support provided to develop linkages with relevant authorities for the issue related to women, girls and other excluded groups, to your school level?
Accountability - who knows what we are doing?
 Were the SMCs, SRCs (School Representative Councils), teaching and non-teaching staff involved in planning and implementation phase
 How many (monthly or quarterly) review meetings were held with the beneficiaries especially children where Plan/Partner staff discussed project budget, activities and results?
Does Plan/Partner altered the activities in light of the suggestion from beneficiaries, especially children during those meetings? any examples of such modifications?
Do project beneficiaries know how to give feedback to Plan and its partners, how effective feedback mechanism was?




Are all stakeholders of project are well aware about commitments of project narrated in proposal document?
What is the opinion of beneficiaries and implementing partners about transparency and accountability practiced by Plan while implementing this project?
To what extend SMC and SRC members awarded about project interventions and how they ensured accountability mechanisms for project interventions?
How much Telenor branding is present at School level/ Assets?
Page 5 of 19

Scale up and Innovation – what is the potential for reaching larger numbers of the target population?
 What are the innovative approaches/practices devised by the teachers, SRCs, communities, Plan, Implementing partner during project

Learning - how are we learning from program experience and sharing it to improve the program and with others?


 implementation?
Up to what extent M-learning contributed in improvement of learning methodologies and how students benefitted?
How effectively project lessons (good and bad practice) are identified, documented and used for project improvement?
How problems and opportunities that are arising during implementation are acted upon and addressed both by Plan and its partners?
What were the key learning found during the implementation of project and how these learning can be incorporated in other running programs/project of the organization?
Methodology
A mix of both quantitative and qualitative methodology is recommended for conducting the evaluation of this project. The Consultant will submit detailed proposal proposing tools, sampling criteria, sample size and detail methodology for evaluation. DAC / PALS evaluation criteria 2 should be used as prime framework for evaluation
Key Stakeholders should be consulted during the evaluation :
The key stakeholders of the project are:
 Children
 Parents
 Teachers
2
Relevance – are we doing the right thing? Effectiveness – are we doing the right thing well? Equality and non-discrimination – are we missing anyone? Efficiency – are we getting the most results for our inputs?
A ccountability - who knows what we are doing? Sustainability and impact – will what we are doing remain after we depart? Scale up and Innovation – what is the potential for reaching larger numbers of the target population? Learning – how do we learn from programme experience and share it to improve programmes?
Page 6 of 19

 members of School management committee and Students Representative Council
 Implementation team of Plan International Pakistan
 Implementing partner staff
 District education department
 One key member from donor, if possible
Intended Users of the Report
Following will be the intended user of the report:-
 Plan International
 Implementing partner
 SMC and education department to evaluate the project progress
 Donors to ensure that project implemented in line with proposal document
Outputs / deliverables
The following deliverables are expected:
 An inception report [covering what sampling strategy the evaluators intend to follow, data collection tools (possibly as annexes) any interview or FGD guides, survey forms, or other data collection instruments to be used, clearly stating the limitations of the proposed data collection methods and the sampling strategy, competencies of the proposed team in gathering and analysing data, detail work plan with level of efforts for each of the proposed team member. Elements of Ethics involving children].
 Evaluation matrix: which should shows how the evaluator plans to answer each of the evaluation questions reflecting the data collection methods set out to answer the questions. It should be presented as an annex with inception report.
 A draft report for the study using the format given below in the TORs.
 A final report after incorporating comments from Plan team in digital copy in MS Word (page size A4). A hard copy printed and bound (excluding spiral one) with the pages containing graphs, figures and pictures printed in colour.
 Summary report translated in Urdu designed on coral draw (page size 6.5”X9.5”).
 Submit a presentation containing methodology and key finding
 Logos and pictures in the report (with written consent form the person, duly signed) should also be submitted in original form separately along with final report.
Page 7 of 19

 All materials produced by the study including hard copy of the report and raw data either in SPSS, excel, FGD and IDI transcripts both in soft and hard form.
 The consultant will be responsible to present most significant findings to the Plan Management and key stakeholders including community, to get their feedback on critical areas.
 The consultant will also be responsible for sharing key findings of the report in evaluation dissemination events.
Dissemination Plan
 The consultant will be responsible to present most significant findings to the Plan Management and key stakeholders including community, implementing partner, to get their feedback on critical areas.
 Summary report in Urdu will be designed in coral draw that will be shared with community level stakeholders.
Outline of the reports to be delivered
Final Evaluation report format should have as minimum included:
 Standard cover sheet having following contents; Title of the Study with geographic area
 Month and year of execution
 Plan Logo on bottom right corner
 Name and address of consultant/firm who conducted the evaluation
Contents of Study will include;
Acknowledgment
Executive Summary (Having contents; Objectives, Methods, results & conclusion)
1.
Background [description of project and activities]
2.
Literature review
3.
Methodology (having below mentioned components) a.
Objectives of the study b.
Operational definitions c.
Study design d.
Sampling Method and Sample Size e.
Data Collection Procedure f.
Data Analysis
Page 8 of 19

g.
Significance / Importance of the study, Human subject protection
4.
Limitations
5.
Findings
6.
Conclusions
7.
Recommendations will guide Plan and its partners for bringing further improvements in such type of projects.
8.
References
9.
Annexure [management response table 3 , TOR, data collection tools, case studies…]
Following lists must be given at the start;
1.
Table of contents (automatically generated)
2.
List of Figures
3.
List of Tables
4.
Acronyms and abbreviations
Timeline and Indicative Budget
1.
1 st January to February 29, 2016 for data collection and report writing
2.
Total budget Rs.1000,000/=
Criteria for Evaluator
1.
Evaluator should have knowledge of local area and have previous experience of evaluating School Rehabilitation projects as well as disaster risk reduction and child protection.
2.
Able to represent data in tabular, graphical and narrative form.
3.
Have evaluation team consist of 4-5 members including 2 female member to conduct meetings with female teachers and student representative committee
4.
Masters in Social Sciences with at least 6-7 years of experience in the education or development sector.
2.
Payments
3Format will be provided by Research Coordinator
Page 9 of 19

Terms of payment shall be 25% on approval of the inception report and tools, 25% upon submission of the 1 st draft report and 50% on submission of approved final report. Professional fees, administrative costs related to transport, accommodation and stationary will be handled by the consultant.
3.Content of the Proposal
We invite interested candidates to submit the following application documents:
The consultant is required to submit a detailed Technical and Financial proposal. The technical proposal must contain:
 A detailed methodology for the quantitative and qualitative aspects of the assignment.
 a) A detailed work plan including dates for submission of the draft and final Report
 Evidence of availability of appropriate qualifications, manpower and key staff that will constitute the team.
 CVs of the assigned team member(s) detailing relevant experience.
The financial proposal must be submitted in Pak Rupees with a detailed break up of all activities budgeted for, showing unit, unit cost and duration.
Ethical and child protection Considerations
The Evaluator must follow Ethical Principles 4 for involving human subjects in a research and obtain written/ verbal consent from the human subjects. Permission from elder must be sought if the children under 18 years are involved as subjects. Signed informed consent of each child and his/ her parents will be taken after explaining purpose of the study and its usage. Individual responses should not be shared to observe confidentiality of data. Plan will ensure that no risk or harm is involved in this study. Study findings will provide evidence to implementers and planners in that it will benefit the population overall. The consultant should understand and sign child protection policy of Plan International,
Pakistan at time of signing agreement with Plan. In case, the report contains photos; the consultant has to take written consent from the photographed person, on a form will be shared by Plan and should be submitted in original form separately along with final report. Moreover, to protect the children, do not use their real names when providing a quote in the report. The preferred style for giving reference to an individual
4Helsinki Declaration 2012: Ethical Principles for Research Involving Human Subjects
Page 10 of 19

child is to provide the false name instead of its real name, age and where he/she is from. Consultant shall avoid plagiarism 1 of any kind and abide by the principle of intellectual property and joint data ownership in the case of study carried out in collaboration with others. The final report will be scanned for potential plagiarism and the study report will be rejected if the copied contents exceed 10%.
Submission Procedure:
The technical and financial proposals (both in hard form and soft copy of only technical proposal) should be sent in separate sealed envelopes, marked on the top right hand corner Technical and financial Proposals for “ Final Evaluation of the project “Telenor Pakistan School
Rehabilitation and Improvement Project ”. Please submit proposals to The Country Director Plan Pakistan, P.O. Box 537, F-7 Markaz, or to
House 9, Street 32, Sector F 7/1 Islamabad by or before close of business by January 04, 2016
Only short listed applicants will be contacted. Plan reserves the right to reject any or all proposals and is not bound to any legal claim in this regard. No telephone inquiries will be entertained.
ANNEX_ Questions related to CCCD Standards
Standard 1: Working with Children & Communities
1.
Has Plan/partners’ staff held meetings with community (including children, youth, men and women) during the process of designing and implementation? What was their actual role in identification of problems, proposing solutions and analysis of the issues which include cause & effect analysis for problem identification?
2.
How children and their families benefited from the particular projects or interventions implemented by Plan, Partners, government and other NGOs/ CSOs in during project implementation?
3.
How many times partners, government, CSOs and community reviewed projects or conducted reflection meetings with the community groups of the village?
4.
What were the self-initiatives of CBOs or forum in the implementation of the project under evaluation? What were plan/ partners / government support in self-help initiatives? During the process of design and implementation of self-help initiatives who made the decision and how you discussed the learning?
5.
How government or other NGOs or local politician supported to resolve the same problem at their end? What was Plan role in facilitating linkage between community groups and relevant stakeholders for collective action to address the issues that will benefit children and their
1
Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit. Research misconduct does not include honest error or differences of opinion.
Page 11 of 19

families? Have you signed MOU or know about any MOU signed with authorities to support village CBO for similar type of interventions that benefited children and their communities?
Standard 2: Tackling exclusion and Gender Inequality
1.
Did Plan/Partner conduct any meeting during project under evaluation, in which they asked about the number of people who are excluded due to any reason? How are the issues of the excluded groups of people addressed in Plan interventions?
2.
Is there any representation of the excluded categories of people in any community forums or groups in your community that work with
Plan/Partner? How you ensure the inclusion of aforementioned groups in regular activities/benefits implemented by Plan/Partner? How excluded groups are benefited from Plan?
3.
How the above category of people contributed towards resolving the issues faced by girls and other excluded children during the period under evaluation?
4.
How Plan or partner supported in making positive contributions for tackling issues faced by women, girls and other excluded groups in your village? Or any support provided to develop linkages with relevant authorities for the issue related to women, girls and other excluded groups, to your community forum/ CBO?
5.
Are there any existing practices in the community which side line excluded groups?
6.
How exclusion and gender inequalities were addressed through this project (ask from Plan implementation staff and implementing partner)? Has Plan developed any strategic partnership with CSOs and government at district, provincial & national level to address discrimination and gender inequality? Give examples.
Standard 3: Engaging with Civil Society (CSO are not limited to IP)
1.
Did Plan held any meetings under this project at provincial and district level with CSO forums, alliances, trade unions, media and networks to share its work and strategies (particularly regarding this project)? Give some examples which highlight that Plan shared its work with these networks?
2.
How much CBO know about Plan’s work and key strategies under this project?
3.
Has Plan’s local office mapped all CSO at district level working for same issue or child rights issues?
4.
Has Plan under taken any joint initiatives under this project (any project activity, campaign or capacity building initiative) along with other
CSOs working on common theme to benefit children? Is there any example under this project in which CBO or any other community forum worked with Plan or Implementing Partner by sharing resources? Give examples?
5.
Has Plan got into long term strategic partnership [long term partnership must be more than 3 year or without any time limitation with focus to collaborate in lobbying and advocacy] with any CSO at district level for child right realization?
Page 12 of 19

6.
Can you name any network or alliance in which Plan is identified as one of the member organizations that are part of the social network of
CBOs / CSOs?
Standard 4: Influencing Government
1.
Has Plan conducted mapping under current project or at PU level to identify the relevant duty bearers at different levels.
2.
Did Plan/PU share the plans of this project with relevant district level government line departments? Please give examples. Has Plan shared the progress related to this project to local and national government? Did Plan and government counterpart jointly conduct consultation and reviews with children and communities during the course of implementation of this project?
3.
How Plan’s projects supported government in providing services to children and their communities? [Give examples where CBOs or children groups discussed their needs and government diverted their services to them with Plan’s support.]
4.
Is Plan part of any working group/ networks supporting government in developing/reviewing/changing practices/ policies to support child rights?
5.
In what areas has Plan advocated with the government to resolve or allocate resources to the same issue faced by children or communities? How many CSOs led Public dialogues supported by Plan to hold duty bearer account able on the issues of child rights?
What was the issue and what was the result?
6.
How much proportion of budget of current project allocated for policy advocacy and lobbing on Child Rights
Standard 5: Strengthening Plan’s Accountability
1.
Has Plan/Partner staffs held meetings to discuss their plans and work during this project implementation? To what extent the project components (activities) were shared by whom Plan or partner? What was the frequency of sharing monthly, quarterly or six monthly or at the start of project? Was it before partner hiring or after its induction? Approximately how many people were included in that meeting?
2.
How many (monthly or quarterly) review meetings held with your community where Plan/Partner staff discusses project budget, activities and results with you? Does Plan/Partner alter their activities in light of your suggestions during those meetings? Share any examples of such modifications?
3.
Did you get opportunity to provide feedback and ask question to Plan and IP about quality of activities and utilization of budget of the project in your village? Are there any examples from previous year where Plan or partner modified its activities, budgets and implementation process in light of the suggestion came through review meetings with community and partners? [Whom you asked these question, what forum, how you get response, when last time]
-
Do you have Plan Office phone numbers or postal address or the contact numbers of an individual you may contact during this project period? Is there any feedback or complaints mechanism in place and how much it’s effective (please examples)? Have you contacted
Page 13 of 19

Plan/Partner staff in case of any issue/feedback? Are you satisfied with the response? (Note down the positive/negative responses received in this case. Also record experiences where staff was contacted and of the outcomes
Page 14 of 19

2.
Logical Framework
Narrative Summary
Objectively
Indicators
Verifiable
Overall Objective: To improve access of children in flood-affected areas to education in a child friendly and safe environment
Specific Objective 1: partially
To rehabilitate and create a child friendly and resilient environment for 10,080 children in 30 damaged government elementary schools for girls and 14 partially damaged government elementary school for boys by implementing a school improvement program in 4 flood-affected district of
Punjab, Sindh and KPK in 1.5 year.
 44 Govt. Girls
Elementary/Middle Schools rehabilitated
 40% increase in school enrolment
 100% retention in current enrolment
 44 partially damaged Govt.
Elementary/Middle schools rehabilitated
 # of SDPs developed and implemented
Means of Verification


Completion reports
Pictorial evidence (post and pre –intervention)
 School registers attendance
 Completion reports
 Pictorial evidence (post and pre –intervention)
 School registers attendance
 SDPs
 Baseline and End
Project Evaluation
Assumptions
 Education department is fully cooperative
 Teaching staff buy into the project and have time to participate in trainings
 SMCs are fully functional
Specific Objective 2: To promote disaster resilience for 10,080 children in the 44 schools by ensuring that childcentred Disaster Risk Reduction is
 70% of the 10,080 children across the 44 targeted school have improved knowledge and understanding of resilience and
 Midterm reviews
 Annual reviews [peer reviews]
 Functional monitoring
 Deterioration of security and political situation and general decline of law and
Page 15 of 19

incorporated into schools’ rehabilitation and development planning and its implementation. safer school concepts
 100% of the SRCs and SMCs formed/strengthened
 80% of SRCs and SMCs have improved knowledge and understanding of resilience and safer school concepts
 Safety Plans are developed as part of the SDPs across the 4 targeted schools
 Early warning systems are in place across the 44 targeted schools
Specific Objective 3: To enhance the quality of the learning experience through the provision of IT labs and capacity building of teachers on use of IT.
 88 of teachers trained on use of
ICT and pedagogical skills
 # of students using computers and with access to internet facilities
Output – Specific Objective 1 :
1.
Improved physical infrastructure and
 44 partially damaged Govt.
Elementary/Middle schools rehabilitated mechanisms-records
 Filed visit reports
 Visitors records/reports feedback
 School contingency planning documents
 Implementation plans
 Complaint mechanisms—records
 Training modules and records
 Awareness raising materials and campaign records
 Pictorial and video evidence
 Case studies’
 School and SMC records
 Attendance sheets
 Training report
 School timetables
 Field monitoring reports
 Completion reports
 Pictorial evidence (post and pre –intervention) order in the country
 Poor access to remote areas due to the flooding
 District government, especially Department of Education, is supportive of the project intervention
 Education department is fully cooperative
 Teaching staff buy into the project and have time to participate in trainings
 SMCs are fully functional
 Education department is fully cooperative
 SMCs are fully
Page 16 of 19

Output – Specific Objective 2:
1.
facilities at the 44 targeted schools  # of SDPs developed and implemented
Increased schools knowledge and understanding of DRR and Child
Protection issues amongst 10,080 children across the 44 targeted
 # of children trained on DRR and Child Protection
 # of school evacuation plans developed
 # of SMCs established
 # of mock drill exercised conducted in the 4 targeted schools
 SDPs
 End Project Evaluation
 Minutes from village disaster management committee meetings
 M&E reports
 School development plans
 School records
 Pictorial and video evidence functional
 Continued cooperation of district and government provincial
 Experienced and skilled staff are recruited and retained
Output – Specific Objective 3:
1.
Increased capacity of 88 teachers across the 44 targeted schools to impart ICT training to their students and peers
 88 Teachers trained on the use of ICTs.
Activities – Specific Objective 1:
1.
Assessment and rehabilitation/improvement in the main buildings of the 44 targeted schools
2.
Assessment and provision of rehabilitated and improved WASH facilities in the 44 targeted schools
3.
Construction of 1 IT lab in each of the
 Improved classrooms, verandas, teaching staff offices, and assembly halls in the 44 targeted schools
 WASH facilities functional in
44 targeted schools
 Total of 44 additional room constructed across the 44


Attendance sheets
Training reports
 Visit Reports
 Assessment reports
 Project completion report
 Pictorial/video evidence
 Monitoring reports
 Education department is fully cooperative
 Teaching staff buy into the project and have time to participate in trainings
 SMCs are fully functional
 Deterioration of security and political situation and general decline of law and order in the country
 Poor access to remote areas due to the flooding
 District government,
Page 17 of 19

44 targeted schools
4.
Installation of solar panels in each of the 44 targeted schools
Activities – Specific Objective 2:
1.
7.
8.
9.
Dialogue with district and provincial government to brief them about the project and agree roles and responsibilities
2.
Project Launch
3.
Documentary about the project
4.
Activation and training of SMCs and
SRCs on participatory needs assessment survey, SDP and contingency planning
5.
Development/assembling of IEC materials on school safety and DRR
6.
Training and refreshers of teachers and non-teaching staff on first aid and disaster risk reduction/school safety, including psychosocial care
HVCA, development of school safety action plans and conducting mock drill exercises
SMCs conduct sessions on DRR to students
Skills development training for SRC members maintenance
(installation of and solar
 targeted schools
Solar panel installations functional in 44 targeted schools
 44 government
Elementary/Middle schools selected for the project
 44 SMCs and SRCs trained, functional and managing the project’s activities
 Project Launching Ceremony
Held
 Documentary Developed
 # of trainings conducted
 # of schools safety plans developed
 # of HVCA conducted
 # of mock drill exercises conducted
 # of sessions conducted with school children across the targeted schools
 # of students and teachers utilizing dJuice mLearning in targeted schools
 MOU with relevant government department
 Meeting minutes and activity reports from
SMCs and SRCs
 Launching Report
 Documentary
 List of participants
 Copy of school safety plan
 Training modules
 Copy of reports
 Reports of event
 List of participants and report of sessions
 Telenor Records especially Department of Education, is supportive of the project intervention
 School teachers and education authorities are conducive to the adoption of DRR in the targeted schools
 Schools are motivated and driven by the interest of the children
Page 18 of 19

panels/DRR/Child Protection)
10.
Pilot dJuice mLearning in 44 targeted schools
Activities – Specific Objective 3:
1
2
3
Provision of school furniture, books and ICT materials in 44 targeted schools.
Hiring of Resource Person to conduct teacher training on ICT
Training of teachers on ICT skills and provision of follow-up support
 88 Teachers are trained in the use of ICTs for improved pedagogy
 # Of follow- up visits.
 Resource persons are on board
 Learning resources and ICTs available in 44 Govt.
Elementary/middle Schools
 Teachers
Reports
Training
 Attendance sheet
 Visit reports
 Contract agreement
 School
Record/Inventory
Register
 Teaching staff buy into the project and have time to participate in trainings
Page 19 of 19