Education in South
Sudan:
investing in a better future
A review by Gordon Brown
Education in South Sudan: investing in a better future
Cover image: A boy listens to his teacher during a lesson at the improvised Hai Kugi School on the outskirts
of Juba, South Sudan. © UNESCO /M. Hofer (2011)
2
Education in South
Sudan:
investing in a better future
A review by Gordon Brown
3
Contents
Glossary
5
Acknowledgements
6
Foreword: South Sudan – time to act
7
Executive Summary
11
1. An education system under pressure
18
2. Current levels of development assistance
26
3. Accelerating the catch up
31
4. Closing the gap – delivering on the promise
38
Conclusion
44
Endnotes
45
Education in South Sudan: investing in a better future
List of Figures
Figure 1
South Sudan – anchored to the bottom of the world education league
20
Figure 2
School participation in South Sudan - below the average for Africa
20
Figure 3
Primary school attrition
21
Figure 4
The secondary deficit
21
Figure 5
South Sudan’s gender gaps – among the world’s widest
22
Figure 6
Few of South Sudan's children are in permanent classrooms
24
Figure 7
South Sudan’s Teacher Workforce – limited training, few women
25
List of Tables
Table 1
Financing Basic Education in South Sudan: Targets, Plans and Gaps (2012-2015)
33
Table 2
The scope for early delivery in education: financial estimates for achieving specified
targets (selected non-governmental organisations)
36
Table 3
Closing the financing gap (an illustrative proposal)
39
List of Boxes
Box 1
Scaling up and capacity building
35
Box 2
Building capacity and working through government systems
37
Box 3
Delivering the peace dividend – a role for Community Support Bases (CSBs)
43
4
Glossary
ADF
African Development Fund
AfDB
African Development Bank
BRAC
Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee
BSF
Basic Service Fund
CECs
County Education Centres
CSBs
County Support Bases
DAC
The OECD’s Development Assistance Committee
DfID
Department for International Development
EPP
South Sudan Education Peace Premium
GER
Gross Enrolment Ratio
GPE
The Global Partnership for Education
GPI
Gender Parity Index
GRSS
Government of the Republic of South Sudan
IDA
International Development Association
LSDAI
Local Service Delivery Aid Instrument
MDGs
Millennium Development Goals
MDTF
Multi-Donor Trust Fund
MoGEI
Ministry of General Education and Instruction
NER
Net Enrolment Ratio
ODA
Oversees Development Assistance
TTI
Teacher Training Institute
UNDAF
United Nations Development Assistance Framework
5
Education in South Sudan: investing in a better future
Acknowledgments
This report was written with Kevin Watkins
of the Centre for Universal Education at the
Brookings Institution. Our research was
greatly assisted by many individuals and
organisations.
David Masua (Education Programme Manager,
Windle Trust), Sue Nicholson (Education
Technical Adviser, Save the Children in South
Sudan), and Habibur Rahman (Education
Programme Manager, BRAC South Sudan).
Several ministers from the Government of the
Republic of South Sudan were extremely
generous with their time, providing advice and
comments on early drafts. Special thanks are
due to Joseph Ukel Abongo (Minister for
General Education and Instruction), Peter
Adwok Nywabi (Minister for Higher
Education) and Kosti Manibe Ngai (Minister
for Finance and Economic Planning). Senior
officials and consultants from a number of
ministries provided comments and insights
including Esther Akumu (Director for
Development Partner Coordination, Ministry
of General Education and Instruction),
Stephanie Allan (Donor Coordinator, Ministry
of Finance and Economic Planning), Deng
Deng Yai (Undersecretary for General
Education and Instruction), Catherine Dom
(Technical Adviser, Ministry of Finance and
Economic Planning), and Moses Mabior,
(Director for Aid Coordination, Ministry of
Finance and Economic Planning).
We also benefited from discussions with Jubabased staff from a number of donor agencies,
including Hilde Johnson (Special
Representative to the Secretary General on
South Sudan), Yasmin Haque (South Sudan
Country Representative, UNICEF), William
Osafo (Education Team Leader, USAID South
Sudan Mission), and Fazle Rabbani (Education
Adviser), DFID.
Staff working with non-governmental
organisations in South Sudan provided
invaluable advice based on their programme
experience. We are indebted to Caroline De
Anna (Education Programme Coordinator,
Episcopal Church of Sudan), Reverend
Emmanuel (Education Manager, Episcopal
Church of Sudan), Emily Lugano (Education
Adviser, Save the Children in South Sudan),
6
Initial findings from the report were
presented to a group of non-governmental
organisations at a meeting held in London, on
20 March 2012. The subsequent discussions
and comments informed the redrafting
process. We wish to thank the following
organisations for their participation: Action
Aid, the Anglican Church, BRAC, the British
Council, Camfed, Care International, The
Children’s Investment Fund Foundation,
Christian Aid, Comic Relief, the Global
Campaign for Education, the Open University,
Oxfam, Save the Children and VSO.
Michael Holman, author and former Africa
Editor of the Financial Times, kindly
commented on an early draft.
While all of the individuals and organisations
mentioned above have informed this report,
the views expressed are those of the authors
alone.
Foreword: South Sudan – time to act
parents everywhere around the world, I know
that it is through education that children
broaden their horizons and develop the skills
they need to realise their potential. Education
and learning are the real foundations for
opportunity.
The Right Honourable Gordon Brown MP,
former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom,
Co-Chair of the High Level Panel on global
education
One of the great privileges that I have enjoyed
in my political life is the opportunity to meet
Nelson Mandela.
Like many people around the world, I have
been inspired by his life, his courage, and his
wisdom. Through his personal example, he
has demonstrated that iron resolve backed by
practical endeavour and clear strategies can
move mountains.
Of the many words that I have read by
Madiba, there is one sentence that I am always
drawn to. It is this: “There is no passion to be
found playing small - in settling for a life that is
less than the one you are capable of living.”
Since becoming a parent I have often thought
about these words. Like parents everywhere
across the world, I want my children to have
the lives they are capable of living. And like
Today, millions of children around the world
are denied a chance to put those foundations
in place. Progress towards the 2015 goal of
universal primary education is slowing, leaving
67 million primary school age children locked
out of classrooms – and many more receiving
a sub-standard education. Poverty, child
labour, early marriage, and armed conflict are
among the scourges holding back progress in
education, along with failures of political
leadership.
The High Level Panel on global education was
created to address what I see as a global crisis
in education. As co-chair, along with Graça
Machel – Madiba’s wife – I have spent time
researching that crisis. I have spoken to
political leaders, the heads of international
agencies, and non-governmental organisations.
And I have spent time talking to people at the
sharp end of the crisis in education. I have
heard agonised stories from parents who
want their children to be able to live the life
they are capable of living, but are forced by
circumstances to settle for something less;
and I have spoken to children who are
desperate for the education that they know
could transform their lives.
Africa’s newest nation
My work as Co-Chair of the High Level Panel
on global education has involved visits to
many countries. But there is one country that
illustrates more than any other what is not
working in the current international aid
7
architecture on education. That country is
South Sudan, Africa’s newest nation.
Much has been achieved over the six years
that have passed since South Sudan emerged
from a brutal and protracted conflict. Yet
parents and children are still waiting for an
education peace premium – and South Sudan
is embarking on independence anchored to
the bottom of the world league table on
education.
Over one million children of primary school
age are out of school. Enrolment rates in
secondary education are below 10 per cent.
In what is a desperate situation for all
children, South Sudan’s girls face additional
disadvantages. Just 6 per cent of 13 year old
girls have completed primary school. So
extreme are the gender inequalities that
young girls in South Sudan are more than
twice as likely to die in pregnancy or
childbirth as they are to make it through
primary school and into secondary education.
building, the development of shared identity,
and the creation of a society that is more
resilient and less vulnerable to violence.
To its credit, the Government of the Republic
of South Sudan (GRSS) is putting in place an
education strategy that holds out the promise
of a better future. However, it lacks the
financial resources, technical capacity and
institutional systems to overcome the vast
backlog in education provision. That is why
the international community has such an
important role to play. Several donors, UN
agencies and non-governmental organisations
have put in place education programmes that
are making a difference – but not on the
required scale.
This paper sets out an agenda for change. It
identifies a framework for policies that would:
•
Education in South Sudan: investing in a better future
•
Behind these numbers is a vast waste of
potential. Getting children into school and
providing them with decent quality
opportunities for education would help them
to build a better future, for themselves and
their country. In an increasingly knowledgebased and interconnected world, sustained
and shared prosperity depends not on what
countries have in terms of natural resources,
but on what their citizens are able to learn.
For South Sudan’s young people, education is
a passport to employment.
Education also has a wider role to play.
Armed conflict and the threat of violence
remains a source of insecurity for many of
South Sudan’s people. Many factors are
involved, including prejudice, long-standing
hostilities, and attitudes that see recourse to
violence as legitimate. With the right
curriculum in place, the education system
could act as a powerful force for peace8
•
•
Bring opportunities for improved
education to 2.5 million children, half of
them currently out of school
Provide financial support for the
education of half-a-million girls
Make provision for the education of
300,000 children displaced as a result of
armed violence, or living in conflict zones
Train 30,000 teachers and build 3,000
schools
Achieving these goals will require additional
resources. We set out a financing strategy
that includes an increased resource
mobilisation effort on the part of the GRSS.
Development assistance will have to cover a
financing gap of US$1.6bn over the next four
years, or US$400m annually.
Our proposals include recommendations for
individual donors. The Global Partnership for
Education (GPE), the major multilateral
mechanism charged with financing efforts to
achieve the international development goals,
has yet to establish a programme in South
Sudan. This is a wasted opportunity – and not
just for South Sudan. The GPE needs to
establish its credentials as an innovative and
dynamic force for change in countries affected
by conflict. The World Bank’s International
Development Association (IDA) could also
play a vital role. We propose a GPE-IDA cofinancing arrangement to mobilise US$180m
annually.
Other actors also have to step up to the
plate. Bilateral donors and the European
Commission could mobilise an additional
US$100m annually. Non-traditional donors –
including China – could be approached. And
the Africa Development Bank/Africa
Development Fund has developed co-financing
mechanisms that are well suited to support
the development of education infrastructure.
I am, of course, aware that some people will
argue that the goals that have been set are
too ambitious, that the costs are not
affordable, and that South Sudan should
concentrate on taking small steps in the right
direction, rather than attempting a great leap
forward.
I do not accept these arguments. In the
course of research for this paper I have
looked at the programmes of several nongovernmental organisations doing
extraordinary work in education. The
Ecumenical Church of South Sudan runs the
largest teacher-training programme in the
country, whilst the Bangladesh Rural
Advancement Committee (BRAC) operates
over 500 schools in some of the most difficult
parts of the country, providing thousands of
children with the hope of a better future. And
Save the Children is bringing health and
education support to many communities.
These and other non-governmental
organisations have found ways of delivering
results, working with and through
government. They are clear that, with
additional support, they could scale-up their
programmes. The same is true of UN agencies
and many bilateral donors. Expanded delivery
is held back not by a lack of capacity, but by a
lack of predictable finance on a scale
commensurate with the problem.
Having reviewed the situation in South Sudan
I am struck by similarities with other conflictaffected countries. Children in these countries
should have first call on international support.
Instead, they are pushed to the back of the
queue for development assistance. Education
is not a priority in the humanitarian aid
system – in fact, it accounts for less than 2
per cent of emergency aid. And because the
governments of conflict-affected states are
often unable – or unwilling – either to deliver
services or to meet the reporting standards
required by major donors, children and
parents are left to fend for themselves. From
Somalia and the refugee camps of northern
Kenya, to the war zones of north-eastern
Democratic Republic of Congo, conflict is
destroying opportunities for education on an
epic scale, and the aid system is providing
limited protection.
As an international community motivated by
shared values and a common commitment to
education, we must acknowledge this gap in
the aid architecture – and then we must fill it.
That is why I believe we need a new type of
organisation to deliver not just money, but
also teachers, books, temporary classrooms,
and counsellors trained in trauma
management to conflict areas. It is against this
background that we are planning to form a
new type of organisation called Education
without Borders. The aim: to provide a
mechanism that galvanises support,
coordinates action, and delivers aid and
education services to those most in need.
This is not an exercise in creating parallel
structures. It is an attempt to create a
mechanism through which a wide range of
actors – the public, teachers and other
education professionals, the business
9
community and others – can join a shared
effort to keep the flame of education alive for
children trapped in conflict. It can achieve for
education in broken down areas a little of
what Médecins Sans Frontières and the Red
Cross achieve for health.
Let me conclude by returning to the country
that is the focus for this report. When I think
of South Sudan, I think of a people who have
shown extraordinary courage in the face of
unimaginable adversity. I think of parents who,
like you and me, want the best for their
children. And I think of children who are filled
with talent, potential and hope.
Education in South Sudan: investing in a better future
It is to the children of South Sudan that I
dedicate this report. And it is on their behalf
that I ask your support for the proposals it
sets out.
South Sudan’s children have waited long
enough for the education peace premium.
And they have a right to expect bold action
and our best effort – not half-measures,
hesitation and indifference.
To paraphrase Madiba we are ‘playing small’
with education in South Sudan. And by playing
small we are consigning a generation of
children to lives that are immeasurably less
than the lives they are capable of living.
The children of South Sudan deserve better –
and we must do better by them.
The Right Honourable Gordon Brown MP, former
Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Co-Chair
of the High Level Panel on global education
Children at the BRAC supported Hai Kugi School on the outskirts of Juba in South Sudan. © UNESCO /M.
Hofer (2011)
10
Executive Summary
"I never had the chance to finish school - but all my children must have an education. Then they can have
the chance of a better life. No one will get anywhere in this country without an education."
Beida Ropani, aged 28, farmer, Lora village, Central Equatoria, South Sudan.
Education in South Sudan – investing in
a better future
chronic shortages of classrooms and
textbooks. Learning outcomes are abysmal.
The newly-independent country of South
Sudan is anchored to the bottom of the world
league table for education. More than half of
its primary school age children – over 1
million in total – are out of school. Young girls
are more likely to die in pregnancy or
childbirth than to graduate from primary
school. South Sudan’s young people face
restricted opportunities for the education
they need to build a better future for
themselves and their country. It is time for
the world to come together and change this
picture.
Set against these challenges there is a vast
untapped potential for change. At the heart of
that potential are the people of South Sudan.
They have shown extraordinary courage,
resilience and commitment to education. In
the face of overwhelming odds, they have
been trying to get their children the schooling
they deserve. Enrolment numbers have more
than doubled in the five years since the peace
agreement. The GRSS has pledged to make
education a priority – and that pledge is
backed by a strategic plan for the
construction of an education system.
The children of South Sudan have suffered
enough. It is time to deliver the education
peace premium that their parents hoped for –
and that they deserve.
Donors have a more mixed record.
Development assistance for education falls far
below the level required to support a
breakthrough. The education sector receives
a low-level of support and aid efficiency has
been hampered by weak coordination. Most
bilateral donors are operating programmes on
a modest scale. While UNICEF has played an
important role in coordination and
reconstruction for education, the wider
multilateral aid effort has been limited.
The Government of the Republic of South
Sudan (GRSS) has set ambitious goals in
education but there are daunting obstacles to
be overcome. The recent disruption of
revenue from oil exports threatens to starve
basic service budgets of the financing needed
to build schools, health clinics, and vital social
and economic infrastructure. Ongoing
violence in parts of the country is causing
large-scale displacement and dislocation of
services. There are problems in governance and in government capacity. The education
system is under-financed. Most of the
country’s teachers are untrained. There are
Other actors are conspicuous by their
absence. The Global Partnership for Education
(GPE), a multilateral partnership that operates
under the financial auspices of the World
Bank, rightly describes itself as “the only
multilateral partnership devoted to getting
all out-of-school children into school for a
quality education.”i Promoting gender
11
equity is one of the GPE’s priorities.
South Sudan has a larger proportion of
its children out of school than almost
any other country in the world, along
with the deepest gender inequalities.
Yet six years after the peace
agreement, the GPE has not yet
delivered a programme in South Sudan.
Education in South Sudan: investing in a better future
Hopes that this would change in early 2012
have not yet been realised. Following a
review of the Government of South Sudan
draft education strategy, the GPE secretariat
determined that full endorsement of the plan
would require its further development over
several years and recommended that the
government re-submit a less ambitious
‘transitional plan’. An indicative allocation of
just US$38 million over four years has been
set aside – an amount that falls far short of
what is needed. What should have been a test
case for the GPE’s effectiveness has become a
showcase for what is going wrong in an aid
system that is too inflexible, slow-moving and
unresponsive to the needs of conflict-affected
countries.
There is still time to change this picture. The
Board of the GPE could demand an urgent
review of the response to South Sudan’s
education strategy. It is also important that
the World Bank steps up to the plate by
putting into place a financing programme to
support early delivery of results and longterm capacity building.
What is clear is that the children of South
Sudan have a right to expect something more.
In the absence of a strengthened aid effort,
South Sudan will fail to achieve the ambitious
goals set by its government and demanded by
its people. This paper sets out the case
for a South Sudan Education Peace
Premium (EPP) backed by a US$1.6
billion aid investment over the period
2012-2016 - US$400 annually. The GRSS
would need to supplement this aid effort by
12
mobilizing an additional US$100m annually for
education spending.
Supplemented by an increased resource
mobilisation effort on the part of the GRSS,
the education peace premium would extend
opportunities for some 2.5 million children
and adolescents. Beyond the wider benefits
for poverty reduction, peace-building and
state-building, returns from the peace
premium would include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
another 1 million primary school age
children in school
wider benefits for an additional 1.5
million learners by improving the
quality of education
emergency provision for 300,000
children displaced by on-going
conflicts
early childhood provision for 300,000
children under the age of 5
support for half-a-million girls
extended opportunities for
adolescents and young adults who
missed out on opportunities for
basic education
training for 30,000 teachers
another 3000 schools for current
and future generations of learners
Financing for the proposed EPP would be
drawn from a range of sources. Success will
hinge on a compact between the GRSS and
the international community, represented by a
range of donors.
Our proposal envisages a broader and deeper
donor support base for education. We
suggest that the GPE provide annual financing
of US$90m, with the World Bank co-financing
an equivalent amount through the
International Development Association (IDA).
Drawing on its extensive experience and
project portfolio in post-conflict states, the
African Development Bank/African
Development Fund is well placed to support
the development of school infrastructure and
support. We propose a financing contribution
of around US$40m annually. Less concessional
elements in the financing could be secured
against future oil revenues. Bilateral donors
and the European Union would have to
mobilise another US$100 million annually,
with non-traditional donors – including China
– providing US$30m annually. We also argue
that private foundations and charities should
play a greater role in supporting education in
South Sudan.
Delivering an early and substantial education
peace premium in South Sudan will be difficult
– but the degree of difficulty should not be
exaggerated. Sustained progress will require
the development of technical and
administrative capacity, along with the
development of more robust systems for
transparency and accountability in public
finance. Increased and more equitable public
spending is critical. But governance
constraints can be overcome by drawing on
arrangements that have emerged since the
comprehensive peace agreement, as well as
the experiences of other countries.
To that end, we propose the creation of a
pooled fund for education. Jointly managed by
donors and the GRSS, this would build on the
practices established under the Basic Service
Fund (BSF). This has been the most successful
of the pooled funding mechanisms in South
Sudan, with spending of US$65m to date on
primary education, health, water and
sanitation. The BSF has been a major source
of financing for school construction and
teacher training. The great advantage of the
facility is that it enables donors to pool risk
and resources behind the government’s
strategy, working through non-government
organisations with a proven track record on
delivery.
With current pooled funding arrangements in
South Sudan about to expire, there is an
opportunity to put in place a flexible new
structure for education. Over time, the
pooled funding mechanism could evolve into a
sector-wide support programme. More
immediately, it could mobilise support for
non-governmental organisations working with
government to build capacity and deliver
results on the ground.
The achievements of non-governmental
organisations refute the claim that South
Sudan lacks the conditions for an education
take-off. Working with a broader alliance of
churches, the Episcopal Church of South
Sudan has developed the largest teacher inservice training programme in the country,
meeting high standards of performance. One
of the largest non-governmental organisations
providing education is the Bangladesh Rural
Advancement Committee in Education
(BRAC) – an agency with a proven track
record in reaching highly marginalised
communities and training female teachers.
Save the Children is leading the
implementation of a major alternative
education programme financed by the United
Kingdom’s Department for International
Development (DfID) and piloting innovative
early childhood interventions. We have based
our cost-estimates for the education peace
premium on the programmes of these and
other NGOs with a proven capacity for
scaling-up, as well as UN agencies and bilateral
donors.
In drawing up the proposed plan of action we
do not discount the very real difficulties that
will have to be addressed. Outcomes will
depend on the development of a partnership
between the GRSS, donors and nongovernmental organisations, and on political
leadership on all sides. Listing problems and
enumerating the many technical reasons that
can be found either for delaying action, or for
testing the water with small-scale pilot
programmes, is easy. But South Sudan’s
children cannot afford delay and prevarication
13
– and the country cannot afford to waste the
potential of a generation of youth. Our
proposal combines the four critical
requirements for delivering results: achievable
targets, an efficient delivery mechanism,
predictable aid, and a compact between the
GRSS, donors and non-governmental
organisations.
Education in South Sudan: investing in a better future
Headline figures for the cost of the proposed
programme have to be considered against the
potential flow of benefits, as measured by the
number of children in school, the expanded
opportunities for learning, and the renewed
hope that will come with progress in
education. The US$400m a year for four
years that is required may seem unaffordable.
The question that has to be asked is whether
the world is willing to stand-by while 2.5
million children lose their chance for an
education that could lift them out of poverty,
create jobs, build a more peaceful and
resilient society, and support economic
growth. Failure to expand opportunities for
education will increase the risk of more
conflict, which will in turn leave donors facing
the prospect of increased humanitarian aid
costs. Viewed against this alternative, the cost
of implementing the actions proposed in this
report is a small price to pay for a very high
return.ii
14
An agenda for action
This report sets out an agenda for
achieving an educational breakthrough in
South Sudan. Proposals include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Additional aid of US$400m
annually for four years, with
domestic budget resources
increased by US$100m annually.
The GPE and IDA to mobilise
US$180m through a co-financing
arrangement.
An independent assessment of the
GPE’s review of the South Sudan
draft education strategy.
The creation of a pooled fund for
education in South Sudan to
provide a focal point for
government support.
Measures to support
disadvantaged children, including
financial incentives for parents to
keep children in school, especially
young girls; expanded education
provision in conflict-affected areas;
and programmes for adolescents.
Expanded programmes for training
teachers and recruitment of female
teachers.
Introduction
The Republic of South Sudan is sub-Saharan
Africa’s newest nation. Established in July
2011, the country achieved statehood facing
enormous challenges. The Government of
South Sudan (GRSS), created with the signing
of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement in
2005, inherited none of the institutions
associated with an independent state. South
Sudan’s human development indicators are
among the worst in the world. The human
capital and physical infrastructure are limited.
Insecurity remains a major concern across
many parts of the country.
Yet independence has unleashed a wave of
hope, optimism and expectation. Having
endured a brutal and long-running civil war
that claimed over 2 million lives, South
Sudan’s people have a right to expect a ‘peace
dividend’, including improved access to basic
services, more secure livelihoods, and greater
safety. Failure to deliver in these areas would
be a lost opportunity with tragic human
consequences for the people of South Sudan,
and with damaging implication for peace and
security not just across the new nation, but
across the region.
Delivering the education peace dividend
Perhaps more than any other sector,
education has the potential to deliver an early,
large and highly visible peace dividend. The
education system in any country is a point of
contact between governments and their
citizens. And in a country like South Sudan,
where the civil war destroyed educational
opportunities for generations, the presence of
functioning schools, teachers and books has
the potential to demonstrate that the peace is
delivering. Moreover, South Sudan’s people
attach a very high value to education, with
survey evidence showing that parents identify
schooling – alongside food and water – as
being a major priority.
Across South Sudan, parents and young
people are striving to overturn a legacy of
illiteracy, restricted opportunity, and poor
quality schooling. In towns and villages across
the country, desperately poor people are
working to get their children into an
embryonic and over-stretched education
system. The GRSS is working with partners to
strengthen that system and build capacity.
While the term ‘post-conflict reconstruction’
is widely used to describe the process now
underway in South Sudan, in the case of
education – and other basic services – it is
misleading. Six years ago this was a country
without an education system. Even today, only
the initial foundations are in place. So this is a
case of post-conflict construction in a country
that inherited no infrastructure and has very
limited human resources.
Against this backdrop, the achievements
registered in education since the 2005 peace
accords have been extraordinary. The number
of children in primary school has doubled in
five years. Over 500 classrooms have been
constructed. Led by a clear statement of
intent on the part of President Salva Kiir, the
GRSS has put in place ambitious plans to
accelerate progress towards the 2015
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).
South Sudan’s constitution includes a
provision establishing the entitlement to ‘free
and compulsory education at the primary
level’. The South Sudan Development Plan
includes a wide range of 2015/16 targets for
education aimed at putting the country on
track for the MDGs.iii
The Ministry of General Education and
Instruction (MoGEI) is finalising a strategy
15
Education in South Sudan: investing in a better future
aimed at translating these targets and highlevel political commitments into policies and
spending commitments aimed at achieving the
MDGs and wider Education for All goals by
2022.iv Currently available in draft form, that
strategy - Promoting learning for all - aims to get
the country on course for universal primary
education by 2016, with expanded provision
of second chance education, measures to
improve learning achievement levels and a
range of strategies aimed at closing the gender
gap. The document, which has been drawn up
in close consultation with the Local Donor
Group, bears testimony to the
professionalism of staff in the Ministry of
General Education and Instruction (MoGEI).
Several bilateral donors, UN agencies and
non-governmental organisations are
supporting the reconstruction effort, often
working under difficult conditions. UNICEF’s
Go to School Programme helped to double
school enrolment in three years. Both the
government and its partners have
demonstrated a capacity for flexibility and
innovation, building classrooms, delivering
textbooks and training teachers. v Nongovernmental organisations are active across
the country, often operating in areas affected
by conflict. While experience under the
World Bank-managed Multi-Donor Trust
Fund (MDTF) was disappointing, another
pooled funding arrangement – the Basic
Services Fund (BSF) – delivered cost-effective
results, notably in school construction and
teacher training. One of the strengths of the
BSF has been its ability to lower transaction
costs and achieve economies of scale in
delivery.
For those who question the capacity of
international aid and partnerships in education
to deliver results on the ground, the evidence
from South Sudan tells a different story.
Donors and non-governmental organisations
have found ways of delivering results, working
in the process to build government capacity.
16
The challenge now is to build on best practice
and scale-up the level of ambition in an
environment that may deteriorate as a result
of budget austerity.
The oil crisis
Like all other sectors, education stands to be
severely affected by the ongoing crisis over oil
exports. Failure to resolve that crisis will have
grave consequences for South Sudan (as it will
for Khartoum), raising the spectre of a
reversal of the fragile gains in education,
health, water and other areas that have been
achieved over the six years since the
comprehensive peace agreement. With oil
accounting for 98 per cent of government
revenues, even a modest loss of export
earnings would lead to significant cuts in
expenditure.
The background to the crisis can be briefly
summarised. Since the comprehensive peace
agreement, oil from South Sudan has been
exported through pipelines from Sudan. As of
March 2012, pipelines from two of the three
oilfields were close to shut-down. The GRSS
decision was prompted by a heavy transit tax
levied by the Government of Sudan and a
subsequent seizure of oil shipments by the
government in Khartoum. Negotiations
through the Africa Union have failed to
resolve the crisis.vi The GRSS has responded
by announcing plans to build new oil pipelines
through Kenya and Ethiopia. However, this
will entail significant capital costs and it would
be several years before the revenues from
those pipelines came on stream.
At the time of writing this report, the GRSS
was preparing an austerity budget to adjust to
the loss of oil revenues. While education is
treated as a ‘protected’ area, the draft budget
still envisages reductions in spending of
around 20 per cent. Real cuts in expenditure
are likely to be far deeper than this since a
number of programmes that involve co-
financing with donors could also be reduced.
Classrooms that are under construction could
be left unfinished, teachers could be left
unpaid, and children could be left without
textbooks. Aid programmes that blend
development assistance and government
finance will be disrupted. Such outcomes
would inevitably worsen the dire situation in
education that we document in the next
section. They would also have consequences
in other areas, including health, nutrition and
water. In order to limit damage, donors
should prepare a contingency plan in the form
of an emergency poverty reduction fund
through which they can channel resources.
There are no winners from the oil crisis.
Failure to find a settlement will bring the
budgets of the GRSS and the Government of
Sudan under acute pressure. In South Sudan,
there is a danger that currency depreciation
would raise the price of vital imports and
spark food price inflation. Moreover, tensions
over oil could tip over into a wider conflict
making other border issues more difficult to
resolve. The people of both countries stand
to suffer. On all of these counts, no effort
should be spared in attempting to arrive at a
negotiated settlement.
This report is organised in three parts. Part 1
provides an overview of where South Sudan
stands in education, which is at the bottom of
the global league for opportunity, gender
equity and learning. Part 2 looks at current
levels of aid to education. In part 3 we
highlight the core threat to the education
prospects of South Sudan’s children. That
threat is the very large gap between the
targets that have been set on the one side,
and the financing provisions made by
government and donors to achieve those
targets on the other. Part 4 sets out a
financing and delivery strategy for accelerating
South Sudan’s educational catch-up.
17
1. An education system under pressure
The challenges facing the GRSS in education
are mirrored in wider human development
challenges. While the period since the 2005
peace settlement has witnessed progress in
many areas, South Sudan retains some of the
worst social indicators in the world. Recent
assessments highlight vast areas of unmet
need.
Education in South Sudan: investing in a better future
Poverty levels are exceptionally high. Oil
revenues create the misleading impression
that South Sudan is a country with relatively
high levels of per capita income. In fact, over
80 per cent of the population is estimated to
live below the international poverty threshold
of US$1.25 a day.
The poor state of basic service provision is
reflected in health indicators. Maternal
mortality rates are the highest in the world over one-in-fifty women die during pregnancy
or child-birth. Female literacy rates may be
the lowest in the world. Immunisation
coverage is limited – less than 5 per cent of
children are fully vaccinated - and Sudan ranks
fourth globally for deaths from malaria. Well
under half of the population has access to
even the most basic health care facilities, with
just 14 per cent of births attended by skilled
staff. Malnutrition rates are very high, with
UN agencies reporting one-third of children
under the age of five are stunted and onequarter underweight. Almost 3 million people
live in a state of chronic food insecurity.
Each of these indicators has a bearing on
education. Although South Sudan has been
getting more children into school, the high
incidence of poverty, illness and malnutrition
inevitably takes on toll on the prospects for
reducing drop-out rates and raising learning
standards.
18
Ongoing armed conflict is a pervasive source
of insecurity. The military takeover of Abyei
and other areas by the Sudanese Armed
Forces and attacks on civilians in Southern
Kordofan and Blue Nile State result in large
scale displacements. Alongside these crossborder conflicts, intra-communal, inter-tribal,
and militia-based violence, notably in the
states of Warrap, Unity, Upper Nile, Jonglei
and Lakes, continue to cause displacement.
During 2011, it is estimated that over 300,000
people were displaced in South Sudan as a
result of armed conflict.
For all of these immense difficulties pessimism
is unwarranted. As UNICEF has pointed out,
the period since 2005 has witnessed progress
on several fronts.vii The under-five mortality
rate has dropped by 20 per cent; in large
measures as a result of improved
immunisation and a strengthened health and
nutrition framework. From a very low base,
access to roads and water has improved. And
there has been a surge in access to education.
Progress and shortfalls in education
Progress in education mirrors wider
developments since the peace accords. There
have been important advances, albeit with
marked disparities across states. However,
the country is a long way from achieving the
international development goals such as
universal primary education and gender
equity. For children who are in school, the
quality of education is often so poor that they
are unlikely to master basic literacy and
numeracy skills.
Evidence of the value that South Sudan’s
people attach to education is provided by a
post-peace settlement surge in school
enrolments. Between 2005 and 2009, the
number of children enrolled in primary school
doubled, from 0.7 million to 1.4 million. Data
for secondary education is unreliable, though
evidence suggests that enrolment levels have
increased significantly.
These achievements reflect the strong drive
of parents to get their children into school.
Household surveys consistently document the
importance that parents attach to education.
As the government’s Social Sector
Development Plan puts it: “Stakeholders
consistently placed basic health and education
among their top development priorities on the
grounds that these services provide not only an
immediate benefit, but are linked to the nation’s
economic future by building the foundation for a
stronger, more highly skilled labour force.” More
than half of children and youth participating in
one UNICEF survey identified education as
their principal interest.viii
Having endorsed the Education For All goals,
policy makers in South Sudan face daunting
challenges with limited resources. They have
to improve access to school for a whole
generation of primary school children, half of
whom are currently out-of-school. They need
to extend opportunities to the many
adolescents and adults who missed out on
earlier opportunities for education – and
there are more than 2 million illiterate people
in the age range 15-40, almost two-thirds of
them female.ix
At the same time as expanding access, the
GRSS has to improve the quality of education
provision and raise learning outcomes.
Education outcomes reflect the combined
effects of household poverty, untrained and
unsupported teaching staff and limited access
to learning materials. Less than 8 per cent of
grade 6 students scored more than 50 per
cent in a sample mathematics test. The
average score in a sample mathematics test
was 38 for grade 6 South Sudanese students.
In comparison, grade 5 Sudanese students
scored 47 and grade 4 Yemeni students
scored 34 in the same sample test.x
The twin goals of improving access and school
retention while raising quality goals will have
to be pursued in the face of acute
demographic pressures. South Sudan is a
young country not just by virtue of its recent
independence but also in terms of its age
profile. One third of the population is aged
between 5 and 16 years old. But this figure
understates the effects of population growth.
In 2008, the there were around 1.2 million
children in South Sudan aged between 0 and 5
years, more than double the population aged
20-25.xi Ensuring that there are places
available in school for these children and that
they receive a good quality education is
critical not just for the children in question,
but for South Sudan’s human development
prospects as well.
A country apart – South Sudan’s education
deficit
The advances registered over the past six
years should not deflect attention from the
scale of the challenge ahead. Education is one
of the most effective mechanisms for
delivering a peace premium. It is a core part
of the social contract between citizens and
states. For the majority of people in South
Sudan, the education peace premium has yet
to arrive. The country’s education system is
not, as presently constituted, fit for the
purpose of supporting the country’s social and
economic development, peace-building, and
state-building.
On almost any measure of performance,
South Sudan is anchored to the bottom of the
international league table.xii Of the 121
countries in the world for which comparable
data is available, South Sudan ranks second
lowest; for secondary education is ranked the
lowest out of 134 countries (Figure 1).
19
Figure 1: South Sudan - anchored to the
bottom of the world education league
Enrolment
olment rates, most recent year
NER
GER
in primary education
in secondary education
(South Sudan amongst
(South Sudan amongst
123 countries)
134
34 countries)
160%
140%
Figure 3 illustrates the high rate of attrition
and gender disparity in South Sudan’s primary
schools. In 2010 there were just under half-ahalf
million children in the first grade of primary
school. By the eighth grade that figure had
fallen to just over 20,000 (with fewer than
7,000 girls).
120%
As these figures suggest, many children enter
school only to drop out before gaining basic
literacy skills. Over one-quarter
quarter drop out
between grades 1 and 2 – and just 16 per cent
of students enrolled at grade 1 complete
primary education. The rate for girls is 9 per
cent, underlining the cumulative effect of
gender inequalities.
100%
Education in South Sudan: investing in a better future
Fewer than half of primary school age children
are in school. The net enrolment rate is just
44 per cent, implying that around 1.1 million
children in the relevant age range are out of
school. Secondary school enrolment is
reported at less than 10 per cent. Drop-out
Drop
rates are very high. Using 2009 data, the
World Bank put the gross enrolment rate at
145 per cent for grade one, falling to just 8
per cent at grade eight. As illustrated in
Figure 2,, enrolment rates in South Sudan are
far below the average levels for sub-Saharan
sub
Africa – and these figures mask the marked
disparities across states.
Source: UNESCO, 2011, Building a better future:
Education for an independent South Sudan
Figure 2: School participation
partici
in South Sudan - below the
average for Africa
Primary School Net Enrolment Ratio (NER), 2010
20
Source: Education Management Information System 2010, GRSS
Figure 3: Primary school attrition
Enrolment by grade and gender, 2010
15,694
6,681
14,135
28,022
Female
43,872
24,049
50,000
75,914
41,504
153,349
118,737
Male
67,148
100,000
90,866
150,000
182,311
200,000
113,243
250,000
262,309
164,040
300,000
0
P1
P2
P3
P4
P5
P6
P7
P8
Source: Education Management Information System 2010, GRSS
Figure 4: The secondary deficit
Pupil enrolment by grade and gender, 2010
12,000
10,522
10,000
7,216
8,000
5,500
6,000
Male
4,299
4,000
Female
2,995
2,300
2,000
1,260
395
0
S1
S2
S3
S4
Source: Education Management Information System 2010, GRSS
Many of those who do complete school are
over age. If children entered South Sudan’s
primary schools at the official entry age and
progressed smoothly through the system,
they would complete primary school by the
age of 13. However, only one in ten thirteen
year olds have completed primary school. In
five of the ten counties – Eastern Equatoria,
Western Equatoria, Jonglei, Upper Nile and
Northern Bahr-el-Ghazal – the completion
rate for thirteen year old girls is less than 5
per cent.
Attrition rates in secondary education are
equally marked, as are gender disparities
(Figure 3). Only around 400 girls are
reported to be enrolled in the last grade of
secondary school.
As this data illustrates, South Sudan’s girls face
a triple disadvantage. In an education system
that offers limited opportunities for all
21
children, they are the last in, the first out and
the least likely to make it to secondary
school. Taking into account both primary and
secondary school, no country in the world
ranks lower than South Sudan on the measure
of gender inequality (Figure 5).
Figure 5: South Sudan’s gender gaps –
among the world’s widest
Countries ranking on the Gender Parity
Index (GPI), most recent years*
years
Gender Parity Index of Gross Enrolment Ratios
1.6
Primary GPI
Secondary GPI
(149 countries)
(130 countries)
1.4
Gender parity
1.2
7 girls for every
10 boys in school
South
Education in South Sudan: investing in a better future
Sudan
5 girls for every
10 boys in school
1.0
*Female as a proportion of male enrolment
Source: UNESCO, 2011, Building a better future:
Education for an independent
dependent South Sudan
22
Emergency provision
Armed conflict and displacement continue to
threaten the education of many of South
Sudan’s children. Here, too, there has been
some progress. Since 2010, the ‘Education
Cluster’ of donors has worked with the GRSS
GR
to strengthen emergency coordination. The
cluster has increased access to protected
learning spaces and trained almost 2,000
teachers in emergency-affected
affected areas.
However, large gaps in provision continue to
hamper progress towards education for all.
Education
ucation systems are directly affected by the
consequences of armed conflict. During 2011,
an estimated 152,000 primary and secondary
school-aged
aged children returned to South Sudan
from the north, putting pressure on already
over-stretched
stretched education systems. Episodes of
widespread violence and displacement within
South Sudan have created further pressures.
The international response has been found
wanting.
Humanitarian aid has not responded
effectively to the education challenge posed
by displacement. The revised
ised 2011-2012
2011
financing requirement for delivering education
in emergencies was estimated at around
US$40m,
40m, with some 229,000 children needing
support. By mid-year,
year, pledges received
amounted to less than half of the request,
with the slow disbursement of funds further
delaying implementation of projects. The
conclusion to be drawn is that many displaced
children – probably numbering in hundreds of
thousands – are receiving at best limited
provision, and at worst no education support
at all.
Barriers to primary
mary school access and
completion
Factors behind low enrolment and early drop
out vary across states. The two factors most
widely reported by parents for their children
being out of school are cost and distance.
While the GRSS has a nominal policy of free
basic education, many schools appear to levy
charges. Moreover, parents face indirect costs
associated with the purchase of uniforms and
books. Distance is especially problematic in
states – such as Western Bar Ghazal,
Western equatorial and Jonglei – with low
population densities.
Both cost and distance barriers have marked
gender effects. In situations where the
education of a girl is less prized than that of a
boy, girls stand to lose out when hard choices
have to be made – as is regularly the case
during periods of drought. Similarly, security
concerns mean that parents are less likely to
allow their daughters to walk long distances
to school when they are very young and again
after puberty. Thus distance often results in
girls starting school late and dropping out
early.
Gender disparities are reinforced by
interlocking social, economic and cultural
factors. While detailed evidence is unavailable,
the practice of early marriage is widespread
and has been identified in youth consultation
exercises as a cause of girls dropping out,
especially when associated with pregnancy.
Other factors such as the absence of separate
toilets and the unavailability of sanitary towels
also create barriers for young girls.xiii
National average figures obscure pervasive
disparities. For every ten boys enrolled in
primary and secondary school there are
respectively just seven and five girls. The vast
majority of girls drop out before grade 5.
There are also marked inequalities between
states. Whereas Western Equatorial, Upper
Nile and Central Equatorial have gross
enrolment rates in excess of 90 per cent, the
figure falls to 67 per cent for Unity and
around 50 per cent or less for Jonglei,
Warrap and Eastern Equatorial. Wealth gaps
are further marked. Children from the
wealthiest quintile of households are 32 per
cent more likely to enrol in grade 1 than
children from the poorest quintile. They are
also far less likely to drop out.xiv
Some of the greatest barriers to accelerated
progress in education are located beyond the
school environment. Poverty and hunger take
a shocking toll on young children in South
Sudan. Evidence from many countries has
shown that maternal malnutrition and micronutrient deficiency, coupled with malnutrition
in early childhood, has devastating, and largely
irreversible, consequences for cognitive
development and learning achievement.
Similarly, the high incidence of malaria, acute
respiratory tract infection, and intestinal
parasites reported for children inevitably
contributes to high rates of absenteeism and
diminished learning outcomes. This is why
South Sudan urgently needs an integrated
strategy that links maternal and child health
provision with education.
School based factors are also critical. No
education system anywhere in the world is
better than its teachers – and the teacher
workforce in South Sudan reflects the
country’s weak human capital base. There are
around 28,000 teachers across the country.
Almost half have just a primary school
education, while just 16 per cent of those
teaching in primary schools have professional
qualifications. Around two-thirds of teachers
report having no pre-service training, while inservice training is limited in terms of
coverage, and largely unknown in terms of
qualitative outcomes.xv The subject and
content knowledge of primary school
teachers is so weak that many would struggle
to master the curriculum they are supposed
to teach.
The limited number of female teachers almost
certainly plays a part in reinforcing gender
disparities. Just 13 per cent of primary school
teachers are female, with five states – Jonglei,
Unity, Warrap, Lakes and Northern Bahr
23
Ghazal – having a female presence of 8 per
cent or less.xvi
The learning infrastructure – critical
shortages
The experience of South Sudan cautions
against understating the importance of
physical infrastructure and teaching materials.
International dialogue on policy approaches
for achieving education for all have seen a
growing emphasis on the quality of teaching
and learning outcomes, as distinct from
‘inputs’ such as classrooms, books,
blackboards and desks. In some countries, the
shift in emphasis is both welcome and long
overdue. In the case of South Sudan,
infrastructure deficits and shortages of
learning materials reinforce deficits in the
quality of education, as illustrated by the
following data:xvii
•
Education in South Sudan: investing in a better future
•
•
•
Pupil-teacher ratios are very high,
especially for trained teachers. The
national average ratio for pupils-trained
teachers is 1:117, rising to 1:141 in Unity
and Upper Nile states and 1:201 in Jonglei
Classroom shortages are pervasive.
One third of the children ‘in school’ are
being taught in the open air and another
quarter in semi-permanent or basic
classrooms (Figure 6). The average pupil
classroom ratio is 134:1
Provision of latrines and safe drinking
water is limited, with the 2009 EMIS
reporting just half of schools having access
to both facilities
Textbooks are in short supply, with an
average pupil textbook ratio of 1:4 rising
to the worst case scenario of 1:9 in Unity
state
Stark as it is, this evidence on learning
infrastructure understates the difficulty of the
circumstances facing young learners. As part
of the wider nation-building process, South
Sudan is making the transition to an English
24
language education system. However, many of
the country’s trained teachers and bettereducated adults learnt in Arabic, rather than
English. Different curricula are used in
different parts of the country, reflecting past
adaptations by local communities to the longrunning civil war. While national data is
limited, partial evidence points to high levels
of teacher absenteeism and low levels of
instructional time. Evidence from four states
suggests that a majority of teacher are actively
teaching for less than 10 hours a week,
compared to best practice norms of more
than 30 hours. Unsurprisingly, the majority of
schools and teachers do not currently cover
the syllabus they are expected to teach.
Figure 6: Few of South Sudan's
children are in permanent
classrooms
Primary School Classroom by Type,
2010
Other
0.5%
Tent
2.1% Roof
only
11.6%
Permanent
28.4%
Open-air
33.2%
Semipermanent
24.1%
Source: Education Management Information
System 2010, GRSS
Another debilitating factor in the education
system is a shortage of professional staff to
train teachers, develop a cadre of education
professionals, and build national centres of
excellence (Figure 7). This is a critical
bottleneck. Effective trainers have a strong
multiplier effect across the education system.
If one trainer enhances the classroom skills of
twenty teachers, over 800 children stand to
benefit in a single year.xviii Similarly bottlenecks
appear in other areas – school inspection,
learning assessment and teacher support to
name three – with a potential to deliver
benefits across the entire education system.
Failure to remove these skills and
infrastructure bottlenecks will leave South
Sudan trapped in a vicious cycle of underprovision and poor quality education.
Figure 7: South Sudan’s Teacher Workforce – limited training, few women
Primary Education, 2010
Gender Balance
Professional qualifications by type
3,286
9%
Female
Unknown
16%
28%
Untrained
Male
In-service
20%
27%
Pre-service
Source: Education Management Information System 2010, GRSS
Part of the solution is to build upon what is
already happening at a regional level. While
South Sudan is developing its own teacher
training infrastructure, there is a strong case
for making grants available for secondary
school and college graduates to attend
teacher training institutes in Uganda and
Kenya. But there is also scope for drawing on
a wider pool of talent. The Office of Gordon
and Sarah Brown is developing an initiative –
Education without Borders – that aims to
facilitate the employment in conflict-affected
countries of international professional staff
equipped to train local counterparts through
temporary placements. In the case of South
Sudan, the placements could take place in a
national centre such as Juba University,
teacher-training institutes, or county-level
education centres. The South Sudanese
diaspora, much of which is highly educated,
also has the potential to play a major role
both in financing and the transfer of skills.
25
2. Current levels of development assistance
No education strategy for South Sudan will
succeed without government leadership. By
the same token, even the best laid
government plans for achieving the goals set
out in the education sector strategy will fall
short of their targets in the absence of
increased aid. In this section we look at the
aid financing requirements for an accelerated
catch-up plan in education.
Education in South Sudan: investing in a better future
South Sudan is a major recipient of
international development assistance. Total
committed overseas development assistance
(ODA) to South Sudan amounted to
US$1.1bn in 2010. Around half of this amount
is geared not towards long-term development
but humanitarian aid, most of which is
mobilised on an annual basis.xix Development
assistance plays a critical role in the delivery
of basic services. Since 2005, between 30-40
per cent of the government’s budget has been
financed by aid. That share has probably
increased as a result of a budget crisis in 2009
associated with a decline in oil prices.
The UN is by far the largest multilateral
donor. Under the current United Nations
Development Assistance Framework
(UNDAF), a coordinated work plan has been
drawn up with estimated resource
requirements of US$1.1bn over two years.
Only around one-third of this amount is
currently available. South Sudan is not
currently a member of the World Bank. Once
the country has applied for membership it will
be eligible for IDA funding, though only a
small amount – currently around US$75m –
has been set aside.
Six years after the Comprehensive Peace
Agreement bilateral donors are still relatively
thin on the ground in Juba, the capital of
South Sudan. In descending order, the five
26
major donors are the United States, the
United Kingdom, the Netherlands, the
European Union and Norway. This group
accounts for around two-thirds of
commitments. Donors themselves recognise
that fragmentation and weak coordination are
serious problems, as is the limited provision
of technical assistance. Most support is
provided through non-governmental
organisations, reflecting donor reluctance to
work through a public financial management
system that requires strengthening.
Aid for education
The development partnership in education
reflects many of the strengths and weaknesses
of the wider aid environment. Several
multilateral and bilateral donors have
identified education as a priority, with the
bulk of funding being routed through nongovernmental organisations. Significant results
have been achieved. However, current levels
of aid fall short of the levels required to
achieve the targets set out in the GRSS’s
education plans, potentially putting the
international development goals out of reach
for several generations. Given the limited
capacity of government systems, the
education sector would also benefit from
strengthened coordination between donors,
UN agencies and non-governmental
providers.
The Basic Services Fund
There is now a major window of opportunity
to strengthen the aid architecture for
education. Since the Comprehensive Peace
Agreement, donors have delivered a large
share of their development assistance through
two pooled funds – the Multi-Donor Trust
Fund and the Basic Services Fund.
The delivery record has been mixed.
Expectations for the MDTF were very high.
Created as part of the 2005 peace agreement
with support from fifteen donors, it was the
largest of the pooled funds in South Sudan.
Donor pledges amounted to US$593m by the
end of 2009 but less than 10 per cent of this
amount had been disbursed. Although the
pace of disbursement subsequently picked up,
the limited support provided through the
MDTF in its first four years was a wasted
opportunity.
The BSF built-up a far stronger track record
than the MDTF. Established in 2005, initially
with support from the United Kingdom’s
Department for International Development
(DfID), the BSF’s objective was to increase
access to basic services in education, health
and water and sanitation both by financing
service delivery and by building the GRSS’s
capacity to plan, monitor and coordinate. The
donor support base has expanded over time
through financing from the European Union,
the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden.
Disbursement rates have been high, with
US$60m allocated by 2012. Of the five pooled
funds operating in South Sudan, the BSF has
been described in an independent evaluation
as “the most efficient, accessible and userfriendly, delivering tangible results.”xx
BSF activities in education have focussed on
classroom construction, school rehabilitation
and support for teacher training. By 2011, the
fund has supported the construction of 104
schools, 570 classrooms and just over 2000
teachers. In each delivery phase, the targets
set have been achieved or exceeded.
Why has the BSF been able to deliver been
able to deliver? Three principal reasons stand
out. First, key donors have provided sustained
leadership and support, with the GRSS
actively involved in management and
oversight. The BSF’s Steering Committee,
which allocates funds, is chaired by the GRSS’s
Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning,
with further representation from the three
relevant sector ministries, and the Ministry of
Gender.
Second, in contrast to the MDTF, which was
managed by the World Bank, the BSF
Secretariat is contracted to a commercial
consultancy company, BMB Mott MacDonald.
Under this arrangement, all aspects of the
BSF’s operations, including grant allocation,
contracting, financial management and capacity
building are integrated in the secretariat. This
is in marked contrast to the MDTF, where
procurement, audit and monitoring were
contracted separately, with World Bank
reporting requirements followed in each area
– an arrangement that led to protracted
delays. Overhead costs have also been lower
in the BSF than in comparable UN funds.
The third area of difference has been in
delivery. Under the BSF, grants are channelled
through non-governmental organisations
delivering services linked to the targets agreed
with the GRSS. In 2010-2011 there were
thirty-eight non-government agencies
receiving grants. While other pooled funds
use the same arrangement, they have been
unable to provide the rapid and predictable
support that organisations with a capacity to
scale-up their programmes need to maximise
results.
Experience under the BSF illustrates many of
the wider advantages of pooled funds in postconflict settings. Pooling enables donors to
share risks, coordinate their efforts, and build
government capacity while meeting strong
standards for fiduciary oversight. Support to
post-genocide Rwanda was provided through
a UNICEF-managed pooled fund. The
Afghanistan Reconstruction Trust Fund, which
is administered by the World Bank with
support from thirty-two donors, has
mobilised pledges of almost US$1bn. Results
27
include putting another 8 million children in
school.
The impending closure of the pooled funds
creates several risks and a major opportunity.
The risks include a decline in funding for
education, allied to weaker coordination
behind government efforts and further
fragmentation. These risks merit urgent
attention, not least because pooled funding
for education is already falling.
Education in South Sudan: investing in a better future
The opportunity created by the expiry of
existing arrangements is the flip side of the
risk. The GRSS and donors have a chance to
put something better in place. Over the past
few years, support for education has been
provided through multiple pooled funding
channels, each with their own management
systems. Leaving aside the problems that have
dogged the MDTF, this is an arrangement that
raises transaction costs, duplicates demands
on the GRSS’s already over-stretched
resources, and undermines effective delivery.
The education sector urgently needs a single
pooled fund which, building on the practices
of the BSF, facilitates donor coordination and
support for the education sector strategy.
Such a fund could potentially attract funds
from bilateral donors, philanthropic
foundations, and other funders not presently
active in South Sudan.
Bilateral donors
Most of the major bilateral donors in South
Sudan are involved in supporting education.
Their programmes vary in scale, scope and
focus. However, donors have broadly aligned
their efforts behind the strategic goals set by
the GRSS.
The broad range of donor activity can be
illustrated by reference to some of the larger
programmes. The United States is
implementing a three-year US$30m
programme to build or rehabilitate three
teacher-training institutes, while supporting a
28
range of pre-service and in-service training
programmes. Development assistance from
the United Kingdom includes the South Sudan
Education Programmes, which will construct
32 primary schools and 4 secondary schools
across four states, and a textbook programme
that will deliver 12 million textbooks in 2012.
UKaid is also designing a new support to girls’
education to lower the demand side barriers
to girls’ education in South Sudan. The
European Union is currently designing a pilot
schools grant programme for 100 schools
across four states. The Japanese government
through JICA and UNHCR have already
supported construction of one teacher
training institute (TTI) near Juba and trained
70 master trainers.
The level of bilateral aid for education is
highly variable across years. This is partly
because of the narrow donor base and partly
because of the timing of aid programmes
supporting large-scale capital spending on
schools and classrooms. In total, bilateral
donors committed US$29m to education in
2009 and US$56m in 2010, with much of the
increase associated with the UKaid schoolbuilding programme.
The Global Partnership for Education – a
missed opportunity
One potential source of multilateral funding
for education has yet to materialise. The
Global Partnership for Education (GPE,
formerly known as the Fast Track Initiative) is
a financing mechanism operating with an
independent board under the auspices of the
World Bank. In many ways, South Sudan is a
test case for the GPE which describes itself as
“the only multilateral partnership devoted
to getting all out-of-school children into
school for a quality education.”xxi
It is difficult to square that description
with the experience of South Sudan. In
January, 2012, the GPE reviewed the South
Sudan’s draft education strategy at the
request of the local donor group, which has
supported government efforts to develop a
national plan. The review marked an
important milestone. Endorsement could have
helped not just to unlock GPE resources, but
to leverage wider assistance.
In the event, the GPE review questioned what
it described as the ‘internal prioritization,
relevance and realism’ of the strategy,
determining that it was insufficiently
developed to merit full endorsement. The
review called for further work to reach a
stage whereby “this plan could be updated over
the next few years to become a full
comprehensive plan for the sector.” In the
interim, the GRSS was invited to consider the
possibility of submitting an interim plan at a
later date. The GPE has set aside an indicative
allocation of US$38 million for South Sudan
for the period 2011-2014.
This is not a credible response. South Sudan
cannot afford to wait a ‘few years’ for a
coordinated donor response. There are
unquestionably areas in which the draft plan
could be strengthened. In some areas,
including the role of devolved states, a more
detailed implementation matrix is required.
The GPE review also notes a number of data
gaps, neglecting the real constraints that the
government and donors operate under: South
Sudan did not inherit an education planning
system with a strong data base.
Another concern is the GPE’s indicative
allocation. This appears to be implausibly low
given the scale of the education deficit in
South. Moreover, the US$38m figure appears
to be based on a financing formula which
artificially deflates the country’s potential
entitlement.xxii This is more than a technical
issue. By using education data relating to prepartition Sudan, the GPE may have
underestimated by a wide margin the scale of
the education deficit in South Sudan – and the
associated financing entitlement.
The GPE’s response raises wider concerns
over its current operations. South Sudan is a
test case for the responsiveness, flexibility and
relevance of the facility itself. The GPE should
have seized the opportunity provided by the
peace settlement to work with donors and
the GRSS in framing the education strategy,
delivering financial support, and leveraging
wider aid. The review itself could have been
used to actively support the further
development and resubmission of the draft
strategy with a view to securing early
endorsement. Instead, it identifies, often at a
very high level of generality, reasons for
delaying support. The end result is that, six
years after the peace settlement, there is still
no GPE programme in South Sudan – and the
prospects for early and substantial support
are not promising.
Given this background, the Board of the
GPE should urgently request an
independent assessment of the
Secretariat’s review of the GRSS’s
education strategy. That assessment should
be undertaken by a team of internationally
recognised experts on education planning in
post-conflict environments. Apart from
evaluating the Secretariat’s review, the expert
team should be requested to identify specific
areas in which the education strategy for
South Sudan can be strengthened, while at the
same time identifying mechanisms through
which the GPE can deliver early support on a
meaningful scale. In the light of the
assessment, the Board should request the
GPE Secretariat to provide technical support
to the GRSS and the local donor group in
order to strengthen the planning process.
South Sudan’s experience with the GPE raises
a wider concern. Notwithstanding the high
professional standards of the Secretariat, the
processes through which national plans are
29
Education in South Sudan: investing in a better future
assessed and decisions taken on whether or
not to recommend endorsement remain
arbitrary and opaque. The Secretariat should
not be placed in the position of acting as
‘judge and jury’. It is in this context that I have
argued in an earlier paper that the GPE should
30
move towards a system of independent
review and assessment. In the event that plans
are not endorsed, the presumption should be
in favour of providing the technical support
required to address the problems identified.
3. Accelerating the catch-up
What would it take in financial terms for
South Sudan to register a breakthrough in
education? The answer to that question will
depend on the level of ambition that is set.
Taking the GRSS’s own goals as a starting
point, we have carried out cost-estimations
for a range of 2015 targets and associated
programmes aimed at:
•
•
•
•
•
Putting the country in touching distance of
universal enrolment by 2015, with
learning benefits for 2.5 million children in
primary education
Providing 100,000 adolescents and young
adults with access to accelerated learning
programmes to facilitate their entry into
formal education
Breaking down gender disparities by
providing financial support to half-amillion girls
Reaching marginalised groups, including
children displaced by armed conflict
Supporting secondary education including
technical vocation training for 100,000
children.
Achieving these goals will require a dramatic
scale-up of existing programmes and
strengthened aid partnerships. Currently,
South Sudan lacks many of the most basic
institutional programmes required for
accelerating progress in education. There is
just one functioning TTI and a small number
of County Education Centres (CECs). The
national curriculum is still under development.
As highlighted earlier, classrooms and books
are in chronically short supply. Perhaps most
serious of all, the country does not have a
teacher workforce equipped to raise learning
achievement levels.
Identifying the human and physical
infrastructure and inputs required to achieve
our targets is clearly not an exact science.
The GRSS’s education strategy provides a set
of credible targets. It also identifies the key
requirements for achieving these targets in
terms of teacher-training and support,
classroom construction, textbook supply, and
stipends for particularly disadvantaged social
groups. Current levels of provision planned by
government and donors fall far short of these
requirements.
Table 1 documents the size of the gap. It
compares the targets with the levels of
provision that will be achieved by 2015 under
current financing arrangements. The first
column identifies a range of critical targets for
achieving the accelerated catch-up goals.
These range from classroom construction to
teacher training and textbook provision, the
strengthening of government capacity in
education planning and school management.
The targets also include provisions for preschool, hard-to-reach children, girls and
children affected by ongoing conflict. As
illustrated in Column 2, current aid
commitments fall far short of the levels
required to achieve these targets. To cite
some of gaps between target and projected
provision:
•
•
•
South Sudan will require 3,000 additional
classrooms to 2015, while current donor
financing will support around one-tenth of
that number
In-service training is needed for around
30,000 teachers and teacher-volunteers,
while current financing will cover just
2,000
County Education Centres are critical
delivery and outreach facilities for inservice training and at least one facility is
required for each county – planned
provision will support the construction of
just 14 such centres
•
•
•
Even on the most conservative estimate
150,000 accelerated learning/adult literacy
places are required, while planned aid will
deliver just 30,000
Denting the gender gap in basic and lower
secondary education will require bursaries
for at least half-a-million girls, while
planned financing will cover less than half
of this number
Funding for education in humanitarian
crises amounts to less than half of UN
OCHA’s estimated requirements (which
are themselves an under-estimate)
Education in South Sudan: investing in a better future
The final column in Table 1 provides a
ballpark figure of the financing requirements
for closing the 2012-2015 financing gap. That
gap is around US$1.9bn, or US$500m on an
annualised basis. Factoring in an increased
resource mobilisation effort of US$100m
from the GRSS (see below), the aid financing
gap is around US$400m annually over and
above current commitments. That gap would
have to be covered through increased
development assistance. For comparative
purposes, we estimate the combined
multilateral and bilateral aid commitment to
education between 2012 and 2015 will
amount to around US$80m per annum.
Classroom construction represents the
overwhelming bulk of this amount of the
financing gap, reflecting the significant up-front
capital costs of closing the deficit in physical
infrastructure. These costs would gradually
decline after 2015, though maintenance would
impose additional requirements on the
recurrent budget.
What is striking about the wider estimates is
the relatively low cost of investments that,
under the right institutional conditions, could
generate very high returns in terms of
learning outcomes. For example US$3m a
year would be sufficient to provide all of
South Sudan’s children with a full set of
textbooks for basic education. Around
32
US$10m a year would facilitate effective inservice teacher training. And US$5m a year
would provide half-a-million girls with a
bursary that might facilitate their entry to
school and reduce the likelihood of drop-out.
Turning to the benefit side of the equation
there would be significant gains from the
increased spending. The investments outline
above would create a physical and human
resource infrastructure equipped to:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Bring another 1.1 million primary school
age children into the education system
Improve the learning environment of
children currently in primary school
Provide second-chance opportunities to
0.2 million over-age children and young
adults
Reach 0.3 million children with improved
early childhood provision
Allocate bursaries to 0.3 million girls,
creating incentives to keep them in
education
Support 300,000 children affected by
armed conflict
Table 1 Financing Basic Education in South Sudan: Targets, Plans and Gaps (2012-2015)
Item
Target
Currently
Planned
Provision
Gap
Unit Cost
(US$)
Financing
Gap (millions
US$)
Physical Infrastructure
School construction
3,000
300
2,700
600,000
1,600
Teacher Training
Institutes
8
3
5
5,000,000
25
County Education
Centres
79
14
65
2,500,000
15
Learning Infrastructure
Textbooks
20 million
12.5 million
7.5 million
1.5
11.5
Student Kits
6 million
-
6 million
10
60
Pre-service Teacher
Training
10,000
4,000
6,000
5,000
30
In-service Teacher
Training
30,000
2,000
28,000
1000
28
Accelerated Learning/
Adult Education
150,000
30,000
120,000
200
24
Innovation for inclusive education
Pre-school
300,000
-
300,000
200
60
Education for children
in cattle camps
100,000
5,000
95,000
50
5
Bursary for girls
500,000
200,000
300,000
50
15
Building Government Capacity and Accountability
Officers trained in
public financial
management and
educational planning
150
NA
NA
-
2
Officers trained in
school supervision
500
NA
NA
-
3
Head teachers with
school management
training
1000
NA
NA
-
3
Functional School
Management
Committees and Parent
Teacher Associations
1000
NA
NA
-
7
Education in Emergencies
Education in Emergency
Grand Total
300,000
50
US$1938.5m
33
These are ambitious goals. Some people will
claim that they are not just ambitious, but
implausible. South Sudan, so the argument will
run, lacks the peace, stability and good
governance needed to register progress on
the proposed scale.
Education in South Sudan: investing in a better future
We reject that view. Over the past six years
the people of South Sudan have voted for
decisive action on education through their
own actions. Despite all of the very real
problems that characterise the policy
environment, there are 700,000 more
children in school today than there were in
2005. Working through the BSF, aid donors
have financed service delivery, built capacity
and made a difference to the lives of millions
of people. Non-governmental organisations
have developed practical solutions to
apparently intractable problems. They are
held back from delivering more by financial
constraints that could be alleviated through
increased aid (Box 1).
None of this is to understate the critical
importance of strengthened governance. The
development of an effective public finance
management system would help to create the
conditions under which donors could work
through government budgets and national
systems, rather than through projects and
parallel, off-budget arrangements. Several
donors and UN agencies are working with the
GRSS to strengthen public finance
management systems. Meanwhile, the GRSS
itself has developed a credible proposal for a
new financing mechanism – the local Service
34
Delivery Aid Instrument – through which aid
can be integrated into the system of budget
transfers from central to local governments
(Box 2).
Within the Education Ministry, the GRSS has
already taken measures to build an Education
Management Information System and a payroll
system for teachers. Looking ahead, the
Ministry needs to develop the capacity to set
standards and norms for curriculum
development, school inspection, learning
achievement assessments, teacher training and
other core functions, working through a
strengthened system of teacher-training
institutes and building a national centre of
excellence through the college of education in
Juba University.
It is difficult to overstate the capacity
constraints facing the GRSS, or the wider
institutional constraints facing donors. The
Ministry of Education has a pool of highly
professional and committed staff, but that
pool is limited is size. Education ministries in
state governments have an even weaker
administrative capacity. Any large scale
increase in aid will have to address donor
concerns over corruption and
misappropriation – and President Salva Kiir
has made strengthened governance in this
area a national priority. Weak coordination
between donors and between NGOs creates
another layer of potential impediments to
increased and more effective aid. Yet none of
this precludes a significant strengthening of
the aid partnership in education.
Box 1 Scaling up and capacity building
Linked to the targets set in the GRSS’s draft education strategy, the goals set out in this report imply
a high level of ambition. That ambition is achievable. The challenge is to identify approaches that
deliver early results while building long-term capacity.
Meeting that challenge will require partnerships between governmental and non-governmental
organisations. There is much to build on.
The education system suffered very badly during South Sudan’s civil war – but it did not disappear. It
was kept alive by national and international church-based agencies and non-governmental
organisations. The comprehensive peace agreement provided an opportunity to build on these
foundations. Dialogue has not always been easy. However, the GRSS and non-governmental actors
have worked together to address the daunting task of constructing a national education system.
In researching this report we examined the work of four of the most prominent agencies involved in
education. The Episcopal Church of South Sudan is one of the largest trainers of teachers in the
country. Another specialised institution – Windle Trust – has built an impressive track-record in
cost effective teacher training. Save the Children supports schools that are providing education to
around 140,000 children and is piloting programmes in Early Childhood Care and Development – a
critical but still neglected area.
The fourth organisation is a relative newcomer. The Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee
(BRAC) has an outstanding track record in its own country in bring education to marginalised
communities – and in raising learning standards. It has been operating in South Sudan since 2007.
BRAC now operates 500 schools in South Sudan, many of them in conflict-affected areas. The
organisation has a policy of hiring only women teachers, who are provided with short but intensive
training and ongoing support. Schooling and all learning materials are provided free of charge.
Each of the four agencies works closely with the Ministry of Education and county level education
authorities. Their activities are closely aligned with the national planning system. For example, the
Episcopal Church and Windle Trust train teachers who will work in government schools and
teacher-trainers employed by government agencies. Children in BRAC schools work to a curriculum
aimed at enabling them to make the transition to grade 5 of the public education system. Save the
Children works with and through government systems, with capacity-building a core priority.
We discussed with each of the four agencies a range of options for scaling-up programmes in
priority areas identified in the GRSS draft education strategy. We then set a range of targets. The
agencies were asked to assess feasibility, identify institutional requirements, and estimate costs over
and above existing programmes. Our aim was to assess whether the agencies saw the governance
environment as a binding constraint.
While that constraint was recognised, each agency was able to identify innovative approaches that
would enable them to extend their reach, if the finance were available. The Episcopal Church of
South Sudan and Windle Trust could potentially train 25,000 teachers over the next four years over
and above their current plans at a cost of US$15m and US$10m respectively. Financial constraints in
this case related mainly to the cost of recruiting trainers, hiring facilities, and providing learning
materials. Similarly, BRAC identified the potential to create an additional 100,000 school places at an
additional cost of US$40m for basic school construction, training and support for female teachers
and the provision of textbooks and learning materials (Table 2).
35
Box 1 Continued.
Table 2 The scope for early delivery in education: financial estimates for achieving
specified targets (selected non-governmental organisations)
Agency
Specified target
Required
Resources
Time Frame
Episcopal Church of Sudan
15,000 teachers
trained
15 Million
4 years
BRAC South Sudan
100,000 out of
school children
receive basic
education
40 million
4 years
Save the Children in South
Sudan
100,000 children
in pre-schools
25 million
3 years
10 million
3 years
5,000 children in
Cattle Camps
Windle Trust International
10,000 teachers
trained
Debates over the respective roles of government and non-governmental organisations in education
provision sometimes generate more heat than light. In the case of South Sudan, the right direction of
travel is clear. The country needs a public education system that provides all children with an
entitlement to receive a good quality education. That means building national planning systems with
the technical, administrative and financial capacity to deliver results.
Education in South Sudan: investing in a better future
Non-governmental organisations need to avoid creating parallel structures. But as the four agencies
reviewed in this box demonstrate it is possible simultaneously to build government capacity and
deliver results that can transform the lives of vulnerable children.
36
A student writes on a blackboard at BRAC supported High Kugi School on the outskirts of Juba, South Sudan.
© UNESCO /M. Hofer (2011)
Box 2 Building capacity and working through government systems
Aid effectiveness is greatly enhanced when donors can work through national budgets overseen by
strong public finance management systems. The GRSS acknowledges that current fiduciary
management systems need strengthening – and that donors will continue to work through
multilateral agencies with more robust arrangements. But it has also developed an innovative
proposal for overseeing the financing of devolved services, including education.
At the heart of the proposal is the Local Service Delivery Aid Instrument (LSDAI). The intention is
to ensure that aid for local services support is aligned to sector policies, channelled through the
public financial management system, managed by government institutions, and oriented to the
achievement of outcomes.
The proposed LSDAI would channel aid to finance salaries, inputs and services provided through
facilities and county-level governments. At the same time, the instrument would support a range of
capacity building activities. Aid funds would be earmarked against specified activities, with budget
markers traceable all the way down to facilities/counties and up to the national budget. Funds would
be linked to identifiable results, with reporting on outputs linked to financing.
37
4. Closing the gap – delivering on the promise
Education in South Sudan: investing in a better future
Identifying financing gaps in education is one
thing, closing them is another. The
circumstances are hardly propitious.
Government spending on education has
stagnated since 2008, thereby declining in per
pupil terms. Aggression on the part of the
government in Khartoum over the oil dispute
poses further threats. If the GRSS is forced to
cut oil exports there is a real danger that the
education budget will be hard-hit by the
inevitable austerity measures that would
follow. Prospects for aid are also uncertain.
Development assistance for education has
been increasing from a low base. However,
fiscal pressures in donor countries are placing
pressure on bilateral aid budgets – and South
Sudan is seen by many donors as a high risk
environment.
Set against these constraints there are
compelling reasons for the GRSS and its
development partners to act decisively on
education. There are obvious risks attached
to aid for education in South Sudan. At the
same time, development assistance
investments have the potential to generate
very high returns in terms of dynamic and
inclusive economic growth, human
development and political stability. And there
are also risks to inaction. Failure to respond
to the hopes and aspirations of South Sudan’s
children and youth will inevitably reinforce
social tensions, with damaging consequences
for peace-building.
For the wider international community
practical considerations and ethical
imperatives provide a mutually reinforcing
case for action. Independence has created a
window of opportunity to make the transition
from an aid-relationship dominated by
humanitarian response towards a compact for
38
long-term development and self-reliance – a
compact that holds out the promise of
strengthened and more cost-effective results.
The ethical case for action is overwhelming.
Having signed-up for the Education for All
goals and the MDGs, donors countries have
an obligation to act on the pledges they have
made – and few countries have a stronger
claim to international support than South
Sudan.
Mobilising support
Without understating the level of political
leadership required, the bottom line is that an
accelerated 2012-2015 catch-up plan in
education for South Sudan is feasible and
affordable – and the alternative is unthinkable.
Table 3 sets out a credible financing option,
which aims at illustrating how the US$1.6bn
financing gap over four years could be closed
through a compact between the GRSS and its
development partners.
Initial leadership has to come from the GRSS
itself. President Salva Kiir has signalled a clear
intention to prioritise education. That
intention is reflected in national planning
documents and reinforced by the draft
education sector strategy. The challenge now
is to strengthen the national budget
commitment to education. In 2011, education
spending amounted to just 7 per cent of the
national budget compared to 40 per cent for
defence.
The current imbalance between spending on
defence on the one side and priorities such as
health and education on the other is
unsustainable. Unresolved disputes over
border issues and the oil crisis create
inevitable pressures to increase the military
spending. However, real security, resilience
against conflict and peace-building requires
spending on schools, health clinics, clean
water and roads – not state-of-the art
armaments. It is in this spirit that our
proposal envisages a doubling of
national resource mobilisation for
education, bringing an additional
US$100m to the sector annually. In the
event of the oil crisis being unresolved,
this increase would have to be financed
through loans backed by future oil
revenues.
Table 3 Closing the financing gap (an illustrative proposal)
Source of Finance
Additional financing (US$m/per
annum)
Government of South Sudan
Education
Social welfare
100
11
Multilateral/Regional Organisations
Global Partnership for Education
90
International Development Association
90
African Development Bank/Fund
40
Bilateral donors
OECD
Non-traditional donors
100
30
Partnership for South Sudan
Philanthropic foundations
10
Global Business Coalition*
5
Education without borders*
2
South Sudan diaspora
2
Total
US$500m
* Mainly goods and services
39
Education in South Sudan: investing in a better future
As our indicative estimates illustrate, this
enhanced domestic resource mobilisation
effort will not close the financing gap. Both
multilateral and bilateral donors will need to
do more. South Sudan presents the reformed
Global Partnership on Education and the
World Bank’s International Development
Association (IDA). The credibility and future
financing of the GPE depends critically upon
its effectiveness in responding to the needs of
countries such as South Sudan. The current
indicative allocation is an under-estimate of
several orders of magnitude. In its education
strategy, the World Bank recognises the
urgency of supporting the right to education
in conflict-affected states – and this was a
theme in the Bank’s flagship 2011 World
Development Report. With current
commitments to basic education through IDA
running at very low levels for sub-Saharan
Africa and the World Bank’s President having
pledged a substantial increase in IDA support
for education, South Sudan is a litmus test. In
this context, there is scope for a GPEIDA co-financing arrangement to
mobilise another US$180 million.
The Africa Development Bank (AfDB) and its
concessional arm, the African Development
Fund (ADF), have the potential to play a
leadership role in South Sudan.xxiii Both the
AfDB and the ADF have extensive experience
of working in fragile states (in 2008 the AfDB
created a Fragile States Facility), with a core
area of expertise in areas such as
infrastructure development, capacity-building
and governance.xxiv
Several countries have used AfDB support to
leverage finance from other sources, including
the Arab Development Bank in Africa. In one
recent operation, the AfDB provided US$30m
in co-financing for a major schools
construction and education quality
programme in Tanzania, supplementing
financing from government and donors.
40
Another project provides support for
education infrastructure in Niger.xxv
Our proposal envisages the AfDB/ADF
contributing US$30m in the form of
concessional loans and grants,
leveraging another US$10m from other
donors. This financing could play a critical
role in providing up-front financing for the
construction of classrooms and teachertraining facilities under an accelerated catchup programme, adding to government and
donor resources. Loan elements in the
financial package could be secured against
future streams of revenue from oil exports.
Bilateral donors and the European Union
should also step up to the plate. Our
proposal envisages traditional OECD
donors mobilising another US$100m
annually, with another US$30m coming
from non-traditional donors such as the
Gulf States and China. Around half of this
amount could come from the major donors
currently operating in the country and the
European Union, with the balance provided by
donors – including France, Germany and Japan
- currently operating on a modest scale in
education. South Sudan also provides an
opportunity for the OECD’s Development
Assistance Committee (DAC) donors to join
with non-traditional donors in a joined up
strategy to support progress in education.
With a significant presence in the country and
a strong record in infrastructure provision,
China would appear to be well placed to
support classroom construction.
There are obvious dangers in involving
multiple donors in an ambitious programme
for scaling up aid. If individual donors
operated through their own reporting
systems and independent projects, using their
own preferred models of delivery, an already
over-stretched education ministry would be
swamped by new demands. Education delivery
would become increasingly fragmented.
Financial management and the development of
effective budget reporting systems would
suffer.
For all of these reasons South Sudan needs a
pooled fund in education. Just as the BSF
enabled donors to align and coordinate their
activities behind government plans, the pooled
fund in education would harness donor
activity to the national strategy. The planning
and reporting system would operate through
the Ministry of Finance and Ministry of
Education. Like the BSF, financial management
would be provided by a company jointly
selected by donors and the GRSS. In
Afghanistan, the pooled funding system has
helped to transform the education system in a
challenging fragile state environment. There is
no reason that a pooled fund in education
operating on a stand-alone basis or as part of
a wider mechanism could not produce similar
results.
Studies from around the world demonstrate
that aid is at its most effective when operating
through national budgets overseen by
effective public finance management systems.
Concerns over fiduciary risk have prevented
any donors from operating through the
GRSS’s budget. However, several donors and
UN agencies are supporting the development
of more robust budget and financial
management systems. As these systems
develop, it is important that donors identify
opportunities for working through line
ministries. One example of an innovative
programme in this area is the Local Service
Delivery Aid Instrument, which currently
operates on a pilot basis but could be scaledup.
Building new partnerships – linking pooled
funds
Looking beyond traditional bilateral and
multilateral sources, there are opportunities
for mobilising wider support. In the health
sector, philanthropic foundations, private
companies and charities have come together
to provide finance, goods (such as low cost
medicines) and services (including training of
health workers and financial management) in
support of the international development
goals. Much of that support has been
channelled through the global public health
funds. There is currently no counterpart to
these funds in education. If there were, it
could be linked to the national pooled fund.
The gap could be filled by building on
foundations that are already in place. In the
same way that the global health funds have
enabled a wide range of actors to come
together in support of shared development
goals, the GPE could provide a multilateral
channel for support to South Sudan.
This would open the door to new
partnerships. Rather than avoid South Sudan
because of the high start-up costs of
establishing a programme, or because of the
transaction costs associated with creating new
projects, managing fiduciary risk, and engaging
with over-stretched governments agencies,
philanthropic foundations, private companies,
and public institutions could operate through
a single coordinating mechanism.
New avenues for support could be opened.
Respected international institutions such as
the Open University, MIT, and New York
University operating open educational
resource systems could be linked to teacher
training centres operated by government or
non-governmental organisations, to colleges
and to secondary schools, providing them
with access to training modules, assessment
exercises, and course materials. With Sudan
making the difficult transition from an Arabbased to an English language curriculum,
tailored English language courses could be
developed.
41
Opportunities that are currently closed off
could be exploited. Take the case of ICT. Like
other countries across Africa, South Sudan
has an opportunity to leapfrog technologies.
Instead of focusing their efforts on traditional
‘e-learning’, providing students and teachers
with access to the web via personal
computers, the government and its partners
could tap into ‘m-learning’. Today, the handheld mobile is becoming a supercomputer.
With ‘3G’ technologies and a satellite phone
link, teachers can download material from the
web and use a multi-media projector to
display it on a classroom wall. It is estimated
that South Sudan will need 12 million
textbooks to cover all of the children in
primary school. Should it import all of these
books? Or should it use tablets and e-readers
that can download books from a USB device?
Education in South Sudan: investing in a better future
The problem in all of these areas is that
philanthropic foundations, companies and
academic institutions wishing to support the
education sector in South Sudan face high
transaction costs and significant barriers to
entry because of the risks associated with any
intervention. These barriers could be
lowered, as they have been through the global
health funds, by operating through a
multilateral framework linked in turn to a
pooled fund in the education sector.
42
County Support Bases – an emerging
infrastructure
Effective implementation of an accelerated
catch-up plan in education will require
cooperation with actors beyond the sector. It
is vital that the GRSS and its development
partners seize every opportunity for
delivering education to children, youth, and
adults.
Progress does not have to wait upon the
completion of programmes for school
construction or teacher training. Education
can be provided on a temporary basis in a
range of civic facilities, community centres and
non-governmental facilities. Similarly, schools
can double-up as sites for the provision of
vital child and maternal health services. An
effective pooled fund in education would have
to avoid operating in a narrowly defined
‘schools-silo’ and exploit to the full the
opportunities created by wider initiatives.
One initiative merits special consideration.
The United Nations Mission in South Sudan
(UNMISS) is developing a decentralised
presence at state and county levels under its
wide-ranging remit to provide protection and
support for recovery, capacity-building and
peace-building efforts. To this end, it is
constructing a network of County Support
Bases (CSBs) equipped to facilitate the work
of agencies working in some of the least
accessible and conflict-affected parts of the
country. These CSBs could provide a platform
for a cost-effective peace dividend in
education and other sector (Box 3).
Box 3 Delivering the peace dividend – a role for County Support Bases (CSBs)
Many non-governmental organisations and other agencies have a capacity to scale-up their work in
delivering basic services and building capacity. They are often constrained by interlocking problems
of access and finance. Large areas of South Sudan are inaccessible for parts of the year, especially
in the rainy season. Conflict creates further hazards. Lacking the financial resources to develop a
service-delivery infrastructure in remote and conflict-affected areas, development agencies have a
limited reach.
Proposals from the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) could help to change this
picture. The aim is to create a network of County Support Bases (CSBs) across the country.
Staffed and equipped to facilitate the activities of agencies seeking to intensify their work with
counterparts in government and local communities, the CSBs have the potential to spread costs,
extend support to highly marginalised areas that are hard-to-reach, and deliver results.
The current ambition is to secure approval for the construction of nineteen CSBs over the next
year rising to thirty-five after three years. This is in addition to UNMISS’s existing presence in ten
state capitals. With 60 percent of the country inaccessible for six months of the year, CSBs can
help to ensure that the UN mission is present and active in the most remote and conflict-prone
areas. They will have the additional benefit of providing a logistics presence at the county level for
state institutions, UN agencies and development partners which can be used to support
implementation of the South Sudan Development Plan (SSDP). The proposed design of the CSBs
includes provision for two classroom sized buildings equipped with internet access, community
radio and resources to support a range of learning activities.
This represents an immense opportunity for education. The CSBs could become a focal point not
just for adult learning, but for the provision of teacher-training and support activities, early
childhood support, and training for county-level education officials. They have the potential to
facilitate highly cost-effective interventions that deliver significant – and early – results. By meeting
the capital costs of construction and the recurrent costs of infrastructure provision, the CSBs
would generate significant economies of scale. Agencies working in education and other sectors
would be able to expand and intensify their work with local counterparts at a lower cost by
tapping into a shared development resource. Critically, the CSBs could provide a networked
platform for delivering an education peace dividend in some of the country’s most high risk and
unstable areas.
Given the potentially very high returns and cost-effectiveness the CSBs, consideration should be
given to a scaled-up initiative. Funding for twenty-five centres has been obtained from Norway and
the Netherlands, with project execution taking place through the United Nations Development
Program (UNDP). Current donors should urgently allocate resources for the additional ten CSBs
envisaged in the current plan. At the same time, there are strong grounds for developing a scaledup initiative that would provide all seventy-nine counties with a CSB by 2015. Funding could be
drawn from a range of non-traditional sources identified in Table 2, including China. There is also
scope for requesting support from the AfDB/ADF to leverage additional finance from a range of
agencies, including philanthropic foundations.
43
Conclusion
South Sudan’s children have suffered for long
enough. They have the right to an education –
and a right to expect the international
community to act decisively on their behalf.
With the 2015 deadline for the MDGs and
the Education for All commitments looming,
South Sudan is a test case for measuring the
strength of these commitments. In the
absence of a concerted aid effort, the country
will fail in its ambitious effort to catch-up the
ground it has lost in education as a result of
civil war, human rights abuse and endemic
poverty.
Education in South Sudan: investing in a better future
This paper sets out a strategy for an
accelerated catch-up programme in education.
The strategy would require US$400m in
additional aid annually for the period 20122015, along with increased resource
mobilisation on the part of government.
These are significant investments. But the
potential returns are very high. The proposed
programme would deliver an education peace
dividend that puts another 1 million children
in school, improves the quality of education
for 2.5 million learners, and provides a
second-chance to many children who lost out
on an education in their earlier years. Benefits
beyond the education sector would be
reflected in enhanced prospects for economic
growth, jobs creation, and improved health.
Hai Tokyo School classroom, supported by BRAC, in Juba, South Sudan. © UNESCO /M. Hofer (2011)
44
Endnotes
i)
globalpartnership.org/about-us/about-the-partnership
ii)
Total cost per pupil amount to around US$169 per pupil. However, this includes the full cost
of classroom construction. Factoring in the future benefits of these investments would reduce
per pupil costs. Discounting the capital costs of construction, per pupil financing for 2.5 million
children (the 1.4 million in school and 1.1 million primary school age children out of school) is
between US$33-50 depending on discounting methodology. An earlier draft of the report
carried a misprint on per pupil cost estimates.
iii)
Government of South Sudan (2011) South Sudan Development Plan. Juba
iv)
GRSS Ministry of General Education and Instruction (2011) Education Sector Strategic Plan
2012/13 - 2016/17: Ensuring Non-One is Left Behind. Juba
v)
GRSS Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning (2010) Donor Book 2010. Juba
vi)
Details taken from reports in the Financial Times, including: http://on.ft.com/wP3w14
vii)
UNICEF (2011) Health and Nutrition Programme in South Sudan. Juba
viii)
UNICEF (2011) Children and Youth Consultation Report. Juba
ix)
GRSS MoGEI (2011)
x)
World Bank (2011) South Sudan Education Status Report. Juba
xi)
Estimates based on 2008 Population Census
xii)
UNESCO (2011) Building for a Better Future: Education for an Independent South Sudan. Paris
xiii)
GRSS MoGEI (2011)
xiv)
World Bank-Global Partnership for Education (2011) Education in South Sudan: Status and
Challenges for a New System. Washington
xv)
Ibid.
xvi)
GRSS Ministry of Education (2011) Education Statistics for Southern Sudan. National Statistics
Booklet 2010. Juba
xvii) Ibid.
xviii) This assumes a pupil-teacher ratio of 40:1
xix)
List of all humanitarian pledges, commitments & contributions in 2011 at http://fts.unocha.org
xx)
Fenton, Wendy (2008) NGO perspectives and recommendations on pooled funding mechanisms in
Southern Sudan
xxi)
globalpartnership.org/about-us/about-the-partnership
xxii) The Global Partnership for Education uses an indicative allocation formula that gives scores
for a range of factors including education needs, public institutions and expenditure. The data
used for South Sudan is merged with Sudan, which makes the exercise of questionable
relevance.
xxiii) The AfDB uses its triple AAA rating to raise money on international markets which is lent to
governments at below commercial market interest rates. The ADF mobilised a record
US$9.1bn from donors during its replenishment for the period 2011-2013. The facility
45
provides grants and interest free loans with a repayment period of fifty years and a grace
period of 10 years.
xxiv) afdb.org/en/topics-and-sectors/initiatives-partnerships/fragile-states-facility
Education in South Sudan: investing in a better future
xxv) afdb.org/en/news-and-events/article/afdb-and-niger-sign-fcfa-41-billion-budget-support-andeducation-support-agreement-7632
46
i
ii
iii
South Sudan Development Plan. GRSS, Juba, 2011
Education Sector Strategic Plan (ESSP) 2012/13-2016/17: Ensuring Non-One is Left Behind, MoGEI, Juba,
2011
v
2010 Donor Book. Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning. Government of South Sudan.
vi
Details taken from reports in the Financial Times, including: http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/0ece7e2c-4c1c11e1-98dd-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1pDyyVUqu; http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/dd8bfa52-4a8f-11e1-a11e00144feabdc0.html#axzz1pDyyVUqu
iv
vii
UNICEF in South Sudan, Health and Nutrition Programme, Juba, 2011
Children and Youth Consultation Report, UNICEF, Juba 2011
ix
Education Sector Strategic Plan (ESSP) 2012/13-2016/17:
x
South Sudan Education Status Report. World Bank. Juba, 2011.
xi
Estimates based on 2008 Population Census
xii
Building for a Better Future: Education for an Independent South Sudan, UNESCO, 2011
xiii
Education Sector Strategic Plan (ESSP) 2012/13-2016/17
xiv xiv
Education in South Sudan: Status and Challenges for a New System, World Bank-Global Partnership for
Education, Washington, 2011
xv
Education in South Sudan: Status and Challenges for a New System, World Bank-Global Partnership for
Education, Washington, 2011
xvi
Education Statistics for Southern Sudan, GRSS, Juba, 2011
xvii
Stattistical Booklet: Education. Ministry of Education. 2011.
This report is one of a series released to support Gordon and Sarah
xviii
This assumes a pupil-teacher ratio of 40:1
xix
Brown’s
Education
All campaign.
We are
working to find
List of
all humanitarian
pledges,For
commitments
& contributions
in 2011
Report as of 20-February-2012 http://fts.unocha.org.
solutions to the global education crisis - boosting the number of
xx
DFID basic services
xxi
http://www.globalpartnership.org/about-us/about-the-partnership/
children in primary schools worldwide, and partnering with
xxii
The Global Partnership for Education uses an indicative allocation formula that gives scores for a range of
government, business and non-profit leaders and organisations across
factors including education needs, public institutions and expenditure. The data used for South Sudan is
mergedthe
withglobe
Sudan, which
makes the
exercise
of questionable
relevance.
to achieve
the
Millennium
Development
Goal of universal
xxiii
The AfDB uses its triple AAA rating to raise money on international markets which is lent to governments at
primary education by 2015.
below commercial market interest rates. The ADF mobilised a record US$9.1bn from donors during its
replenishment for the period 2011-2013. The facility provides grants and interest free loans with a repayment
period Learn
of fifty years
and athe
grace
period of 10at
years.
about
campaign
gordonandsarahbrown.com
xxiv
http://www.afdb.org/en/topics-and-sectors/initiatives-partnerships/fragile-states-facility/
xxv
http://www.afdb.org/en/news-and-events/article/afdb-and-niger-sign-fcfa-41-billion-budget-support-andeducation-support-agreement-7632/
viii
The Office of Gordon and Sarah Brown
PO Box 67550
London EC2P 2JF
47
Copyright © The Office of Gordon and Sarah Brown Limited 2012