Third Primary Education Development Project (RRP BAN 42122-01)

RISK ASSESSMENT AND RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN

1. Overall program risks are considered moderate given the government’s priorities articulated in the National Education Policy, and achievements made and lessons learned from the ongoing Second Primary Education Development Program (PEDP II).1 Major risks to the program are related to the capacity to plan, manage, implement, and monitor sector reforms; these constraints are pervasive in the public administration system. The scale of the education system, highly centralized management, and existing fragmentation complicate the accountability inherent under the current management regime and make the regulatory environment extremely challenging. Any parallel implementation systems would pose considerable challenges. The approach of linking disbursements to key results may be subject to such capacity risks. Timely achievement of some disbursement linked indicators (DLIs) requires close interministerial collaboration. Some other DLIs may also be influenced by changes in the political environment. Therefore, there are risks that achievement of DLIs may slip because of factors outside the control of the Ministry of Primary and Mass Education (MOPME). These risks are mitigated, acknowledging the gradual buildup of capacity, by including a combination of implementation steps and processes to policies and output level results in the selection of DLIs. Furthermore, some flexibility will be sought in adjusting the DLIs as needs and circumstances require, provided that such adjustment will not affect achievement of the overall result area. Regular fiduciary risk assessment and mitigation measures are an integral part of risk management. 2. The MOPME, through the Directorate of Primary Education (DPE), has initiated results-based management—monitored through an annual school census, including its reporting in the annual sector performance report of key performance indicators. The proposed Third Primary Education Development Project2 will help strengthen this approach. The government’s Third Primary Education Development Program (PEDP III)3 supports the strengthening of institutions that will sustain improvements in the sector. It integrates its design structure with the administrative and financial units already responsible for service delivery in the sector, and reinforces them with focused capacity building. This combination promotes greater local accountability and should boost effectiveness and durability in program implementation and outcomes. The planned strengthening of monitoring and evaluation functions is particularly critical to the success of results-based management. Finally, during the PEDP III, the government seeks to reduce parallel implementation systems by establishing an integrated school system from preschool to higher secondary levels, within a framework that unifies public, nongovernment organizations, and private providers, as articulated in the National Education Policy.

Risk Assessment and Risk Management Plan

Risks

Assessment Without Mitigation

Management Plan or Measures

Assessment with

Mitigations

Outcomes

1. Political will and consistent support for policy issues critical for PEDP III implementation

High A policy framework has been agreed that draws from the national policy framework approved by parliament in December 2010.

Medium

2. Coordination of PEDP High PEDP III implementation arrangements Medium

1 ADB. 2003. Report and Recommendation of the President to the Board of Directors: Proposed Loan to the

People’s Republic of Bangladesh for the Secondary Education Development Program. Manila. 2 ADB. 2011. Report and Recommendation of the President to the Board of Directors: Proposed Loan to the

People’s Republic of Bangladesh for the Third Primary Education Development Project. Manila. 3 Directorate of Primary Education. 2011. Third Primary Education Development Program. Dhaka.

2

Risks

Assessment Without Mitigation

Management Plan or Measures

Assessment with

Mitigations

III components between DPE divisions and between organizations under MOPME and MOE

create mechanisms for coordinating functions within DPE division, between MOPME directorates, between MOPME and autonomous bodies, between MOPME and NGOs, and between MOPME and other ministries.

3. Institutional and personnel capacity to mange, implement, and monitor PEDP III’s agenda and planned activities

High PEDP III interventions emphasize institutional strengthening and human resource development Partnership arrangements with government organizations, NGOs, and private sector planned.

Medium

Outputs

4. Slippage in meeting DLIs

Medium Technical assistance included to target DLI areas needing support, along with realistic commitment from the government. Acknowledgements of the gradual buildup of capacity by including a combination of implementation steps and processes to policies and output level results as DLIs.

Low

5. Timely generation of reliable information for monitoring of results

High A DLI included that will help strengthen monitoring and evaluation functions, including completion of annual school census with increased coverage of schools and institutions.

Medium

6. Regulatory framework not supportive of desired school level changes

High Revision of regulatory framework, particularly relating to school management committee, school level improvement planning, and school level performance indicators during implementation of the PEDP III. A policy framework has been agreed that supports related areas at all levels.

Medium

7. Flexibility in program implementation to incorporate lessons learned annually

High Government commitment to allow flexibility with appropriate budget approval instrument, such as annual strategic plan, annual work plan supported by the annual operation plan, and decision note from the budget management committee of the Ministry of Finance.

Medium

Fiduciary and Financial

8. Financial viability and sustainability

High PEDP III integrates its design structure with the administrative and financial units already responsible for service delivery in the sector, and reinforces them with focused capacity building. It will be critical to increase resources to the education sector to ensure effective

Low

3

Risks

Assessment Without Mitigation

Management Plan or Measures

Assessment with

Mitigations

implementation of the PEDP III.

9. Slow progress on procurement and financial management action plan

High Annual fiduciary review with follow-up actions included Joint fiduciary oversight by development partners, including annual fiduciary review and quarterly fiduciary review, with prior and post review of procurement

Low

10. Ensuring needs-based funding of schools and institutions

High Annual school planning process ensures allocation of funds based on needs of schools rather than types of schools (e.g., government primary schools and registered nongovernment primary schools

Medium

11. Limited experience of regular treasury system in implementing development programs

High Orientation of PEDP III implementation procedures with detailed implementation and operations manual planned, and targeted high quality regular monitoring with technical assistance planned to strengthen the regular system by building on the PEDP II.

Medium

Overall High Medium

DLI = disbursement linked indicators, DPE = Directorate of Primary Education, MOE = Ministry of Education, MOPME = Ministry of Primary and Mass Education, NGO = nongovernment organization, PEDP II = Second Primary Education Development Program, PEDP III = Third Primary Education Development Program.