PAQE Baseline Evaluation Report-FINAL

PLAY FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF QUALITY EDUCATION
PROGRAM BASELINE EVALUATION REPORT
May 2016

2 | PAQE Baseline Report – Phase One
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................................................................3
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY......................................................................................................................5
2.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................8
3.0 RECOMMENDATIONS.....................................................................................................................10
Data Collection and Storage Recommendations.........................................................................................10
Evaluative Recommendations .....................................................................................................................11
4.0 METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................................................13
5.0 BASELINE EVALUATION RESULTS....................................................................................................23
National Education Indicators .....................................................................................................................23
Emotional and Physical Safety of Learning Environments...........................................................................27
The Application of Gender-Sensitive, Child-Centered Play-Based Approaches...........................................33
Life Skills of Children....................................................................................................................................71
Girls’ Education and Children’s Rights in the Community ...........................................................................76
Plans and Strategies ....................................................................................................................................83
Civil Society Partners...................................................................................................................................88
Education Barriers.......................................................................................................................................91
6.0 LIMITATIONS AND RISKS.................................................................................................................93
APPENDIX ....................................................................................................................................................98
Qualitative Data Availability and Use between Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the Baseline Evaluation..............103

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Planning and implementing the baseline data collection across eight diverse countries to better
understand and measure baseline values for the Global Affairs Canada-funded program was a complex
process, and one that would not have been possible without the collaborative team effort of numerous
Right To Play personnel, external consultants, and the ongoing support from Global Affairs Canada. The
strong dedication by all team members to ensuring high quality data was unwavering throughout the
process.
First, we would like to thank the following individuals for their guidance:
Nina, Valentic, Vice President, Program Development and Evaluation
Katrin Imhof, Vice President, Africa Programs
Sherine Ibrahim, Vice President, Middle East and Asia
Tanya D’Souza, Regional Program Manager, Africa
Rola Hodeib, Regional Program Manager, Middle East and Asia
Armel Oguniyi, Regional Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Officer, Africa
Amadou Cissé, Right To Play County Manager, Mali
Ethel Sackitey, Right To Play Country Manager, Ghana
Marie-Josephine Thama Kora, Right To Play Country Manager, Liberia
Romeo Essou, Right To Play Country Manager, Benin
Boris Degan, Right To Play Country Manager, Rwanda
Josephine Mukakalisa, Right To Play Country Manager, Tanzania
Harrison Ruben, Right To Play Country Manager, Mozambique
Iqbal Jatoi, Right To Play Country Manager, Pakistan
The following Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Officers took the lead in various stages at the country
level in planning, enumerator training, data collection and entry:
Simana Paul Kone, MEL Officer, Right To Play Mali
Frank Kwaku Amoateng, MEL Officer, Right To Play Ghana
James Bazzie, MEL Officer, Right To Play Liberia
Rock Quenum, MEL Officer, Right To Play Benin
Edwin Byusa, MEL Officer, Right To Play Rwanda
Martha Kihampa, MEL Officer, Right To Play Tanzania
Cremildo Manjate, MEL Officer, Right To Play Mozambique
Raffat Khaqan, MEL Officer, Right To Play Pakistan
The MEL team at Right To Play headquarters assumed a primary oversight role throughout all stages of
the baseline, and with the support of several highly-skilled external consultants, compiled the country
results into the enclosed baseline report:
Christopher Johnston, Director, Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning, Right To Play International
Colleen Keilty, Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Specialist, Right To Play International
Nick Petten, external consultant
Jenna van Draanen, external consultant
Priya Kekre, external consultant
Kevin de Souza external consultant
Kerrie Proulx, Ph.D., external consultant
Ben Brisbois, external consultant

4 | PAQE Baseline Report
Tanya Chung Tiam Fook, external consultant
Additionally, Suzanne Field and Kristin Neudorf, former Right To Play International MEL Manager and MEL
Specialist, respectively, provided critical support for planning, tool design, sampling design, and analysis
framework(s) to international, regional and country teams towards a successful baseline evaluation
process.
But above all….
While there were many hands and minds involved in planning, preparing and carrying out the baselines,
at the heart of everything are the children, youth, parents, teachers, and partners. Above all, we would
also like to extend our most heartfelt thanks and appreciation to the 76 schools who opened their doors
to us, and to the thousands of children, youth, teachers, leaders, parents, and partners who took the time
to share their thoughts, experiences, and perspectives with us.

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report presents the baseline findings of the Play for the Advancement of Quality Education (PAQE)
program. The PAQE program will directly address the educational needs of over 475,000 vulnerable and
marginalized children and youth through a 21-month quality education program in eight countries: Benin,
Ghana, Liberia, Mali, Mozambique, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Pakistan.
The baseline evaluation was completed in two phases of data collection and analysis during 2015 and
2016. This report consolidates the findings from both phases and makes various methodological and
select preliminary programmatic recommendations. Along with this report, eight country-level reports
were produced that provide more detail for each indicator and demonstrate more analytic disaggregation
and within-country comparison than is possible to present in the global report.
Overall, our findings indicate that the eight countries represent various stages in planning and
implementation of play-based education with levels of activity ranging from the creation of national
policies and discussions amongst senior members of government to individual teachers’ use of play-based
learning plans and materials in their classroom.
While some countries have policies on play-based learning in place already and the effects are starting to
be seen downstream at the local level, other countries are just starting to recognize the need to improve
their national education system using play-based learning approaches. Some countries face immense
hurdles related to recent budgetary crises and national medical emergencies and although they have
already demonstrated early promising signs in their engagement with Right To Play, it will be a challenge
to demonstrate dramatic program impact over the 21-month period. The range of scope of the PAQE
program in working on national policies, district strategies and locally-led efforts will increase the
likelihood of play-based learning becoming an accepted and celebrated pedagogical approach: as it is
intervening on multiple levels.
The scope of data collection and analysis for the baseline evaluation is extensive with the use of over 20
different tools collecting data from stakeholders ranging from national government representatives to
children in rural communities. Children, especially, were consulted in the evaluation using various
measures that attempt to provide an understanding of their lived realities and perceptions of quality
education, This is essential, as children are the group that stand to gain the most from this program.
Among the highlights of the baseline evaluation elaborated in more depth in the report are:
National Education Indicators - Attendance rates varied across the countries with Pakistan on the
lower end with a mean attendance rate of 59% and Rwanda on the higher end with 98%. Rwanda
and Tanzania were the only countries for which females had a higher completion rate than males,
and in Tanzania’s case even a higher attendance rate
Emotional and Physical Safety of Learning Environments - Mali, Mozambique, Rwanda, Ghana and
Pakistan reported that no schools had existing strategies or plans related to this indicator.
Tanzania reported that out of 15 schools (including comparison schools), all have existing
strategies from the national level. In Liberia, it was reported that five schools have existing plans

or strategies on child protection and safeguarding, five schools have gender equality plans or
strategies, and nine schools have maintenance and safety of physical works plans or strategies.
There are challenges with limited data and with measurement tools related to these indicators.
Application of Gender-Sensitive, Child-Centered and Play-Based Approaches – Demonstration of
applied knowledge, through the continuum of teacher training (COTT) on gender-sensitive, child-
centered play-based learning techniques shows some evidence of teachers’ and school
administrators’ knowledge of gender-sensitive, child-centered play-based learning techniques,
though better data at end line will be required. Confidence levels are generally low among
trained teachers, principals and school administrators in their ability to apply child-centered play-
based techniques in schools. Regarding the extent of play-based learning approaches in
education strategies, annual plans and priorities at local, district and national levels, despite some
early, promising signs at the national policy level, the extent is relatively low across all PAQE
countries with only some mentions of plans or strategies by government officials and low reports
of plans at the local level, as reported by school administrators.
Education Barriers – The awareness of education barriers among children was high particularly
regarding physical violence and abuse. Other common barriers across all countries, which relates
to gender equality, include girls getting married at a young age, being involved in prostitution and
domestic labour. The most common barrier for boys was having to work at home and in the
community. Parental disinterest in education was also cited as a barrier to education.
There are a number of recommendations made in the report.
Recommendations related to Data Collection and Storage include:
Where there are small sample sizes, reducing the number of quantifiable questions to only those
necessary for analysis
Asking more qualitative questions that can be transcribed and analyzed to allow for more depth
to understanding the research participants' perspectives and opinions
Regular data audits and development of data management protocols
Clearer guidance, more training, and quality control related to facilitation of focus group
discussions
Tool revision to include reducing the number of questions asked and/or prioritizing particular
questions
Setting or enforcing standards on how to report various characteristics and demographic
information of each site
Evaluative Recommendations outlined in the report include:
Case studies, providing an opportunity for a rich understanding of context, and combining
qualitative and quantitative data
For end-line data collection consider asking questions about a country's international
commitments to all of children’s rights, especially a child’s right to play

Creating a more focused overall data collection and analysis plan that can better provide
alignment of data collection, analysis, and understanding of program success
The depth and range of data collected and analyzed in this evaluation will allow Right To Play to continue
to build on its knowledge repository and continue to identify promising practices in international
development in education. As such, this report makes frequent methodological recommendations to
manage and analyze the data with the goal of yielding meaningful and accurate evidence of the
program’s impact. The baseline evaluation presents findings and recommendations that will further
contribute to Right To Play’s efforts in monitoring, evaluation and learning.

2.0 INTRODUCTION
Beginning in 2007, Right To Play partnered with the Global Affairs Canada (formerly DFATD and CIDA) to
implement Basic Education through Sport and Play for Children and Youth in West and Francophone
Africa: Play to Learn reaching over 200,000 children in Benin, Ghana, Liberia, Mali and Rwanda. The
results of Play to Learn demonstrated the power of Sport and Play for Development and Peace (SPDP) to
transform the way that teachers teach, students learn, and communities interact with children and youth.
The success of this, and the subsequent Advancing Health, Education and Development (AHEAD)
program(s) also positioned the Government of Canada and Right To Play to lead the way in solving the
critical education challenges that confront the world today.
The Global Affairs Canada-funded Play for the Advancement of Quality Education (PAQE) program will
directly address the educational needs of over 475,000 vulnerable and marginalized children and youth
through a 21-month quality education program in eight countries: Benin, Ghana, Liberia, Mali,
Mozambique, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Pakistan. Across regions, the program will build on the momentum
and learning generated by programs including Play To Learn, AHEAD, the NORAD-funded development
program in Mozambique, Tanzania, and Pakistan, and others, both expanding and deepening results to
influence system-wide change. From October 2015 to June 2017, the PAQE program will aim to improve
educational attainment and participation for children and youth aged 2 to 15 in eight countries at scale
through a sustainable and replicable child-centered, play-based learning model. This ultimate outcome
will be achieved through focused interventions at the school, community and policy level that result in:
1100: Improved positive participatory and gender-sensitive learning environments that promote
play-based learning:
1200: Improved commitment of community stakeholders to address barriers to education, and;
1300: enhanced policy and regulatory environment for the delivery of gender-sensitive, child-
centered, play-based learning policies and practices across communities
1400: increased engagement of targeted Canadians and Canadian institutions in activities that
promote the value of sport and play to advance quality education in developing countries
To achieve these outcomes, the program’s core activities include:
Training of teachers, coaches, district level education officials and parent-teacher associations in
the use of child friendly learning approaches;
Mobilizing child-led and youth-led clubs and sport leagues to undertake community development
initiatives to address barriers to education;
Providing technical assistance and mentorship to civil society partners and governments on
policies and practices that promote child friendly learning,
To achieve sustainable development outcomes, the program will bring partners together at a local and
national level to jointly advocate for decision-makers to support and invest in innovative play-based
approaches for improving education quality. The program will convene government, non-governmental,
private-sector and technical partners to introduce an integrated approach to quality education across all
eight countries. This approach includes community-level program implementation, policy change,
research-based evaluation, and intensive capacity-building for national and local partners that will
transform national education outcomes.

In addition, working with Right To Play’s Canadian Athlete Ambassadors, the private sector and schools
across Canada, the program will increase public understanding of the role that the Government of
Canada and its partners play in improving education quality in developing countries, while mobilizing
support for the effort to improve education outcomes globally.
For more information on program expected outcomes, please see Appendix A: Performance
Measurement Framework.
Right To Play has developed and implemented a rigorous measurement plan to monitor and evaluate the
outcomes of the PAQE program. An extensive, two-phase baseline has been conducted in each of the
eight countries in 2015, to establish a foundation for subsequent measurement activities. The first phase
of the baseline evaluation was completed in August 2015 and the second phase was completed in May
2016. Data collection was conducted in a two phased approach due to the magnitude of data required
and the data collection limitations presented by the school holiday periods. The results of both phases are
included in this report.

3.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
Data Collection and Storage Recommendations
1. When particular groups have a small sample size, we recommend reducing the number of
quantifiable questions to only the ones necessary for analysis and asking more qualitative
questions that can be transcribed and analyzed. This will allow for more depth to understanding
the research participants' perspectives and opinions on a particular issue. For example, the school
administrators and education officials usually had a small sample size, but were answering
questions that were similar to teachers who had a much larger sample size. School administrators
and education officials may have more specific types of information to communicate, particularly
on plans and strategies, which the standard SSKII may not leave enough room for. It may also
make the interview more efficient by asking those two groups fewer, more focused questions.
2. Regular data audits and management protocols could be developed and employed more
rigorously during the course of the program. If data storage was centralized, audits could be
conducted by the Right To Play HQ on a single database, or a standard model of data
management, storage and audits could be utilized at the country level. Careful management of
the data during the course of the program would ease the data preparation for the end-line
analysis.
3. Focus group discussion, Measure the Change, and community mapping data provided a rich
opportunity for participants to communicate, on a deeper level than the SSKII, their perspectives
and opinions about the program. Indeed, the toolkits for each measure instructed enumerators
to facilitate a group discussion that included taking notes on non-verbal information and
contextual issues. The data obtained from these measures could have been strengthened if each
country office was given enough time and budget to maximize the depth of discussion and data
collection. We further recommend increased training for enumerators on collecting data during a
focus group, including training on the importance of audio-recording and transcribing.
4. Not all questions asked in the Semi-Structured Key Informant Interviews were included in the
baseline analysis. Considering that multiple country offices reported not having enough time to
administer all the tools, it is recommended that some of the tools reduce the number of
questions asked and/or prioritize particular questions.
5. When country offices reported on school characteristics and demographic information, standards
of reporting differed between countries. For example, there was no standard way to describe
what constitutes an ‘existing’ school versus a ‘new’ school in terms of years as a Right To Play

school. Similarly, there was no standard way to describe the status of teachers trained on Right
To Play’s approach that would be possible to incorporate into data analysis. It is recommended
that going forward with the PAQE evaluation, standards are set or more closely adhered to with
the country offices on how to report various characteristics and demographic information of each
site.
Evaluative Recommendations
1. Case studies can provide an opportunity for a rich understanding of context. They can be viewed
as mini evaluations with an overall strategy, data collection and analysis developed at the school
or local level. Given the proper resources to develop and carry out a case study including
facilitating focus groups and conducting interviews, case studies can help inform Right To Play’s
programmatic decisions and offer valuable insights of a particular context that can be generalized
to other similar contexts. Case studies could collect a combination of qualitative and quantitative
data and present them in a narrative format relies extensively on the context. They can also be
used to support a global analysis of the PAQE program. In this case, it is recommended that cases
are carefully selected based on various representative sites in the program, given enough time
and resources for country office buy-in, and follow consistent standards across all sites so that
the case studies are somewhat comparable.
2. Children’s rights represent a large array of rights and responsibilities that are often challenging to
summarize and understand in its scope and implications for children and their families. In
addition to girls’ rights to education and a child’s right to protection, which Right to Play collected
extensive data on, there are many other rights such as provision and participation rights that are
equally important. It is recommended that measures employed during the end-line data
collection consider asking questions about a country's international commitments to all of
children’s rights, especially a child’s right to play. This is especially recommended in interviews
with education officials at the national and district level.
3. Currently, Right To Play is collecting a vast amount of data, feeding into numerous indicators. In
some cases, there are data collected that do not match up to any of the indicators and for some
indicators there is not an obvious match to a data source or sources. In addition, there are many
indicators that are not readily apparent which elements of the program each will provide
information on. We recommend creating a more focused overall data collection and analysis plan
that can better provide alignment of data collection, analysis, and understanding of program
success.
4. Observational scores indicated that teaching experience correlated negatively with observations
of child-centred and play-based learning in the classroom. Teachers with more years of teaching
experience were less likely to be using these approaches. However, this finding was not consistent
with results from semi-structured interviews with teachers. This might be due to the difference in

the scales used to assess years of teaching experience, or social desirability bias from teachers’ self-
reports. The mixed results warrant future attention to determine whether more efforts should be
focused on behaviour change amongst more experienced, seasoned teachers.
5. Class size also appears to be strongly correlated with the use of play-based and child-centred
learning approaches. Future research could explore the issues and barriers to implementing such
approaches in large classes and determine solutions for increasing play-based and child-centred
learning, especially in large classes.
6. Although most schools have access to lesson planning templates, many do not have access to
games, sports or play equipment. Providing access could be a focus for future efforts, but also
removing barriers that may prevent teachers from using these materials even if they have access
(this seems to be an issue in Rwanda and Pakistan). Future qualitative data collection should
explore why lesson-planning templates are used so widely across all countries to understand
teacher motivations that can be applied for other tools as relevant to the program.

4.0 METHODOLOGY
2.1 SAMPLING
Baseline data collection was conducted in a combination of existing Right To Play partner schools, new
Right To Play partner schools, and comparison sites, which were selected using a stratified random
selection process. Wherever possible, program sites that were newly implementing Right To Play
activities were selected for the baseline (i.e. those that were not implementing Right To Play activities
under the preceding DFATD grant), while acknowledging (through stratification) the continuity of
program outcomes in existing partner schools from Play To Learn and AHEAD.
The key defining characteristics of all program sites within each participating country were first identified.
The characteristics varied slightly for each country, based on the specific local context, and included items
such as rural versus urban settings, the socio-economic situation, religious, ethnic and cultural groups,
and other such predominant features. Each program site within each country was then categorized by
these unique characteristics, followed by a random selection of sites from within each characteristic
group. The proportion of characteristics represented in the sample was matched to the proportion of
characteristics in the population (i.e. all program sites).
Table 1. Key defining characteristics of sites across eight (8) PAQE countries at Inception.
Country
Strata
Geography Location
Program
Length
Teachers
Trained
School Level Gender
Benin x x x x
Ghana x x x x
Rwanda x x x x
Mali x x x x
Liberia x x x x
Tanzania x x x
Mozambique x x x x
Pakistan x x x x x x
Definitions of key characteristics (strata):
Geography: schools selected from the different areas in the three regions.
Location: schools in both urban and rural settings.
Length of program: depending on the school and location, not all teachers in participating schools have
been trained in child-centred, play based learning methodologies (or sub-topics therein).

# of Teachers Trained: as a proportion of teachers in each school which have participated in Right To Play
training.
School Level: equivalent to level of education, and distinguishing between primary and high school
Gender: in Pakistan, this strata was considered as schools can be gender-segregated.
Comparison sites in Benin, Rwanda, Tanzania and Pakistan were purposefully selected to meet the
following three criteria:
sites that were not implementing Right To Play activities
sites that matched the selected program sites as closely as possible, in terms of their
characteristics, context and population demographics
sites that were located far enough away from the Right To Play sites to ensure that children
involved in Right To Play activities would not be interacting and imparting lessons on the
comparison site children.
Table 2. Participating Right To Play and comparison sites, by number and location
Country Group Location(s)
Schools
# Old New
Benin
Right To Play Cotonou, Allada, Tori 10 5 5
Comparison Cotonou, Allada, Tori 5
Ghana Right To Play Assikuma, Keta, Wa 6 0 6
Rwanda
Right To Play Bugersera, Kigali, Rubavu 10 4 6
Comparison Bugersera, Kigali, Rubavu 5
Mali Right To Play
Bougouni, Bamako, Koulikoro,
Segou
6 0 6
Liberia Right To Play Bong, Margibi, Montserrado 10 8 2
Tanzania
Right To Play Morogoro, Dar es Salaam 10 4 6
Comparison Morogoro, Dar es Salaam 5
Mozambique Right To Play
Maputo Province
(Namahacha), Gaza Province
(Xai-Xai), Gaza Province
(Chokwe), Zambezia Province
(Namacurra)
14 10 4

Pakistan
Right To Play
Mansehra, Mardan, Pehsawar,
Thatta, Umerkot
5 0 5
Comparison
Mansehra, Mardan, Peshawar,
Thatta, Umerkot
2
*“Old” and “new” denote existing versus new Right To Play partner schools under PAQE.
2.2 DATA COLLECTION TOOLS
A mixed-methods data collection approach was used to collect the baseline data from all eight countries,
with the following tools utilized:
Girls’ Survey
Child Survey
Focus Group Discussions with children, youth and parents
Measure the Change Activities (MCA) with children and youth1
Classroom observations
Semi-structured, key informant interviews with teachers, school administrators, education
officials and country offices
Safe space audits
Community Initiatives Mapping
Community Initiatives Tracking
Community Play Space Audit
Document Review
All of the tools were first reviewed to ensure contextual relevance and appropriateness, and then
translated and back-translated, so they could be conducted in the language most familiar to the
participants. Translators were engaged to translate in circumstances where the facilitators did not speak
the local language.
Girls Survey
To understand gender equality and access to education across all eight countries, a survey was developed
specifically for girls aged 9 and over with the intent of assessing the following:
Decision making as related to access to education
Barriers to education for girls, varying by culture and context
Parental, caregiver, and/or community support for girls’ education
1 Measure the Change Activities (MCA) are a qualitative data collection method that use games, drama/role play,
writing, or art to enable participants to creatively demonstrate what they have learned, or to express the changes
that have occurred in their lives as a result of participating in program. MCAs often include a group discussion
component, where experiences and learning can be explored more deeply with the participants.

Child Survey
To understand children’s socio-emotional and cognitive development, leadership practices, perceptions
of and participation in school and attitudes related to gender equality, a survey was developed with
composite questions and collected from children across all 8 countries. Both the Child Survey and Girls
Survey have existed in various revisions over a number of years in Right To Play, stemming from work
done under a university partnership in 2011-12.
Focus Group Discussions
To provide a more detailed understanding of outcome areas, focus group discussions were conducted
with children and parents. Participants were identified and invited in advance to take part in the
discussions. Efforts were taken to engage participants that represented both genders.
Measure the Change Activity
Groups of 10-15 children and youth, across all eight countries in the Right To Play group participated in
Measure The Change Activities (MCA) to provide Right To Play with a deeper understanding of:
gender roles, and gender differences in decision-making with regards to access to education;
gender differences with regards to the perception of support from parents, caregivers and
community members to attend school;
and the recognition of children’s rights (both genders) by parents, caregivers and community
members.
One arts-based activity (Boy-Girl Mapping) and one role-play exercise (Public Service Announcement)
were used to measure these outcomes, each accompanied by a group reflection and discussion.
Classroom Observations
Classroom observations in Right To Play group sites in Mozambique, Pakistan, Tanzania, Ghana, Liberia,
Mali and Rwanda were conducted to assess physical safety, emotional well-being, and the use of child-
centered teaching methodologies in the classroom. In Rwanda and Pakistan, classroom observations were
also conducted in comparison schools.
Semi-structured, key informant interviews
This mixed-methods tool was conducted in order to further understand the perspectives of teachers,
school administrators and education officials on:
Training and mentorship plans for teachers and school administrators;
The availability of learning and training materials that address play-based techniques in
classrooms and schools;
Access to equipment that support the integration of play-based learning;
Confidence in, and abilities to implement child-centered, play-based learning methodologies;
Presence and level of life and leadership skills among children
Play-based learning approaches in education strategies, annual plans and priorities at all levels
The relevance of play-based methodologies in relation to national education priorities and
practices

Government awareness and support for the gender-sensitive, child-centered play based learning
approaches
Safe space audits
This tool was conducted in schools across all eight countries and the majority Right To Play group sites to
better understand the physical and emotional safety, as well as gender-sensitivity, of learning
environments (including classrooms, play spaces, and hygiene facilities).
Community Initiatives Mapping
This tool was conducted with teachers, parents and children as a facilitated discussion group using a large
format map to measure the degree to which schools are implementing plans and systems to advance
emotional and physical safety of learning environments, and the degree of community-led initiatives that
promote children’s rights and girls’ education.
Community Initiatives (Event) Tracking
The Community Initiatives (Event) Tracking tool is designed to measure outcomes related to the 1200
series of the PAQE program, particularly related to community events, and child and youth leadership.
Community Play Space Audit
This tool was used to assess the physical infrastructure at schools where children could play and includes
such things as indoor and outdoor playgrounds and play spaces, and the type of activities that schools
were doing to improve the infrastructure with the support of Right To Play.
2.3 DATA ANALYSIS
Data analysis for each outcome indicator measured in the Phase One baseline evaluation was conducted
as follows:
1102. Extent to which schools are implementing strategies to advance emotional and physical safety of
learning environments.
Semi-structured interviews with teachers were used to ask if there was anything they were doing to make
the schools safer for their children. Frequency analysis was presented in specific country reports and
high-level summaries have been provided for this indicator in this report.
1103. Extent to which gender sensitive child-centered play-based approaches are applied in classrooms.
The outcomes related to this indicator were assessed through the classroom observation tool, semi-
structured interviews with teachers and child survey for triangulation. The classroom observations were
conducted using a four-point scale to assess the level of child-centered and play-based learning practices
that were observed. Level A was considered to be the highest (i.e. most desired) option. Level B
definitions were considered to be sufficiently positive and on track, but with some room still for further

development. Level C or D were considered to be either undesired occurrences or not yet ‘sufficiently’
child-friendly and/or child-centered. Teachers were considered to be using these methods if they receive
an A or B in the observation. The scores in the report represent the weighted average percentage of Level
A or B scores reported in the classroom observations. To explore an alternative conservative performance
standard for measuring this, data on teachers who met the A or B criteria for all of the variables in the
composite score has also been provided.
Additionally, for triangulation self-reported data from the semi-structured interviews with teachers on
the frequency of use of play-based techniques is also presented wherein “use” is considered if the
techniques are reported as used daily or sometimes. This has been further complemented by children’s
data from the Child Survey on their teachers’ approachability in situations when something is not
understood in class, they have problems at home or need extra tutoring.
1201. Perception of parental and community support for access to education by girls.
Three tools were used to assess the current status of these outcome areas. The girls survey explored girls’
perceptions of being supported by their parents in accessing education including their perceptions of how
important it is to their mother/father that they attend school and whether their mother/father provide
support for education in the following areas: asking about school or school work, helping with studying or
homework, paying school fees or buying school supplies or books, attending events at school (play-days),
attending meetings at school (e.g. parent/teacher committees), talking to the teacher about school work,
and talking to their child about what they want to study in the future or what they want to do when they
grow up. Questions 7- 11 from the Girls Survey were used to calculate a composite score out of 23. All
data has been presented as a percentage score.
Focus group discussions with children further explored perceptions of the importance of education
amongst mothers and fathers. Focus group discussions with parents explored perceptions of why it is
important for their child to access education.
1203. Number and type of community-led initiatives that promote children’s rights and girls’ education
The status of this indicator was explored at baseline through focus group discussions with parents.
Questions explored whether anyone (person or organization) in the community was doing anything to
make school better for children, to help more children go to school, or to stay in school longer. Questions
also explored whether anyone (person or organization) was doing anything to improve children’s rights in
the community.
For quantitative reporting, Q 2, 6, 10, 15 and 22 were used from the Community tracking log to measure
the number of events held in each country that were specific to promoting children’s rights and girls’
education.

1302. Perception of Education Officials (national and local levels) and Civil Society Organizations on the
level of relevance of play-based methodologies in relation to national education priorities and practices.
The status of this indicator was explored at baseline through thematic analysis of semi-structured key
informant interviews with Education Officials and national government representatives. Additional data
from the Advancing Health, Education and Development (AHEAD) program evaluation was used during
the analysis.
1111. Number and percent of trained pre-primary, primary teachers, principals and school administrators
demonstrating increased knowledge as they progress through the continuum of training on gender-
sensitive, child-centered, play-based learning techniques.
Three types of tools were used to assess the status of this indicator: semi-structured interviews with
teachers, semi-structured interviews with school administrators, and classroom observations.
In the semi-structured interviews, teachers and school administrators were presented with common
scenarios of ‘poor’ or disruptive behaviours amongst children – i.e. boys teasing girls in the classroom, or
if they find out a child was being abused by an adult – and were asked to describe how they respond
when the occurrence happens in their classroom or schoolyard. The enumerators then checked off the
corresponding response category that aligned with the answer. In this way, the questions were presented
as open-ended, but the answers were quantifiable. Responses included a form of respectfully discussing
the behaviour with the child, redirecting the child on a more positive behaviour, and doing something
with the class to promote gender inclusion were scored as ‘positive responses’. Positive Responses for
each of the sub-questions were as follows: 1.1 & 1.5: d & e;
1,4,1.6: d,e,f; 1.3: d,e,g; 1.7: d,e,f,h,i; 1.8:d,e,f,h,I,j. Responses that included a form of physical
punishment, yelling, shaming or embarrassing the child, or excluding the child from classroom activities
were considered ‘negative responses’. Negative responses were scored as follows: 1.1-1.5: a,b,c; 1.6-
a,b,c,h,g; 1.7 and 1.8- a,b,c,g. Respondents could thus attain a maximum score of 27 for “Positive learning
environment” and a maximum score of 6 for “Play-Based Learning.” The composite score for knowledge
was subsequently calculated as an average of the two domains and is presented as percentages for each
domain and overall composite scores. It is important to note that while the indicator language according
to the PMF demands “number and percent” of teachers, this measurement technique presents the data
as average percent scores. Discussions on how to best address this indicator are underway.

1112. Number and percentage of trained pre-primary, primary teachers, principals and school
administrators accessing learning and training materials that address play-based techniques in classrooms
and schools
The status of this indicator was assessed through semi-structured interviews with teachers and school
administrators. Participants were asked whether they use and have access to: games that are specific to
the subjects they teach; games that could be general for any subject they teach; play-based lesson
planning templates; and, sports and play equipment. Percentage of respondents reporting access and use
has been presented specifically for each material type across the countries, as well as an average of
access and use across the different groups of material.
1113. Level of confidence of trained teachers, principals and school administrators in their ability to apply
child-centered play-based techniques in schools.
The status of this indicator was assessed through semi-structured interviews with teachers and school
administrators. Specifically, participants were asked how confident they feel in their ability to use play-
based activities to teach and whether their confidence has changed in the last year. Quantitatively, only
those respondents self-reporting as having confidence levels of 4 or 5 were categorized as being
confident.
1122. Number and percentage of teacher-trainers and education officials who demonstrate increased
knowledge about training on gender sensitive, play-based learning.
No relevant data was collected to demonstrate this indicator. In addition to teacher-trainers not being an
identified sample in the dataset, questions in the education official SSKII relate to their perceptions of
gender-sensitive, play-based learning, rather than their knowledge of training, as this indicator is seeking
to demonstrate. The language of this indicator was changed between the Phase 1 and Phase 2 data
analysis.
1132. Perceptions of teachers, parents and children of the presence of learning-related life skills
Thematic analysis was conducted for three tools were used to assess the status of this indicator: semi-
structured interviews with teachers, focus group discussions with children, and focus group discussions
with parents.
1104. # and % of children and youth that demonstrate life skills in classrooms and schools
This indicator was assessed through data from the Child Survey and semi-structured interviews with
teachers. Children’s self-reported data on a range of questions were used to measure the following
domains as outlined in the tool: Self Confidence: 1, 2, 3,4; Emotions: 5,6,7,8; Collaboration: 9, 10;
Communication: 11,12,13,14; Inclusion: 15,16,17 and Inclusion of divergent groups: 18,19,20,21. Based

on the responses, scores were dichotomized as present or absent for each life skill and has been
presented as percentages of children demonstrating each skill across the countries.
This has been triangulated with data from the teachers’ interviews on their perceptions of how often
students demonstrate communication, confidence and teamwork skills in their classrooms. Percentages
of teachers reporting their students as frequently demonstrating these life skills have been categorized as
“mid-high” levels while infrequent or no demonstration has been categorized as “none-low”.
1141. Number and percentage of schools that provide physically safe, gender-appropriate facilities
As part of the PAQE program, gender sensitive, inclusive, and safe play spaces, classrooms and sanitation
facilities will be rehabilitated through a community and school-led process. To monitor and evaluate this
outcome, the standards in the safe space audit tool allow us to measure the physical and emotional
safety of these learning environments, and work to address infrastructure needs.
The outcomes related to this indicator were assessed through the safe spaces audit. To establish a
baseline against which to measure positive improvements to these spaces, safety audits were conducted
on schools within the sample communities. Spaces were assessed against specified standards within each
of the following four categories: general school environment including security threats and potential
hazards, classroom conditions, indoor play spaces, outdoor play spaces and access to latrines.
To calculate the overall assessment score for this indicator, all schools were measured out of 24 -
maximum score possible if schools met all the safety and gender-inclusive standards. To address gender
inclusion, a composite score out of 3 was calculated based on meeting standards in Questions 1.7, 5.3
and 5.7 of the Safe Space Audit. All scores are presented as percentages. Lastly, the proportion of schools
implementing any sensitization or infrastructure improvement events has been reported as a percentage.
While the three categories were separately presented in the country reports, for the sake of the global
report, an average of the three domains has been presented.
Right To Play acknowledges that it may not be able to address the safety issues within each of these
areas, as some may be beyond the influence of the Right To Play program (e.g. security threats).
However, these categories were included in the audit to ensure that the process captured a more
comprehensive picture of the safety of play-spaces that children are accessing.
1221. # and % of children and youth with awareness of education barriers within the community, particularly
related gender equality.
This indicator was measured using child survey data that asked how frequently they faced certain barriers
to schooling. Children were considered “aware” of barriers if they responded that the barriers asked about
are either “always” or “sometimes” (A or B) a reason why students don’t attend school. A summary score
was produced from these new binary (0/1) awareness variables that gave a number for how many barriers
each of the students was “aware” of and if they scored 4+ (out of 7). This allows us to arrive at a percentage
of students who are aware of barriers which has been presented in the report.

For further triangulation, data from the girls’ survey assessing the level of safety girls experience in different
situations in their schools has been dichotomized as follows: Q. 21, 22 , 24 and 25: safe= A, unsafe = B; Q.
23: safe = A + B, unsafe = C + D. This has been presented as aggregated percentages within the report.
1222. Level of life & leadership skills acquired by children.
Focus group discussions with children and parents were used to identify descriptions and examples of the
kinds of things children have done to address problems in their school or community.
1322. Level of awareness of government partners of child-centered, play-based methodologies to improve
teacher practice and education quality
The status of this indicator was measured through thematic analysis of responses from semi-structured,
key informant interviews with Education Officials.
1114. Increased access among teachers, principals, and school administrators to knowledge sharing and
mentorship opportunities on play-based methodologies (through networks, communities of practice, etc.)
This indicator was measured through data from the interviews with teachers and school administrators
when they were asked if they discussed the use of play-based activities with other teachers within schools
and with other schools. Proportions of teachers and school admins reporting discussion have been listed
as percentages.
An overall note on disaggregation:
Disaggregated data for the quantitative and qualitative indicators has been highlighted wherever relevant
and statistically meaningful. This analysis was not completed if sample sizes were too small (<20 in each
disaggregated group or in the overall sample). Barring that, disaggregation was done wherever possible
and significant:
By existing and new Right To Play schools
By the Right To Play (Intervention) and Comparison group for Benin, Rwanda, Tanzania and
Pakistan.
By Males and Females (Child and Teachers)
By Urban vs. Rural
By Grade

5.0 BASELINE EVALUATION RESULTS
The PAQE Baseline evaluation measured progress towards a range of indicators under the following
overarching outcome series:
1100: Improved positive participatory and gender-sensitive learning environments that promote
play-based learning
1200: Improved commitment of community stakeholders to address barriers to education
1300: Enhanced policy and regulatory environment for the delivery of gender sensitive, child-
centered, play-based learning policies and practices across communities.
The results of the baseline evaluation are presented below according to the themes of the indicators. The
themes are: national education indicators; emotional and physical safety of learning environments; the
application of gender-sensitive, child-centered play-based approaches; life skills of children; girls’
education; plans and strategies; coaches; community leadership and children’s’ rights; civil society partners;
and education barriers. The number for each indicator is allocated according to the particular series it
belongs to. Please see the PAQE Performance Measurement Framework for more information.
National Education Indicators
This series of indicators provides an overall picture on attendance and promotion rates across the
country. Attendance rates varied across the countries with Pakistan on the lower end with a mean
attendance rate of 59% and Rwanda on the higher end with 98%. Rwanda and Tanzania were the only
countries for which females had a higher completion rate than males, and in Tanzania’s case even a
higher attendance rate. Please refer to the tables at the end of this section for attendance rates,
completion rates and promotion rates.
Benin
Benin had a median attendance rate compared to the rest of the countries at 84%. The Right To Play
group had a higher attendance rate compared to the comparison group (86% vs. 83%). CE2 grade
attendance was higher (86%) than CE1 (83%). Existing schools had higher attendance rates (86.8%) vs.
new schools (82.9%).
When triangulated with girls’ survey data, across the board, girls reported that they rarely or never miss
school (highest 78% with existing Right To Play schools and lowest was 73% among new Right To Play
schools).
Ghana
The mean attendance rates among male and female students in Ghana were comparable at 78% & 79%
respectively. In terms of grade, attendance rates were higher for Grade 5 (~83%) and lowest for Grade 1
(~70%) with the middle grades averaging at 78%.
When triangulated with girls’ survey data across the board, the highest proportion of girls (56%) reported
that they rarely or never missed school, but when asked if they wished they could attend school more
regularly, up to 81% wished they could.
Liberia

No attendance data was obtained for Liberia. Among 242 girls surveyed, 90.5% expressed that they
wished to attend school more regularly. Approximately 65% of these girls reported missing at least one or
more days of school per week.
Mali
In Mali, attendance rates were comparable among male and female students, but differed between rural
and urban students (96.8% vs. 99.3%).
When data from the girls’ survey was examined, Grade 4 students reported missing school most
frequently and 100% of them expressed that they wish they could attend school more often. In
comparison, Grade 5 and Grade 6 students reported lesser levels of absence from school. 63% of Grade 5
students and 53% of Grade 6 students wished they could attend school more regularly.
Mozambique
Mean attendance data from Mozambique revealed an overall rate of almost 77% which did not vary by
child gender but illustrated some differences by Right To Play school type. Males and females had similar
attendance rates of 76.7% and 76.1% respectively. However, the new Right To Play schools’ data showed
higher rates with 88%, compared to existing schools with an attendance rate of 73%. Data for
disaggregation by grade and urban/rural were not available partly due to time limitations in obtaining
data from the Ministry of Education.
The data from the girls’ survey (N=543) reflects the overwhelming majority of 79% of girls expressing
their desire to attend school more regularly.
Pakistan
Mean attendance rates from Pakistan are relatively low compared to other countries at 59.1% with
higher rates among male students (61.3%) than females (55.3%). There was no linear relationship
between grade and attendance but it’s worth noting that the ECE class had the lowest mean attendance
of 52.3%. Finally, the Right To Play program group had higher baseline attendance compared to the
Comparison group (61.3% vs. 51.4%).
Data from the girls’ survey corroborates the findings from the school records attendance as illustrated by
the 88% of girls expressing their desire to attend school more regularly. Following the patterns in the
attendance rates, 53% of comparison group students said they often missed one day of school a week
compared to 33% of Right To Play students.
Rwanda
Overall, Rwanda had much higher attendance rates than other program countries based on school
records data at 98.6%. The rates did not appear to differ significantly between Right To Play and
comparison schools (98.7% vs. 98.4%). Data in school records did not provide gender or grade
information.
Self-reported data from the Children’s Survey however reveals a different picture when it comes to
children’s desires of attending school more frequently. Over 99% of comparison group students and 95%
of Right To Play group students expressed their desire to attend school more frequently than they do. In
both groups, the largest proportion of students reported missing a few days of school a week (~ 41% in
both groups).

Tanzania
Overall, Tanzania’s attendance rates were an average of 78% with no significant differences by gender.
Comparison group attendance was slightly higher at 80% than the Right To Play group’s attendance at
78%. Attendance patterns across the grades revealed a slight decrease as the grades increased from
Grade 4 to Grade 6 (82% vs. 77% vs. 76%).
About 93% of comparison group students and 97% of Right To Play group students expressed their desire
to attend school more frequently than they do. However, when Right To Play students were asked about
how often they miss school, 70% claimed they never did, compared to 6% in the comparison group
schools for this indicator. This suggests that Right To Play school children may have a desire to attend
school even more regularly than their current levels.

1000. Improved educational attainment and participation of girls and boys, aged 2-152
Table 1: National Completion Rates across all Right To Play Countries
[Source: UNESCO UIS]
Male Female Overall
Benin 82.4% 70.2% 76.4%
Ghana 97.5% 95.6% 96.5%
Liberia 63.5% 54.0% 58.8%
Mali 56.0% 50.0% 53.1%
Mozambique 50.6% 44.6% 47.6%
Pakistan 80.0% 67.0% 73.7%
Rwanda 61.0% 72.1% 66.6%
Tanzania 70.2% 77.1% 73.7%
Table 2: Promotion Rates for Male and Female Children
[Source: School Records]
Male Female Overall
Benin 60.1% 58.5% 59.3%
Ghana 88.6% 89.3% 86.0%
Liberia 82.6% 80.9% 81.8%
Mali 59.8% 56.1% 57.9%
Mozambique N/A3
N/A N/A
Pakistan 80.4% 77.6% 78.6%
Rwanda N/A4
N/A N/A
Tanzania N/A5
N/A N/A
2
Data for Out-of-School Children (OOSC) varied between reports from Right To Play country offices and the
UNESCO’s online database and included a mixture of percentages and total numbers. Please refer to the individual
country reports for more information on OOSC.
3
Promotion data was not available for Mozambique. In 2013, the primary to secondary transition rate was 61.5%
for both sexes and survival to the last grade of primary education was 30.8% for both sexes.
4
Promotion data was not available for Rwanda. In 2012, the primary to secondary transition rate was 74.9% for
both sexes. In 2013, survival to the last grade of primary education was 34.8% for both sexes.
5
Promotion data was not available for Tanzania. In 2012, the primary to secondary transition rate was 56.3% for
both sexes. In 2013, survival to the last grade of primary education was 66.7% for both sexes.

1101. Attendance Rates
Table 3 : Mean Total Attendance Rates across Teacher
Gender for all Countries6
[Source: School Records]
Male Female Overall
Benin 84.8 83.2 84.0
Ghana 78.0 79.1 79.0
Liberia N/A N/A N/A
Mali 98.8 97.9 98.1
Mozambique 76.7 76.1 76.9
Pakistan 66.2 55.3 59.1
Rwanda N/A N/A 98.6
Tanzania 77.8 78.9 78.4
*Overall % here includes comparison groups for relevant countries.
For differences between Right to Play & Comparison groups, please
refer to Table 24 in the Appendix.
Emotional and Physical Safety of Learning Environments
As part of the PAQE program, gender sensitive, inclusive, and safe play spaces, classrooms and sanitation
facilities will be rehabilitated through a community and school-led process. The following indicators relate
to the emotional and physical safety of learning environments for children across program types.
1142. # and % of schools with strategies to advance emotional and physical safety of learning
environments
The Right To Play country offices were asked to report on the number of percentage of schools with
strategies or plans7
for child protection and safeguarding, gender equality, and maintenance and safety of
physical works. Benin did not provide data for this indicator. Mali, Mozambique, Rwanda, Ghana and
Pakistan reported that no schools had existing strategies or plans related to this indicator. Tanzania
reported that out of 15 schools (including comparison schools), all have existing strategies from the
national level. The extent of those strategies being implemented at the school level was not elaborated
6
Grade data for Benin was not available in the same format as other countries. Attendance data for Liberia was
not available. Attendance data for Rwanda was not available by child gender
7
The terms ‘plan’ and ‘strategy’ were often used interchangeably in the various tools and responses without a clear
definition of each.

upon by the country office. In Liberia, it was reported that 5 schools have existing plans or strategies on
child protection and safeguarding, 5 schools have gender equality plans or strategies, and 9 schools have
maintenance and safety of physical works plans or strategies. No information was provided about the
characteristics of the schools with plans or strategies in Liberia.
1102. Extent to which schools are implementing strategies to advance emotional and physical
safety of learning environments8
Right To Play conducted an assessment of the national education system in most countries—except for
Pakistan—as part of an earlier evaluation of the Advancing Health, Education and Development (AHEAD)
program for children and youth. The assessment documented the various ways that Right To Play has
been engaged in these countries, including working with government to assist schools in implementing
strategies to advance emotional and physical safety of learning environments. Results related to
strategies to advance emotional and physical safety of learning environments from the assessment
reports and country office reports9
are presented below.
Overall, there was very little mention of specific strategies related to this indicator. Rwanda’s assessment
mentioned UNICEF’s Child Friendly School (CFS) standards and its adoption by the government which
provides one example of a possible strategy, however, there was no evidence to show the extent to which
this strategy has been implemented or how widely used the CFS standards are within each school.
Further research for this indicator could explore whether the PAQE countries have recognized,
implemented, and measured UNICEF’s CFS standards.
While no strategies or plans were reported in Ghana, the country office provided some information on
the possible extent of schools advancing emotional and physical safety of learning environments (see
below). Benin did not provide data for this indicator. The country offices in Mali, Mozambique, and
Pakistan did not provide information on the extent of any strategies or plans, or the extent of schools
advancing emotional and physical safety of learning environments. The results of this indicator should be
interpreted with caution due to limited data10
.
In one reported instance in Rwanda, a school administrator suggested using physical punishment in a
scenario where a child has taken something from another child without asking and if a group of boys
were teasing a group of girls in the classroom. Whether or not this school had a plan or strategy for
emotional and physical safety, this measure could be used in combination with others to indicate the
extent to which schools are advancing emotional and physical safety of learning environments and
whether plans or strategies contributed to it.
8
In the PMF, additional baseline data from Phase 1 is included under this indicator for “training and mentoring
strategies” and “play-based learning strategies”
9
The country office reported for this indicator through document reviews and interviews with staff.
10
Please refer to Right To Play’s National Education Policy Assessment reports for each country for an in-depth
review of policies that could relate to this indicator.

Ghana
The country office reported that most of the heads of institutions shared some thoughts with respect to
how they ensure children are protected, for example, restrictions in the use of canes and child protection
clubs to enhance knowledge of students. Additionally, they reported that some schools had their Parent
Teacher Associations occasionally support the rehabilitation of school facilities.
Liberia
The country office reported a ‘low’ extent of child protection and safeguarding, and gender equality. They
also reported that Liberia has a Girls’ Education Policy that seeks to: consolidate national and
international laws to promote girls’ education and to advance priorities that will accelerate progress in
improving girls’ education; and eliminate the gap between the girl child and the boy child in completing
primary, secondary and tertiary school by ensuring that girls are provided scholarships and other
supports. The extent of countries implementing the strategies on the maintenance and safety of physical
works was reported to be ‘medium’ where there is some mention of strategies but the approaches are
not elaborated.
Rwanda
In 2009, Rwanda’s Ministry of Education adopted UNICEF’s Child Friendly School (CFS) standards as the
minimum quality standards for all schools across the country. In regards to infrastructure, the four main
standards of CFS that schools must have are: appropriate, sufficient, and secure buildings; a healthy,
clean, secure, and learner protected environment; a child-friendly, barrier free environment which
promotes inclusive access and equal rights of every child; and adequate and appropriate equipment that
supports the level of education. The extent to which schools have implemented and following these
standards were not reported on, but provide a basis from which this indicator can be measured.
Tanzania
The country office reported that there is a child protection and safeguarding policy at the national level
which requires all schools to implement strategies on child protection and safeguarding that is in accord
with The Law of the Child Act which highlights the fundamental rights of children and lays the foundation
for a child protection system that will prevent and respond to violence, abuse and the exploitation of
children. Gender equality is a priority and mainstreaming strategy at the national level and highlights
major challenges in the realization of gender equality in Tanzania. The national strategy offers guidance to
implementers on effective ways to incorporate gender concerns into all activities and further identifies
education as a key sector of concern. Strategies to ensure equal opportunities for girls and boys in
education include expanding infrastructure and facilities at schools as well as sensitizing and motivating
community members on gender equality.
The country office also reported that the role of Right To Play has changed to be seen more as a
development partner recently due to support on infrastructure improvements like classrooms, latrines,
desks, and water and sanitation support. Right To Play has also been invited to meetings among other
development stakeholders.

1141. # and % of schools that provide physically safe, gender-appropriate facilities
Safe Space Audits were conducted by Right To Play to measure outcomes related to the 1100 series of
the PAQE program, particularly related to school environments. To monitor and evaluate these outcomes,
the standards in the safe space audit tool allow us to measure the physical and emotional safety of these
learning environments, and work to address infrastructure needs. Three questions in the Safe Space Audit
asked questions about the gender-appropriateness of the facilities.
Data from Indicator 1102 has been triangulated with the safe space audit in the following section. During
the teacher SSKIIs, teachers were asked whether they are doing some ‘overall activity’ in advancing
emotional and physical safety of their school environment.
In the countries of Benin, Ghana, Mozambique and Tanzania, the safe space audit score for physical
facilities was scored as much lower than the self-reports of the teachers which may indicate either a
limitation in the way the question was asked from teachers or in the safe space audit. It is also possible
that teachers’ efforts to provide a physically safe facility was still in the early stages of implementation
and a difference could not be measured yet.11
Table 4: Average percentage score of schools on assessment of their physical facilities, gender inclusion
and activities held for improvement of spaces12
Source: Safe Space Audits
Country
Physical Safety
Assessment Score13
Gender Inclusion
Assessment
Score
Community
Sensitization
Activities Composite Score
n(%)
Benin (N=15) 46.7% 8.9% 53.3% 36.3%
Ghana (N=4) 42.7% 25% 75% 47.6%
Liberia (N=10) 63.8% 50% 20% 41.9%
Mali (N= 13) 37.5% 46.2% 0% 27.9%
Mozambique (N=14) 25.0% 17% 29% 23.4%
Pakistan (N=17) 43.9% 12% N/A 27.9%
Rwanda (N=15) 62.8% 73% 27% 54.4%
Tanzania (N=15) 16.1% 20% 80% 38.7%
11
A recommendation for further investigation could be to triangulate the data from teachers with reports from
school administrators about the physical safety at their school, this is not currently being measured.
12
Given the small overall sample sizes for Safe Space Audits, the disaggregation by school type would not be
meaningful and has thereby not been provided.
13
In the country reports the ‘overall assessment’ data refers to the physical facilities score. The global report
includes composite scores for all 3 measures (physical facilities, gender inclusion and community sensitization
activities). This discrepancy between the country and global reports indicates a larger issues around inconsistencies
in terminology used between multiple iterations of tools and PMFs. The consultant recommends that prior to the
end-line analysis the language is harmonized across all tolls and guiding documents.

Benin
Using the safe space audits, Benin schools scored an average of 46.7% on physical facilities, 8.9% on
gender inclusion and about half (53.3%) of the schools reported conducting community sensitization
events related to physical and emotional safety of their schools.
Based on teacher interviews, 94% of teachers reported doing some overall activity to advance the
emotional and physical safety of their school environment. The most frequently cited activity was
teaching parents the importance of positive discipline with all 100% of teachers reporting on this. In
contrast, when it came to helping parents understand their children’s rights or initiatives specific to
increasing safety for girls, only 4% of teachers affirmed engaging in such activities.
Ghana
Using the safe space audits, Ghanaian schools scored an average of 42.7% on physical facilities, 25% on
gender inclusion and 75% of the schools reported conducting community sensitization events related to
physical and emotional safety of their schools.
Based on the teacher interviews, over 80% of teachers reported making overall efforts to advance the
emotional and physical safety of their schools for the students, with the highest proportion
spontaneously mentioning helping parents understand children’s rights and helping the children
themselves understand this. Only 3% of teachers mentioned initiatives specific to increasing safety of
girls.
Liberia
Using the safe space audits, Liberian schools scored an average of 63.8% on physical facilities, 50% on
gender inclusion and 20% of the schools reported conducting community sensitization events related to
Based on the teacher interviews, 58% of teachers reported doing something to address physical and
emotional safety of schools. Increasing the safety and security of schools was the most cited answer
(95%), followed by helping children feel safer on their walk to and from school. In contrast, only 15%
reported being involved in initiatives for specific activities addressed in the community and 0% mentioned
being involved with specific activities to improve the safety of girls.
Mali
Using the safe space audits, Malian schools scored an average of 37.5% on physical facilities, 46.2% on
gender inclusion and 0.0% of the schools reported conducting community sensitization events related to
Based on the teacher interviews, only 10% of teachers reported doing something to address the physical
and emotional safety of schools. Increasing the safety and security of schools and helping children feel
safer on walks to and from school were the most cited answers (30%). Female teachers in general
reported higher levels of actions undertaken, compared to male teachers. One stark difference is
observed when comparing 33% of female teachers mentioning some initiative specific to improving girls’
safety in schools, to 0% of male teachers.

Mozambique
Using the safe space audits, schools in Mozambique scored an average of 25% on physical facilities, 17%
on gender inclusion and 29% of the schools reported conducting community sensitization events related
to physical and emotional safety of their schools.
When teachers were interviewed about their initiatives to address emotional and physical safety in their
work, 76% affirmed that they engage in some activity. However, when it came to describing specific
initiatives, the highest reported prevalence was only at 18% for “increasing safety and security of children
at school.” Initiatives around increasing awareness of children’s rights among parents and children were
only reported by 11% of the group.
Pakistan
Using the safe space audit, schools in Pakistan scored an average of 44% on physical facilities, 12% on
gender inclusion. Community space inventory data was missing for Pakistan.
Among the Pakistani teachers sampled, only 26% confirmed addressing physical and emotional safety
through some initiatives or actions in their schools. None of the comparison group teachers however
addressed any specific activity in their responses. Comparatively, Right To Play teachers had some
responses (average of 5%) but it was only 1 respondent who cited four types of activities.
Rwanda
Using the safe space audits data, schools in Rwanda had an average score of 63% on physical facilities and
a promising 73% on gender inclusion. 27% of the schools reported conducting some initiatives around
advancing or promoting physical and emotional safety in their schools.
When teachers were interviewed about their initiatives to address emotional and physical safety in their
work, 77% affirmed that they engage in some activity. However, when it came to describing specific
initiatives, the highest reported prevalence was less than half the sample at 47% for “helping children feel
safer on walks to and from school”. On the other end, on average only 2% mentioned activities specific
for increasing safety for girls. On comparison of cumulative averages between groups, there were
minimal differences between male and female teachers, and Right To Play and comparison schools.
Tanzania
Using the safe space audits, Tanzanian schools scored an average of 16% on physical facilities and 20% on
gender inclusion. A great majority (80%) of the schools reported conducting community sensitization
events related to physical and emotional safety of their schools.
Based on teacher interviews, 51% of teachers reported participating in some overall activity in advancing
emotional and physical safety of their schools. The most frequently cited response was for specific
initiatives addressing girl’s safety (15%), followed by helping parents understand children’s rights (12%).
The differences between Right To Play teachers and Comparison group teachers were stark even at the
overall level (71% vs. 30%). Specifically, these differences were most pronounced for helping parents
understand positive discipline (15% vs. 4%), helping children understand their rights (15% vs. 0%) and
specific initiatives addressing girl’s safety (26% vs. 4%). Surprisingly, within Right To Play schools, the
teachers from the newer schools reported more activities than existing school teachers especially
for increasing safety and security of children, helping them feel safer on walks to and from school and any
specific initiatives addressing girls’ safety.

The Application of Gender-Sensitive, Child-Centered Play-Based
Approaches
National – Local Connection
This series of indicators relates to national and sub-national levels which explore high-level efforts for
supporting gender-sensitive, child-centered play-based approaches. Key participants include government
officials, education officials, Right To Play country office staff and civil society partners.
1301. Extent of play-based learning approaches in education strategies, annual plans and priorities
at local, district and national levels.14
Government officials at the national and district level, school administrators, and Right To Play country
offices were asked questions about the extent of play-based learning approaches in their respective
countries. Countries that reported AHEAD evaluation results typically provided more information for this
indicator, notably Ghana, which reported a relative high level of extent of play-based approaches, despite
reports from school administrators that they were not aware of any plans for this. Despite some early,
promising signs at the national policy level, the extent is relatively low across all other countries with only
some mention of plans or strategies by government officials and low reports of plans at the local level, as
reported by school administrators.
Benin
In an interview with a government official from the National Institute for Training and Research in
Education, they mentioned that through teacher network meetings and annual teachers’ seminars steps
have been taken to introduce ‘role play’ in the current education curriculum, however there is, “no game
manual available”.
When education officials (n=2) were asked whether they had a plan for training or mentoring teachers to
use play-based learning, both answered that they did not. The reason given was that they were not
prioritized during the teacher networks (séances d'unités pédagogiques). The officials also mentioned
that no other plans or strategies exist related to play-based learning in official responsibilities of district
officers, allocation of budget, policies, or school curriculum.
When school administrators (n=16) were asked whether they had a plan for training or mentoring
teachers to use play-based learning, all answered that they did not. Many of the reasons were that they
have not received the training yet. Another reason given was that they did not have the means (for
example, games or partners) to implement a play-based approach. While 4 out of the 10 Right To Play
14
The terms ‘plans’ and ‘strategies’ are used interchangeably throughout the various measures and has been noted
in the Performance Measurement Framework as needing to be consulted on with local stakeholders.

schools in Benin have trained all their teachers, only one school administrator mentioned that they didn’t
have a plan because the teachers were already trained.
No data was given by the Country Office in their document review.
Ghana
The country office in Ghana reported that active, learner-centered pedagogy is mentioned throughout
Ghana’s education policies and plans as a way of ensuring and delivering high quality education. The 2012
Ghana country report on Scaling up National Quality Education in Ghana noted that pre-primary and
lower primary education is supposed to be based on play and group activities including role plays, sports,
and games that strengthen the child’s health and socialization. The Ghana education policies applies both
for national and district levels. It was also mentioned that the Education Sector Plan Act 778 and the
Sustainable Development Goals (2030) highlights the use of play-based approaches to train teachers.
2 out of 3 education officials that were interviewed reported having a plan for training or mentoring
teachers on play-based learning in the classroom. The one education official that reported no plan in
place also mentioned that no plans were in progress. One of the education officials mentioned that
official responsibilities were given to “circuit supervisors” to enhance the ways that schools use play-
based learning. No other plans or strategies exist related to play-based learning in official responsibilities
of district officers, allocation of budget, policies, or school curriculum.
Interviews were conducted with national government representatives (n=6) for the AHEAD evaluation.
From the interviews, it was reported that steps have been taken toward integrating play-based learning
into the national education system, and play-based learning already appears in certain curricula,
guidelines, and training in Ghana, however one interviewee noted that more work is needed. One
interviewee noted that play-based learning should be integrated into the system, “through pre-service
and in-service training opportunities and through capacity-building programmes for institutionalized
structures and INSETs like District Teacher Support Teams (DTSTs), District Master Trainers (DMTs) and
Curriculum Leaders.” This interviewee also mentioned that “Even though, the structures are in place for
the in-service dimension, there is the need for capacity building. The same will also apply for the
impending training of trainers at the 7 Colleges of Education offering Early Childhood Education”.
5 out of the 6 national government representatives noted that policies, strategies, guidelines or programs
that support the use of play to advance educational priorities exist. Specific quotes from the
representatives are included:
“Play as a methodology is most appropriate at the KG and Lower primary level (1-3) as the
curriculum specifically spells out that at that level, the methodology should be strictly play based
with group work activities. These will enhance teaching and learning by making class more
interactive and help build a good foundation for the children.” Participant #1
“The GES curriculum considers play-based methodologies. It emphasizes the various dimensions of
learning by encouraging activities that promote the cognitive, emotional and social dimensions of
learning.” Participant #2
Despite high reports of play-based learning approaches at the national level, when school administrators
(n=6) were asked whether they have plans for training or mentoring teachers on play-based approaches,
all responded that they did not. Three of them mentioned that they did not have the necessary material

and one mentioned that they, “had no idea about this”. This could indicate that the early successes of
policies at the national level have not yet created an impact downstream at the local level.
Other plans, strategies and initiatives were mentioned to include elements of play-based learning,
including The Child Friendly School Model, the Education Strategic Plan, the SHEP Policy, policy for
kindergarten level and lower primary, and the School Health Education Unit. One of the participants also
mentioned that there is currently a process taking place to review and modify the syllabus/curriculum
and identify areas that play can be incorporated. One of the participants mentioned that low learning
outcomes and high drop-out rates prompted the government to integrate play-based learning. 4 out of
the 6 representatives noted that there are staff focused on play-based learning and/or Right To Play
within their office. All representatives noted that there’s no budget allocated to the integration process.
Liberia
When education officials (n=4) were asked whether they had a plan for training or mentoring teachers to
use play-based learning, all answered that they did not and there were no plans ‘in-progress’.
Additionally, no official responsibilities exist for district officers or other staff to enhance the ways that
schools use play-based learning.
In interviews with school administrators (n=10), 5 reported having a plan for training or mentoring
teachers on play-based learning and 2 reported having a plan for increasing the way play-based learning
is used in the classroom. Most of the comments for not having plans included a lack of resources
(including funding) and not receiving the directive from government officials.
Mali
In an interview with government officials conducted during the AHEAD evaluation, it was reported that
some changes towards the integration of play-based learning are already happening. Teachers have
started using the method while Pedagogical Advisers are monitoring; teachers now make lesson plans for
play sessions and use the reflect-connect-apply approach; and, a team has been set up to create toys and
other play materials for different games. The use of play-based learning is now part of the action plans of
the Directorate of Pre-primary Education and the National Institute for Youth and Sports; the
Kindergarten program provides for the use of play in teaching; and, the use of play is now included in
syllabuses for Physical Health Education and Sports, Natural Sciences, the Kindergarten curriculum and
early childhood caregivers manual.
Education officials (n=32) were asked whether they have plans for training or mentoring teachers on play-
based learning. 8 responded that they did and 3 responded that they were in-progress. When asked
whether they have a plan for increasing the way play-based learning is used in the classroom, 4
responded that they did and 2 responded that they were in-progress. For those that did not have a plan,
the most common reason was that there was no budget for it.
teachers on play-based learning and 1 reported having a plan for increasing the way play-based learning
is used in the classroom. A few mentioned that they are still at the beginning of the initiative and
partnership and, therefore, did not have a plan in place yet.
The Right To Play country office in Mali reported ‘no mention, or very little mention, of play-based
approaches’ at the national, district or local level.

Mozambique
The country office in Mozambique reported a low extent of play-based learning approaches in education
strategies, annual plans and priorities at local, district and national levels. Game and play-based
approaches are endorsed by the Ministry of Education and Human Development, and the Education
Sector Plans for grades 1 and 2, but not for grades 3 to 7.
In interviews with school administrators (n=7), one participant reported having a plan for training or
mentoring teachers on play-based learning in the classroom. No other details were given on this plan and
there was a significant amount of incomplete data for the education officials in Mozambique.
In interviews with national government officials (n=2), it was noted that they need evidence of results
first and then they would disseminate and integrate play-based learning into the curriculum. One official
also commented that there was more interest from the district and provincial government officials who
have participated in meetings and trainings organized by Right To Play. They support the reports of the
country office that there are no plans or strategies currently in place to integrate play-based learning.
Pakistan
The Right To Play country office reported that there are no specific play-based learning approaches in
education strategies, annual plans and priorities at local, district or national levels.
In interviews with school administrators (n=8), one participant reported having a plan for training or
mentoring teachers on play-based learning in the classroom. No other details were given on this plan.
One participant that mentioned not having a plan indicated that there is no planning mechanism for
primary schools because continuous change in policies prevents them from preparing training or
mentoring for teachers in school. Participants mentioned no other plans for increasing the way play-
based learning is used in the classroom. Two participants mentioned that they use play-based learning
activities twice weekly in their classroom, indicating that they may not have properly understood the
question, or that they do not need a plan to use play-based learning.
Rwanda
Right To Play has already seen success in the integration of play-based learning into the Rwanda
education system; and has supported the Rwanda Education Board (REB) to revise and update their
physical education curriculum to incorporate more learner-centered methodologies. The Physical
Education and Sport (PES) curriculum requires at least 1 period per week and the staff in charge of PES
curriculum can help colleagues on play-based learning. However, there are no special budget allocated to
support the use of play to advance educational priorities.
Right To Play has also been able to integrate its Holistic Child Development play-based module into the
new National Physical Education and Sport Guide that is being implemented in all primary schools in
Rwanda; and has provided technical expertise to the Ministry of Sport and Culture (MINISPOC) in
developing an Action Plan for Sport for Development. Physical Education teachers have started
implementing this new guide, which includes Right To Play games and methodology.
The Rwanda country office reported that there is some mention of play-based approaches, but
infrequently. Play-based approaches are not elaborated upon in a strategy, neither in a description of, nor
the implementation of, the approach.

Interviews with government officials reported that steps had been taken to integrate play-based learning
into the national education system, including the incorporation of play-based learning into the new
curriculum and other policies and guidelines. Other sport and play activities have also been incorporated
in the school calendar year with no additional details provided. A few government officials mentioned
that other than some budget to train teachers and head teachers on play-based methodologies, an
adequate budget for integration is lacking.
5 of the education officials (n=10) reported that there are official responsibilities for district officers or
other staff to enhance the ways that schools use play-based learning, however no policies, strategies,
guidelines or programs have been revised or created to support the use of play-based learning to advance
educational priorities. Some of the reasons given include the lack of training and materials.
teachers on play-based learning (with one ‘in-progress’) and 4 reported having a plan for increasing the
way play-based learning is used in the classroom.
Tanzania
According to the country office report, there are some mentions of play-based approaches, although
infrequently, at the national level which are not elaborated upon in a strategy, neither in a description of,
nor the implementation of, the approach. The Government of Tanzania recommended a child-centered
pedagogy as early as 1982 and the commitment was reinforced in the 2000s with instituted policies that
stipulate teachers should use pedagogical approaches that make learning interactive and engaging. The
Primary Education Development Plan III (2012-2016) acknowledges that child-centered pedagogy has still
not been achieved and that greater priority needs to be given to pre- and in-service teacher training to
equip teachers with the skills necessary to implement the competency-based primary curriculum
instituted in 2005.
There are some mentions of play-based approaches, although infrequently, at the local and district level
which are not elaborated upon in a strategy, neither in a description of, nor the implementation of, the
approach. Pre-primary education curriculum is based on participatory methods which emphasize the
child as the main performer in the process of teaching and learning, and teachers implementing activities
such as drawing, painting, story-telling, singing, sports, observation, rhymes, site visits and drama. The
availability of playgrounds is considered essential for this level of education.
Additionally, as part of the core primary syllabus, Tanzania has developed Haiba na Michezo or
Personality Development and Sport, which is a subject which uses physical education lessons as a way to
help children learn about basic life skills (NEPA).
The country office reported15
that out of 15 schools (including Right To Play schools and comparison
schools), all have existing strategies from the national level16
. 25% of existing schools have training and
15 Source: Country office document review
16 See Indicator 1142 for more information on the strategies

mentoring strategies ‘in progress.’17
None of the new Right To Play schools have training and mentoring
strategies ‘in-progress’ or play-based learning strategies “in progress”.
The school administrators sample included four from schools with existing Right To Play programs, and six
from schools with new Right To Play programs. Overall, 75% of school administrators from schools with
existing Right To Play programs had participated in Right to Play training. None of the school
administrators from schools with new Right To Play programs had participated in training.
100% of school administrators from schools with existing Right To Play programs reported that schools
had developed plans for training or mentoring teachers to use play-based learning in the classroom,
compared to 20% from schools with new Right To Play programs. All school administrators from schools
with training or mentoring plans reported that these plans were in progress. School administrators
reported that Right to Play had trained teachers in play-based approaches; no further details about
training or mentoring plans are provided, although one school administrator noted that it had improved
student attendance and performance. Most school administrators did not answer whether or not the
schools had plans to increase the ways that play-based learning is used in the classroom.
1302. Perception of education officials (national and local levels) and CSOs on the level of relevance
of play-based methodologies in relation to national education priorities and practices
Government officials and civil society organizations (CSOs) were asked about the perceived level of
relevance of play-based methodologies in relation to national education priorities and practices. The level
of reporting varied across countries for this indicator where some countries provided more information
possibly due to involvement in the AHEAD program (for example, Ghana) and in other countries, this
question was not consistently explored during data collection. Where there was not enough data to
answer this indicator specifically, results from other related questions are presented for some countries.
Ghana presented a more detailed report on the perception of education officials, possibly due to
involvement in the AHEAD program and evaluation, and includes some quotes to support their analysis of
the interviews18
.
Benin
In an interview with a government official from the National Institute for Training and Research in
Education, the official’s response indicated strong support in the relevance of play-based methodologies
in relation to national education priorities. They mentioned that, “The more the child is interested in what
the teacher is doing the more he would succeed in his study”.
17 Risk/data limitation from the PMF: Baseline value for existing schools is from a small sample (4 schools) so it may
not actually be representative of program results, and teams may wish to consider a more conservative target than
what the baseline is indicating.
18
The results of the AHEAD evaluation’s interviews with government officials were presented to the consultants for
this baseline report as a quasi-report that had been previously analyzed using unknown methods.

Education officials (n=2) were asked whether they had any plans or strategies in place to increase the way
that play-based learning is used in the classroom and to explain why or why not. None of the respondents
provided an explanation on the relevance in relation to national education priorities.
Ghana
The Right To Play country office in Ghana reported that the Ghana Education Service has shown a clear
consensus that Right To Play’s play-based methodology is adding value to pedagogical practice in Ghana
especially in the kindergarten and first cycle primary levels. The country office reported, as a clear
demonstration, that teachers use Right To Play’s structured resources often as part of their physical
education and health instruction which has been endorsed by Directors of Education and the District
Inspectorate team. Similarly, head teachers, District Education Directorates (Keta, Asikuma, Central
Tongu) and some GES officials continue to send in requests to Right To Play to help train teachers under
their purview on how to integrate the games into the regular classroom program in order to help achieve
curriculum requirements and create a more child-centered, participatory environment for teaching and
learning.
Education officials (n=3) were asked whether they had any plans or strategies in place to increase the way
that play-based learning is used in the classroom and to explain why or why not. None of the respondents
provided an explanation on the relevance in relation to national education priorities.
Interviews were conducted with national government representatives (n=6) for the AHEAD evaluation. All
representatives felt that play can help support national education priorities.
“I think that given the fact that student engagement is heightened with play, one very important
benefit that play offers to education nation-wide is enhancing academic performance. If classes
are interesting, then children will be more willing to learn.” Participant #5
“Play as a learning/teaching method enhances high enrolment, retention and completion and
therefore ensures the EFA (Education For All) goals.” Participant #4
“Children learn through playing and so it would bring variety in teaching and learning. It will make
teaching and learning more interesting which will arouse and sustain the interest of children. In
the school setting, there should be a place as well as facilities for play. The Ghana Child Friendly
School Model recommends this initiative.” Participant #6
“Play as a learning and teaching method can contribute to the advancement of GES priorities,
however, there are limited opportunities available to our children at the moment.” Participant #2
Liberia
A government official reported that play as a learning and teaching method could, “to a large extent”,
help the advancement of national education priorities because, “play will make learning easier for
children” and by, “ensuring a solid foundation for children”.
Mali
In an interview with government officials, conducted during the AHEAD evaluation, it was reported that
play-based learning is perceived as contributing to national development priorities, especially in terms of

PAQE Baseline Evaluation Report-FINAL

PAQE Baseline Evaluation Report-FINAL

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to PAQE Baseline Evaluation Report-FINAL

Similar to PAQE Baseline Evaluation Report-FINAL (20)

PAQE Baseline Evaluation Report-FINAL