FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
EDUCATION SUPPORT PROGRAM (ESP) 
USAID/EGYPT
April 2015 
This publication was prepared at the request of the US Agency for International Development. It was prepared by 
DevTech Systems, Inc. and its subcontractor, The QED Group LLC, under Order No. AID-263-0-15-00009.
FINAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF THE 
EDUCATION SUPPORT PROGRAM (ESP) 
USAID/EGYPT 
Submitted to: USAID/Egypt COR, Jana Wooden 
Prepared by: Ahmed Gabr, Megan Gavin, Virginia Lambert, and Sherine Mourad 
Cover photo: Credit to Ahmed Gabr, the photograph is of students and teachers in an ESP supported 
school. 
April 2015 
DISCLAIMER: 
The authors’ views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States 
Agency for International Development or the United States Government. 
This page is intentionally left blank
ACRONYMS 
AIR American Institute for Research
ATs Assistant Teachers
BOTAT Board of Trustees Assessment Tool
BOTs Boards of Trustees
ERP Education Reform Program
ESP Education Support Program
IR Intermediate Results
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MOE Ministry of Education
OIG Office of the Inspector General
PAT Professional Academy for Teachers
PMP Performance Monitoring Plan
RR Remedial Reading
SCOPE Standards-based Classroom Observation Protocol for Egypt
SWD Social Work Department
TOT Training of Trainers
USAID US Agency for International Development
i 
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
The USAID/Egypt Education Support Program (ESP) was a three-year nationwide activity of support to 
the Ministry of Education (MOE) to restore stability and build the quality of the public education system 
in the period immediately following the January 2011 revolution. At the conclusion of the ESP (January 
31, 2015), USAID/Egypt contracted DevTech Systems Inc. (DevTech) and its subcontractor The QED 
Group, LLC (QED) to conduct the final performance evaluation of the program. 
The evaluation objectives were: (1) to review analyze, and evaluate the effectiveness of USAID-funded 
ESP activities in achieving program objectives and completing deliverables; and, (2) to provide specific 
recommendations and lessons learned to ensure that future funding for capacity-building in the areas 
for Boards of Trustees (BOTs), teacher training, and remedial reading are directed to activities that have 
the highest potential to achieve improved and sustainable results. 
The evaluation was carried out in February and March 2015, by a team of four evaluators, two from the 
United States and two from Egypt. USAID/Egypt identified six questions to frame the evaluation: 
 To what extent has the project been able to achieve its planned overall objectives? 
 To what extent has BOT participation increased, in terms of effective school management? 
 To what extent have students’ reading skills improved?
 How has teacher performance changed? 
 To what extent are the project’s achievements and results sustainable?
 Based on the evaluation findings, what are the lessons learned from the project’s inception to 
date that USAID should take into consideration in the design of future activities in this area? 
The Education Support Program 
The ESP began in October 2011, and was designed by USAID/Egypt and the MOE to meet the urgent 
need to respond to post-revolution demands to strengthen public education. Local communities were 
mobilized and seeking a role in ensuring their children’s schooling and security. In response to citizen 
pressure, the Ministry had hired more than 130,000 Assistant Teachers (ATs), most without teaching 
experience or training, to fill staff shortages throughout the country. These two immediate needs 
defined the two principal components of the ESP: 
 Building the capacity of the Board of Trustees (BOT) and the MOE Social Work Department to 
become more effective governance bodies for the schools; and 
 Strengthening the capacity of local districts (idaras) nationwide to build the basic pedagogical 
skills of the ATs. 
The underlying rationale/hypothesis for the program focused on training. Intensive training for the new 
assistant teachers was intended to improve teaching practices and thereby increase students’ literacy. 
Training of the MOE Social Work Department staff would increase their capacity to train the schools’ 
Boards of Trustees (BOTs) and thereby increase effective community participation in school governance. 
Importantly, the ESP was implemented nationwide through a central office in Cairo and five regional 
ii
offices, working directly with governorate and district MOE offices and officials. The quantitative targets 
for training and capacity-building were ambitious. A project modification at the start of the second year 
added several new activities, including a remedial reading and writing program for grades 4 to 6. 
Evaluation Design and Methods 
USAID/Egypt allocated six weeks for the final performance evaluation and specified that field visits and 
data collection were to be conducted in two contrasting regions, the urban governorates of Cairo and 
Alexandria, and three governorates in Upper Egypt, Minya, Assiut, and Sohag. Given these parameters, 
a mixed methods design was used, with a primary reliance on project documentation and qualitative 
data collected through personal and group interviews with key informants from the program and its 
partner organizations, MOE officials at the national, governorate, and district levels, and with school 
directors and teachers in 16 primary and preparatory schools in the five governorates. In addition to 
project files, quantitative data were collect through observation in 120 classrooms and a short survey of 
recently hired teachers in the five governorates. 
Primary data collected by the evaluation team measured perceptions of behavior and behavior change 
and did not provide direct measures of actual behavior. Further, because the ESP had not collected 
baseline data for key indicators in 2011, the evaluation team had no basis to assess the magnitude of 
change in factors like effectiveness of BOT participation, improvements in reading skills, or changes in 
teacher performance. 
Findings and Conclusions of the Evaluation 
A. Achievement of Planned Objectives 
Question 1: To what extent has the project been able to achieve its planned overall objectives? 
Conclusion 1: The immediate strong outputs provided the necessary response to crisis in the public 
education system. The evidence presented in project documentation shows that the ESP successfully 
met the very ambitious targets set for nationwide training programs for newly hired assistant teachers 
(115,722) and MOE district-level social worker departments (271) and BOTs (23,533). Likewise, the ESP 
established a national presence, with implementation in all governorates. 
Conclusion 2: The methods of implementation contributed to the rapid response and a foundation for 
sustainability. The training programs were implemented through a bottom-up, decentralized approach 
led by the five ESP regional offices, working with and through the MOE officials at the governorate and 
district levels. This approach coupled with the cascade training model strengthened capacity, stability, 
and ownership at the local level. 
B. School Governance and Local Leadership
Question 2: To what extent has BOT participation increased in terms of effective school management? 
iii
Conclusion 1: BOTs that received ESP training were more effective than BOTs not exposed to this 
training in filling their role in school governance. The evidence and findings to support this conclusion 
were drawn from focus group discussions with 16 BOTs in five governorates, ten of which had received 
ESP training and six that had not. 
In spite of the small size of the BOT sample, differences were evident between the BOTs that had and 
had not received training. At the same time, these differences were not large and were confounded by 
other factors like location (Upper Egypt and rural/urban.) BOTs that had been exposed to training were 
more likely to be engaged in broad student issues like drop-out rates, reported more effective and 
varied fund-raising to respond to school needs, registered strong participation in monthly meetings and 
were more likely to engage in informal planning and self-assessment. 
Conclusion 2: The observed influence of ESP training on BOT participation in school management may 
diminish over time. Sustainability of these effects may be limited. Only three of the current BOT 
participants received the training and there was minimal evidence of diffusion of training lessons 
between those trained and other BOT members. Also, for all BOTs, limited financial resources were the 
core constraint on effective participation, and training did not resolve this constraint. 
Gender Considerations: In the ESP, the majority of the teachers and social workers trained were 
women. In terms of the teacher training, no meaningful differences by sex were observed in the effects 
of or response to the training. The training of social workers, however, was significant in terms of 
women’s empowerment, demonstrating a strong positive effect on self-confidence and a sense of 
professionalism in an area dominated by women that has been traditionally under-valued and under￾utilized. The principal focus of the ESP on gender equality was the lack of women’s involvement in the 
BOTs, but this aspect of the ESP could not be fully developed due to policy constraints. 
C. Educational Quality 
Question 3: To what extent have students’ reading skills improved?
Conclusion 1: Parents, teachers, and school directors reported that they saw significant improvements 
in literacy skills among the students in the Remedial Reading program, and recommended that the 
program be expanded to more students and grades. The reports of parents, teachers, and 
administrators about the results of the Remedial Reading program were consistently and strongly 
positive across all observers and schools. School directors observed that changes in reading also lead to 
changes in performance in other subjects. 
Conclusion 2: The training for Remedial Reading teachers was effective. All of the Remedial Reading 
teachers interviewed said that the training gave them the strategies they needed to improve the reading 
and writing skills of their students. Across the board, district, governorate, and central level MOE 
reading unit officials expressed their support for the training and their intent to expand the program. 
Conclusion 3: Additional materials, especially student workbooks, will be required to expand the 
program. Some governorates and schools have leveraged resources for reproduction. 
iv
Conclusion 4: Sustained implementation of the Remedial Reading Program in the schools would be 
strengthened by training of supervisors and other stakeholders (for a community of reading) and 
strengthening of a network of teachers who participated in the training. 
Question 4: How has teacher performance changed?
Conclusion 1: The ESP training provided to Assistant Teachers was effective in improving their 
teaching and thereby the performance of their students. School directors and the ATs themselves 
affirmed that their teaching improved as a result of the training, particularly in the areas of classroom 
management, teaching/learning strategies, and assessment methods. Teachers emphasized that the 
practical and workshop nature of the training was particularly effective. The classroom observations 
showedobservations showed that the performance of ESP-trained teachers was better than that of non￾ESP teachers across all the dimensions documented. 
Conclusion 2: The AT training was successful in creating a cadre of teachers who recognized the 
benefits of the initial training and also want more training to reinforce their teaching/learning 
strategies, particularly in their subject matter areas. 
The Professional Academy for Teachers (PAT): ESP support to the PAT throughout the project was a 
key element for sustainability of capacity-building and improved education quality. The mandate of the 
PAT is to establish and maintain quality measures and standards for the public school teacher’s career 
path. The ESP supported the PAT in all aspects of this mandate, including certification of training 
programs, developing a corps of qualified trainers, and preparing training centers for certification. The 
collaborative relationship between the ESP and the PAT helped PAT acquire its current status. 
Sustainability of these achievements may be diminished if resources commensurate to ESP financial 
support are not available, or if measures are not in place to ensure the continued transparency, 
independence, and objectivity of PAT certification processes. 
D. Sustainability and Institutionalization 
Question 5: To what extent are the project’s achievement and results sustainable?
Sustainability in terms of retention, application, and utility of the training content was a consistent 
theme in ESP design and implementation, and has been examined in relation to each of the ESP 
components. The evaluation also examined three dimensions of sustainability in terms of the ESP 
process of training delivery and of the response it provided to the issues of education quality. 
Structural Sustainability: The ESP was implemented through and in close collaboration with the existing 
MOE units at the governorate and district levels through capacity-building and tools to strengthen these 
units, engendering ownership of the programs and capacity and commitment to continue 
implementation. Likewise, sustainability was enhanced through the institutional support of the PAT and 
the cascade-training model. Sustainability will require that the PAT assume the key role played by the 
ESP regional offices in quality assurance in training delivery. 
v 
Financial Sustainability: This dimension is problematic. Limited access to funds was cited as a constraint 
on training at all levels – the schools, districts, and governorates. The ESP supported the training process 
financially and no clear mechanisms are in place meet these costs in the future. Interviews suggested an 
undue reliance on BOT resources. 
Decision-making: The ESP was implemented during a time of social upheaval when the national centers 
of decision-making and authority were in flux and relatively weak, resulting in a strong partnership with 
sub-national authorities. As the social situation stabilizes and the centralized bureaucratic structure is 
reinforced some of the movement toward decentralization may be challenged. 
E. Lessons Learned and Recommendations 
Question 6: Based on the evaluation findings, what are the lessons learned from the project’s 
inception to date that USAID should consider in the design of future activities in the area?
1. Future activities should be designed to reinforce the foundation for decentralization that 
developed under the ESP through support for governorate- and district-level decision-making 
and budget control. Likewise, mechanisms should be identified to maintain the local and 
regional networks among governorates, districts, and schools developed under the ESP. 
2. In developing an approach to increase the effectiveness of BOTs in school management it is 
necessary to go beyond the uniform BOT training modules available through the school social 
workers, and take account of both the idiosyncratic situation of each local board and the need 
to build a broad cross-cutting base of citizen participation in schools to support the BOT 
mandate. Three distinct dimensions for action are identified. 
3. The MOE has endorsed and expanded the utilization of the ESP core training for ATs 
(Educational Applications) and the ESP Remedial Reading and Writing activity. The 
recommendation identifies four key areas for USAID support to formalization of these efforts in 
the future. 
4. The Professional Academy for Teachers is a key institution in building a sustainable and 
transparent structure for teachers’ professional development. Three areas for continuing USAID 
support include building flexibility into PAT implementation plans for effective response to crisis 
situations, creation of a business model to sustain PAT as a semi-governmental entity, and 
reinforcement of the role of PAT in quality assurance. 
5. Future activities should include a component to study and advise on funding and budgeting to 
support maintenance and upgrading of training centers, courses, and materials. 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................... i
II. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 1
III. BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................................... 2
IV. EVALUATION METHODS AND LIMITATIONS ......................................................................................... 3
V. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................................. 6
A. ACHIEVEMENT OF PLANNED OBJECTIVES ......................................................................................... 6
B. SCHOOL GOVERNANCE AND LOCAL LEADERSHIP ............................................................................. 9
C. EDUCATIONAL QUALITY ..................................................................................................................14
D. SUSTAINABILITY AND INSTITUTIONALIZATION ...............................................................................22
E. LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..............................................................................24
Annexes 
A. Evaluation Statement of Work 
B. Persons Interviewed 
C. Bibliography of Documents Consulted 
D. Detailed Methodology and Data Collection Instruments 
E. Progress Indicators 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
1 
II. INTRODUCTION 
The USAID/Egypt Education Support Program (ESP) was a three-year activity that began in October 2011 
and was extended through January 2015. The final performance evaluation was carried out over a six￾week period in February and March 2015. The team of four evaluators and a logistics specialist from 
DevTech Systems, Inc. (DevTech) and The QED Group, LLC (QED), benefitted from access to program files 
and the full collaboration of the ESP staff, in spite of the fact that many had moved on to new positions. 
The purpose of the evaluation was twofold: 
 To review analyze, and evaluate the effectiveness of USAID-funded ESP activities in achieving 
program objectives and completing deliverables; and, 
 To provide specific recommendations and lessons learned to ensure that future funding for 
capacity-building in the areas for Boards of Trustees (BOTs), teacher training, and remedial 
reading are directed to activities that have the highest potential to achieve improved and 
sustainable results. 
The ESP was a national program focused on (1) deepening the participation of citizens in their local 
schools and (2) improving the quality of public education through improved instructional methods. The 
program was implemented during a tumultuous period in Egypt, and as it evolved and was modified 
over the three-year period in response to changing needs and requests from the Ministry of Education 
(MOE), additional sub-activities were developed and implemented. The evaluation questions that frame 
the evaluation design and report are directed to the two principal components, citizen participation and 
education quality, although some of the linked sub-activities also are reviewed. 
The six evaluation questions are: 
 To what extent has the project been able to achieve its planned overall objectives? 
 To what extent has BOT participation increased, in terms of effective school management? 
 To what extent have students’ reading skills improved?
 How has teacher performance changed? 
 To what extent are the project’s achievements and results sustainable?
 Based on the evaluation findings, what are the lessons learned from the project’s inception to 
date that USAID should take into consideration in the design of future activities in this area? 
Because this is a performance evaluation, rather than an impact evaluation with a defined 
counterfactual, baseline measures, and a comparison group, the evaluation questions about BOT 
participation, reading skills, and teacher performance cannot be answered as stated. Rather, they are 
examined in terms of participant and stakeholder perceptions of performance, and achievement of 
conditions intended to improve performance, and not by direct measures of change and impact. 
However, the evaluation does utilize the internal ESP impact assessments of the teacher training and the 
school Boards of Trustees, prepared in response to an audit in late 2012 by the Office of the Inspector 
General. (See Annex C.) 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
2 
The intended audience for the evaluation is the Ministry of Education (MOE) and other education sector 
stakeholders, USAID/Egypt, and USAID/Washington. The four evaluators included two Egyptian 
monitoring and evaluation specialists with experience in the education sector, Ahmed Gabr and Sherine 
Mourad, and two US-based technical and evaluation specialists, Megan Gavin and Virginia Lambert 
(team leader.) The evaluation included approximately three-weeks of primary data collection with 
stakeholders at the national-level and in five governorates (Cairo, Alexandria, Minya, Assiut, and Sohag), 
arranged and managed by the team logistics specialist, Laila Kamal. 
III. BACKGROUND 
The Education Support Program began in October 2011, amidst the unrest and fervor that followed from 
the January 2011 revolution. It was designed by USAID/Egypt and the MOE as a direct response to the 
urgent need to provide stability and quality in the public education system. In particular, in response to 
citizen demand the Ministry had hired more than 130,000 Assistant Teachers (ATs), most without 
teaching experience or training, to fill staff shortages. These ATs required immediate training to be 
effective in the classroom and to qualify for full-time permanent positions. At the same time, local 
communities were mobilized and seeking a role in ensuring their children’s schooling and security. 
These two immediate needs defined the two principal components of the ESP: 
 Building the capacity of the Boards of Trustees (BOTs) and the MOE Social Work Department to 
become more effective governance bodies for the schools; and 
 Strengthening the capacity of local districts (idaras) nationwide to build the basic pedagogical 
skills of the ATs. 
Strategically, the ESP supported the USAID/Egypt Assistance Objective 22, Improved Access to Quality 
Education, through the intermediate results (IR 22.2), Improved Instructional Methods and (IR 22.3) 
Enabled Public Participation in Education. The underlying development hypothesis focused on training. 
Intensive training for new teachers would improve teaching practices and thereby increase students’ 
literacy. Training of the MOE Social Work Department staff would increase their capacity to train the 
BOTs and thereby increase effective community participation in school governance. Initially, the ESP 
was designed as a two-and-a-half year activity but it was modified in October 2012, to include additional 
activities, and the period of performance was extended to three years, through September 2014.1
 
Importantly, the ESP was implemented nationwide through a central office in Cairo and five regional 
offices, with implementation focused directly on the governorate and district MOE offices and officials 
rather than the central offices. The quantitative targets for training and capacity-building were 
ambitious, in response to the magnitude of the demand generated by the revolution. Also as a 
reflection of the crisis situation, the ESP had no policy component. 
The ESP faced various contextual challenges during implementation including instability and turnover in 
the MOE central offices, periodic suspension of local activities because of security threats or changes in 
personnel, and a general distrust of outsiders and donor projects. The October 2012 program 
 
1
 It was later extended through FebruaryJanuary 2015.
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
3 
modification added several new activities and reprogrammed funds originally intended to support small 
grants to the local BOTs, which would have increased ESP direct exposure in the communities. Between 
October and December 2013, all activities were suspended. On June 30, 2013, aid restrictions were 
announced that affected certain education programs. In spring 2014, legislative relief became available 
that permitted resumption of the affected programs. These challenges need to be taken into account in 
evaluating program effectiveness. 
Another key characteristic of the ESP was that it was designed specifically to build on the successful 
training and capacity building activities developed and implemented in the prior USAID-funded 
education programs in Egypt, especially the Education Reform Program (ERP). USAID reported that the 
MOE request for assistance in dealing with the problems in the public education system during the 
revolution resulted from their positive experience with the previous USAID activities. This continuity not 
only made the rapid scaling up of the program possible but also provided the opportunity to improve 
the products and tools developed earlier, based on experience, rather than developing new ones. 
Two additional program characteristics were important in carrying out the evaluation. In part because of 
the crisis situation and rapid start-up, the ESP did not collect baseline data for any of the indicators or 
expected results. A Rapid Assessment study of the BOTs and the ATs was completed during the first 
quarter of implementation to identify priority geographic regions and issues but no data is available for 
direct before and after comparisons. Second, as noted, the ESP had a number of stops and starts –
some activities were dropped and others were expanded. The evaluation report takes note of some of 
these changes but the principal focus of the analysis is the six USAID evaluation questions, which 
encompass the priority activity areas for USAID and the MOE. 
IV. EVALUATION METHODS AND LIMITATIONS 
USAID/Egypt allocated six weeks for the final performance evaluation and specified that field visits and 
data collection were to be conducted in two contrasting regions, the urban governorates of Cairo and 
Alexandria, and three governorates in Upper Egypt, Minya, Assiut, and Sohag. Given these parameters, 
a mixed methods design was used, with a primary reliance on project documentation and qualitative 
data collected through personal and group interviews, supplemented by classroom observation and a 
short survey of recently hired teachers in the five governorates. 
Mixed Methods Approach 
A mixed-methods approach was applied in this study. Quantitative methods included a survey of 1362
Assistant Teachers (ATs) to measure teachers’ perceptions of the training and of its effect on their 
performance, and 120 classroom observations for ESP-trained and non-ESP teachers to assess the 
application of the training lessons. The quantitative data was collected to provide insight on the 
perceptions and changes in behavior of the teachers targeted by the ESP. Qualitative data sources 
included interviews in 16 primary and preparatory schools with ATs, school directors, remedial reading 
teachers, and scientific club coordinators. The team also conducted individual and group interviews in 
the MOE idara and mudereya offices where the schools were located, with top officials and 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
4 
representatives of the training and reading units, and the social work departments. BOT focus group 
interviews were held as a part of each school visit. The team also met with principal partners and 
stakeholders of the program at the national level, including various units of the MOE and the 
Professional Academy for Teachers (PAT) as well as ESP staff and USAID/Egypt. 
Data Sources and Evidence 
The teacher survey was constructed specifically for the evaluation. The survey items were based on 
content and approaches included in the ESP training provided to Assistant Teachers. The questionnaire 
was completed by 1362 assistant teachers, 771 of whom had participated in ESP training and 591 who 
did not. The questions asked participants to rank their knowledge of content and mastery of skills. The 
scale was based from 1 (no knowledge) to 4 (strong knowledge), with an option for “no opinion,” which 
was included to accommodate the cultural tendency to remain neutral rather than hold a negative 
position. The questionnaire also provided respondents with a space for qualitative feedback on their 
perceptions of the training. The questionnaires were distributed to a purposive sample of recently-hired 
teachers in the five governorates by local coordinators contracted by the evaluation team. 
The classroom observations were conducted by trained classroom observation data collectors. These 
data collectors had been trained for this task by the ESP, and were familiar with the classroom 
observation tool, the modified SCOPE (Standards-based Classroom Observation Protocol for Egypt), 
which had been used by the ESP in the initial Rapid Assessment Study (2012) and the Assistant Teacher 
Impact Assessment (2014). Twenty-four classroom observations were conducted in each governorate, 
equally divided between teachers who had and had not participated in ESP training. Comparisons were 
made between the two groups but in the absence of baseline measures a difference-in-differences 
approach to quantify differences was not possible. 
Qualitative sources for the evaluation included data gathered in the field over a two week period, during 
which the team split into two groups. One covered the three governorates in Upper Egypt and the other 
worked in Cairo and Alexandria. Interviews were conducted in 16 primary and preparatory schools 
including four in Cairo, five in Alexandria, two each in Minya and Assiut, and three in Sohag, as well as 
with the MOE idara and mudereya officials in the idaras where the schools were located. 
The team also met with members of the BOT in each school in focus group interviews. The tool for 
these discussions was based on the BOT self-assessment tool (BOTAT), which had been utilized by the 
ESP in its Rapid Assessment Study (2012) and the Board of Trustees Assessment Study (2014). 
The teams completed a total of approximately 80 individual and group interviews during this period. In 
addition to the field visits key informant interviews were conducted with the ESP counterparts at the 
central level. Annex B includes a complete list of individuals interviewed. Data collection tools and 
interview guides are appended in Annex D. 
Lastly, in addition to the qualitative and quantitative primary data sources, the team utilized project 
documentation, ESP monitoring information, and ESP research reports and impact assessments. A 
complete list of documents and sources can be found in Annex C. 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
5 
Data Analysis Approach 
In applying the mixed methods approach, multiple sources of information are brought to bear and cross￾examined. For the questions on education quality (i.e., the AT training and remedial reading and 
writing), the quantitative classroom observations and survey responses were examined to verify and 
quantify the perceptions of training effectiveness reported in interviews with teachers and school 
directors. In turn, the qualitative interviews provided guidance for interpreting the statistical 
observations. 
In the absence of quantitative data to assess BOT performance, the team relied on the testimony of BOT 
members in the focus groups. Since both trained and untrained boards were interviewed with the same 
instrument, comparisons could be drawn between the two categories as well as observations of the 
effects of contextual factors such as location (i.e., urban and Upper Egypt), and the composition of the 
board (e.g., gender, community leadership, and continuity of membership). Analysis of the data 
gathered from this small sample of BOTs was framed by the findings of the larger ESP Rapid Assessment 
Report and the 2014 Board of Trustees Assessment Study. 
Limitations 
The interpretation and generalizability of the evaluation findings are limited by several key constraints. 
The ESP was implemented nationwide in all governorates and districts, touching hundreds of thousands 
of teachers, administrators, and local citizens. For various reasons – resources, timing, security – the 
evaluation was conducted in only five governorates in two contrasting but by no means representative 
regions of the country. The teacher survey and classroom observations also were limited in breadth and 
were based on purposive rather than random samples in the interest of time and to insure inclusion of 
contrasting characteristics. A list of schools for field visits was compiled to cover all major components 
of the ESP, but the final selection of 16 institutions was made by the field coordinators who worked 
previously with the ESP, taking into account accessibility and receptivity. Each field team also was 
accompanied by an MOE security official. These constraints require caution in generalization and 
highlight the importance of the mixed methods approach and utilization of multiple data sources. 
The absence of baseline measures for key targets, especially the ATs and the BOTs, is a serious 
constraint, especially for outside evaluators. Without knowing the starting point for these programs it is 
not possible to measure change over time or to assess the magnitude and importance of the 
characteristics and change that are observed. The evaluation design attempted to compensate for this 
deficiency by using comparison groups of those who were and were not included in ESP activities, and 
respondent recall of baseline conditions, but interpretation is attenuated. 
Finally, with only six weeks allocated to the entire evaluation process, the depth of analysis and 
presentation are necessarily limited by the resources available. 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
6 
V. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 
A. ACHIEVEMENT OF PLANNED OBJECTIVES 
Question 1: To what extent has the project been able to achieve its planned overall objectives?
The ESP was designed and implemented in a time of social unrest with a sense of urgency and high 
expectations. The principal immediate and practical task was to respond to the request for support 
from the MOE to open and fully staff the public schools, and quell the widespread protests and 
strikes of parents and teachers. 
This task was approached through two principal objectives: (1) to improve educational quality and 
student achievement by training the newly hired assistant teachers in improved instructional 
methods; and (2) to increase local citizen involvement in the schools through training of the MOE 
social workers to strengthen and support the participation of the school BOTs. 
The activities and targets to achieve these objectives were ambitious, and intended to be completed 
within 30 months. Following a rapid assessment study to describe the dimensions of each 
component and the priority areas for immediate attention, a process was put in place for 
implementation nationwide. According to the ESP first Annual Report, the project was tasked to 
train 75,000 of the 100,000 newly hired teachers and the Social Work Departments (SWDs) in all 260 
idaras to realize the training, in turn, of 25,000 BOTs. While some of these targets were increased 
when the program was extended to three years, the data presented in the final performance report 
(October 2013 – December 2014) show that the ESP met or exceeded all indicator targets. (See table 
in Annex E.) The only exceptions were the activities that were suspended in the USAID/Egypt wind￾up plan in October 2013. 
The fact that the ESP successfully met its targets and helped restore order in the public education 
system is significant. The methods used to achieve this objective also deserve attention. 
The ESP was implemented through a bottom-up and decentralized approach, in large part as a result 
of the circumstances in which it operated. The Minister of Education changed four times during the 
project period and the central Ministry was not a stable base on which to build the implementation 
plan. In response, the five regional offices of the ESP built a network of trainers and training centers 
at the mudereya and idara levels to respond to the training requirements of the MOE officials at the 
local level. Using a cascade training model, the ESP trained a corps of master trainers in each region 
who trained local trainers in each idarra nationwide, who were responsible for delivery of the 
standardized training to the ATs and the social workers. The ESP regional offices developed the local 
networks to manage the training delivery and importantly, the training materials and monitoring of 
training quality in the idaras to ensure that the teachers and social workers in all regions received a 
high quality product. 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
7 
The value of building local capacity within the MOE was reflected in the evaluation interviews with 
the mudereya and idara directors, and managers of the Social Work and Training Departments, who 
are moving forward now to plan and administer continuing core training activities. They referred to 
the presence of the certified trainers and training centers as the base for carrying on without ESP. In 
conclusion, implementation at the sub-national level contributed to decentralization, 
empowerment, and partnership as local officials were in a position to make decisions and take 
initiatives. 
A second important factor in the ESP achievement of the indicator targets in a nationwide and 
timely program was the continuity between the ESP and past USAID/Egypt education projects, 
especially the Education Reform Program (ERP), which ended in 2010. The ESP utilized existing 
training programs and materials adapted to the new circumstances. This approach contributed not 
only to the rapid start-up but also to quality and sustainability as tools and methods developed 
earlier were honed and certified. ESP also worked with many of the same staff in the field and built 
on the networks of contacts they had developed over the previous six years. In the schools and 
offices visited, especially in Cairo and Alexandria, familiarity of the approach to instructional 
methods and classroom management, and with the people themselves, provided an initial credibility 
and access. Many school directors and teachers talked about how the ESP program built on what 
they had implemented under the ERP. At times, they referenced training received under ERP rather 
than ESP. When asked for an overall assessment of the ESP, in at least three situations, interviewees 
at the mudereya and idara levels cited the quality of personnel as a positive factor. 
Two additional critical factors in implementation were provided directly by the ESP, which may 
affect sustainability: (1) the key logistical role of the ESP in providing the training materials and 
resources to trainers and trainees for the training sessions to occur, and in monitoring the quality of 
these sessions; and, (2) the centrality of the communication and information networks in the region 
that were built around the ESP regional offices. 
Findings Conclusions
The ESP met the quantitative targets for all 
components. The immediate strong outputs provided the 
necessary response to crisis in the public 
education system.
ESP established a national presence, with 
implementation in all governorates.
Implementation through a bottom-up, 
decentralized approach and cascade training 
model.
The methods of implementation contributed to 
the rapid response and prepared a foundation 
Continuity with past USAID/Egypt education for sustainability.
projects allowed rapid results and stability.
The response to Question 1 focused specifically on the program outputs and achievement of indicator 
targets. This emphasis was chosen because the achievement of these targets as a response to the 
request from the MOE for support in a crisis situation was an important immediate objective in and of 
itself. As noted in the 2013 Audit Report from the Office of the Inspector General (see Annex C), 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
8 
however, outputs alone say nothing about the achievement of the broader objectives of the ESP, to 
improve access to quality education by (1) deepening the participation of citizens in their local schools 
and (2) improving the quality of public education through improved instructional methods, and, in turn, 
improvement in students’ basic reading and writing skills. The following three sections of the report 
examine the evidence related to the effectiveness of the ESP activities in achieving these objectives and 
expected outcomes. 
ESP Monitoring and Evaluation System 
The ESP monitoring indicators cited above and the Performance Management Plan (PMP) developed in 
response to the IG Audit report provided a tracking system to monitor quantitative indicators of tasks 
completed. However, it did not track indicators that could have provided ESP management with 
feedback on the effectiveness and efficiency of activities. The data in the PMP were disaggregated only 
by geographic region and sex, leaving out more in-depth questions. For example, the performance 
indicator, Mentors successfully complete PAT-certified training package, is a monitoring indicator that 
tells project management how many mentors completed the entire PAT-certified training package, and 
their location, and the proportion of those enrolled who have not yet completed the entire package. 
However, it offers no measure of the number of mentors who were not reached by the training or of the 
effectiveness of this training within the schools. 
The program was designed to focus primarily on training new teachers. In addition to tracking the 
number trained, indicators could have been incorporated to inform ESP management about the quality 
of the training delivery, training material, or training diffusion, for example, through periodic measures 
of how these trainees applied their new skills or the impact of the training on teaching outcomes, as 
reflected in a sample of student scores tracked over time. 
Another example of a missing indicator that could have been used by ESP management is a direct 
measure of the effect of the training of social workers on the changes in the behavior of the BOTs, or a 
measure that would have permitted an analysis of the relationship between the delivery of training to
social workers or the satisfaction of BOTs with the training they received. While the PMP indicators are 
very direct measures of project objectives as outputs, the PMP should have included additional 
indicators of effectiveness and efficiency. 
Overall, the monitoring and evaluation system was missing two essential elements: first, baseline 
measures for key indicators that precluded a reliable measure of change related to project inputs; and, 
second, outcome indicators to capture information about effectiveness on an ongoing basis. Although 
such indicators might be perceived as difficult to track with the massive targets set for the ESP, such 
measures might have been developed and tracked through a carefully designed sampling scheme. 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
9 
B. SCHOOL GOVERNANCE AND LOCAL LEADERSHIP 
Question 2: To what extent has BOT participation increased in terms of effective school management? 
The team held focus group discussions with the members of 16 BOTs in the five governorates selected 
for the evaluation (Cairo, 4; Alexandria, 5; Minya, 2; Assiut, 2; and Sohag, 3). Ten of these BOTs had 
received ESP training and six had not. Of the 13 BOT members, on average, seven participated in the 
focus group discussions, and all three categories of members (teachers, parents, and community 
stakeholders) were represented. The discussions were held in the schools or in the mudereya offices. 
A focus group protocol devised for this purpose (Annex D), was based on the Board of Trustees 
Assessment Tool (the BOTAT) that was used by the ESP in the Rapid Assessment Study (2012) and the 
final Board of Trustees Assessment Study (September 2014). The report addresses the findings and 
conclusions drawn from these discussions relative to BOT participation in terms of effective school 
management. It is structured around the basic tasks required for the BOT to carry out this role. 
Overall 
The interviews showed that while ESP-trained BOTs were more effective and more involved in school 
management than BOTs that were not trained, the difference between the two categories was not 
great, at least in Upper Egypt. At the same time, clear differences were observed between BOTs at the 
village level (rural areas) and those in urban areas, regardless of training. BOTs at the village level 
seemed more capable of interaction and communication with both the community and school 
management because they could link the school and students’ needs to the community and parents on 
a regular and frequent basis. The closeness of the community also translated into better resource 
mobilization from the community. This difference may be explained by the fact that in the villages, 
compared to the cities, communication involved direct interaction driven by rural social norms and 
mechanisms for transparency. In addition, in cities people tend to be occupied with more diverse issues. 
Needs Assessment and Resource Mobilization 
Based on the focus group discussions, BOTs that had been exposed to ESP training were more likely than 
those without training to identify school and student problems and to establish constructive cooperative 
working relations with the school management in resolving these problems. For example, trained BOTs 
were more likely to be engaged in promotion of a Remedial Reading Program or scientific club to 
support students’ academic performance, or to take on issues related to student dropouts. Untrained 
BOTs tended to be involved primarily with infrastructure problems such as school yard, school fence, 
sunshade, and a speed bump. While the infrastructure problems are clearly important for the comfort 
and safety of students, and ESP-trained BOTs, in fact, worked on such problems as well, ESP-trained 
BOTs were more likely to move beyond these tasks to confront issues dealing with educational, social, 
and psychological problems. It takes more knowledge and work to spot a student’s performance 
problem(s) and analyze it in terms of the social or psychological context than to spot the need for more 
sand for the school yard. 
 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
10
BOT membership was perceived by both BOT members and, reportedly by the parents in the General 
Assembly, as primarily a job of fund-raising in a poor community. Limited financial resources remained 
the core problem for all BOTs interviewed. All BOTs struggled to acquire adequate funding for their 
urgent needs, especially when those needs derived from an MOE policy with which the school must 
comply, as in the case of the shortage in student workbooks for the Remedial Reading program. 
At the same time, the focus groups showed that the ESP-trained BOTs tended to be more creative and 
more successful in mobilizing resources, both financial and volunteer human resources, because they 
were proactive rather than simply reacting to problems presented by school management. Examples of 
proactive behavior included fundraising campaigns to print students’ workbooks, inviting volunteers to 
work with students in scientific clubs, or communicating with people of means in the community to 
cover the costs of school tuition for poor students. 
Participation 
In response to the discussion about the levels of participation of BOT members, and of parents in the 
General Assembly in the last BOT election, all BOTs responded with approximate numbers that were not 
documented. However, most estimates for General Assembly participation stood at 10 to 15%. (In some 
cases, like large urban schools, this was likely an overstatement.) The BOTs reported that average 
attendance in their monthly meetings was 10 or 11 of the 13 members. 
In regard to women’s participation, the evaluation was most concerned with membership of mothers. 
Although participation was low in all BOTs, mothers were more likely to be present in urban BOTs than 
in rural BOTs, where the team encountered no women among the parental representatives, regardless 
of ESP training. Discussions with the rural BOTs suggested that in the rural social context women do not 
participate in the BOT because it is a public organization. There is no similar social restriction against a 
mother going to the school on an informal basis to deal with problems affecting her children. 
Internal Processes 
Although planning and later examining and evaluating the effectiveness of their approaches were not 
common practices among the BOTs, the interviews did show that ESP-trained BOTS were more likely to 
use informal planning and self- assessment in their operations, and that this allowed them to be more 
organized in their approach to tasks and in distribution of responsibilities. 
Community Outreach 
Based on the interviews, local school BOTs in Cairo and Alexandria were more likely to be connected to 
the BOTs at the governorate level than was the case in the three Upper Egypt governorates. In Upper 
Egypt, governorate-level BOTs either had not been activated or at least, they were not connected to 
BOTs at the school level. 
All BOTs reported that it is difficult to engage the general assembly although the ESP-trained BOTs 
appeared to have made some strides in this effort because they were more proactive and constructive. 
For example, ESP-trained BOTs were more likely to communicate directly with individual parents about 
BOT activities or to encourage them to let their children participate in the scientific club or the remedial 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
11
reading program. BOT members were more likely to be perceived as individuals that were acting on 
behalf of the school and the best interests of the students. 
Sustainability Issues 
ESP training was provided to only three members of each BOT (the school social worker, the school 
director, and the BOT chairman). Testimonies in the focus groups revealed that, in many cases, BOT 
members that had not received training directly from the ESP were not even aware that any training had 
occurred. In no case did the evaluation uncover an example of interactive systematic training within the 
BOT, suggesting that the ESP aim to train the BOTs remained relatively incomplete. Evidence showed 
that the most effective training, that of the social workers themselves, was not transferred to the BOTs 
in any systematic manner. While the training may be sustainable among government employees at the 
idara and mudereya levels, the sustainability and continued application of the training in the school￾level BOTs and the local community may well be lost when the trained social worker and school director 
are transferred to another school and a new BOT chairman is elected. The absence of a clear system for 
diffusion of training among other BOT members appears to have been a shortcoming in the overall ESP 
training strategy. 
Findings Conclusions
ESP-trained BOTs are more constructive and 
cooperative in overall management. ESP-trained BOTs are more effective than BOTs not 
trained by ESP in filling their role in school 
management.
ESP-trained BOTs have more ability to identify 
priority problems
ESP-trained BOTs have more ability to mobilize 
financial, in-kind, and volunteer human resources.
BOTs in Upper Egypt have limited access to 
governorate-level funding.
Sustainability of the influence of BOT training on 
effectiveness in school management may diminish 
over time.
BOT membership has been renewed without 
change since 2011.
There is minimal evidence of the diffusion of 
training lessons between individuals trained and 
other BOT members.
Limited financial resources represent a core 
problem for all BOTs.
Scientific Research Clubs 
The initial design of the ESP included competitive small grants to be awarded to BOTs to develop specific 
projects in their schools including the introduction of Scientific Research Clubs, to introduce upper 
primary and preparatory students to the scientific method of problem solving and research. When 
USAID re—programmed these grant funds in 2012, due to the policy environment at the time, the 
decision was made to introduce the scientific (or science) clubs into selected schools on a pilot basis. A 
training program and materials were developed to introduce selected teachers, who would serve as 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
12
coordinators of the clubs, one or more representatives of the BOT, and the school director to the 
concept of and methodology for the program. 
The evaluation team met with teachers, trainers, parents, and students involved in seven scientific clubs 
in Cairo (2), Alexandria (4), and Sohag (1). The extent of the visit and discussion, as well as the size and 
depth of the experience varied considerably across schools. The small sample in no way provides 
aviablea viable assessment of the pilot experience or the basis for recommendations for the future. The 
ESP conducted an in-depth assessment during the final quarters of the project to develop 
recommendations on how to move forward with the model and make it sustainable. The 
recommendations focused on the need to formalize the management and funding of the clubs, which 
were operated more or less on a volunteer basis during the pilot phase, and to build a broader base of 
community understanding of and support for the club activities. (See the ESP Final Report, 2015.) 
The evaluation team observed a generally positive reception to the concept of the Scientific Club in the 
schools, on the part of the directors and teachers involved, as well as by the ESP regional staff. In 
addition, in one school the team visited, the parents of students in the club came forward to provide 
testimony to the evaluators about the importance of the club for their children and to urge continuation 
of the clubs and expansion. Some suggested it should be incorporated into the official syllabus and 
made a required subject for all students. 
At the same time, a number of shortcomings and difficulties were noted. The science club was 
introduced as an activity rather than academic subject and parents were reluctant for their children to 
participate and take away time from their required studies. Teachers volunteered their time to work 
with the club, carrying out these tasks in addition to their full teaching schedules, at times including 
activities on Saturdays and during the school vacation. Participation in the clubs diminished over time 
because of the additional time involved and lack of new members as the original group graduated. 
Teachers reported that they could not realistically be expected to continue to work with the clubs on a 
volunteer basis. 
The evaluation team also focused on the relationship of the BOTs to the clubs, as a potential component 
of sustainability. The level of BOT support for the clubs varied considerably across schools. All of the 
BOTs mentioned the club as a valuable initiative in the school and spoke of its achievement with pride, 
but the team did not encounter any situation in which the BOT indicated a responsibility for the 
program and intent to carry it forward after the termination of the ESP. The evidence suggested that no 
mechanisms were in place for continuation of the model in the individual schools after the current cycle, 
and the clubs were in the process of phasing out. 
Gender Considerations 
Gender equality and women’s empowerment are central aspects of USAID policy and required 
components of all USAID-funded activities and evaluations. In the ESP, all activities were monitored in 
terms of male and female participation and outcomes. The majority of the teachers and social workers 
trained were women. The ESP and the evaluation team assessment of the outcomes of the AT training 
in terms of classroom performance and in teachers’ perceptions of the effectiveness of the training 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
13
showed no meaningful differences by sex – men and women reported and demonstrated the same 
responses to the training experience. Two observations that might be considered in the design and 
review of future training programs are: (1) USAID recommends that all training programs include a 
module on gender awareness and identification of relevant gender considerations; and (2) consideration 
should be given to inclusion of a review of training materials in terms of gender bias as a part of the PAT 
certification process. 
Most of the employees of the MOE Department of Social Work are women. The interviews with the 
social workers about the training showed a strong impact on them as individuals and as social workers, 
with particular emphasis on the value of the training in increasing their self-confidence, their sense of 
professionalism, and even their self-perception. The training had a strong positive effect within a 
profession dominated by women that has been traditionally under-valued and under-utilized. The 
recommendation within the MOE and the SWD that this training be continued and expanded is 
testimony to the impact of the training from the point of view of women’s empowerment. 
The principal focus of the ESP on gender equality was the lack of women’s involvement in the BOT and 
community participation in school management. The Rapid Assessment Study carried out by the ESP at 
the initiation of the program confirmed the overwhelming domination of men among the BOT members 
and particularly the absence of women as representatives of the parents and the community 
stakeholders. To the extent that women did participate in the BOTs, they were teachers, school 
directors, and the school social worker, who is automatically a non-voting member of the Board. The 
evaluation team observed this same imbalance in the small sample of BOTs interviewed for the 
evaluation. The explanation given for the lack of participation was culture, lack of time or security issues 
around the meeting times, or simply, lack of interest. At the same time, the focus group discussions 
confirmed the findings of other studies and experiences that mothers are more involved in their 
children’s schooling than are the fathers, making sure that assignments are completed, monitoring 
grades, and ensuring that time is given to studying. Mothers also accompany the children to school and 
take responsibility for the children’s safety. The focus group discussions also presented anecdotal 
evidence of the importance of having women involved in the BOTs, as the women present in several of 
the BOTs raised issues of concern in the school specifically related to girls, particularly in terms of 
security and harassment. In one group, a teacher referred to the importance of the effort of the school 
director to interact with the mothers when they dropped off their children in the morning. Another 
spoke of the involvement of the mothers in accompanying their daughters to after-hours activities to 
protect the girls and the teachers. 
The ESP carried out a case study in two idaras to investigate the lack of women’s participation and to 
recommend methods to increase this participation. (See the ESP second annual report.) The study 
showed that mothers are eager to participate but a number of factors may interfere, including the 
openness of the school administration to participation and interest of parents, the culture of the BOT 
(e.g., some are more active in the broader community than others), and the belief, which is stronger in 
some areas than others, that public participation is the sphere of men in the family. The ESP engaged in 
some isolated activities to encourage mothers’ presence in the school (e.g., a mother’s club, literacy 
classes for mothers) but these activities were among those that were cut short during the wind-up 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
14
preparations for the Mission. It also is important to note that other donors (e.g., the CIDA STEPS 
project) and NGOs have experimented on a pilot basis with activities to encourage mothers to come 
forward. Going forward, additional work with the BOTs should commence with an in-depth study that 
will include attention to the issue of women’s involvement/empowerment, and of the existing tools and 
activities that have been tested and applied in various situations. It also will be important to take 
account of the idiosyncratic characteristics of the BOTs, recognizing that activities to increase 
participation must be participatory and that the standardized training should be only one component of 
the package. 
C. EDUCATIONAL QUALITY 
Question 3: To what extent have students’ reading skills improved?
The Remedial Reading and Writing program (RR) focused on improving the reading and writing skills of 
the poorest performing students. It is important to reiterate (as referenced in the methodology section, 
that data was not collected on student performance for this evaluation) rather the Team relied on 
documented evidence from teachers, directors and parents of their perceptions of the changes in 
student reading performance to draw findings and conclusions. 
The program focused on the provision of curriculum and training. The curriculum included teacher and 
student guides to provide additional reading and writing practice in each lesson. Trainers in the idaras 
trained teachers selected by administrators. The program was designed to be administered three times 
a week to groups of 20-25 students in grades four, five and six. However, implementation varied among 
schools and idaras. The screening test of students identified their individual needs and therefore active 
approaches were modified to meet their needs. There were a total of 36 lessons. 
The findings and conclusions related to the Remedial Reading program are presented in four parts: (1) 
those focused on the training received by the teachers; (2) those related to the change in performance 
of the students; (3) the findings and conclusions related to the materials provided by ESP; and (4) the 
follow-up support and sustained implementation of the Remedial Reading program in the schools. 
Consistently across all governorates Remedial Reading teachers expressed that the training they 
received from the ESP was of high quality. They went on to highlight that the approach was interactive 
and that the content was needed in their instructional practices. In addition, the Remedial Reading 
teachers reflected on the opportunity to exchange with other teachers. For example, teachers from a 
school in Sohag, stated: 
The training was excellent it was something that we had been longing for—there was also an 
experience exchange with other teachers from other governorates that we enjoyed. 
In addition teachers explained that the Remedial Reading approach was based on an approach that they 
had been exposed to in their own education. Therefore, these teachers were more able to uptake the 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
15
methodologies and implement them with their students. For example, the same teachers from Sohag, 
stated: 
The curriculum has changed and now it is back to the old form; it is a mix of the old 
methodologies with new methodologies- it has taken the best of both parts. This is how I was 
taught. 
Findings and Conclusions: changes in teachers and students 
Findings Conclusions
100 percent of the teachers said the practical RR 
training gave them the strategies they needed to 
improve the reading/writing skills of their 
students.
The training for RR is effective it should continue 
and more materials and examples should be 
provided.
Teachers said that they wished the RR training 
was longer and had more concrete examples.
Between 90 and 95 percent of directors stated 
that changes in reading lead to changes in 
student performance in other subject areas.
Parents, teachers and directors want the RR 
program to be expanded to more students, and 
grades.
Parents wanted their children in the RR program, 
when they saw how it helped the poorest 
performing students.
a. According to school staff (teachers, directors) 
the poorest performing students improved in 
reading.
b. According to parents of students in the RR 
program- their students improved. 
In addition to perspectives from teachers, school directors, idarra level, mudereya level and the Central 
MOE level figures expressed their support of the ESP Remedial Reading program. They identified that 
the Remedial Reading Program solved a specific need in education with regard to literacy. For example, 
a school director in Sohag (School 001, FWINTV020) stated:
The problem in Egypt is illiteracy- this project solved the problem of illiteracy; the reality is 
that students could not read and write, therefore, they hated school- now they are more 
confident. 
Later, this same director highlighted that the relationship between the ability of read and write trickled 
into other subject areas and success and to mitigate drop out. This sentiment was expressed by 
teachers and directors in the majority of the idaras across upper and lower Egypt, including Cairo and 
Alexandria. These actors also highlighted the importance of materials as part of the Remedial Reading 
Program. 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
16
Findings and Conclusions: materials.
Findings Conclusions
Resources for reading instruction are limited in 
schools, especially Sohag, Minya and Assiut .
Materials are still required and they must be 
revised for reproduction. Some governorates have 
leveraged resources to reproduce.
The workbooks are an essential part of the RR 
program and the improvements in literacy.
There are grammatical errors in the Remedial 
Reading materials; and there is a big gap between 
levels 1 and 2 in the RR program.
Findings and Conclusions: follow-up and sustained implementation in schools.
Findings Conclusions
A network of teachers who participated in the 
trainings has been created. Within this network, 
professionals communicate among themselves 
about ideas from their practice.
Networks are an important part of teacher 
practice. They sustain the teachers once they 
return to the classroom and try new strategies.
Inspectors were not included in the trainings; the 
approach reflects a teaching approach by which 
teachers and directors learned.
The inspectors need more training. Other 
stakeholders should be involved (for a community 
of reading). 
Question 4: How has teacher performance changed? 
Background on the ATs. This section examines how teacher performance has changed. The ESP trained 
approximately 115,000 ATs. The AT training program focuses on providing applications for use in the 
program. USAID designed and executed the program based on needs articulated by the MOE to 
implement a training program for the first cadre of teachers. The program allowed for these 
participants to be certified in the formal system. The ESP works via local partners to implement the 
program, specifically via training units in governorates and Master trainers. 
The course focuses on providing new teachers with practical skills and techniques to use in the 
classroom. A variety of experimental activities are provided during the training. Teacher participants 
discuss and exchange ideas during the training (five days). The program focuses on five main topics; 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
17
these include: (1) national standards and quality- this allows teachers to know the expectations for their 
performance, (2) lesson planning- this focuses on skills for designing lessons and the use of appropriate 
materials, (3) strategies- active learning is introduced vs. traditional rote methods, (4) classroom 
management- focuses on presenting routines, rules, and seating structures for efficient management 
and in turn learning, and (5) assessment- both self-assessment and student assessment is introduced for 
improved teaching and learning. 
This section focuses on the changes in teacher performance viewed from the national, school, and 
classroom levels. 
Findings and Conclusions: National/governorate level 
Findings Conclusions
The ESP responded directly to a request and need 
of the MOE to improve the teacher performance 
of ATs throughout the nation.
Given the political turmoil during the project the 
ESP was able to effectively respond to a demand 
presented by the MOE at the national level but 
implement through close coordination at the 
governorate level. Finding 2: the ESP executed its support via a
horizontal process by working directly with the 
governorates and regional ESP offices as opposed 
to working via the central MOE.
Findings and conclusions: School level
Findings Conclusions
Nearly 100 percent of the ATs did not have 
sufficient training prior to the AT training. They 
said they lacked teaching strategies, classroom 
management practices, and guidance on 
assessment.
The AT training was successful in creating a cadre 
of teachers who also want more training to 
reinforce their teaching-learning strategies, 
assessment methods, and classroom management 
(in their subject areas).
The practical and workshop nature of the trainings 
was effective, teachers embodied it and used it in 
their classrooms.
Nearly 100 percent of teachers and directors said 
that the teachers who participated in the AT 
training improved in their teaching and as a result 
their students also learned.
An additional benefit of the AT training was that 
teachers became more confident in their ability to 
teach They shared that as they became more 
confident their teaching improved.
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
18
Findings and conclusions: Classroom level 
Analysis of classroom level quantitative data acquired through both the modified SCOPE and the survey 
indicated that ESP Assistant Teachers (ATs) have outperformed their fellows Non-ESPs along each of the 
two dimensions assessed in this evaluation, their classroom performance (via SCOPE) and their 
perception of learning / benefiting from the AT training (via AT Survey). See graphs 1-4 below. 
Graph 1 
Data represented on Graph 1 above suggest that in general the classroom performance of ESP ATs is 
better than that of the non-ESPs along almost all 27 indicators within the seven dimensions addressed 
by the tool. The data indicates also that the area that would need more attention in the future trainings 
is that under the fifth dimension, Engage students in structured cooperative learning experience, while 
the strongest area comes under the fourth dimension, encourage students to have a voice in the 
learning process. 
Graph 2 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
19
Data presented on Graph 2 above indicates that ESP trained teachers performed higher on two principal 
components: classroom management and student participation. This finding is consistent with the 2014 
Impact Evaluation conducted by ESP. The trained teachers performed slightly higher with regard to 
classroom management. In addition while men performed higher than trained women on classroom 
management, women performed higher than trained men on student participation. Culturally, male 
teachers in class are at an advantage in terms of classroom management and student discipline; 
whereas female teachers have an advantage in being able to reach out to students and engage them in 
greater interactive participation. 
Graph 3 
Data presented on Graph 3 above demonstrates performance along seven dimensions. Again, the 
findings are consistent with the 2014 Impact Evaluation conducted by ESP. For example, the lowest 
performance dimension remains promoting cooperative learning experiences whereas the highest 
dimension is encouraging student voice. 
On the second dimension, perception of ESPs about their benefiting from their training came more 
positive than that of non-ESPs as shown by the below graphs 4 & 5.
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
20
Graph 4 
Graph 5 
Data presented on graph 4 indicates that: 1) both categories of teachers have learned from their 
respective trainings; 2) perception of ESPs of their knowledge before training along all 10 areas 
addressed by the survey was lower than that of non-ESPs’s self-perceptions’; and 3) ESPs perceived their 
knowledge after training as higher than that of non-ESPs along the ten areas. Graph 5 clarifies this 
finding. It clearly demonstrates not only did ESPs show more positive perceptions, but they also showed 
larger ratios of change than non-ESPs’ along each of the 10 areas of the survey. 
The Professional Academy for Teachers (PAT) 
Support to the Professional Academy of Teachers (PAT) was a major task of ESP over the three years of 
its activities. ESP made it possible for PAT to accomplish a number of tasks that came at a difficult time 
after the revolution of January 2011, where hundreds of thousands of teachers hired under short-term 
contracts were in the streets demonstrating to pressure the government to employ them officially as 
MOE teachers after many had been teaching without official contracts for a number of years. At that 
time, in 2011 and 2012, PAT was recently established and defining its position within the Egyptian 
education system as a body mandated to establish and maintain quality measures and standards for the 
Egyptian governmental school teacher’s career path based on the teacher’s cadre concept and scheme. 
This mandate entailed introducing processes for: 1) certifying teachers for a cadre level based on the 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
21
specific qualifying criteria for each of the cadre’s five levels; 2) certifying training programs to be used to
qualify teachers for certification; 3) certifying trainers to deliver these training programs, and 4) 
certifying training providers/centers to ensure the delivery of training that conforms to quality 
standards. 
The findings of the evaluation confirmed with evidence that ESP supported the PAT in achieving the 
above goals, by assisting in certification of 124 programs by supporting PAT in hiring consultants to 
design, produce, review, approve and print these programs’ materials in standard training packages
(which contained trainer and trainee manuals and resources required for delivery of each program.) ESP 
helped build a pool of qualified trainers for PAT, where the ten certified Master Trainers were 
responsible for preparing 661 Certified Trainers to train 1200 candidates in training of trainers (TOT). In 
addition, ESP helped prepare 63 training centers at the idara and mudereya levels to qualify for PAT 
certification, by providing office furniture, equipment, infrastructure and connectivity, in addition to 
training. As such, ESP became a real partner with PAT in supporting its efforts to attain its goals. 
The most important contribution that ESP made to the PAT was support for its task to train more than 
115,000 Assistant Teachers, in response to a crisis management decision made by the MOE (referenced 
above), even though this training was not within PAT’s mandate. 
The data about the PAT-ESP collaboration was gathered in key informant interviews with stakeholders 
including PAT staff (e.g. PAT Director and Ex-Director, Deputy Director, and Department Heads at 
headquarters), former ESP directors, certified trainers, and teachers. The following table summarizes
the findings and conclusions about the PAT – ESP mutual cooperation during the ESP project life. 
Findings Conclusions
ESP was perceived positively by PAT in terms of 
shared objectives, support for PAT achievements, 
and a high level of cooperation/communication. The ESP successfully supported the PAT along a 
number of critical dimensions for institutional 
development in a timely way, which helped PAT 
acquire and establish its current status.
ESP’s major achievements with/for PAT included: 
institutionalized certification process, training and
accreditation of ATs, and certification of training 
centers.
ESP’s financial support to PAT activities was 
instrumental to their success.
Sustainability of these achievements may be 
diminished if resources commensurate to ESP 
financial support are not available, or if measures 
are not in place to ensure continued transparency, 
independence, and objectivity of PAT certification 
processes.
When the ESP ended a number of PAT sub￾activities were still unfinished (e.g. training centers 
in idaras, resource centers in governorates.) 
Operationalizing the certification processes with 
the support of the ESP added value to the 
educators’ profession in Egypt. However, when 
questioned about their recent experience with PAT 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
22
Findings Conclusions
certification, some certified trainers and teachers, 
particularly in the urban governorates, cautioned 
about the continued objectivity and fairness of 
some PAT implementation practices.
D. SUSTAINABILITY AND INSTITUTIONALIZATION 
Question 5: To what extent are the project’s achievements and results sustainable?
Sustainability was a consistent theme in the studies and reports of the ESP. The above discussions of the 
training for social workers and BOTs, the remedial reading program, and the teacher professional 
development training examined the strengths and weaknesses of each activity from the point of view of 
sustainability. Particular attention was given to the retention, application, and utility of the training 
content. Key findings, which are reflected in the recommendations section below, include: 
 The link between the highly acclaimed and effective training of the Social Work Department and 
the training and strengthening of the BOTs and participation in school management is weak. 
This transfer occurred in some cases but it was not systematic and not necessarily reflected in 
outcomes; 
 Supervisors/inspectors need to be incorporated into the AT and remedial reading training so 
that they can support the application of the training lessons by the newly hired and Arabic 
language teachers. ESP initiated training of the school directors and they referred to this 
training in the interviews, but the training of mentors, many of whom are supervisors, was cut 
short. 
The response to Question 5 is directed to sustainability not of the results of the training but of the 
process of training delivery and of the response it provided to the issues of education quality. An 
external program that delivers training without constructing mechanisms to internalize the training 
content and the process is a one-time injection that will disappear in time regardless of the effectiveness 
of training itself. The cascade training model with the emphasis on putting a substantial corps of skilled, 
certified trainers in place is an important component of the sustainability model. Other important 
elements are the PAT mandate and capacity to certify training courses, centers, and trainers. The sense 
of involvement in and ownership of the program among local level officials also will support 
continuation of the ESP process at least in the short-term. 
The evaluation examined three aspects of sustainability of the ESP training delivery process: structural/ 
institutional (structural mechanisms to formalize the training delivery process); financial (access to and 
control of resources to support the training process); and, decision-making and lines of authority to 
manage and update the training. 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
23
Structural 
The structural aspects of sustainability are the most clear because the ESP was implemented through 
and in close collaboration with the existing MOE units in the mudereyas and idaras. ESP provided 
capacity-building and tools to strengthen the training, literacy, and reading units in the mudereyas and 
idaras. The positive results of this strategy are evidenced by the continuation of the AT training since the 
ESP ended and the incorporation of this training into the cadre system and local training plans. The 
Remedial Reading and Writing activity, even in the pilot phase was grounded in the mudereya and idarra 
Reading (Literacy) Units. In interviews, the directors of these units, at least in the urban governorates, 
presented strong testimony about their commitment to expansion of the program and a sense that they 
have access to and control of the components necessary to move forward independently. 
Likewise, the Social Work Department units in the mudereyas and idaras expressed commitment to the 
training developed and delivered with the ESP. The professed transformative impact of this training on 
the social workers themselves has created a sense of professionalism and a demand and commitment to 
continue, although the energy behind this commitment varies by region. At the same time, the 
excitement expressed in interviews about the social worker training did not necessarily translate into 
commitment to training and assisting the BOTs, and the evaluation identified minimal evidence of a 
structural mechanism to sustain this link. 
As discussed above, the PAT as an institution also has a strong role to play in structural sustainability, 
and the ESP collaborated closely with the PAT to support institutional development and capacity￾building. One of the key roles to be assumed by the PAT, which was almost entirely done by the ESP 
regional offices during the ESP, is that of quality assurance. The validity and effectiveness of the cascade 
training model requires constant monitoring to ensure that the training being delivered at all levels 
maintains uniform standards for content and delivery. The interviews in the training units in the 
mudereyas and idaras gave no indication that they would assume the monitoring role. 
Financial 
The financial aspect of sustainability is more problematic than the structural, and may merit a more 
concrete and detailed assessment than was possible in the evaluation. Limited access to funds was 
mentioned as a constraint in the vast majority of interviews at all levels – the schools, the idaras, and 
the mudereyas, especially in the questions of continuation of activities after ESP. The ESP supported the 
training process financially through payments to trainers, provision of per diem and transport for 
trainers and trainees, acquiring training venues, and printing and distributing materials. Later, the ESP 
furnished and equipped training centers for certification. It also supported the development of the PAT 
resource center, and hired outside consultants to work with PAT staff on a variety of activities. 
The evaluation team also heard testimony about how individuals volunteered their time to support 
various activities, and trainers and teachers mentioned buying materials like paper and markers with 
their own money – because of “patriotism” or belief in the activity. At the same time, particularly the 
teachers who worked extra unpaid hours with the science clubs and the remedial reading students, or in 
summer camps at the schools, said that they could not continue this practice indefinitely because of its 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
24
impact on their home lives. The ESP was implemented during a time of rapid social change when 
expectations and energy were high. The interviews suggested that this volunteerism is not sustainable 
over time and these tasks will have to be compensated to continue. 
Additional costs also will be incurred in simply maintaining the foundation that the ESP put in place – to 
maintain and repair the training centers, reprint existing manuals and workbooks, and train new trainers 
as the present ones retire. At the local levels, when questioned in the schools, idaras, and mudereyas 
about how they would manage these costs, the most frequent response referred to the BOTs. In spite 
of anecdotal reporting of success stories in getting funds from the BOTs, the analysis showed that this is 
at best an undeveloped source of finance and inherently unsustainable. 
Decision-making 
The ESP worked within and strengthened the existing organizational structures to build in sustainability 
of the training process, but it also was implemented during a time of social upheaval when the national 
centers of decision-making and authority were constantly in flux and particularly weak. The ESP 
capitalized on this situation by working through the sub-national authorities to act in the interests of 
their own spheres of control. The program sought and in some cases succeeded in building a sense of 
ownership and empowerment at the local level. As the social situation stabilizes and the centralized 
bureaucratic structure is reinforced some of the movement toward decentralization may be challenged. 
Experience suggests that two possible avenues for this challenge may be financial (budget control) and 
definition of spheres of authority. 
E. LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS 
Question 6: Based on the evaluation findings, what are the lessons learned from the project’s 
inception to date that USAID should take into consideration in the design of future activities in the 
area? 
The conclusions of the analysis in each section define the primary lessons identified by the evaluation 
team. Most of these conclusions and lessons recognize the broad satisfaction reported to the 
evaluation team about the quality and breadth of the training and technical assistance activities of the 
ESP, and identify unfinished tasks and potential gaps moving forward. The broad recommendations 
presented here follow from the lessons drawn from the analysis. 
RECOMMENDATIONS 
1. Future activities should be designed to reinforce the foundation for decentralization that 
developed under the ESP through support for mudereya- and idara-level decision-making and 
budget control. (One example might be a focus on idara planning, scheduling, and funding of 
cadre training for local teachers and social workers.) Likewise, mechanisms should be identified 
to maintain the local and regional networks that were nourished under the ESP by the ESP 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
25
regional offices. (One approach might be to build on the ESP truncated program for local 
leadership development and training.) 
2. In developing an approach to increase the effectiveness of BOTs in school management it is 
necessary to go beyond the uniform BOT training modules available through the school social 
workers, and take account of both the idiosyncratic situation of each local board and the need 
to build a broad cross-cutting base of citizen participation in schools to support the BOT 
mandate. 
 A comprehensive study on BOTs should be conducted before any further investment. The 
recommended study should consist of two dimensions: social and economic, as well as 
attention to women’s participation and the community context, especially rural/urban 
differences. 
 Many BOTs operate independently, within the school. To increase BOT effectiveness in 
fostering community participation and involvement in the schools, attention should be given 
to building networks and linkages, both horizontal with peer/neighboring BOTs, and with 
local NGOs, and vertical with BOTs at the governorate level to provide BOTs with more 
opportunity to access governorate resources. 
 BOTs require additional capacity-building to effectively understand and carry out their role 
in school management. In addition to training, capacity-building activities should include: 
collective workshops at the governorate level that include representatives from different 
BOTs in the governorate to foster exchange of experiences; national events that promote 
the role of BOTs in the society and establish for social recognition for this role; exchange 
visits among BOTs at the local, governorate, and national levels; and a media promotion 
campaign to raise awareness about community participation in education management in 
general and school management in particular. 
 
3. The MOE has formally endorsed and expanded the utilization of the ESP core training for ATs 
(Educational Applications), and the Remedial Reading and Writing activity. In the future, USAID 
should support formalization of these activities through: 
 Training other school staff and community stakeholders on the remedial reading program 
especially inspectors, directors, and parents to build community of practice and support 
around the importance of reading; 
 Seeking to identify reliable mechanisms to ensure that the necessary workbooks and 
manuals are available to all schools, including those in poor rural areas. An example of a 
step in this direction would be to work with the idaras to generate a list of potential funding 
sources and activities to generate funds to share with the idara and school BOTs; 
 Supporting the institutional structures that are in place to ensure on-going review, revision, 
and updating of the teaching manuals and student workbooks; 
 Collaborating with the MOE in developing online mechanisms to facilitate continued and 
continuous training of teachers in all cadres, and in promoting online (and in-person) 
teaching circles for all teachers, including those in remote areas. 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
26
4. The Professional Academy for Teachers is a key institution in building a sustainable and 
transparent structure for teachers’ professional development. 
 Assist PAT in incorporating the flexibility in implementation that characterized the ESP to 
accommodate changes on the ground within its pre-planned objectives by introducing 
mechanisms that are responsive to national level changes/crisis and allow them to 
accommodate immediate changes and emerging needs. 
 Assist PAT in creating a business model that can sustain it as a semi-governmental entity. 
 Reinforce the role of PAT in its role of quality assurance of its products, policies, and training 
management. Provide support to PAT in institutionalizing quality measures for its 
certification processes. Maintenance of quality should be a component of the certification 
of renewals for training centers and trainers. 
5. Future activities should include a component to study and advise on funding and budgeting to 
support the maintenance and upgrading of training centers, courses, and materials. Additional 
attention also should be given to the trainer fee schedules and sources of compensation. 
27
Annexes
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 
28
 
ANNEX A. - STATEMENT OF WORK 
Education Support Program (ESP) Final Evaluation
Award Title: Education Support Program 
Cooperative Agreement: AID-263-A-11-00010 
Total - USAID Amount: $18,860,268 
Start Date: October 2011 
End Date: September 2014 
AOR: Hala El Serafy 
Evaluation Manager: Marie El Soussy 
Partner: Ministry of Education 
Implementing Partner: American Institute for Research (AIR) 
Governorates of Implementation: Minya, Sohag, Cairo, Alexandria, and Assiut 
Background
Over the last 35 years, Egypt has made progress in providing access, increasing enrollment and 
closing the gender gap in basic education. USAID collaborates with the Government of Egypt in 
developing a learning environment where teachers inspire, students think critically, and 
communities participate actively in their schools. USAID support for basic education focuses on 
schools in underprivileged urban areas. Support for higher education includes workforce 
development and scholarships for undergraduate degrees from universities in Egypt and post￾graduate degrees in the U.S. 
USAID is improving the efficiency, quality and relevance of Egypt’s overall education system to 
help Egypt be competitive in the global economy. Future support will help facilitate 
implementation of reforms throughout the country, particularly in professional development and 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex A. 
29
improved instruction. USAID works with Egyptian Ministry of Education to implement 
programs by supporting: 
 Egypt‘s efforts to improve students’ reading, writing and math skills in early grades and to 
design and implement effective programs nationally; 
 Egypt’s Ministry of Education’s efforts to decentralize the education system in order to 
strengthen local institutional capacity, increase involvement of the community, enhance 
accountability and increase performance standards; 
Approximately 16 million Egyptian children (roughly 90 percent, nearly half of whom are girls) 
attend 43,000 public schools. While primary school enrollment is high, and Egypt has reached an 
acceptable level of first-tier education indicators, Egyptian children are not receiving the quality of 
education or skills needed to facilitate ongoing learning. 
USAID supports reforms to deliver the core skills of reading, math and writing throughout the 
primary school experience (grades 1 - 4) while strengthening community engagement for 
accountability and transparency. 
Program Description
Since 2011, political events in Egypt have disrupted the public school system. Many of the 
primary breadwinners in poor families have lost their jobs, which has had a negative impact on 
their ability to pay for their children’s education. Furthermore, as a result of protests by tens of 
thousands of part-time assistant teachers, the GOE eventually agreed to hire them as full-time 
teachers and increase their salaries infusing thousands of underqualified educators into the 
system. 
As a result of the political unrest since late January 2011, the fragility within social and economic 
systems in Egypt may remain for an extended period of time. The Education Support Program 
(ESP) was designed to provide immediate support to address emerging educational quality needs 
during Egypt‘s transition towards democracy. 
The Education Support Program (ESP) commenced in October 2011 and is being implemented 
by the American Institute for Research (AIR), which will conclude its activities in September 
2014. ESP focuses on deepening the participation of citizens in their schools at the grassroots 
level and improving the quality of education, reaching all schools in 260 districts nationwide, 
through two main components: 
 Building the capacity of the Board of Trustees, and the Social Work Departments in the 
Ministry of Education, in order to become more effective governance bodies, support school 
improvement, and increase transparency and accountability at the 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex A. 
30
school level; 
 Strengthening the capacity of districts nationwide to build the newly hired Assistant 
teachers’ basic pedagogical skills. 
ESP Development Hypothesis
At the request of the Ministry of Education (MOE), ESP is a nationwide project that was designed 
to provide immediate support to address educational needs during Egypt‘s transition towards 
democracy and empower its citizens. One premise behind the design was that if one or two weeks 
of intensive training is provided to assistant teachers, their teaching practice would improve, and 
thus they would be able to improve the students’ basic reading and writing skills. A second 
premise was that if training and technical assistance were provided to the MOE’s Social Work 
Departments ( SWD), members of the SWD would acquire the skills and knowledge necessary to 
strengthen the Board of Trustees’ (BOTs ) capacities through training and technical support. 
ESP objectives
ESP supports USAID/Egypt’s Assistance Objective 22 to improve access to quality education, 
since it expands access for vulnerable students in areas that are most affected nationwide by the 
economic and security crisis in 2011, as a result of the political upheaval across Egypt. A rapid 
assessment study was conducted by ESP to determine the most affected areas. That report will be 
provided to the evaluation team prior to their fieldwork. 
ESP supports the improvement of instructional methods by providing training for newly hired 
teachers and members in the Social Work Departments (SWD) in the MOE; who work with the 
BOTs to strengthen and support their participation in the schools. 
ESP Planned Outcomes 
 Increase the capacity of the Ministry of Education and Social Work Departments to 
support the BOTs in dealing with the challenges which face the schools. 
 Support districts and BOTs in implementing activities to improve skills of students in 
upper primary (grade 4 and higher) who have reading and writing difficulties. 
 Support districts and BOTs in implementing activities to improve the learning of science. 
 Build the capacity of newly-hired Assistant Teachers. 
 Build the capacity of training departments at the governorate and district levels to meet 
teachers’ professional development needs. 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex A.
31
 Strengthen the capacity of institutional leadership at the district level to plan for and 
manage contingencies and professional development. 
 Support 271 SWD members in order to build the capacity of the BOTs. 
 Train 100,000 assistant teachers and 3,000 trainers nationwide.
 Train 25,000 BOTs in effective school governance and support, and the democratic 
election of BOT members. 
 Develop and implement a remedial reading and writing skills program for elementary school 
students (grades 4-8) who are facing significant learning challenges due to their inability to read. 
 Introduce the Science Club initiative for enhancing primary and preparatory students’ 
scientific and critical thinking. 
 Provide technical assistance to PAT to establish a website and database for training 
participants and trainers.
 Establish a Professional Development Certification System for training programs, trainers, 
reviewers and training centers. 
 Develop a leadership skills program for school principals, training all primary school 
principals in six governorates, preparing trainers in all governorates to expand the provision of the 
training nationwide. 
 Train 3,200 school-based mentors to provide continued support to assistant teachers. 
 Support governorate and district level contingency planning committees to plan for 
addressing serious incidents that might affect schools, students’ attendance and learning, in case of 
disastrous situations. 
Implementation Strategies/Approach
 Working through partners, such as the Professional Academy for Teachers (PAT), the Social 
Work Department (SWD) in the MOE, and the training departments at the central and local levels 
to ensure that program interventions are sustained. 
 Building capacity at the local level through training of master trainers and involving local leaders 
in planning and implementation of activities. 
 Building on USAID earlier investments in developing training materials and activities.
 Adopting innovative non-traditional training strategies to increase efficiency and effectiveness. 
 Linking leadership capacity-building activities with real school level problems.
 Adapting the cascade model (training-of-trainers).
Project Modification
In 2012, a modification of the cooperative agreement resulted in the inclusion of remedial reading 
and writing activities in response to a need expressed by the MOE and evidenced by poor Early 
Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA) scores in the Arabic language in 2009. In early 2013, ESP 
administered a screening test for reading that independently confirmed the 2009 results.
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex A. 
32
As a result, ESP began implementing remedial reading and writing activities specifically targeting 
fourth and fifth grade struggling readers, as they were at high risk for falling behind in their studies, 
losing motivation, and dropping out of school. 
In the beginning stages of the intervention, ESP worked with the MOE and local education 
stakeholders to identify schools with the lowest reading scores in the various Egyptian 
governorates (and specifically a cross-section of districts within those governorates). ESP selected 
teachers who were interested in having their schools participate in the activities and motivated to 
implement additional interventions. In total, 75 schools were selected throughout multiple districts 
in five governorates: Minya, Sohag, Cairo, Alexandria and Assiut. 
The science clubs were added to ESP on October 18, 2012. ESP developed and piloted a model of 
community supported Science Clubs that aim to improve students’ scientific inquiry and higher 
thinking skills. Presently, 3000 students (boys-girls) from grade 5 through grade 9 in 140 schools in 
20 districts are participation. Each club has 20-25 students working in groups under the supervision 
of the teacher. Any student can join regardless of his/her grade level. 
Lastly, the Mission has approved a no-cost extension of ESP from September 2014 to February 
2015. The no- cost extension was approved to compensate for the time lost due to the project wind 
up plan and allow the ESP to complete all originally-planned activities and targets. 
Evaluation Purpose
This is a final performance evaluation and its purpose is to: 
1. Review, analyze, and evaluate the effectiveness of USAID-funded ESP activities in achieving 
program objectives and completing deliverables. 
2. Provide specific recommendations and lessons learned to ensure that future funding for capacity 
building in the areas for BOTs, teacher training, and remedial reading, and are directed to activities 
that have the highest potential to achieve improved and sustainable results. 
Audience and Intended Users
The audience for the evaluation will be the Ministry of Education, USAID/Egypt Mission, 
specifically the education team, and USAID/Washington. The evaluation results will be shared with 
the Ministry of Education, as well as other stakeholders, other donors, UN agencies, and education 
NGOs in a workshop setting. The Report should be made accessible to the public via USAID’s 
Development Experience Clearinghouse (DEC), within three months of report completion. 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex A.
33
The evaluation will answer the following questions:
 To what extent has the project been able to achieve its planned overall objectives? 
 To what extent has BOT participation increased, in terms of effective school management ? 
 To what extent have students’ reading skills improved? 
 How has teacher performance changed? 
 To what extent are the project’s achievements and results sustainable? 
 Based on the evaluation findings, what are the lessons learned from the project’s inception to 
date that USAID should take into consideration in the design of future activities in this area? 
Evaluation Design and Methodology
This evaluation is intended to focus on how ESP has achieved its objectives. It will evaluate how the 
award has been implemented, what it has achieved, whether expected results have occurred according 
to the award’s design and in relation to the development hypothesis, and how activities are perceived, 
valued, and sustained. 
The evaluation should then provide specific recommendations and lessons learned to ensure that 
future funding for capacity-building for BOTs and teacher training, remedial reading, and science 
clubs are directed to activities that have the highest potential to achieve improved and sustainable 
results. 
The evaluation must follow the USAID Evaluation Policy of January 2011 
(http://transition.usaid.gov/evaluation/USAIDEvaluationPolicy.pdf)
The Evaluation Team should consider a range of possible methods and approaches for collecting and 
analyzing the information which is required to assess the evaluation objectives. The evaluation team 
shall share data collection tools with USAID for review, feedback and/or discussion with sufficient 
time for USAID’s review before they are applied in the field. 
The data collection methodology will include a mix of tools appropriate to the evaluation’s 
questions. These tools will include a combination of document review, in-depth interview with the 
key informants, and focus group discussions. Since the project is nationwide, the evaluation team 
will conduct site visits to Minya, Sohag, Cairo, Alexandria, and Assiut, The rationale for selecting 
these governorates is that they have received both the ESP trainings and the remedial reading 
activity. 
It is expected that the evaluation team will identify a teacher’s comparison group for the focus 
group discussion to compare teachers who received training with those who did not receive 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex A.
34
training. Additionally, the team will review the Standardized Classroom Observation Protocol for 
Egypt (SCOPE) and the Board of Trustees Assessment Tool (BOTAT) used by the project 
evaluators together with the results from April 2014 assessment to assess the effectiveness of 
Assistant teachers’ and board of trustees’ training. 
The evaluation team is expected to identify a comparison group for the focus group discussion to 
compare members of BOTs who received training and capacity building with those who did not 
receive training; results should be disaggregated by gender. The evaluation team will conduct 
structured observations to assess students’ performance and will conduct a desk review of the results 
of the remedial reading assessment report. Moreover, the evaluation team will need to provide a 
methodology for answering each evaluation question. Evaluators will use a mix of quantitative and 
qualitative data collection and analysis methods. 
Interviews and Site Visits
The Evaluation Team will conduct in-depth interviews and focus group discussions, at a 
minimum, with the following organizations/staff: 
 Professional Academy for Teachers (PAT). 
 Social Work Department in the MOE.
 American Institute for Research (AIR)
 Teachers who received training & their supervisors.
 Teachers that did not receive training. 
 Boards of Trustees. 
 USAID/AOR. 
 Supervisors who conducted the internal evaluation. 
 Ministry of Education staff. 
 Project Staff 
As per the evaluation policy, there will be a USAID team member as part of the evaluation team but 
s/he will not attend the interviews in order to maintain the integrity of the evaluation. The role of the 
USAID team member will be approving the work plan submitted by the evaluators. S/he will assist in 
setting up appointments with MOE officials, as well as provide the evaluation team with a list of 
stakeholder contacts. 
The evaluation team will provide a more detailed explanation of the proposed methodology for the 
collection of data and analyses method. The team will stay in Egypt for five weeks (a six day work 
week is authorized). As part of their planning, the evaluation team will submit the 
schedule for field visits. A logistics coordinator will be responsible for travel-related logistics and 
will provide administrative support to the evaluation team members. 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex A.
35
Relevant documentation
The evaluation team should consult a broad range of background sources including project 
documents and other relevant materials. 
USAID and the ESP team will provide the evaluation team with a package of background 
materials prior to the team’s arrival in Egypt: 
 Program design documents and modification. 
 Annual reports. 
 Quarterly reports. 
 Remedial reading initial impact results ( 2013) 
 Performance Management Plan updated report. 
 Internal evaluation report (April2014) 
 SCOPE results (the tool for assessing teacher training). 
 BOTAT results (the tool for assessing Boards of Trustees’ training). 
 Cooperative Agreement. 
 Audit findings of the USAID/ Egypt’s Education Support Program. 
 List of beneficiaries and contact information for key informants.
 Rapid Assessment Study, conducted for the most affected areas nationwide. 
Data Limitation, Quality and Analysis
The evaluators may face some data limitation which will be considered by the USAID education 
office. For example, there is no baseline data for the project. USAID expects that all issues affecting 
validity be discussed and documented during evaluation planning. Measures to mitigate these issues 
will be addressed with all team members and USAID in the implementation phase and detailed in the 
final report. Another limitation is that the results framework for the project was not developed at the 
project design phase. The evaluation team shall ensure that the data 
they collect clearly and adequately represents answers to the evaluation questions, sufficiently 
precise to present a fair picture of performance, and at an appropriate level of detail 
Prior to the start of data collection, the evaluation team will develop and present, for USAID/Egypt 
review and approval, a data analysis plan which will emphasize the unit of analysis; for example, the 
BOT members, the teachers and the students. The unit of analysis will also be disaggregated by 
gender. The evaluation team will explain how focus group interviews will be transcribed and 
analyzed, how the qualitative data from the focus group discussions and in-depth interviews with the 
key informants and other stakeholders will be integrated with
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex A.
36
quantitative data from the different relevant documents to reach conclusions about the 
effectiveness of the ESP program. 
Team Composition and roles
The evaluation team will be composed of a team leader, three technical members and a logistics 
coordinator. Team member qualifications include: 
Team Leader: A senior international consultant with 10 years’ experience in conducting evaluations 
for basic education activities. S/he should also have a minimum of 5 years in leading evaluation 
teams, interpersonal relations and writing skills. 
Team Members (3): A mix of senior and mid-level consultants, one international and two local 
consultants with a minimum of 5 years’ experience in monitoring and evaluating or designing 
education projects, with strong writing skills, excellent understanding of the Egyptian public 
education system, as well as USAID programs.
Logistics Coordinator: Three (3) to five (5) years’ experience in handling travel-related 
logistics and providing administrative support. 
The Team Leader will
 Finalize and negotiate with USAID/Egypt the evaluation work plan; 
 Establish evaluation team roles, responsibilities, and tasks; 
 Facilitate the team planning meeting (TPM) 
 Ensure that the logistics arrangements in the field are complete; 
 Manage team coordination meetings in-country and ensure that team members are working to 
schedule; 
 Coordinate the process of assembling individual input/findings for the evaluation report and 
finalizing the evaluation report; 
 Lead the preparation and presentation of key evaluation findings and recommendations to 
USAID/Egypt team prior to departing Egypt. 
The Team Members will coordinate in
 Designing the evaluation plan. 
 Developing a data collection plan. 
 Conducting field visits, surveys, and interviews. 
 Collecting the data. 
 Recording and summarizing the data. 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex A.
37
 Analyzing the data collected. 
 Preparing reports and presentations for discussing the findings. 
The Logistics Coordinator will
 Handle travel related logistics and provide administrative support to the evaluation team 
members. 
 Be responsible for setting up meetings with USAID and stakeholders. 
Deliverables:
 Team Planning Meeting: A team planning meeting will be held in Egypt at the outset of the 
evaluation. This meeting will allow USAID/Egypt to discuss the purpose, expectations, and 
agenda of the assignment with the Evaluation team. In addition, the team will: 
 Clarify team members’ roles and responsibilities 
 Review and develop final evaluation questions 
 Review and finalize the assignment timeline and share with USAID/Egypt 
 Present and discuss data collection methods, instruments, tools and guidelines 
 Review and clarify any logistical and administrative procedures for the assignment. 
Work Plan: In the planning meeting, the team will discuss a detailed work plan which should be 
prepared by the team prior to the meeting. The work plan should include the methodologies 
to be used in the evaluation, timeline and detailed Gantt chart. The work plan will be submitted 
to the ESP AOR and the Evaluation Manager at USAID/Egypt for approval. 
A detailed methodology and data analysis plan (evaluation design, data analysis steps and 
details, operational work plan) will be prepared by the team and discussed with the USAID 
during the planning meeting. 
Upon arrival, USAID will provide the Evaluation Team with a stakeholder analysis that includes an 
initial list of interviewees, from which the Evaluation Team can work to create a more comprehensive 
list. Prior to starting data collection, the Evaluation Team will provide USAID with a list of 
interviewees and a schedule for conducting the interviews. 
Debriefings: The team will present the major findings of the evaluation to USAID/Egypt. The 
debriefing will include a discussion of achievements and issues as well as recommendations for the 
future activity design and implementation. The team will consider USAID/Egypt comments and 
revise the draft report accordingly. 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex A.
38
The team will then present their major findings to the Ministry of Education and they will 
consider the MOE’s comments and present a revised draft. 
Draft evaluation report: A draft report of the findings and recommendations should be submitted to 
the USAID Evaluation Program Manager prior to the Team’s departure from Egypt. USAID will 
provide written comments on the draft report within 10 working days of receiving the document. 
Final Report: The Evaluation Team will submit a final report that incorporates responses to 
Mission comments and suggestions. This report should not exceed 30 pages in length (not 
including appendices, lists of contacts, etc.). The format will include an executive summary, table 
of contents, glossary, methodology, findings, and conclusions. The report will be submitted in 
English, electronically, and will be disseminated within USAID, project stakeholders, and the DEC 
according to the dissemination plan developed by USAID. The Executive Summary of the Report 
will be translated into Arabic and submitted within 30 days after the final report is submitted. 
At the time of submission the final report, the survey instruments, interviews and data sets 
should be submitted on a flash drive to the evaluation program manager. 
Expanded Executive Summary: The team will submit an expanded executive summary to 
accompany the final report that will include a background summary on the evaluation purpose and 
methodology, and an overview of the main data points, findings, and conclusions. The expanded 
executive summary should be easy to read for wide distribution to local audiences. The expanded 
executive summary will be submitted in English and Arabic, in hard copy and electronically. The 
report will be disseminated within USAID and to stakeholders according to the dissemination plan. 
Reporting Guidelines
 The evaluation report should represent a thoughtful, well-researched and well organized effort to 
objectively evaluate what worked in the project, what did not and why. 
 The report should include the evaluation Scope of Work as an annex. All modifications, whether 
in technical requirements, evaluation questions, evaluation team composition, methodology, budget, 
or timeline need to be agreed upon in writing by the AOR. 
 Evaluation methodology shall be explained in detail and all tools used in conducting the 
evaluation such as questionnaires, checklists and discussion guides will be included in an Annex in 
the final report. 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex A.
39
 Evaluation findings will assess outcomes of the trainings on the ATs and BOTs. 
 Limitations to the evaluation shall be disclosed in the report, with particular attention to the 
limitations associated with the evaluation methodology (selection bias, recall bias, unobservable 
differences between comparator groups, etc.) and what is being done to mitigate the threats to 
validity. 
 Evaluation findings should be presented as analyzed facts, evidence, and data and not based on 
anecdotes, hearsay or the compilation of people’s opinions. Findings should be specific, concise and 
supported by strong quantitative or qualitative evidence. 
 Sources of information need to be properly identified and listed in an annex. 
 Recommendations need to be supported by a specific set of findings. 
 Recommendations should be action-oriented – organized according to whether recommendations 
are short-term or long-term, practical, and specific, with defined responsibility for the action. 
The final report will be reviewed using the Checklist for Assessing USAID Evaluation Reports 
(http://www.usaid.gov/policy/evalweb/evaluation_resources.html).
Evaluation report requirements:
The format for the evaluation report is as follows: 
1. Executive Summary—concisely state the key findings; 
2. Table of Contents
3. Introduction—purpose, audience, and summary of task; 
4. Background—brief overview of the ESP program in Egypt, USAID program strategy and 
activities implemented in response to the problem, brief description of ESP projects/components, 
purpose of the evaluation; 
5. Methodology—describe evaluation methods, including threats to validity, constraints and gaps; 
6. Findings/Conclusions—based on the evaluation questions; also include data quality and 
reporting system that should present verification of spot checks, issues, and outcomes; 
7. Challenges—provide a list of key technical and/or administrative, if any; 
8. References (including bibliographical documentation, meetings, interviews and focus group 
discussions); 
9. Annexes—annexes that document the evaluation methods, schedules, evaluation scope of work, 
interview lists and tables— should be succinct, pertinent and readable. 
ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex A. 
40
Timeline/Deliverables:
1. Work Plan Discussion and submission: 2 days after the team’s arrival to Egypt. 
2. Evaluation design: 2 days after the team’s arrival to Egypt. 
3. Methodology Plan: 2 days after the team’s arrival to Egypt. 
4. Draft report: Prior to the team’s departure from Cairo. 
5. Evaluation Data: Prior to the team’s departure from Cairo. 
6. Inbreifs with USAID and MOE: Prior to the team’s departure from Cairo. 
7. Final report: 3 weeks after the USAID provides feedback on draft report
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex B. 
41
ANNEX B. - PERSONS INTERVIEWED 
Name (First, Last) Type Institution Governorate Date
Ahmed Anas ESP- Regional Director ESP QKena- Upper Egypt 12/30/2014
Samir Fadel ESP-Regional Director ESP Cairo- Urban 12/30/2014
Yaser Youssef ESP- Technical ESP Cairo 2/8/2015
Hala EL Serafy ESP- AOR USAID Cairo 2/9/2015
PAT- Leadership PAT PAT Cairo 2/12/2015
Mamdouh Fadil COP ESP Cairo 2/18/2015
Dr. Ramadan Hassan Undersecretary MOE- Minya Minya 2/15/2015
Waleed Mohammad
Fayek Thabet
Merry Hanna
Dr. Eman Hassan Trainers MOE- Minya Minya 2/15/2015
Ahmad El-Sayed
Essam Abd-El-Hafeez
Saber Fakhry Training Unit MOE-Minya Minya 2/15/2015
Manal Abd-El-Mon’em
Eshaq Nikola
Mostafa Al-Ansary SWD MOE-Minya Minya 2/15/2015
Ahmad Kilany
Mahmoud Salama
El-Sayed Mohammad
Mohammad Othman
Somaiya El-Badry 
Badreiya Nageh BOT- School 1 Al-Qays 1 B Minya 2/16/2015
Hassan Hussein 
Eman Abd-El-Fattah
Sahar Qurany
Fayza Farag Teachers (RR/ AT) Al-Qays 1 B Minya 2/16/2015
Mamdouh Ebrahim Mentors Al-Qays 1 B Minya 2/16/2015
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex B. 
42
Salah Abd-El-Hameed Non ESP Teachers Al-Qays 1 B Minya 2/16/2015
Essam Aswa Director Al-Qays 1 B Minya 2/16/2015
Abd-El-Badee’ El-Ashry Resource Center Resource Center Minya 2/16/2015
Abdo Lotfy
Moftah Eawzy
Emam Hossny Reading Unit MOE-Minya Minya 2/17/2015
Ahmad Sawy
Mahdy Mohammad
Mekhael Labeeb
Hatem Gaber
Eid Mohammad (Non ESP BOT of 
Sakyet Dakouf) ESP, Non ESP BOT Mogamma’ Estal Minya 2/17/2015
Ahmad Sawy Director Mogamma’ Estal Minya 2/17/2015
ESP ATs:
Mahmoud Mostafa
Fathy Bastawy
Mona Ramadan
Omaima Ibrahim
Non ESP ATs:
Ali Fo’add
Adb-El-Mon’em Khaled
ESP and non ESP ATs Mogamma’ Estal Minya 2/17/2015
Ibrahim Abo-Bakr
Magdy Ahmad
Mentors Mogamma’ Estal Minya 2/17/2015
Abd-El-Fattah Abo Shama Undersecretary MOE-Assiut Assiut 2/18/2015
Amal Qamar
Mohammad Mahmoud Trainers MOE-Assiut Assiut 2/18/2015
Samir Lotfy Head- SWD MOE-Assiut Assiut 2/18/2015
Trainers-AT:
Mostafa Gaweesh
Ghada Hamed
Trainers-BOT:
Aiman Abd-Allah Trainers- AT, BOT MOE-Assiut Assiut 2/18/2015
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex B. 
43
Yasser Fathy
Badry Dowainy Director
Al-Re’ay Al￾Motakamla Assiut 2/19/2015
Dalal Mostafa
Azza Hamdy
Sara Hossny
Shaima’ Ahmad Teachers
Al-Re’ay Al￾Motakamla Assiut 2/19/2015
Sabah Ahmad
Madeeha Bakr
Atef Zaker
Mohammad El-Ashwal
Mohammad Hammam
Shawky Hassan
Laila Mohammad
Suzan Shaker
Mohammad Abbass BOT
Al-Re’ay Al￾Motakamla Assiut 2/19/2015
Safwat Gendy Director Ali Ebn-Abi-Taleb Assiut 2/19/2015
Ali Othman
Ahmad Mahmoud
Ismael Khaleel
Nermine Abdo
Ahmad Farag BOT Ali Ebn-Abi-Taleb Assiut 2/19/2015
ESP ATs:
Rehab Ibrahim
Tamany Amer
Wafa’ Hussain
Non ESP AT:
Soha Helmy AT - ESP/ non ESP Ali Ebn-Abi-Taleb Assiut 2/19/2015
Sahar Mos’ad Mentors Ali Ebn-Abi-Taleb Assiut 2/19/2015
Abd-El-Azeez Ateya Undersecretary MOE- Sohag Sohag 2/22/2015
Youhanna Ya’koub Master Trainer MOE- Sohag Sohag 2/22/2015
Ahmad Farghal
Khaled Gelany AT Trainers MOE- Sohag Sohag 2/22/2015
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex B. 
44
Abd-El-Mohsen Mandour
Ahmad Hashem
Ahmad Ismael Reading Unit MOE- Sohag Sohag 2/22/2015
Yasser Amin Principal/ Director
Gezeeret 
Mahrous Sohag 2/23/2015
Yasser Amin
Ali Mahmoud Mahrous
Mohammad Mahrous
Ali Ahmad Mahrous
Abo-Bakr Abdo
Mohammad Fahmy
Abd-El-Hameed Ibrahim
Essam El-Deen Khaled BOT
Gezeeret 
Mahrous
Sohag 2/23/2015
Khalaf El-Sayed
Naser Ameen
El-Kazzafy Ahmad Mentors
Gezeeret 
Mahrous
Sohag 2/23/2015
ESP ATs:
Eman Ramadan
Hassan Mahmoud
Non ESP AT:
Dhoha Mahmoud ESP/ non ESP ATs
Gezeeret 
Mahrous
Sohag 2/23/2015
Eveline Ezzat
Sayed Abo-El-Magd
Mervat Rezk
Waleed Mohammad BOT Trainers MOE-Sohag Sohag 2/23/2015
Gamal Abo-El-Mawaheb Principal/ Director
Abd-El-Hammed 
El-Ramly Sohag 2/24/2015
Ahmad Hamza
Ahmad Ibrahim
Shaker Ali
Abd-El-Nasser Abdeen
Nashed Gad
Mohammad Abd-El-Rahman ESP BOT
Abd-El-Hammed 
El-Ramly Sohag 2/24/2015
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex B. 
45
Wa’el Shamrookh
Afaf El-Samman
Gorgett Bolos
Azza Ali
Karam Ameen
Ahmad Hamed
Emad Abd-El-Mageed
Essam Ameer
Ahmad Mahmoud Non ESP BOT
Salah Salem 
(Prep) Sohag 2/24/2015
Location and Name of Person Institution or Organization Title of Position Notes
General Offices in Cairo Govenorate
Dr. Hassan Gawish PAT Director of the General Dpt of Qualification 
and Promotion
Dr. Alaa Sabra PAT Director of the General Dpt of Quality and 
Accreditaion of Training System
Enas Labib PAT Secretary General
Berlanty Magdy PAT Officer in Charge of PAT Governorate 
Branches
Dr. Enas Sobhy PAT Director ICT
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex B. 
46
Dr. Magdy Amin PAT Ex-Director, PAT
Alexandria Governorate
Fayza Abdel Hameed El 
Shenawy Ebdu Mabrouk School Trainer Certified Trainer
Asmaa Mostafa Mostafa Montazah Idara Master Trainer Certified Trainer
Rehab Sabry Ghazy Montazah Idara Manager Remedial Reading Unit RR
Sabah Gad Karim Semry Montazah Idara Manager Remedial Reading Department RR
Ghada Sobhy Youssef 
Mohamad East Alex Idara Quality Control in Charge Certified Trainer
Nelly Fouad Mahmoud East Alex Idara Manager Remedial Reading Unit RR
Mohamad Mohamad Mostafa 
El Hennawy West Alex, Idara Director of Training Centre Certified Trainer
Samia Gamal Hashem Idara (Middle Alex) Manager of Social Working Office BOT
Samar Mohamad Nagui 
Mohamad Idara (Middle Alex) Social Worker Certified Trainer
Saeed Kamel Youssef Idara (Middle Alex) Manager Training Department
Ghareeb Fahmy Masoud Idara (Middle Alex) Mentor Certified Trainer
Hasnaa Mostafa Idara (Middle Alex) Social Worker BOT
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex B. 
47
Mohamad Hassan Mahmoud 
Khalil Alex Educatioanl Modireya Master Trainer Master Trainer
Mogeda Ibrahim Sayed El 
Wazeer Erfan School Manager Preparatory School
Fath Mohamad Samone Erfan School French Teacher AT
Eman Ghoneim Erfan School Educational Supervisor SC Club
Ashraf Abdel Meguid 
Mohamad El Masry Erfan School Council Head BOT
Gamal Mohamad Attia Erfan School School Principal BOT
Samia Abdel Aleem 
Mahmoud Erfan School BOT BOT
Fayza Niham Samaan Abdel 
Messih Erfan School Social worker BOT
Jehan Mahmoud El Sayed Erfan School Master Teacher BOT
Ragab Shaaban Mohamad Aly Erfan School Marine Engineer
Ramadan Kamal Mohamad El 
Sawy Erfan School
Bassant Farouk Mohamad 
Salem Al Zahraa School Master Teacher
Jehan Ismaeel Sedky Moharam Bey School School Principal
Ibtissam Abdel Kader Moharam Bey School Teacher AT
Nevine Maarouf Mohamad Moharam Bey School Teacher AT
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex B. 
48
Hisham Mohamad Mahmoud Moharam Bey School Master Teacher AT
Youssef Hamad Ibrahim Moharam Bey School Master Teacher AT
Aly Mohamad Mohamad El 
Barbary Moharam Bey School Teacher AT
Emad El Dine Abdel Latif
Abdel Ghani Moharam Bey School Teacher RR
Mariam Iskandar Edward Moharam Bey School TA
Nourhan Mohamad Ragab 
Mohamad Helal Moharam Bey School TA
Atef Abdel Hameed Ibrahim Moharam Bey School Master Teacher
Ahmad Mohamad Ibrahim El 
Leithy Mansour Hussein School Master Teacher RR
Doha Mohamad Soliman 
Abdel Hafez Mansour Hussein School Master Teacher RR
Fayrouz Ezzat Mohamad Mansour Hussein School teacher RR
El Sayed Mahmoud sayed 
Ahmad Mansour Hussein School Master Teacher RR
Sayed Ahmad Jelan Mansour Hussein School Council Head RR
Soraya Beshir Mahmoud Mansour Hussein School Council Member
Ibrahim Mostafa Mohamad El 
Labany Mansour Hussein School Financial Controller BOT
Mona Mohamad Soliman 
Abdel Hafez Mansour Hussein School Master Teacher
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex B. 
49
Sagda Ibrahim El Sayed Mansour Hussein School Social Worker RR
Alaa El Dine Mostafa 
Mohamad Mohamad Shalaby Alex Educational Modireya Social Workers Department Head
Cairo Governorate
Mohamad Shaaban 
Mohamad Idara (El Zawya) Supervisor Social Studies
Mohamad Ahmad Mohamad East Nasr City Idara Supervisor Social Work
Dalia Mohamad Adnan 
Naguib Idara (East Nasr City) Supervisor Social Studies
Mohamad Ahmad Mohamad 
Kassab Idara (East Nasr City) Supervisor Social Studies
Yvetter Malak Kaldas Idara (Helwan) Social Worker
Marwa Abdel Samei Al Farouk School Assistant Teacher AT
Amal Soliman Abdel Latif Al Farouk School BOT Al-Farouk School BOT
Soheir Zaki Riad Al Farouk School BOT Al-Farouk School BOT
Waheed Rushdy Hamad Al Farouk School BOT Al-Farouk School AT
Nabeya Abdel Aati Aly Al Farouk School BOT Al-Farouk School
Dalia Yehya Farid Al Farouk School BOT Al-Farouk School, Sc Club & AT SC Club
Soheir Abdel Messih Makeen Al Farouk School BOT Al-Farouk School, Sc Club SC Club
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex B. 
50
Madiha Talaat Soliman Al Farouk School BOT Al-Farouk School, Sc Club SC Club
Medhat Mohamad Fathy 
Nassar Al Farouk School School Principal
Amira Aly Mohamad Talaat Harb School Sc Club Parent SC Club
Sherine Abdel Aziz Talaat Harb School Sc Club Parent SC Club
Mona Seoudy Talaat Harb School Sc Club Parent SC Club
Rania Zaky Abdel Rahman Talaat Harb School BOT Talaat Harb School, Sc Club Parent BOT, SC Club
Nawal Abdel Rahman Talaat Harb School Sc Club Parent, BOT Talaat Harb School SC Club
Ehab Mahmoud Abdel Azim Talaat Harb School Sc Club Parent SC Club
Heba Yehya Youssef Talaat Harb School Sc Club Teacher SC Club
Elham Karam Gadallah Talaat Harb School Sc Club Teacher SC Club
Hoda Sayed Gomaa Talaat Harb School Sc Club supervisor SC Club
Dalal Gamal El Dine Ibrahim Talaat Harb School Sc Club supervisor SC Club
Maha Lotfy Mohamad Talaat Harb School BOT Talaat Harb School BOT
Karima Abdel Salam 
Mohamad Talaat Harb School BOT Talaat Harb School BOT
Ibrahim Mohamad Mohamad 
Ibrahim Talaat Harb School BOT Talaat Harb School BOT
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex B. 
51
Sarah Talaat Abdel Latif Talaat Harb School Teacher - KG AT
Hamed Hassan Mohamad Talaat Harb School First Teacher Arabic Language RR
Doaa El Sayed Abdel Rahman Talaat Harb School Assistant Teacher RR
Maysa Mohamad Fouad Talaat Harb School First Teacher Arabic Language RR
Moataz Ghanem Salah Talaat Harb School Assistant Teacher AT
Mohamad Rashad Metwally El Zawia El Hamra School Principal
Mr. Ashraf El Zawia El Hamra School Deputy Principal
Sayed Mohamad Atta El Zawia El Hamra School Financial Controller - BOT
Abdel Nasser Mohamad El Zawia El Hamra School Head of BOT 
Nefissa Meghawry El Zawia El Hamra School Secretary BOT
Abdallah Ibrahim Abdel Samei El Zawia El Hamra School Computer Teacher AT
Eman Sayed El Toukhy El Zawia El Hamra School Supervisor Arabic Language Mentor
Hala Sayed Mohamad El Zawia El Hamra School Teacher Arabic Language AT
Khaled El Sayed Abdel Aziz El Zawia El Hamra School Supervisor Arabic Language Mentor-AT
Mohamad Mosaad Aly El Zawia El Hamra School Teacher Arabic Language AT
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex B. 
52
Atef Mohamad El Sayed Mahmasha School BOT Member of the BOT
Mr. Sayed Omar Hameed Mahmasha School First Teacher Arabic Language
Mr. Yasser Mahmasha School Teacher Arabic Language AT
Zeinat Mohamad Abdel Aziz Mahmasha School Social Worker AT
Samira TalaatOsman Mahmasha School Member of the BOT ARB
Saeed Mohamed Tawfik Mahmasha School BOT Head of BOT 
Samy Abdel Aziz Al Husseiny Mahmasha School BOT Member of the BOT
Nasser Ibrahim Abd Rabo Mahmasha School BOT Member of the BOT
Khaled Mohamad abdel 
Wahab Mahmasha School BOT Member of the BOT
Lamal Mohamad Abdel 
Wahab Mahmasha School BOT Member of the BOT
Mohamad Kamel Abdel 
Mohsen Mahmasha School BOT Member of the BOT
Zeinab Mohamed Abdel 
Fattah
Educational Directorate 
(Modireya) General Supervisor Social Studies Mentor
Soheir Mohamad Hassan Matareya Training Centre Master Trainer Master Trainer
Essam Mohamad Aly Shawky Matareya Training Centre Manager Preparatory Education
Mahmoud Abdel Ghani Ibn Khaldoon School Council Member BOT
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex B. 
53
Dr. Abdel Fattah Abdel Raouf 
El Koweie Ibn Khaldoon School Councel Member BOT
alaa Abdel Hakim Abdel 
Khalek Ibn Khaldoon School Council Member BOT
Sherif Abdel Moety Mohamad Ibn Khaldoon School Council Member BOT
Mona Mostafa El Khaleegy Ibn Khaldoon School School Principal
Amal Mohamad Amin 
Mahmoud Ibn Khaldoon School Master Teacher
Faten Mohamad Thabet Aly Ibn Khaldoon School Master Teacher
Mona Mohamad Fawzy 
Nassar Ibn Khaldoon School Social Worker
El Sayed Kamel Abdel 
Maksoud Ibn Khaldoon School Accountant BOT
Rania Abdel Kader Abu Zeid El 
Henawy Ibn Khaldoon School Teacher AT
Magdy William Sergah Khalil Ibn Sina A School School Principal
Sally Salah Abdel Aati Ibn Sina A School TA AT
Engy Refaat Mohamad Elwan Ibn Sina A School Teacher AT
Mina Samir Shafik Ibn Sina A School Teacher AT
Mahmoud El Sayed Mohamad 
Zahran Ibn Sina A School Master Teacher RR
Heba Mohamad Hassan 
Mahgoub Ibn Sina A School Master Teacher RR
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex B. 
54
Dina Mohamad Hassan Abdel 
Kader Ibn Sina A School Teacher RR
Fawzya abdel Rehim Kandil Ibn Sina A School Council Member BOT
Ahmad Abdel Aziz Hassan Ibn Sina A School Council Member BOT
Amal Abbas Ibrahim Ibn Sina A School Council Head BOT
Mervat Mostafa Mohamad 
Aly Ibn Sina A School Social Worker BOT
Ashraf Abdel Hamid 
Bassiouny Ghoneim Mansour School School Principal
Dr. Othman Cairo Educational Modireya Director of Training Departement AT
Mr. Radwan Cairo Educational Modireya Director of Remedial Reading
Mr. Radwan Cairo Educational Modireya Manager Remedial ReadingUnit
Wafaa Gad Abu El Yazid Cairo Educational Modireya Master Teacher RR
Hoda Ibrahim Ahmad Gaafar Cairo Educational Modireya Master Teacher RR
Hanan Ahmad Mohamad Abu 
Dina Cairo Educational Modireya Master Teacher RR
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex C. 
55
ANNEX C. - DOCUMENTS CONSULTED
AIR (2015) ESP 15- Month Performance Report Oct. 2013- Dec. 2014 
AIR (2014). Response to the Inspector General’s Recommendation: Assessment of the Impact of 
USAID-Funded Education Support Program. 
ESP (2013). Design, Implementation and Initial Results of Remedial Reading Activities in Egypt. 
ESP (2014). Design, Implementation and Final Results of Remedial Reading Activities in Egypt. 
ESP (2011). Quarterly Performance Report No. 1. 
ESP (2012). Quarterly Performance Report No. 3. 
ESP (2012). Quarterly Performance Report No. 4. 
ESP (2012). Quarterly Performance Report No. 5. 
ESP (2013) Quarterly Performance Report No. 6. 
ESP (2013). Quarterly Performance Report No. 7. 
ESP (2013). Quarterly Performance Report No. 9. 
ESP (2014). Quarterly Performance Report No. 12. 
ESP (2012). Annual Report 1. 
ESP (2013). Annual Report 2. 
ESP (2015). 15-Month Performance Report, October 2013 – December 2014. 
ESP (2012). Rapid Assessment Study Boards of Trustees and Assistant Teachers Data Analysis Report. 
OIG (2013). Audit of USAID/Egypt’s Education Support Program. 
USAID (2012). Modification of Assistance. 
USAID (2011). Cooperative Agreement No. AID-263-A-11-00010 
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex D. 
56
ANNEX D. - DETAILED METHODOLOGY AND DATA COLLECTION 
INSTRUMENTS 
The basic components of the methodology utilized in the evaluation are described in Section II of the 
report. The three data types and sources – (1) project documentation, monitoring files, and summary 
reports and assessments; (2) qualitative individual and group interviews, and focus groups with 
implementers, partners, stakeholders, and beneficiaries; and, (3) two quantitative databases 
(classroom observation and a teacher survey) generated by the evaluation team – were utilized to 
varying degrees in response to the six evaluation questions. Given the significant limitations of the 
methodology, also described in Section II, the analytic process of triangulation and cross-verification of 
the findings was critical. The team’s confidence in the findings that are reported is bolstered by the 
fact that in no case did the various information sources produce aberrant or contradictory pictures of 
processes and outcomes. 
Field Interviews and Focus Groups 
Qualitative data collection through face-to-face interviews was organized around a sample of schools 
in two districts of each of the five governorates specified for the evaluation. Utilizing the ESP 
monitoring files of teachers trained and locations of the two principal school-based programs, 
remedial reading classes and scientific research clubs, the evaluation team developed a list of 
potential primary schools (and a limited number of preparatory schools) to be included in the 
fieldwork. The team contracted a field coordinator in each governorate who had previously worked 
with the ESP and was knowledgeable about the districts and schools in the governorate, as well the 
officials in the MOE governorate and district offices who granted permission to enter the schools and 
conduct interviews. The coordinators made the final selection of schools from the initial list based on 
accessibility and receptivity to participation in the evaluation. The final sample of 16 schools was 
therefore purposive both to accommodate the tight schedule of the evaluation fieldwork and to 
ensure inclusion of the essential elements to be covered in the evaluation. 
In addition to the interviews in each school with the director, ESP-trained and non-ESP ATs, 
supervisors and mentors, and remedial reading teachers (as appropriate) and science club 
coordinators (as appropriate), and the focus group discussion with the school BOT, the team also 
interviewed MOE officials, and representatives of the social work department, and training and 
reading units in the mudereyas and idaras where the 16 schools were located. 
Two additional points are important about the collection of the qualitative data in the field. Although 
the coordinators previously worked with the ESP and therefore might have introduced a potential bias 
into the sample selection, the added value of their knowledge of the local system and access to the 
schools and the officials, in the judgement of the evaluation team far out-weighed the risk of bias in 
this evaluation. Essentially, it would have been impossible to complete the fieldwork in the time 
permitted without the assistance of the coordinators. In addition, the coordinators organized the 
collection of the quantitative data in the governorates for the classroom observation and the teacher 
survey. 
The second point is that the implementation of the ESP was carried out on the governorate and district 
level rather than by school. For the sake of efficiency, the evaluation team identified the teachers, 
directors, and BOTs to be interviewed within specific schools but these 16 schools were in no sense 
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex D. 
57
“ESP schools.” The ATs who received training were drawn from the entire governorate and teachers 
that had received training and those that had not were present in the same schools. The coordinators 
also arranged the focus groups with the BOTs on the basis of the schools visited, for convenience. 
There was no necessary relationship between these particular schools and whether the BOTs had been 
exposed to the ESP BOT training, which was administered separately from the schools through the 
Department of Social Work, at the idara level. 
Classroom Observation 
Formal classroom observations were carried out in 120 classrooms, 60 in the classrooms of teachers 
who had received the ESP training for ATs, and 60 in the classrooms of teachers without this training. 
Twenty-four classrooms were observed in each of the five governorates. The observations were 
conducted by experienced data collection personnel, engaged for this purpose by the coordinators. 
These data collectors had previously worked with the ESP and the MOE in classroom observation and 
were trained in the use of the modified SCOPE tool – the Standard Classroom Observation Protocol for 
Egypt – which also had been used by the ESP in its assessment studies and by the MOE as part of its 
promotion requirements. 
Survey of Assistant Teachers 
A short survey instrument was developed by the evaluation team to be administered by the 
coordinators to a sample of Assistant Teachers in each governorate who had and had not participated 
in the ESP AT training (Educational Applications.) The survey measured teachers’ knowledge attitudes, 
and practices about various teaching methods and techniques that were addressed in the Educational 
Applications course. (ATs who had not received the ESP training were instructed to respond on the 
basis of other training they had received since they had started teaching.) The number of individuals 
completing the questionnaire (N=1362) exceeded the planned sample size of N=1200 (240 
respondents per governorate.) The original intent was to identify 600 ESP participants and 600 non￾ESP teachers as a comparison group. This target proved unrealistic, however, because of the difficulty 
in finding non-ESP ATs in the urban governorates. Accordingly, the coordinators were instructed to 
get as close to parity as possible in each governorate within the total of 240 respondents. In the urban 
governorates the total of 240 questionnaires already were complete when the coordinators identified 
additional groups of non-ESP ATs. They asked these individuals to complete additional questionnaires 
in order to boost the sample of those without ESP training. The individuals completing the survey 
were selected solely as ATs (or recent ATs) who had or had not participated in ESP training. 
The classroom observation and survey data were entered into two databases and descriptive analysis 
was carried out using Excel. The distributions of the two samples by governorate and by sex are 
shown in the following tables. 
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex D. 
58
7% 6% 4% 9% 6%
33%
18%
12% 15% 10% 13%
67%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Graph 1: Survey Participants ESP (771) + Non-ESP (591)
F = 917
M = 445
11% 9% 8% 5% 2%
35%
9% 11% 12% 15% 18%
65%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Alexandria Assuit Cairo Minya Sohag Totals
Graph 2: SCOPE Participants ESP (60) + Non-ESP (60)
F = 78
M = 42
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex D. 
59
Data Collection Tools 
The data collection tools for the evaluation are attached in a separate file. Interview protocols were 
developed for each of the categories of people interviewed in the schools and related institutions, as 
well as for the BOT focus group discussions, so that cumulative and comparative analysis could be 
done across governorates. Protocols also were used for the key informant interviews in the MOE 
central offices, the PAT, and the ESP implementers. These instruments can be found on the following 
pages. 
Table 01 ESP Evaluation Participants # (2 tools)
Gov
Survey SCOPE
# M # F
sub 
tot # M # F
sub 
tot
Alexandria 95 240 335 13 11 24
Assiut 86 163 249 11 13 24
Cairo 60 204 264 10 14 24
Minya 120 138 258 6 18 24
Sohag 84 172 256 2 22 24
Totals 445 917 1362 42 78 120
% M - F 33% 67% 35% 65%
Table 02 ESP Evaluation Participants % (2 tools)
Gov
Survey SCOPE
M = 
445
F = 
917 Subtot
M = 
42
F = 
78 Subtot
Alexandria 7% 18% 25% 11% 9% 20%
Assiut 6% 12% 18% 9% 11% 20%
Cairo 4% 15% 19% 8% 12% 20%
Minya 9% 10% 19% 5% 15% 20%
Sohag 6% 13% 19% 2% 18% 20%
Totals 33% 67% 100% 35% 65% 100%
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex D. 
60
Interview Protocol for MOE Leadership 
Purpose: The purpose of this document is to provide guiding questions for the interview with 
the MOE. The questions are intended to be a starting point for the interview; however it is at the 
discretion of the interviewer to follow leads during the course of the conversation. In other 
words, the questions should be used for a guided conversation and not a strict protocol. 
Question 1: Can you provide insight on the context of the MOE when the ESP began? What 
was the process for the initiation of the ESP? Do you feel that there is a need for additional 
support of this type in the current context? 
Question 2: How did the ESP fit within the overall MOE agenda for basic education 
nationwide? 
Question 3: What features of the ESP do you think are most important? 
Question 4: What aspects of the ESP would you change? 
Question 5: What was your role in design, oversight, and management of the ESP? Did this 
change over time? Will the MOE continue to implement the training for ATs? Are there other 
components of the ESP you will or will not continue? Why? 
Question 6: What recommendations do you have for future USAID Activities? 
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex D. 
61
Interview- ESP
Purpose: The questions are intended to be a starting point for the interview; however it is at the 
discretion of the interviewer to follow leads during the course of the conversation. In other 
words, the questions should be used for a guided conversation and not a strict protocol. The 
focus is on understanding the background and context of the project. It is also to understand the 
implementation of the project from the point of view. 
Question 1: How did the ESP start? is there background you can provide on the origins of the 
ESP?
Question 2: In your view, what are the overall successes of the ESP?, what were the 
challenges? 
Question 3: If you were to implement the ESP again, what would you do the same, what would 
you do differently? 
Question 4: What do you perceive is the future of the ESP? Will aspects of the program 
continue? Which? Why? 
Question 5: In terms of the sustainability of the practices or methods introduced by ESP, are 
there aspects that, in your opinion, are unlikely to be sustainable? What suggestions do you 
have for correcting this problem or for follow-up in the future to reinforce the ESP inputs? 
Question 6: What other information would you like to know about the evaluation or would you 
like to share to the Team? 
Question 7: We would like to learn more about the M&E function in the ESP project. Please 
describe he process for data collection and documentation and reporting. In your opinion, did 
M&E function meet the project management requirements? How? 
Question 8: Please describe the relationship between the ESP and its principal stakeholders, 
the MOE and the PAT. For example, did you work with them on a daily basis? What was the 
decision-making process? What was the process for introducing new initiatives, or for approval 
of plans, materials, etc.? What was the process for selecting teachers and social workers to 
participate in the ESP training programs? 
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex D. 
62
INTERVIEW PROTOCOL FOR THE SOCIAL WORK DEPARTMENT 
This interview is intended for the central and governorate directors for the SWD. The evaluators 
will use the trainer interview protocol for the district social workers. The focus of the questions is 
on the perception of the definition and achievement of the objectives relative to capacity-building 
of the BOTs, as well as sustainability and next steps. 
1. Please describe the relationship between your department and the ESP. What was the 
process for developing the strategy and plan for your activities with ESP? 
2. What was your role in the design and implementation of your program with the ESP? 
What was the role of the SWD in the governorates and districts? What were the 
strengths and weaknesses of the model and division of responsibility? 
3. In your opinion, what was the most important part of the support you received from the 
ESP?
4. What challenges or problems did you encounter? Do you feel that these challenges 
were resolved? If yes, how? 
5. What do you see as the next steps in strengthening the work of the SWD in the 
communities, and in building the capacity of the BOTs to contribute to effective school 
management? 
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex D. 
63
PAT interview Questions 
ESP has worked with PAT over the last few years providing technical support to the academy in 
a number of directions. Can you talk to us about this? 
The above is the introductory question to the whole interview. It should be used as a door 
opener to more detailed questions, in terms of: 
1- In what directions did ESP provide support to PAT? 
Expected directions of support to be reported by PAT official are: 
- website, 
- databases for training participants and trainers, 
- PD Certification System for training programs, trainers, reviewers (are the evaluators?), 
and training centres, 
- Develop a leadership skills program for school principals, 
- Training all school principals in 6 governorates 
- Prepare trainers in all Egypt to expand the provision of training nationwide. 
- For each direction of ESP support reported by PAT official, interviewer should probe for 
details using the questions below 
2- Did PAT actually need support in each of these directions? If No go to 3, if Yes go to 4 
3- Why did you accept it, and what will you do with the product of this particular support? 
4- Did PAT get enough support in each direction? If No, ask why then go to 5 
5- Did the quality of technical support provided by ESP to PAT meet your expectations? If 
No, Why? If Yes, How? 
6- How do you describe the relationship between ESP and PAT? 
7- Do you think that ESP has successfully completed its job with PAT or you think there are 
still jobs that need to be completed? What job in each category? 
a. For the successfully completed jobs, will PAT be able to sustain and develop the 
attained results? How? 
b. For the incomplete jobs, if any, will you work on completing them? How? 
8- If you were to change/modify some the ESP scheme of support that PAT received, what 
exactly would you modify, why, and how? 
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex D. 
64
INTERVIEW PROTOCOL FOR THE MOE OFFICIALS IN THE GOVERNORATES AND 
DISTRICTS 
Because these individuals were the key counterparts for implementing the ESP at the local 
level, and managing the training and follow-up, these interviews will be key to understanding the 
implementation process, problems encountered and adjustments made along the way, and 
perception of continuing demand, next steps, and sustainability. 
1. Please describe when and how you began working with the ESP in this 
muderiya/idarra? 
2. What was the process for carrying out the program here? What problems did you 
encounter? What changes or additions did you make over time? 
3. In your opinion, what were the most important achievements of the ESP in this 
muderiya/idarra? 
4. What remaining gaps can you identify and how will you move forward in resolving then 
now that the ESP has ended? 
5. [For those involved with the remedial reading and writing program and/or with the 
science clubs] 
- Please describe your experience with the remedial reading program/science clubs 
(i.e., how many students, how many schools, differences between girls and boys, 
how the teachers and school directors responded.) 
- Have you seen any evidence of changes or improvements that resulted from these 
activities? 
- What plans do you have for these programs in the future? (If they will be continued 
or expanded) where will they get the resources for these activities? 
6. (Specific question about activities with the BOTs) How do you assess the activities so 
far in your muderiya/idarra for building the capacity of the BOTs to contribute to the 
management of the schools? What do you see as the achievements to date and the 
problems? What will be the next steps for this program? 
7. Overall, how would you rate your experience with the ESP? What recommendations 
would you make for changes in this type of program in the future? 
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex D. 
65
BOT CAPACITY ASSESSMENT 
Focus Group Discussion PROTOCOL 
Final Evaluation-Related Question: To what extent has BOT participation increased, in term 
of Effective School Management? 
Purpose: This instrument is to assess the capacity of the BOT after receiving services from 
ESP. It assesses the BOT’s capacity in ‘7’ areas that describe internal processes and external 
relations and networking. 
Analysis of data of each discussion will provide information on each area and at the overall level 
of the BOT as an independent/standalone organization. 
Target Group: All of BOT members 
Planning
Q1. How do you assess the school and students needs? 
Q2. What is your plan for the second term of the school year/next school year? 
Q.2.1. Who is doing what? 
Q3. Do you use groups/committees? 
Q3.1. How is that? 
M&E: 
Q1. How do you monitor and evaluate yourselves as a BOT/school management? 
Q2. How do you reflect on the findings from the M&E? 
Process 
Q1. Where do you keep your files? 
Q2. How often do you meet to discuss school-related issues? 
Q3. How many BOT members attend, in average? 
Q4. How do you follow up your decisions with the school management and other entities? 
Good Governance 
Q1: How do you perceive the participation of parents in the regular general assembly? 
Q2: How was the BOT was identified? 
Q3: Do you remember how many parents ran for BOT election? 
Q4. What is both the gender and parents/teachers distribution of your BOT? 
Q5. How do you describe your role? 
Q6. How often school management respond to your decisions? 
Q7. How decisions are communicated to other parents? 
Q8. How do you collect opinions from other parents? 
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex D. 
66
Finance and Resources Mobilization 
Q1. How do you describe your capacity in managing financial issues of the BOT? 
Q2. How much did you succeed in mobilizing resources required? Examples. 
Networking 
Q1.Do you have any relation with other BOT/ private sector/NGOs/GOs? 
Detailed Description… 
Q3. Was there a benefit, or foreseen benefit from those relations? (BOTs/Private 
sector/NGOs/GOs) 
Q.4 How do you socially market your services and help the community recognize your role? 
BOT’s Perception on Capacity Building Received: 
Q1. Do you think that your capacity has increased within ESP activities? 
Q1.1. How is that? 
Q2. What areas you needed most that was met/not met? 
Q3. How ESP could have served you better? 
 
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex D. 
67
INTERVIEW PROTOCOL FOR TRAINERS 
This protocol will be the basis for the interviews with trainers at all levels. In the group (or 
individual) interviews we will tailor the questions to the specific group (i.e., SWD or AT trainers, 
master trainers, local trainers, etc.) The focus is on the capacity development of the trainers, the 
cascade model of training, and sustainability of the training structure. 
1. Were you working as a trainer for the MOE prior to the ESP project? 
2. Describe the training you received under the ESP project. Who provided the training? 
What was the best part of the training? How does it compare to other training you had in 
the past while you are prepared as a trainer? 
3. Did the training involve any practical experience? Did your trainers (or supervisors) 
observe you as a trainer and make recommendations? 
4. Did you have any role in planning the teacher training or in designing the training 
materials? If yes, in what way did you participate? 
5. [Questions for trainers who train other trainers]
- How many other trainers have you trained? How often? Do you have other 
responsibilities in addition to training trainers? 
- Do you provide any follow-up with the trainers you train – observation or evaluation? 
What does this follow-up include? Does it affect the trainer’s employment or 
promotion? 
- Are you evaluated as a trainer on a regular basis? 
- Do you have access to the materials you need to use as a trainer? Are these 
materials useful to you? 
- In your opinion, was the training you received sufficient for you to train others? What 
was missing? What changes would you recommend in the training you received? 
6. [Questions for local trainers]
- Are you evaluated as a trainer on a regular basis? 
- Do you have access to the materials you need to use as a trainer? Are these 
materials useful to you? 
- In your opinion, was the training you received sufficient for you to train others? What 
was missing? What changes would you recommend in the training you received? 
- Do you have suggestions for improving the training you provide to the Assistant 
Teachers? 
- Do you do any testing or evaluation to assess whether the teachers understand the 
practices you are teaching them? Do you think they get enough information in the 
training to apply the practices in their classrooms? 
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex D. 
68
- Are you interested in learning new techniques for training or in providing training on 
other types of programs? 
- What types of requirements did you have to meet to become a master trainer? 
7. [Questions for the social workers at the local level who are training and giving technical 
assistance to the BOTs] 
- How many BOTs are you training and assisting now on a regular basis? How often 
(or how many times do you meet with each BOT?] 
- What are some examples of successes you have had with the BOTs? What have 
been the major problems you have encountered? 
- Do you think that the training you received to work with the BOTs was sufficient for 
you to assist the BOTs? What were the most useful things you learned? What was 
missing? What changes would you recommend for the training you received? 
- Are you observed or evaluated in your training and assistance with the BOTs? 
- Would you like to have additional training? What recommendations do you have for 
changes or additions to the training you received? 
- In your opinion, is the training you provide to the BOTs effective in increasing the 
BOT capacity to improve school management? Please explain. 
8. [Sustainability] Would you be able to deliver the same training effectively to incoming 
Assistant Teachers in your idarra? 
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex D. 
69
INTERVIEW PROTOCOL FOR MENTORS 
These following questions are the main topics to be covered in group interviews with the 
mentors in each school visit. Mentors are seen as important in helping ATs apply the practices 
presented in the training in their classrooms, and are therefore important in questions about 
sustainability, change in teacher behavior, and achievement of project objectives. 
Assessment of the Training you received as a Mentor 
1. What are you responsibilities as a mentor? Did the training you received from ESP help 
you in performing this job? If yes – how? If no – please explain. 
2. What were the best aspects of the training you received as a mentor? What aspects did 
you find most useful/least useful? 
3. Do you have any recommendations for the way in which the training was presented 
including: 
- Structure of the training (size of the group, hands-on, practical, length, location? 
- Quality of the trainers? 
- Quality of the materials? 
- Relevance of the training and the materials to your interactions with teachers? (or for 
you as a teacher?) Do you continue to use these materials in your work as a 
mentor? Have you distributed them to other mentors or teachers? 
- What was missing in the training? 
4. Do you think that this training affected the way you interact as a mentor with teachers? 
How do you think you affected the teachers’ practices in the classroom? 
5. Would you recommend this training to other mentors? Would you be interested in 
receiving more of this type of training? If yes, examples of topics to be included. 
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex D. 
70
Teacher Interview 
This interview is designed as part of a larger study on teacher professional development in 
Egypt. Your answers will be kept strictly confidential. We appreciate you taking the time to 
participate; this should take no more than 30 minutes. Thank you! 
Section 1: Background characteristics 
Today’s Date: _______________________ 
Governorate: _______________________ 
District: ____________________________ 
School name: 
________________________ 
Grade: ____________________________
Level of Education: ___________________ 
Years of Experience 
Teaching:______________ 
Gender: ____________________________ 
Date of Birth: _______________________ 
Subject: ____________________________ 
Trained (year): __________________ 
Additional component(s): 
___________________________________
___________________________________
___________________________________
____________
Section 2: Interview questions 
Directions to interviewer: Please use either the space below or your own pad to write down 
responses from Teachers. These qualitative responses will be entered into Dedoose for coding. 
Q1- How has your teaching changed since participating in the ESP training? Please give an 
example. 
Q2- What changes have you seen in your students since implementing the strategies you 
learned in the training? 
Q3- Do you think there have been changes in student’s reading and writing performance? 
Please give an example. 
Q4- What kind of additional training do you need? 
Q5- What kind of materials did you receive to implement the strategies learned in the 
training(s)? 
Q6- What kind of support have you received since the training? (for example from the director, 
other teachers, a mentor or the head teacher?) 
Q7- What are the biggest challenges to improve literacy? 
Q8- Is there anything else you would like to share? 
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex D. 
71
Director Interview 
This interview is designed as part of a larger study on teacher professional development in Egypt. Your 
answers will be kept strictly confidential. We appreciate you taking the time to participate; this should 
take no more than 30 minutes. Thank you! 
Section 1: Background characteristics 
Today’s Date: _______________________
Governorate: _______________________ 
District: ____________________________ 
School name: ________________________ 
Grade: ____________________________ 
Level of Education: ___________________ 
Years of Experience:______________ 
Gender: ____________________________ 
Date of Birth: _______________________ 
Subject: ____________________________ 
Section 2: Interview questions 
Directions to interviewer: Please use either the space below or your own pad to write down responses 
from Teachers. These qualitative responses will be entered into Dedoose for coding. 
Q1- How have your teachers changed since participating in the ESP training? Please give an example. 
Q2- How has student performance changed since their teachers participated in the training? Please give 
examples. 
Q3- Do you think there have been changes in student’s reading and writing performance? Please give an 
example. 
Q4- What kind of additional training or support do you as a Director need? 
Q5- What are the biggest challenges to improve literacy? 
Q6- Is there anything else you would like to share? 
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex D. 
72
يمثل هذا اإل ً ستبيان جزء من دراسة عامة حول التنمية المهنية للمعلم في مصر. ونود أن نؤكد لك أن كافة المعلومات واآلراء 
التي ستقدم ها بهذه اإلستمارة تتمتع بالسرية التامة ولن تستخدم باي صورة لتقييم األشخاص أواإلدارات التي يعملون ب ها كما هو 
متبع في مثل هذه الدراسات. إن فريق العمل بهذه الدراسة إذ يشكر لكم تعاونكم إلنجاحها، يرجو منكم مالحظة أن التدريب الذي 
حصلتم عايه للتأهل لمهنة التدريس هو محور هذه الدراسة سواء كان ذلك تدريبا مقدما عن طريق مشروع دعم التعليم أو عن 
طريق ج هات أخرى. لذا فأن استجاباتكم لكل من بنود االستبيان يجب أن تكون مستقاة من مشاركتكم في التدريبات سواءا 
المقدمة من مشروع دعم التعليم أو من ج هات أخرى. ولكم جزيل الشكر مرة أخرى.
البيانات الشخصية:
التاريخ: _________________________ المؤ هل الدراسي: ___________________
عدد سنوات الخبرة في التدريس: __________ المحافظة: _______________________
إلدارة التعليمية_____________________ النوع: )ذكر/ أنثى(:___________________
تاريخ الميالد: _____________________ إسم المدرسة: ______________________
مادة التدريس:______________________ الصف الذي تدرس له:___________________
أوال: العائد التدريبي
رجاء اإلشارة إلى مستواك المعرفي بالموضوعات التالية قبل وبعد التدريبات وذلك بوضع دائرة حول الرقم المناسب بالجدول بحيث 
يعكس مستواك المعرفي كما تراه، وفي حالة عدم وجود رأي لديك برجاء وضع دائرة حول الرقم .0 
# العائد التدريبي
ليس لدي 
معرفة على 
ا طالق
لدي 
معرفة 
قليلة
لدي 
بعض 
المعرفة
لدي 
معرفة 
كبيرة
ال 
يوجد 
رأي
المعايير والتخطيط
1 كان مستواي المعرفي بمعايير المعلم قبل التدريب 1 2 3 4 0
2 أصبح مستواي المعرفي بمعايير المعلم بعد التدريب 1 2 3 4 0
3 كان مستواي المعرفيبالتقيم الذاتي قبل التدريب 1 2 3 4 0
4 أصبح مستواي المعرفي بالتقيم الذاتي بعد التدريب 1 2 3 4 0
5 كان مستواي المعرفي بخطة الدرس قبل التدريب 1 2 3 4 0
6 أصبح مستواي المعرفي بخطة الدرس بعد التدريب؟ 1 2 3 4 0
التخطيط وإستراتيجيات التدريس )إسترتيجيات التعليم(
7 كان مستواي المعرفي بالتقييم المستمر قبل التدريب 1 2 3 4 0
8 أصبح مستواي المعرفي بالتقييم المستمربعدالتدريب 1 2 3 4 0
اإلستراتيجيات الخاصة بالتدريس وإدارة الفصل
9 كان مستواي المعرفي بأساليب التعلم التعاوني قبل التدريب 1 2 3 4 0
10 أصبح مستواي المعرفي بأساليب التعلم التعاوني بعد التدريب 1 2 3 4 0
11 كان مستواي المعرفي باستراتيجيات حل المشكالت قبل التدريب 1 2 3 4 0
12 أصبح مستواي المعرفي باستراتيجيات حل المشكالت بعد التدريب 1 2 3 4 0
13 كان مستواي المعرفي باستراتيجيات التفكير الناقد قبلالتدريب 1 2 3 4 0
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex D. 
73
# العائد التدريبي
ليس لدي 
معرفة على 
ا طالق
لدي 
معرفة 
قليلة
لدي 
بعض 
المعرفة
لدي 
معرفة 
كبيرة
ال 
يوجد 
رأي
14 اصبح مستواي المعرفي باستراتيجيات التفكير الناقد بعد التدريب 1 2 3 4 0
إدارة الفصل
15 كان مستواي المعرفي األساليب الفني إلدارة الفصل قبل التدريب 1 2 3 4 0
16 اصبح مستواي المعرفي األساليب الفني إلدارة الفصل بعد التدريب 1 2 3 4 0
التقييم
17 كان مستواي المعرفي بأدلة التحقق قبل التدريب 1 2 3 4 0
18 اصبح مستواي المعرفي بأدلة التحقق بعد التدريب 1 2 3 4 0
19 كان مستواي المعرفي بملف الطالب قبل التدريب 1 2 3 4 0
20 اصبح مستواي المعرفي بملف الطالببعد التدريب 1 2 3 4 0
ثانيا: التدريبات
-21 هل تدربت للتأ هل لوظبفتك من خالل تدريبات مشروع دعم التعليم؟ )من فضلك ضع دائرة على اإلجابة المناسبة(
نعم / ال
-22 في إذا كانت اإلجابة بنعم، برجاء إضافة المعلومات تلك التدريبات طبقا للجدول التالي:
إسم التدريب السنة التي تم فيها التدريب عدد األيام التدريبية
-23 أذكر أفضل ما قابلته في تدريباتك
-24اذكر مالم ترضى عنه في تدريباتك وكيف يمكن تحسينها لتعظيم عائد التدريب عليك
شكراً على تعاونك معنا وبذلك الجهد والوقت في إستيفاء هذه اإلستمارة
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex D. 
74
Teacher Survey 
This survey is designed as part of a larger study on teacher professional development in Egypt. Your 
answers will be kept strictly confidential. We appreciate you taking the time to participate. If you 
participated in the ESP training please base your responses on the ESP training. If you did not participate 
in the ESP training please base your responses on the training you have received to date. Thank you! 
Section 1: Background characteristics 
Today’s Date: _______________________
Governorate: _______________________ 
District: ____________________________ 
School name: ________________________ 
Grade: ____________________________ 
Level of Education: ___________________ 
Years of Experience Teaching:______________ 
Gender: ____________________________
Date of Birth: _______________________ 
Subject: ____________________________ 
Section 2: Evaluation questions 
Directions: These questions are based on a scale of 1 to 4. 
1= no knowledge 
2= a little knowledge 
3= some knowledge 
4= a lot of knowledge 
O= no opinion 
2.a. Criteria and planning 
1. Before the training my knowledge of the National Teaching Standards was: 
1 2 3 4 O 
2. After the training my knowledge of the National Teaching Standards is: 
1 2 3 4 O 
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex D. 
75
3. Before the training my knowledge about self-assessment was: 
1 2 3 4 O 
4. After the training my knowledge of self-assessment is: 
1 2 3 4 O 
5. Before the training my knowledge about lessons plans was: 
1 2 3 4 O 
6. After the training my knowledge about lesson plans is: 
1 2 3 4 O 
2.b. Planning and teaching strategies 
7. Before the training my knowledge about continuous assessment was: 
1 2 3 4 O 
8. After the training my knowledge about continuous assessment is: 
1 2 3 4 O 
2. c. Strategies for teaching and classroom administration 
9. Before the training my knowledge about cooperative learning approaches was: 
1 2 3 4 O 
10. After the training my knowledge about cooperative learning approaches is: 
1 2 3 4 O 
11. Before the training my knowledge about problem solving strategies was: 
1 2 3 4 O 
12. After the training my knowledge about problem solving strategies is: 
1 2 3 4 O 
13. Before the training my knowledge about critical thinking strategies was: 
1 2 3 4 O 
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex D. 
76
14. After the training my knowledge about critical thinking strategies is: 
1 2 3 4 O 
2.d. Classroom management 
15. Before the training my knowledge about classroom management techniques was: 
1 2 3 4 O 
16. After the training my knowledge about classroom management techniques is: 
1 2 3 4 O 
2. e. Assessment 
17. Before the training my knowledge about rubrics was: 
1 2 3 4 O 
18. After the training my knowledge about rubrics is: 
1 2 3 4 O 
19. Before the training my knowledge about portfolios was: 
1 2 3 4 O 
20. After the training my knowledge about portfolios is: 
1 2 3 4 O 
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex D. 
77
3. a. Please use the space below to explain what you like about the Training. 
3. b. Please use the space below to explain what could be improved in the Training. 
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
 AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex D. 
78
Section 3: Training question(s) 
Did you participate in the ESP training? Yes/ No 
If yes, what year were you trained: __________ 
What ESP programs: 
_______________________________________
_______________________________________ 
How many days of training: ________________
 ESP Performance Evaluation, USAID/Egypt DevTech Systems Inc. 
AID 263-0-15-00009 Annex D. 
 
79
PROGRESS INDICATORS 
Indicators Y1+Y2
Total
Y3
(1st half)
10/13-3/14
Y3
(2nd half)
4/14-9/14
Y3
(NCE QR)
10/14-12/14
Y3
(Total)
10/13-12/14
Y1-Y3
Project
Final
Project
Goals
Number of Idarra-level SWDs that 
completed ESP-developed training 
packaged endorsed by the MoE
271 0 0 0 0 271 271
Number of BoTs that completed 
MoE-endorsed BoT training course 19,420 371 2689 1,053 4,113 25,533 25K
Number of students in selected 
schools who participated in reading/ 
writing activities
2,699 4036 10770 2,487 17,293 19,992 20K
Number of students in selected 
schools who participated in Science 
Clubs
790 396 1218 513 2,127 2,917 3K
Numbers of Mudderia and Idarra￾level trainers certified by PAT to 
deliver specific coursed
381 0 0 280 280 661 520
Number of newly hired teachers 
who completed PAT-certified
training course
115,053 0 669* 0 669 115,722 100K
Percentage of newly hired teachers 
who successfully passed the PAT￾certified training club
99% 0 99% 0 99% 99% 80%
Number of schools/Idarra potential 
leaders who successfully completed 
the PAT-certified leadership 
training package
2,648 0 0 0 0 2,684** 3K
Number of mentors who completed 
the PAT-certified training package 3,502 0 0 0 0 3,502** 10K
Percentage of mentors who 
successfully completed the PAT￾certified training package
100% 0 0 0 0 100% 100%
Number of Idarra leadership teams 
that successfully completed ESP￾developed contingency planning 
training package
22 0 0 0 0 22* 50
*699 ATs were trained in previous quarters, but their documentation arrived late and they were entered into the 
database for Q4 of Y3 
**These three activities were suspended with the ESP wind-up plan and were not included in the approved ESP 
no-cost extension modification that followed the reversal of the USG wind-up plan.