MCGOVERN-DOLE FOOD FOR EDUCATION 
PROGRAM IN SIERRA LEONE
All Pikin For Learn Phase IV Baseline Evaluation Summary
SUMMARY
Project Background
Catholic Relief Services (CRS) is implementing the fourth phase of the McGovern-Dole Food for Education 
project All Pikin for Learn (APFL) in Sierra Leone. The project aims to reduce hunger while improving literacy 
and primary education, especially for girls. Since 2008, CRS has rolled out APFL, funded by the United States 
Department of Agriculture (USDA), in chiefdoms within the Koinadugu and Falaba districts. The project aligns 
with the education strategy of the Government of Sierra Leone (GoSL) by seeking to improve the quality and 
relevance of education, encourage the completion of primary education for vulnerable and marginalized 
children, and increase community involvement in education. It is designed to achieve these goals by providing 
school meals, training teachers and school administrators, improving water and sanitation facilities, providing 
school infrastructure, and building skills and knowledge within the communities.
In 2018, USDA approved APFL for four additional years of implementation, expanding its reach to 69,731 
primary school pupils in the Koinadugu and Falaba districts from 32,684 pupils in the previous phase. Phase IV 
of the project builds on the progress and lessons learned throughout Phases I, II, and III. It prioritizes activities 
that leverage gains achieved from prior McGovern-Dole investments to achieve sustainability and graduation 
by the end of the project.
Methodology
The external evaluation of APFL IV is a four-year study. Baseline data collection took place June 2019 and 
included 70 sample schools across 15 chiefdoms where the project is intervening – 43 schools continuing from 
Phase III of APFL and 27 new schools. Additionally, 12 FGD collected the critical perspectives of community 
members, leaders, and parents.
FINDINGS
Strategic Objectives
The baseline literacy assessment of surveyed APFL IV class 2 pupils revealed low literacy levels— 5.58 
percent met the project’s reading comprehension benchmark. Pupils’ results against the benchmark are 
presented in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Percentage of Pupils Reaching Literacy Threshold by Sex
Note: Girls (n=334); Boys (n=348); Total (N=682)
Pupils performed best on the alphabet naming subtask; however, the majority of pupils performed poorly on 
each of the other subtasks. The proportions of pupils who did not answer a single item correct across 
subtasks—known as zero scores—are presented in Figure 2. In general, boys outperformed girls.
Figure 2: Percentage of Pupils Receiving Zero Scores by Sex
Note: Girls (n=334); Boys (n=348); Total (N=682)
Teachers play a critical role in pupils’ learning and are, therefore, instrumental in meeting APFL’s project goals. 
There is a clear need for rigorous teacher training and coaching on effective teaching techniques. Fewer than 
half of teachers are certified; therefore, CRS’s teacher training and certification efforts will help fill a critical gap 
in Koinadugu’s and Falaba’s workforce. According to surveys, positive mentorships between teachers and 
head teachers could be an impactful activity.
Supporting the feeding program will be critical for the APFL IV project. Only 6.12 percent of head teachers 
reported being able to provide a school meal on the day of the baseline data collection visit. This indicates that 
without CRS support, provision of meals at schools will be limited. Additionally, with less than half of pupils 
reporting that they are reaching the minimum acceptable diet, keeping the school feeding programs well 
stocked will be essential for pupils’ nutrition.
Relevance
Qualitative data from the community FGDs and the stakeholder KIIs indicate that the holistic approach and 
design of APFL IV is responsive to the most prominent needs of children in their community, specifically 
feeding support, improving teacher quality, water wells and latrines, and improving school building 
infrastructure. Of these needs, school feeding support was cited the most often in FGDs and echoed 
prominently in stakeholder KIIs. Overall, community members are appreciative of APFL’s programming and 
want to see the project succeed.
Effectiveness
Participants in both the community FGDs and stakeholder KIIs view the project’s overall design as 
appropriate—if not critical— to the context of their communities. However, stakeholders and community 
members alike expressed concerns over the effectiveness of the project if all implementation aspects are not 
strictly adhered to and monitored; specific areas of concern include teacher training, food provision, and 
community sensitization. Additionally, participants drew attention to gender considerations within the project 
that should be examined and addressed.
Sustainability and Impact
CRS’s coordination with partners will be critical to ensuring that APFL’s activities are sustainable beyond the 
life of the project. There are opportunities to include all partners—from community members and school 
support groups at the local level through the NSFS at the national level—in each APFL activity. Indeed, the 
NSFS is eager to learn from CRS’s successes as it prepares to take on the responsibility for school feeding 
activities.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Closely monitor project implementation.
Close monitoring of the implementation of activities will ensure fidelity to the project design, alleviate 
community concerns around theft or ineffectiveness, increase CRS’s responsiveness to challenges that arise, 
and allow the project team to link specific interventions with outcomes observed during the midline and endline 
evaluations.
Examine existing student and teacher English language abilities.
Student performance on the listening comprehension subtask may indicate that students have a limited ability 
to understand spoken English. The project may want to consider undertaking more targeted research into the 
reasons for this gap in comprehension. Specifically, this may mean a deeper investment in coaching for basic 
skills for literacy instruction for early grade teachers.
Tailor APFL IV interventions to individual school and community needs.
The project should adapt its approach in different schools and communities based on previous level of support 
from APFL, as well as current needs and priorities. More targeted interventions will lead to greater impact as 
well as encourage stronger community buy-in and ownership, thus promoting future sustainability. CRS should 
leverage existing resources and potential partnerships with other entities working within the communities to be 
more efficient.
Address gender considerations within the programming.
CRS should examine and address gender considerations in all aspects of APFL IV programming. Baseline 
findings show that boys outperform girls on the literacy assessment; furthermore, community members shared 
concerns that challenges around gender are prevalent in targeted communities. CRS should consider 
completing a thorough gender and social inclusion analysis to ensure that the project’s design, implementation, 
monitoring, and evaluation accounts for existing gender disparities and that the interventions designed to 
remove or reduce such disparities are appropriate for the community context.
Build the capacity of the National School Feeding Secretariat.
Considering the APFL IV goal of transitioning the school feeding program to the GoSL, CRS should play a role 
in building the capacity of the nascent NSFS. This could include frequent collaboration and communication 
between the two groups, as well as CRS-led trainings. Potential trainings could focus on building the capacity 
of monitoring-and-evaluation teams to oversee implementation of the school feeding program as well as 
address the program’s administrative and logistical components.
Integrate transition strategy and communication from start‐up for sustainable impact.
Clear communication and expectations setting around CRS’s transition from the region must be central to the 
early discussions with communities, partners, and the GoSL. CRS should develop a transition strategy for 
AFPL IV in partnership with relevant stakeholders. Such a strategy should clearly articulate transitions and 
phase-out approaches for each activity, identify responsible parties to continue implementation after APFL IV 
ends, delineate direct and indirect costs, establish monitoring and oversight guidelines, and set clear timelines.