1	  
MIDTERM	  EVALUATION REPORT
FOOD	  FOR	  EDUCATION	  “LEARNING	  FOR	  LIFE”
GUATEMALA
With	  the	  support	  of:
Catholic	  Relief	  Services	  (CRS)	  Guatemala	  and	  USDA,	  through	  an	  evaluation	  grant	  to:
Boston	  College	  School	  of	  Social	  Work
Program: McGovern-Dole
Funding Year: 2013
Agreement Number: FFE-520-2013/029-00
Submitted	  by:	  
Thomas	  M.	  Crea,	  PhD,	  MSW	  Liz	  Gruenfeld,	  MSW,	  EdM	  Augusto	  Rosales,	  MSc	  Gaspar	  Tambriz,	  BA	  Joseph	  
Molinari,	  MSPH	  Kelsey	  Komich,	  MSW	  
DISCLAIMER: This publication was produced at the request of the United States Department of Agriculture. It was 
prepared by an independent third-party evaluation firm. The author’s views expressed in this publication do not 
necessarily reflect the views of the United States Department of Agriculture or the United States Government.
Accessibility Note: An accessible version of this document can be made available by contacting 
fas.monitoring.evaluation@usda.gov 
October	  2015
2
TABLE	  OF	  CONTENTS
Acronyms.................................................................................................................................................. 3
List	  of	  Tables	  and	  Figures.......................................................................................................................... 4
Executive	  Summary .................................................................................................................................. 5
A.	  	  Midterm	  Evaluation	  Report................................................................................................................. 9
Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 9
Background ........................................................................................................................................ 9
Key	  Evaluation	  Questions................................................................................................................. 10
B.	  	  Methods ............................................................................................................................................ 10
Study	  Sites	  and	  Target	  Population ................................................................................................... 10
Sample ............................................................................................................................................. 10
Measures	  and	  Data	  Collection	  Tools................................................................................................ 11
C.	  	  Results ............................................................................................................................................... 11
Child	  Literacy	  (Strategic	  Objective).................................................................................................. 11
Quality	  of	  Literacy	  Instruction	  (Result	  1.1) ...................................................................................... 13
Student	  	  Attentiveness	  (Result	  1.2).................................................................................................. 16
Student	  Attendance	  (Result	  1.3)...................................................................................................... 21
Increased	  Capacity	  of	  PTAs	  and	  Government	  Officials	  (Result	  1.4)................................................. 32
Multivariate	  Statistical	  Models ........................................................................................................ 35
D.	  	  Discussion.......................................................................................................................................... 37
E.	  	  Recommendations............................................................................................................................. 40
F.	   References ......................................................................................................................................... 45
G.	  Appendix	  A:	  Report	  on	  Kemom	  Ch'ab'al	  Methodology ..................................................................... 46
H.	  Appendix	  B:	  Midterm	  Evaluation	  (MTE)	  Measures............................................................................ 51
3
Acronyms
APCC Asociación	  Proyecto	  Conrado	  de	  la	  Cruz
CRS Catholic	  Relief Services -­‐ United	  States	  Conference	  of	  Catholic	  Bishops
CTA Coordinador	  Técnico	  Administrativo /	  Technical	  and Administrative	  Coordinator for	  the	  
Ministry	  of	  Education
DIDEDUC Dirección	  Departamental	  de	  Educación	  de	  Guatemala /	  Departmental Office for	  the	  
Ministry	  of	  Education
DIGEFOCE Dirección	  	  General	  de	  Fortalecimiento	  de	  la	  Comunidad	  Educativa /	  Department	  of	  
Educational	  Capacity	  Building for	  the	  Ministry	  of	  Education
DIGEBI Dirección	  	  General	  de Educación Bilingüe	  Intercultural /	  Bilingual	  Education	  Office
ELGI/EGRA Evaluación	  de	  Lectura	  para	  Grados	  Iniciales /	  Early	  Grade	  Reading	  Assessment
FFE Food	  for	  Education
HDDS Household	  Diet	  Diversity	  Score
IRB Institutional	  Review	  Board
MINEDUC Ministerio	  de	  Educación /	  Ministry	  of	  Education
MTE Midterm	  Evaluation
PRODESSA Proyecto	  de	  Desarrollo	  Santiago
PTA Parent	  Teacher	  Association
UNICEF United	  Nations	  Children´s	  Fund
USDA United	  States	  Department	  of	  Agriculture
WFP World	  Food	  Program
4
List	  of	  Tables
Table	  1.	  	  Sample......................................................................................................................................... 10
Table	  2.	  	  %	  Correct	  Responses	  on	  ELGI	  Assessments................................................................................. 12
Table	  3.	  	  Teacher	  Attenance	  by	  Grade....................................................................................................... 14
Table	  4.	  	  Observations	  of	  Classroom	  Conditions ....................................................................................... 15
Table	  5.	  	  Principals’	  and	  Teachers’	  Reporting	  Steps	  of	  Kemom	  Ch’ab’al	  Methodology ............................ 15
Table	  6.	  	  Observations	  of	  Student	  Attentiveness....................................................................................... 17
Table	  7.	  	  Child	  Responses	  to	  Food	  Program............................................................................................... 18
Table	  8.	  	  Parent	  Responses	  to	  Food	  Program............................................................................................ 19
Table	  9.	  	  Child	  Food	  Intake	  on	  Day	  of	  Assessment .................................................................................... 20
Table	  10.	  	  Student	  Attendance	  (Teacher	  Reports)..................................................................................... 22
Table	  11.	  	  Perceived	  Factors	  that	  Lead	  to	  Increased	  School	  Attendance .................................................. 22
Table	  12.	  	  School	  Governments................................................................................................................. 23
Table	  13.	  	  School	  Days	  Missed	  Because	  of	  Illness...................................................................................... 24
Table	  14.	  	  Cleanliness	  of	  School	  Kitchens .................................................................................................. 26
Table	  15.	  	  Food	  Preparation	  and	  Hygiene.................................................................................................. 27
Table	  16.	  	  Hygiene	  and	  Infrastructure	  Issues	  at	  Schools ........................................................................... 27
Table	  17.	  	  Estimates	  of	  School	  Enrollment ................................................................................................ 31
Table	  18.	  	  Parents	  Who	  Names	  3	  Benefits	  of	  Primary	  Education:	  By	  Region ............................................ 32
Table	  19.	  	  Trainings	  of	  Government	  Staff .................................................................................................. 33
Table	  20.	  	  Predictors	  of	  Children’s	  Literacy	  in	  Totonicapán Department.................................................. 36
List	  of	  Figures
Figure	  1.	  	  3rd Grade	  ELGI	  Subscale	  Results................................................................................................. 12
Figure 2.	  6th Grade	  ELGI	  Subscale	  Results.................................................................................................. 13
5
EXECUTIVE	  SUMMARY
Catholic	  Relief	  Services-­‐United	  States	  Conference	  of	  Catholic	  Bishops	  (CRS)	  is	  currently	  implementing	  a	  
school	  feeding	  project	  focused	  on	  improving	  the	  literacy	  of	  school-­‐age	  children	  in	  four	  municipalities	  in	  
the	  department	  of	  Totonicapán,	  Guatemala.	  Over	  a	  period	  of	  3	  years	  (2013-­‐2016),	  CRS-­‐Guatemala	  is	  
implementing	  the	  Food	  for	  Education	  (FFE)	  project,	  using	  donated	  commodities	  and	  funds	  provided	  by	  
the	  United	  States	  Department	  of	  Agriculture	  (USDA)	  to	  accomplish	  the	  following:	  (1)	  Improve	  quality	  of	  
literacy	  instruction;	  (2)	  Improve	  student	  attentiveness;	  and	  (3)	  Improve	  student	  attendance. The	  overall	  
project	  is	  focused	  on	  the	  strategic	  objective	  to	  improve	  the	  literacy	  of	  school-­‐age	  children	  in four	  
municipalities	  in	  the	  department	  of	  Totonicapán.
The	  purpose	  of	  this	  Midterm	  Evaluation	  (MTE) is	  to	  identify	  ways	  to	  improve	  project	  effectiveness	  and	  
efficiency	  and/or	  to	  inform	  specific	  future	  decisions.	  The	  MTE	  is	  a	  process	  evaluation	  that	  suggests	  mid-­‐
course	  corrections	  in	  program	  strategy	  and	  recommendations	  for	  improving	  effectiveness	  efficiency.
The	  key	  evaluation	  questions for	  the	  MTE	  are	  the	  following:
(1) To	  what	  extent	  are	  project	  activities	  related	  with	  student	  performance (Strategic	  Objective)?
(2) To	  what	  extent	  has	  the	  quality	  of	  literacy	  instruction	  improved (Result	  1.1)?
(3) To	  what	  extent	  has student	  attentiveness	  improved (Result	  1.2)?
(4) Has	  student	  attendance	  improved,	  and	  what	  is	  the	  relationship	  between	  attendance	  and	  
educational	  performance (Result	  1.3;	  Strategic	  Objective)?
The	  sample	  for	  the	  MTE	  included	  120	  schools,	  301	  teachers,	  2,040	  3rd grade	  students,	  1,792	  6th grade	  
students,	  319	  parents,	  and	  117	  school	  directors.	  The	  MTE	  results	  related	  to	  key	  indicators	  are	  presented	  
below:
Result Indicator Baseline Final	  
Target
Midterm	  Results
Level	  of	  Student	  Reading	  Performance
Improved	  literacy	  of	  
school-­‐aged	  children
Percent	  of	  girls	  who,	  by	  the	  
end	  of	  6th	  grade,	  
demonstrate	  reading	  
comprehension	  equivalent	  to	  
their	  grade	  level	  as	  defined	  
by	  national	  standards	  at	  
USDA	  supported	  schools
25.19%
correct
+10% 31.20% correct	  for girls
Percent	  of	  boys	  who,	  by	  the	  
end	  of	  6th	  grade,	  
demonstrate	  reading	  
comprehension	  equivalent	  to	  
their	  grade	  level	  as	  defined	  
by	  national	  standards	  at	  
USDA	  supported	  schools
24.31%
correct
+10% 31.19% correct	  for	  boys
6
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   1 As	  indicated	  by	  the	  question:	  “With	  the	  food	  from	  this	  project,	  are	  you	  less	  hungry	  at	  school?”
Has	  the	  Quality	  of	  Literacy	  Instruction Improved?
Improved	  quality	  of	  
literacy	  instruction
1.1	  Percentage	  of	  teachers	  in	  
target	  schools	  who	  
demonstrate	  use	  of	  new	  and	  
quality	  teaching	  techniques	  
or	  tools
64.9% 80% 87.5%	  of	  teachers
More	  consistent	  
teacher	  attendance
1.1.1	  Percentage	  of	  teachers	  
at	  target	  schools	  who	  attend	  
and	  teach	  school	  at	  least	  
90%	  of	  scheduled	  school	  
days	  per	  school	  year
88.8% 90% 81.7% scheduled	  school
days	  attended	  by	  
teachers	  over	  the	  school	  
year
7.8% of	  teachers	  teach	  
at	  least	  90%	  of	  
scheduled	  school	  days
Improved	  literacy	  
instructional	  
materials
1.1.3b	  Percentage	  of	  
classrooms	  in	  target	  schools	  
with	  literacy	  instructional	  
materials	  (textbooks,	  
workbooks,	  etc.)	  sufficient	  
for	  effective	  instruction
75.4% 100% 100% of	  schools	  have	  
been	  provided	  literacy	  
instructional	  materials.
Increased	  skills	  and	  
knowledge	  of	  
teachers
1.1.4	  Percent	  of	  teachers	  in	  
target	  schools	  who	  
demonstrate	  use	  of	  new	  and	  
quality	  teaching	  techniques	  
or	  tools
0.0% 70% 87.5%	  of	  teachers	  use	  
new	  and	  innovative	  
teaching	  techniques
Increased skills	  and	  
knowledge	  of	  school	  
administrators
1.1.5	  Percent	  of	  school	  
administrators	  in	  target	  
schools	  who	  demonstrate	  
use	  of	  new	  and	  quality	  
teaching	  techniques	  or	  tools
0.0% 75% 87.0%	   of	  school	  
principals	   use	  new	  and	  
innovative	  teaching	  
techniques
Has	  Student	  Attentiveness	  Improved?
Improved	  students´	  
attentiveness	  	  
1.2	  	  Percent	  of	  students	  in	  
classrooms	  identified	  as	  
attentive	  by	  their	  teachers
27.0% 80% 82.2% of	  students	  are	  
attentive	  based	  on	  
classroom	  observations
Reduced	  short term	  
hunger
1.2.1	  Percent	  of	  3rd	  grade	  
students	  in	  target	  schools	  
who	  indicate	  they	  are	  not	  
hungry	  during	  the	  school	  day
15.8% 60% 86.9%	  of	  3rd	  grade	  
students	  are	  not
hungry1
1.2.1a	  	  Percent	  of	  6th	  grade	  
students	  in	  target	  schools	  
who	  indicate	  they	  are	  not	  
hungry	  during	  the	  school	  day
8.2% 60% 73.2%	  of	  6th	  grade	  
students	  are	  not hungry
Have	  students	  improved	  their	  attendance?
Improved	  student	  
attendance
1.3	  Percent	  of	  boys	  regularly	  
(80%)	  attending	  USDA	  
supported	  
60.0% 85% 80.8%	  	  of	  boys	  from 3rd	  	  
grade	  attended	  school	  
80%	  of	  scheduled	  days	  
7
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   2 This	  number	  was	  obtained	  from	  the	  2014	  baseline	  report.
3 This	  number	  was	  obtained	  from	  the	  2014	  baseline	  report.
classrooms/schools per	  month
76.8%	  of	  boys	  per	  6th
grade	  attended	  80%	  of	  
the	  scheduled	  days	  per	  
month
1.3a	  Percent	  of	  girls	  regularly	  
(80%)	  attending	  USDA	  
supported	  
classrooms/schools
71.7% 85% 75.1%	  of	  girls	  from 3rd	  
grade attended	  80%	  	  of	  
the	  scheduled	  days	  per	  
month
73.0% of	  girls	  from	  6th	  
grade	  attended	  80%	  	  of	  
the	  scheduled	  days	  per	  
month
Increased	  economic	  
and	  cultural	  
incentives	  (or	  
decreased	  
disincentives)
1.3.1	  Number	  of	  school	  
children	  who	  participate	  in
extra-­‐curricular	  school	  
activities
1,820 3,505 2,400 children	  enrolled	  
in	  Spaces	  to	  Grow.
Reduced	  health	  
related	  absences
1.3.2	  Average	  number	  of	  
school	  days	  missed	  by	  
students	  due	  to	  illness	  (for	  
each	  school	  and	  in	  
aggregate)
2.5	  days
67.6%
from	  1-­‐5	  
days	  
2 4.1 days
66.3% of	  students	  
missed	  school	  from	  1-­‐5	  
days	  per	  year
Improved	  school	  
infrastructure	  	  
1.3.3	  Number	  of	  educational	  
facilities	  (school	  buildings,	  
classrooms,	  and	  latrines)	  
rehabilitated	  /	  constructed	  
as	  a	  result	  of	  USDA	  
assistance
0 312 244 facilities	  
constructed	  or	  
rehabilitated.
Increased	  student	  
enrollment	  	  
1.3.4	  Percent	  increase	  in	  
boys	  enrolled	  in	  school	  as	  a	  
result	  of	  USDA	  assistance
0% 4%
18,4372
-­‐ 1.0%
18,245 boys	  enrolled	  
(2014-­‐2015)
1.3.4a	  Percentage	  increase	  in	  
girls	  enrolled	  in	  school	  as	  a	  
result	  of	  USDA	  assistance
0% 4%
17,7653
-­‐ 2.6%
17,307 girls	  enrolled	  
(2014-­‐2015)
Increased	  community	  
understanding	  of	  the	  
benefits	  of	  education	  
1.3.5	  Percentage	  of	  parents	  
in	  target	  communities	  who	  
can	  name	  at	  least	  three	  
benefits	  of	  primary	  
education
96.4% 80% 35.9% of	  parents	  who	  
mentioned	  at	  least	  
three	  benefits	  of	  
primary	  education
8
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   4 Information	  provided	  by	  school	  principals.
School	  governments	  	   Number	  of	  school	  
governments	  established
213 221 162	  school	  governments	  
established at	  midterm
375 school	  governments	  
(baseline	  and	  midterm	  
combined)
Number	  of	  school	  
governments	  strengthened
67.5% of	  school	  
governments	  
strengthened	  (directors)
Improvement	  plans	  	   Number	  of	  existing	  school	  
improvement	  plans
142 221 142 have	  a	  school	  
improvement plan
Increased	  Capacity	  of	  Government	  Officials
Increased	  government	  
support	  	  
1.4.3	  Percentage	  of	  
MINEDUC	  disbursements	  
(financial	  or	  material)	  which	  
arrive	  on	  time	  to	  the	  
appropriate	  institution.
13.1% 10% 21.4%	   of	  the	  
disbursements	  arrived	  
on	  time	  in	  20144
Increased	  
engagement	  of	  local	  
organizations	  and	  
community	  groups
1.4.4	  Number	  of	  PTAs	  
contributing	  to	  their	  school	  
as	  a	  result	  of	  USDA	  
assistance
69 221 215 schools	  have	  a	  PTA	  
that	  contributes	  to	  their	  
schools
1.4.4a	  Number	  of	  PTAs	  that	  
have	  developed	  a	  school	  
improvement	  plan
18 133 62	  (53.0% of	  sampled	  
schools) have	  PTAs	  that	  
helped	  develop a	  school	  
improvement	  plan
where	  one	  is	  being	  
developed.
Increased	  capacity	  of	  
government	  
organizations	  
1.4.1	  Number	  of	  DIDEDUC	  
and	  DIGEFOCE	  staff	  who	  
have	  increased	  their	  capacity	  
to	  implement	  their	  roles	  and	  
responsibilities
0 20 14	  staff have	  been	  
trained
9
MIDTERM EVALUATION REPORT
FOOD FOR EDUCATION “LEARNING FOR LIFE” GUATEMALA
A. Introduction	  and	  Background:	  
The	  links	  between	  childhood	  nutrition,	  literacy	  and	  development	  have	  long	  been	  established	  (Brown	  &	  
Pollitt,	  1996)	  with	  research	  showing	  significant	  developmental	  consequences	  for	  children	  experiencing	  
malnutrition	  (Jyoti,	  Frongillo,	  &	  Jones,	  2005).	  Children	  in	  Guatemala	  experience	  one	  of	  the	  highest	  rates	  
of	  malnutrition	  in	  the	  world,	  particularly	  in	  indigenous	  areas	  where	  estimated	  rates	  range	  between	  
69.5%5 and	  80.0%6
.	  UNICEF	  notes	  that	  the	  high	  rate	  of	  malnutrition	  in	  Guatemala,	  particularly	  for	  
indigenous	  populations,	  results	  in	  chronic	  malnutrition	  and	  related	  lowered	  school	  performance,	  and	  
heightened	  risk	  for	  loss	  of	  intellectual	  ability	  and	  school	  dropout2
.	  Statistics	  provided	  by	  UNICEF	  suggest	  
that	  only	  40%	  of	  children	  who	  start	  primary	  school	  will	  finish,	  and	  on	  average,	  indigenous	  girls	  only	  
attend	  primary	  school	  for	  3	  years2
.	  
Interventions	  frequently	  target	  early	  childhood	  development	  (Ruel	  et	  al.,	  2013)	  but	  the	  effectiveness	  of	  
school-­‐based	  feeding	  programs	  is	  often	  harder	  to	  evaluate	  given	  their	  dual	  goals	  of	  education	  and	  
health	  (Alderman	  &	  Bundy,	  2013).	  Some	  suggest	  that	  school	  feeding	  programs	  are	  in	  fact	  programs	  of	  
social	  protection,	  where	  food	  transfers	  help	  create	  a	  social	  safety	  net	  for	  highly	  vulnerable	  populations	  
(Alderman	  &	  Bundy,	  2013;	  Ruel	  et	  al.,	  2013).	  In	  terms	  of	  education	  outcomes,	  school	  feeding	  programs	  
in	  Cambodia	  have	  been	  shown	  to	  be	  effective	  in	  promoting	  school	  attendance,	  but	  less	  so	  in	  school	  
achievement	  over	  time,	  although	  these	  programs	  were	  cost	  effective	  (Cheung	  &	  Berlin,	  2014).	  In	  Ghana,	  
one study	  found	  that	  the	  time	  required	  for	  school	  feeding	  reduced	  the	  time	  and	  quality	  of	  educational	  
activities	  (Essuman	  &	  Bosumtwi-­‐Sam,	  2013).	  Despite	  immediate	  gains	  in	  reducing	  hunger,	  school	  feeding	  
programs	  often	  fall	  short	  of	  achieving	  educational	  goals	  given	  problems	  in	  targeting,	  food	  quality,	  and	  
systems	  of	  delivery.	  More	  research	  is	  needed	  on	  how	  these	  programs	  can	  best	  target	  vulnerable	  
children	  and	  increase	  educational	  access.
Background
Catholic	  Relief	  Services-­‐United	  States	  Conference	  of	  Catholic	  Bishops	  (CRS)	  is	  currently	  implementing	  a	  
school	  feeding	  project	  as	  a	  means	  of improving	  the	  literacy	  of	  school-­‐age	  children	  in	  four	  municipalities	  
in	  the	  department	  of	  Totonicapán,	  Guatemala.	  Over	  a	  period	  of	  3	  years	  (2013-­‐2016),	  CRS-­‐Guatemala	  is	  
implementing	  the	  Food	  for	  Education	  (FFE)	  project,	  using	  donated	  commodities	  and	  funds	  provided	  by	  
the	  United	  States	  Department	  of	  Agriculture	  (USDA)	  to	  accomplish	  the	  following:	  (1)	  Improve	  quality	  of	  
literacy	  instruction;	  (2)	  Improve	  student	  attentiveness;	  and (3)	  Improve	  student	  attendance. The	  overall	  
project	  is	  focused on	  the	  strategic	  objective	  to	  improve	  the	  literacy	  of	  school-­‐age	  children	  in	  four	  
municipalities	  in	  the	  department	  of	  Totonicapán.
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   5 http://www.wfp.org/countries/guatemala/overview
6 http://www.unicef.org/guatemala/english/overview_18012.htm
10
Key	  Evaluation	  Questions
The	  purpose	  of	  this	  MTE	  is	  to	  identify	  ways	  to	  improve	  project	  effectiveness	  and	  efficiency	  and/or	  to	  
inform	  specific	  future	  decisions.	  The	  MTE	  is	  a	  process	  evaluation	  that	  suggests	  mid-­‐course	  corrections	  in	  
program	  strategy	  and	  recommendations	  for	  improving	  effectiveness	  efficiency.	  The	  key	  evaluation	  
questions	  for	  the	  MTE	  are	  the	  following:
(1) To	  what	  extent	  are	  project	  activities	  related	  with	  student	  performance (Strategic	  Objective)?
(2) To	  what	  extent	  has	  the	  quality	  of	  literacy	  instruction	  improved (Result	  1.1)?
(3) To	  what	  extent	  has	  student	  attentiveness	  improved (Result	  1.2)?
(4) Has	  student	  attendance	  improved,	  and	  what	  is	  the	  relationship	  between	  attendance	  and	  
educational	  performance (Result	  1.3;	  Strategic	  Objective)?
B. Methods
Study	  Sites and	  Target	  Population
The	   four	   municipalities	   included	   in	   this	   project	   are	   the	   following: (1)	   Momostenango;	   (2)	   San	   Andrés	  
Xecul;	   (3)	  Santa	  Lucia	  la	  Reforma;	  and	   (4)	  San	  Bartolo	  Aguas	  Calientes.	  The	  project	   focuses	  on	   several	  
key	   actors,	   including	   preschool	   and	   elementary	  students,	   teachers,	   administrators,	   volunteer	   parents	  
and	   government	   officials.	   The	   target	   population	   comprises	   those	   actors	   in	   the	   2257 schools	   in	   4	  
municipalities.
Sample
From	  the	  population	  of	  schools,	  the	  study	  drew	  from	  a	  simple	  random	  sample	  of	  N=120	  schools.	  	  In	  each	  
school,	  all	  available	  3rd and	  6th grade	  students	  were	  given	  the	  Early	  Grade	  Reading	  Assessment	  and	  Food	  
Intake	  Survey	  (see	  measures	  section).	  Each	  school	  principal	  was	  interviewed	  using	  a	  structured	  protocol.	  
Teachers	  and	  parents	  were	  also	  randomly	  selected	  for	  structured	  interviews,	  and	  all	  available	  parent	  
volunteers	  were	  invited	  to	  participate	  in	  a	  focus	  group8
.	  The	  sample	  numbers	  are	  provided	  in	  Table	  1.
Table	  1: Sample
Municipality Total
Schools
Total	  
%
Schools % Teachers Students Parents Directors
3rd 6th
Momostenango 125 59 69 57.5 209 1,373 1,165 195 69
San	  Andres	  Xecul 22 10.4 9 7.5 26 274 285 21 9
Santa	  Lucia	  la	  Reforma 35 16.5 17 14.2 26 171 206 41 14
San	  Bartolo	  Aguas	  Calientes 30 14.2 25 20.8 40 252 136 62 25
Total 212 100 120 100 301 2,040 1,792 319 117
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   7 13	  schools	  in	  Momostenango do	  not	  participate	  in	  the	  school	  feeding	  program.	  	  As	  a	  result,	  the	  population	  of	  schools	  under	  
consideration	  for	  this	  study	  is	  N=212.
8 Focus	  group	  qualitative	  analysis	  relied	  on	  a	  representative	  sample	  (N=85;	  Momostenango=44;	  Santa	  Lucia	  la	  Reforma=22;	  San	  
Bartolo	  Aguas	  Calientes=9;	  San	  Andres	  Xecul=10).
11
In	  addition	  to	  the	  numbers	  listed	  above,	  CTAs	  were	  also	  interviewed	  using	  a	  semi-­‐structured	  protocol	  
(N=9).	  	  Overall,	  children	  totaled	  N=3,832	  and	  adults	  totaled	  N=717.
Measures
Multiple	  data	  collection	  tools	  were employed	  for	  data	  collection.	  These	  include:	  
i.Early	  Grade	  Reading	  Assessment	  (EGRA)	  /	  Evaluación	  de	  Lectura	  para	  Grados	  Iniciales	  (ELGI)
The	  EGRA/ELGI	  is	  a	  30-­‐question	  reading	  assessment	  test	  developed	  in	  Spanish	  by	  PRODESSA.	  
ii.Food	  Intake	  Assessment
Children	   taking	   the	   EGRA/ELGI	   were	   also	   asked	   to	   complete	   a	   survey	   on	   food	   and	   hunger	   as	  
related	  to	  FFE,	  as	  well	  as an	  index	  of	  breakfast	  foods	  eaten	  during	  the	  day	  of	  data	  collection.	  
iii.Focus Groups	  for	  Parent	  Volunteers
Parent	  Volunteers	  at	  each	  school	  were invited	  to	  participate	  in	  a	  focus	  group,	  of	  no	  more	  than	  8	  
participants	   each.	   These	   focus	   groups	   followed a	   semi-­‐structured	   protocol,	   and	   assessed
volunteers’ perceptions	  of	  the	  program’s	  relevance,	  effectiveness,	  adequacy,	  and	  gender	  equity.
iv.Interviews	  with	  Teachers,	  School	  Administrators,	  PTA	  members,	  Key	  Stakeholders
Structured	  interviews	  were completed	  with	  randomly	  selected	  teachers	  within	  schools as	  well	  as	  
with	   principals,	   parents,	   and	   key	   stakeholders. Structured	   interviews	   with	   school	   principals	  
assessed enrollment	  and	  dropout	  rates.
v.Structured	  Classroom	  Observations and	  Child	  Attentiveness
A	  protocol	  was developed	  to	  assist	  enumerators	  to	  observe	  teachers	  in	  the	  classroom	  context,	  
and	  establish	  the	  extent	  to	  which	  teachers	  have	  improved	  their	  teaching	  skills	  using	  the	  Kemom	  
Ch´ab´al methodology,	   as	   well	   as	   the	   extent	   to	   which	   children	   were	   paying	   attention	   in	   class	  
during	  the	  period	  of	  observation.
vi. Baseline	  and	  Administrative	  Data
Baseline	  evaluation	  data	  were	  used	  to	  replicate	   findings	   from	  the	  baseline	  report,	   for	  accurate	  
comparison	  to	  MTE	  data.	  CRS	  administrative	  data	  were	  linked	  to	  data	  collection	  forms,	  so	  that	  
data	  entry	  was	  prepopulated	  with	  accurate	  information.
RESULTS
CHILD	  LITERACY	  (STRATEGIC	  OBJECTIVE)
For	  boys	  and	  girls,	  literacy	  rates	  increased	  compared	  with	  baseline	  results	  (see	  Table	  2).	  Of	  note,	  these	  
rates	  are	  calculated	  as	  the	  mean	  percentage	  of	  correct	  responses	  out	  of	  100.00%	  for	  each	  subgroup	  (see	  
Table	  2).	  	  These	  numbers	  do	  not	  reflect	  the	  actual	  literacy	  rates	  of	  children,	  which	  should	  be	  calculated	  
as	   the	   percent	   of	   children	   who	   score	   60%	   or	   higher	   on	   ELGI	   assessments. Using	   this	   standard,	  no	   3rd
grade	  children	  achieved	  literacy (0.0%),	  and	  N=29	  6th grade	  children	  achieved	  literacy	  (1.6%	  of	  N=1,793).
12
Table	  2: %	  Correct	  Responses	  on	  ELGI	  Assessments
BASELINE MIDTERM
6th Grade
	  	  Girls 25.19% 31.20%
	  	  Boys 24.31% 31.19%
3rd Grade
	  	  Girls 9.19% 17.59%
	  	  Boys 8.88% 18.87%
Some	  variation	  emerged	  on	  the	  10	  ELGI	  subscales	  which	  comprise	  the	  overall	  assessment.	  Boys	  and	  girls	  
performed	  similarly	  on	  each	  subscale,	  with	  girls	  scoring	  slightly	  higher	  on	  Problem	  and	  Solution (p<.01)	  
and	   Prediction (p<.05)	   subscales.	   Overall,	   the	   highest	   scores	   were	   for	   Problem	   and	   Solution and	  
Identifying	  Themes subscales,	  and	  lowest	   for	  Cause	  and	  Effect and	  Main	  Ideas subscales.	  Scores	   for	  all	  
subscales	  were	  higher	  in	  the	  MTE	  compared	  with	  Baseline,	  with	  the	  exception of	  Logic.
Figure	  1. 3rd Grade	  ELGI	  Subscale	  Results
Students	  in	  6th grade	  scored	  higher	  on	  subscales,	  and	  overall	  ELGI	  scores,	  compared	  with	  3rd graders (see	  
Figure	   2). Boys	   and	   girls	   scored	   similarly	   on	   all	   subscales,	   with	   girls	   scoring	   slightly	   higher	   on	   the	  
Comparison	   (p<.01)	   and	   Making	   Inferences	   (p<.05)	   subscales.	   The	   highest	   scores	   emerged	   in	   the	  
Identifying	  Themes	  and	  Cause	  and	  Effect	  subscales,	  and	   the	  lowest	  scores	  were	   for	   the	  Main	  Idea	  and	  
Prediction	  subscales.
13
Figure	  2. 6th Grade	  ELGI	  Subscale	  Results
QUALITY	  OF	  LITERACY	  INSTRUCTION	  (RESULT	  1.1)
Teachers’ Use	   of	  New	  Techniques	  and	  Tools (Result	   1.1). 87.5% of	   teachers	   report	   using	  one	  or	  more	  
new	   or innovative	   teaching	   approaches. These	   approaches	   included	   looking	   at	   images	   (58.9%),	  
reviewing	   the	   title	   (53.7%),	  and	  looking	  at	   the	   structure	   of	   the	   text	   (36.4%).	  Teachers	  also	  mentioned	  
other	  activities,	  such	  as	  choral	  reading	  (77.5%)	  and	  reading	  aloud	  in	  turns	  (59.7%).
Several	  PTA	  Focus	  Groups	  described	  collaborating	  with	  teachers	  to	  support	  and	  improve	  boys	  and	  girls	  
education.	   Groups	   described	   teacher	   collaboration	   [“(We)	   talk	   with	   teachers	   to	   improve	   education”;	  
“(we)	   support	   the	   teacher”]	   and	   teacher	   monitoring	   [“(we)	   evaluate	   and	   monitor	   the	   carrying	   out	   of	  
educational	  responsibilities”;	  “(we)	  ensure	  that	  teachers	  are	  ok”].	  	  	  
Teacher	  Attendance	   (Result	  1.1.1).	  CTAs	  and	  directors	  were	  asked	   to	  estimate	   the	  percentage	  of	   time	  
teachers	   attended	   school	   during	   the	   school	   year.	   	   Assuming	   170	   days	   of	   school	   per	   year,	   CTAs	   and	  
directors	   differed	   somewhat	   in	   their	   perceptions	   (see	   Table	   3)9
. For	   CTAs,	   estimated	   percentages	   of	  
teacher	   attendance	   ranged	   from	   85.3%	   in	   1st and	   2nd grades,	   to	   86.4%	   in	   3rd and	   6th grades,	   for	   an	  
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   9 Directors	  were	  asked	  to	  estimate	  the	  number	  of	  days	  teachers	  attended	  school	  in	  2015.	  Percentages	  were	  calculated	  based	  on	  
the	  assumption	  of	  170	  days	  per	  school	  year,	  which	  represented	  the	  highest	  number	  of	  days	  reported	  by	  a	  director.
14
average	  of	  85.8% (15.0%).	  For	  directors,	  estimated	  percentages	  ranged	  from	  76.7%	  in	  5th and	  6th grades
to	  77.1%	  in	  all	  other	  grades,	  for	  an	  average	  of	  77.0% (12.0%). However,	  in	  examining	  the	  numbers	  who	  
achieved	  90%	  attendance	  during	  the school	  year,	  only	  7.8% achieved	  this	  benchmark.
Table	  3. Teacher	  Attendance	  by	  Grade
CTA	  Reports
%	  of	  School	  Year
Director	  Reports
%	  of	  School	  Year
First	  Grade 85.3%	  (14.9%) 77.1%	  (12.0%)
Second	  Grade 85.3%	  (14.9%) 77.1%	  (12.0%)
Third	  Grade 86.4%	  (15.2%) 77.1%	  (11.8%)
Fourth	  Grade 85.9%	  (15.0%) 77.0%	  (12.0%)
Fifth	  Grade 85.3%	  (14.9%) 76.7%	  (12.3%)
Sixth	  Grade 86.4%	  (15.2%) 76.7%	  (12.0%)
AVERAGE 85.8%	  (15.0%) 77.0%	  (12.0%)
Parents	   were	   also	   asked	   to	   estimate	   the	   number	   of	   days	   per	   school	   year	   teachers	   attended	   class.	  	  
Parents’	   responses	   ranged	   from	   100	   days	   to	   180	   days,	   with	   a	   mean	   of	   148.0	   days	   (SD=25.0).	   	   On	  
average,	   then,	   parents	   perceived	   teachers	   attending	   class	   82.2% of	   the	   school	   year,	   in	   keeping	   with	  
CTAs’	  and	  directors’	  observations.
On	   average,	   taking	   the	   CTA,	   Director,	   and	   Parent	   mean	   observations,	   the	   estimated	   overall	   average	  
teacher	  attendance	  is	  81.7% of	  scheduled	  school	  days	  attended	  by	  teachers.
These	  estimates,	  based	  on	  perceptions	  of	  various	  stakeholders, are	  necessary	  to	  provide	  this	  indicator	  
given	  the	  apparent	  lack	  of	  record-­‐keeping	  related	  to	  teacher	  attendance.	  	  One	  recommendation	  of	  this	  
report	   is	   to	   institute	   a	   consistent	   means	   of	   keeping	   records	   on	   teacher	   attendance	   using	   mandated	  
electronic	  databases	  (see	  Recommendations).
School	   Materials (Result	   1.1.3b).	   According	   to	   data	   provided	   by	   CRS	   and	   based	   on	   delivery	   reports	  
signed	   by	   school	   directors	   and	   kept	   by	   PRODESSA,	   100% of	   schools	   have	   now	   received	   literacy	  
instructional	   materials.	   Nearly	   all	   school	   principals	   (91.5%) reported	   receiving	   school	   materials.	   Yet,	  
principals	   were	   evenly	   split	   on	   the adequacy	   of	   these	   materials:	   47.1% stated	   the	   materials	   were	  
sufficient to	  cover	  all	  children	  in	  the	  class,	  while	  41.9%	  stated	  these	  materials	  were	  not	  sufficient.	  Yet,	  
principals	  were	  generally	  satisfied	  with	  the	  quality	  of	  these	  materials,	  with	  78.6%	  stating	  the	  materials	  
were	  of	  good	  or	  very	  good	  quality.
Data	   collectors	   completed	   structured	   observations	   of	   randomly	   selected	   classrooms	   (see	   Table	   4).	  
Classrooms	   scored	   highest	   for	   adequate	   lighting	   and	   ventilation	   (88.1%),	   desks	   being	   orderly	   (88.0%;	  
reversed	   scored),	   teachers’	   having	   materials	   (81.0%),	   and	   the	   blackboard	   being	   in	   good	   condition	  
(78.3%),	  and	  lowest	  for	  desks	  being	  in	  a	  circle	  or	  U	  (39.0%),	  desks	  being	  clean	  and	  tidy	  (65.1%)	  and	  desks	  
being	   in	   good	   condition	   (68.2%). Items	   were	   summed	   and	   standardized	   on	   a	   scale	   from	   1-­‐100.	   	   The	  
quality	  of	  classroom	  conditions	  ranged	  from	  32%-­‐100%,	  with	  an	  average	  score	  of	  66.2% (SD=11.5%).
15
Table	  4. Observations	  of	  Classroom	  Conditions
N Range Mean	  (SD) %	  Agree	  or	  
Strongly	  Agree
The	  desks	  are	  in	  a	  circle	  or	  U 277 1-­‐5 3.0	  (1.1) 39.0%
The	  desks	  are	  disorderly	  (reversed) 276 1-­‐5 2.4	  (0.8) 12.0%
The	  desks	  are	  in	  good	  condition 276 1-­‐5 3.6	  (0.8) 68.2%
The	  classroom	  is	  clean	  and	  tidy 275 1-­‐5 3.6	  (0.9) 65.1%
Lighting	  and	  ventilation	  are	  adequate 277 1-­‐5 4.0	  (0.7) 88.1%
The	  blackboard	  is	  in	  good	  condition 277 1-­‐5 3.8	  (0.8) 78.3%
The	  teacher	  has	  classroom	  materials	  for	  the	  children 274 1-­‐5 3.9	  (0.7) 81.0%
OVERALL	  CLASSROOM	  CONDITIONS 270 32%-­‐100% 66.2% (11.5%) -­‐-­‐
Kemom	   Ch’ab’al	   Methodology (Result	   1.1.4.).	   80.4%	   of	   teachers	   reported	   using	   the	   Kemom	   Ch’ab’al
teaching	   methodology.	   Principals	   reported	   only	   moderate	   supervision	   of	   teachers	   in	   regards	   to	   the	  
Kemom	   Ch’ab’al	   Methodology.	   25.6%	   stated	   they	   supervised	   teachers	   “a	   lot”	   or	   “very	   much”,	   while	  
38.5%	  indicates	  “some”	  and	  29.1%	  stated	  “a	  little”	  or	  “very	  little”.	  Principals	  varied	  in	  their	  reporting	  of	  
the	  steps of	  the	  methodology	  (see	  Table	  5).	  	  Most	  reported	  Scanning	  the	  Reading	  (86.0%)	  and	  Reading	  
(80.0%),	   about	   2/3rd reported	   Do	   Exercises	   About	   the	   Reading	   (68.4%),	   while	   less	   than	   half	   reported	  
Review	  Exercises	  and	   Reflect	   on	   the	   Content	   of	   the	   Reading. Overall,	   17.4%	   of	   directors	  were	  able	   to	  
identify	  the	  5	  steps	  of	  the	  methodology.
Teachers	  also	  varied	  in	   reporting steps	  of	   the	  methodology	   (see	  Table	  5). Most	   reported	  Scanning	   the	  
Reading	   (80.1%)	   and	   2/3rd reported	   Reading	   (67.5%)	   with	   fewer	   reporting	   Do	   Exercises	   About	   the	  
Reading	  (58.1%).	  Fewer	  than	  half	  reported	  Review	  Exercises	  and	  Reflect	  on	  the	  Content	  of	  the	  Reading.
Overall,	  18.7% of	  teachers	  were	  able	  to	  identify	  the	  5	  steps	  of	  the	  methodology.
Table	  5. Principals’	  and	  Teachers’	  Reporting	  Steps	  of	  Kemom	  Ch’ab’al	  Methodology
STEPS %	  Principals	  Reported	  
(N=117)
%	  Teachers	  Reported
(N=246)
Scanning	  the	  reading 86.0% 80.1%
Reading 80.3% 67.5%
Do	  exercises	  about	  the	  reading 68.4% 58.1%
Review	  exercises 45.3% 46.3%
Reflect	  on	  the	  content	  of	  the	  reading 41.9% 49.6%
ALL	  5	  STEPS	  MENTIONED 17.4% 18.7%
Most	  teachers	  agreed	  or	  strongly	  agreed	  (93.1%)	  that	  the	  Kemom	  Ch’ab’al	  methodology	  was	  relevant	  to	  
the	  cultural	  context	  of	  Totonicapán.
On	   average,	   teachers	   reported	   teaching	   significantly	   more	   in	   Spanish	   than	   K’iché (p<.001).	   Teachers	  
reported	  teaching 175.3 minutes	  in	  Spanish/Castilian per	  week	  (SD=107.0),	  and	  107.5 minutes	  in	  K’iché
per	  week	  (SD=77.7).
16
As	  part	  of	  this	  project,	  the	  Education	  Specialist	  conducted	  a	  thorough	  review	  of	  the	  Kemom	  Ch’ab’al
methodology	  and	  made	  recommendations	  for	  its	  continued	  use	  (see	  Appendix	  A for	  the	  full	  report).	  In
this	  assessment,	  the	  Education	  Specialist	  found	  that	  the	  Kemom	  Ch’ab’al	  Methodology	  responds	  
accordingly	  to	  the	  National	  Base	  Curriculum	  (CNB	  in	  Spanish),	  that	  the	  materials	  distributed	  to	  the	  
teachers	  and	  students	  are	  of	  high	  quality, and	  that	  the	  materials	  have	  been	  well	  distributed	  to	  the	  
schools	  observed	  in	  the	  MTE.	  The	  Education	  Specialist	  also	  found	  that	  the	  structure	  of	  the	  methodology	  
is	  very	  strong	  and	  conducive	  to teaching	  both	  the	  Spanish	  and	  K’iché languages.	  Reading	  topics	  were	  
well	  selected	  and	  appropriately	  adapted	  to	  the	  context	  of	  the	  communities	  in	  which	  they	  were	  being	  
utilized.	  In	  terms	  of	  grammatical	  structure,	  there	  were	  a	  few	  minor	  grammatical	  errors	  in	  the	  K’iché
portion	  of	  the	  textbooks	  used	  by	  the	  teachers	  and	  students,	  particularly	  in	  the	  teaching	  of	  different	  verb	  
forms	  and	  conjugation	  rules.	  It	  is	  recommended	  for	  future	  production	  of	  Kemom	  Ch’ab’al	  materials	  that	  
there	  be	  a	  thorough	  revision	  by	  a	  specialist	  in	  the	  K’iché language	  to	  ensure	  correct	  grammatical	  uses	  of	  
the	  language.	  
Spaces	  to	  Grow.	  According	  to	  the	  original	  commitment	  with	  USDA,	  the	  target	  for	  the	  midterm	  is	  that 40	  
schools	  will	  have	  implemented Spaces	  to	  Grow	   (17.8%).	  According	  to	  directors,	  this	  number	  surpassed	  
the	  target	  at	  24.8%.	  Relatively	  few	  principals	  knew	  about	  Spaces	  to	  Grow	  (33.3%),	  and	  most	  (76.9%,	  i.e.,	  
the	   non-­‐implementing	   schools) stated	   they	   did	   not	   know	   the	   specific	   activities	   involved	   with	   the	  
program	  or	  did	  not	  answer	   the	  question.	  By	  contrast,	  79.5%	  of	  principals	  expressed	  interest	  in	  having	  
Spaces	   to	   Grow	   at	   their	   school. According	   to	   CRS	   monitoring	   reports	   to	   USDA,	   1,200	   children	   were	  
enrolled	  in	  Spaces	  to	  Grow	  in	  school	  year	  2014-­‐2015.
Administrator’s	   Use	   of	   New/Quality	   Techniques (Result	   1.1.5). 95.7%	   of	   directors	   report	   using	   the	  
Kemom	   Ch’ab’al	   teaching	   methodology.	   87.0% also	   report	   using	   new	   and	   innovative	   teaching	  
techniques.	  Most	  commonly,	  directors	  reported	  looking	  at	  images	   (70.0%),	  reviewing	  the	  title	   (67.0%),	  
and	   looking	   at	   the	   structure	   (33.0%).	   	   Directors	   also	   offered	   a	   number	   of	   other	   techniques,	   such	   as	  
discussing	  dynamics	  and	  themes	  of	  readings	  (21.0%),	  conducing	  reflection	  and	  analysis	  (9.0%),	  exploring	  
and	  modeling	  the	  reading	  (9.0%),	  motivating	  the	  students	  (8.0%),	  and	  playing	  games	  (5.0%).
PTA	  focus	  groups	  repeatedly	  described	  their	  collective	  role	  in	  supporting	  and	  sometimes	  overseeing	  the	  
overall	   functioning	   of	   the	   school.	   They	   stated,	   “(We)	   ensure	   each	   day	   that	   everything	   goes	   along	  
correctly	  at	  the	  school,	  since	  by	  taking	  turns,	  there’s	  someone	  at	  the	  school	  from	  the	  PTA”.	  	  
Yet,	   PTA	   focus	   groups	   cited	   minimal	   participation	   in	   improving	   student	   literacy.	   Focus	   groups	   in	  
Momostenango	   described	   their	   participation	   in	   terms	   of	   teacher	   support	   [“(We)	   work	   in	   teams	   with	  
teachers	   to	   improve	   children’s	   reading”],	   and	   parent	   support	   (describing	   PTA	   support	   of	   a	   literacy	  
program	  run	  by	  parents).
STUDENT	  ATTENTIVENESS	  (RESULT	  1.2)
Student	   Attentiveness	   (Result	   1.2). Data	   collection	   supervisors	   were	   instructed	   to	   conduct	   classroom	  
observations	  for	  randomly	  selected	  teachers	  in	  schools.	  A	  series	  of	  5-­‐point	  Likert-­‐scale	  items	  were	  used	  
to	  assess	  aspects	  of	  student	  attentiveness	  in	  the	  classroom	  during	  the	  period	  of	  observation	  (see	  Table	  
6).	  The	  data	  for	  each	  item	  are	  displayed	  in	  Table	  6,	  which	  show	  the	  average	  score	  of	  each	  item,	  and	  the	  
percent	  of	  respondents	  who	  replied	  “Agree”	  or	  “Strongly	  Agree”	  to	  each	  statement.	  For	  the	  single	  item,	  
“Children	  are	  attentive	  for	  long	  periods of	  time	  (about	  15	  minutes)	  in	  the	  classroom,”	  the	  average	  score	  
17
Table	  6. Observations	  of	  Student	  Attentiveness
N Range Mean	  (SD) %	  Agree	  or	  
Strongly	  Agree
Children	  are	  attentive	  for	  long	  periods	  of	  time	  (about	  15	  
minutes)	  in	  the	  classroom.
269 2-­‐5 3.9	  (0.6) 82.2%
The	  children	  seem	  distracted	  during	  class	  activities. 269 1-­‐4 2.5	  (0.8) 39.4%
The	  children	  follow	  the	  teacher's	  instructions. 272 2-­‐5 4.0	  (0.5) 90.9%
The	  children	  are	  sleepy	  in	  the	  classroom. 268 1-­‐5 2.1	  (0.7) 5.2%
The	  children	  have	  difficulty	  concentrating. 271 1-­‐5 2.5	  (0.7) 10.3%
The	  children	  focus	  on	  a	  task	  until	  they	  complete	  it. 271 2-­‐5 3.8	  (0.6) 81.2%
The	  children	  work	  independently	  (take	  materials,	  work	  
on	  your	  own,	  and	  ask	  for	  help	  if	  necessary).
272 1-­‐5 3.8	  (0.7) 74.6%
The children	  listen	  attentively. 269 2-­‐5 4.0	  (0.5) 90.3%
The	  children	  are	  fighting	  or	  restless	  in	  the	  classroom. 273 1-­‐5 2.4	  (0.8) 13.5%
The	  boys	  participate	  well	  in	  the	  classroom. 272 1-­‐5 4.0	  (0.5) 91.5%
The	  girls	  participate	  well	  in	  the	  classroom. 272 2-­‐5 3.9	  (0.5) 82.3%
The	  teachers	  give	  the	  same	  opportunities	  for	  
participation	  to	  boys	  and	  girls	  (with	  questions,	  allowing	  
them	  to	  speak	  (DANDOLES	  LA	  PALABRA),	  calling	  them	  by	  
their	  name,	  etc.).
271 2-­‐5 4.1	  (0.5) 94.1%
There	  are	  notebooks	  or	  solved	  exercises	  that	  
demonstrate	  that	  children	  work	  to	  strengthen	  their	  
understanding	  of	  written	  texts.
266 1-­‐5 3.9	  (0.8) 80.1%
OVERALL	  ATTENTIVENESS 250 M=70.3% SD=9.8
RANGE:	  	  38%-­‐96%
MUNICIPALITY	  **
	  	  Momostenango 209 M=71.0%,	  SD=10.0%
	  	  Santa	  Lucia	  La	  Reforma 40 M=66.0%,	  SD=	  6.0%	  
	  	  San	  Bartolo	  Aguas	  Calientes 26 M=71.0%,	  SD=	  6.0%
	  	  San	  Andres	  Xecul 26 M=74.0%,	  SD=	  5.0%
**	  p<.01
was	  3.9	  out	  of	  5	   (SD=0.6),	  with	  82.2% of	   respondents	  indicating	  “Agree”	  or	  “Strongly	  Agree”	  with	   this	  
statement	   (of	   note,	   only	   8.6%	   stated	   “Strongly	   Agree”).	   	   The	   Baseline	   used	   a	   4-­‐point	   Likert	   scale	   and	  
found	  that	  27.3%	  of	  observations	  noted	  “A	  lot”	  of	  child	  attendance.	  	  While	  direct	  comparisons	  between	  
the	   baseline	   and	   MTE	   items	   are	   difficult,	   it	   seems	   that	   data	   collectors	   noted	   higher	   levels	   of	  
attentiveness	  in	  the	  MTE	  compared	  with	  baseline.	  	  Principals	  also	  noted	  that	  children	  are	  better	  able	  to	  
focus	  in	  the	  classroom	  (89.7%)	  in	  the	  2014-­‐2015	  school	  year.
Other	   indicators	   corroborate	   this	   finding.	   Most	   (90.3%)	   reported	   that	   children	   listen	   attentively	   and	  
follow	   the	   teacher’s	   instructions	   (90.9%).	   Boys	   seem	   to	   participate	   more	   in	   classrooms	   (91.5%)	  
compared	  with	  girls	   (82.3%),	  but	  94.1%	  of	  observers	  stated	   that	  boys	  and	  girls	  are	  provided	   the	  same	  
opportunities	   in	   the	   classroom.	   	   Indicators	   of	   negative	   behavior	   were	   low	   (sleepy=5.2%,	   difficulty	  
concentrating=10.3%,	   fighting/restless=13.5%).	   Of	   note,	   compared	   to	   the	   other	   positive	   behaviors,	  
relatively	  fewer	  observers	  stated	  that	  children	  work	  independently	  (74.6%).
18
An	   overall	   score	   of	   attentiveness	   was	   created	   by	   reverse-­‐scoring	   negative	   behaviors,	   summing	   all	  
behaviors,	   and	   standardizing	   on	   a	   scale	   from	   1-­‐100.	   	   The	   attentiveness	   scale	   had good	   internal	  
consistency	  (α=.77).	  On	  average,	  classrooms	  scored	  70.3%	  attentiveness	  overall (SD=9.9%),	  with	  a	  range	  
of	  38.0%	  to	  96.0%.	  	  Average	  attentiveness	  scores	  were	  obtained	  for	  each	  municipality	  and	  compared	  for	  
differences	   (p<.01).	   Results	   showed	   highest	   attentiveness	   scores	   for	   San	   Andres	   Xecul	   (M=74.0%,	  
SD=5.0%),	   followed	   by	  Momostenango	   (M=71.0%,	   SD=10.0%),	   San	   Bartolo	   Aguas	   Calientes	   (M=71.0%,	  
SD=6.0%),	  and	  Santa	  Lucia	  La	  Reforma	  (M=66.0%,	  SD=6.0%).	  
Student	  Hunger and	   Food	  Intake	   (Result	   1.2.1).	   	  Children	   answered	   a	   number	   of	   questions	   related	   to	  
their	   food	   intake	   on	   the	   day	   of	  ELGI	  assessment,	  as	  well	  as	   their	   opinions	   on	   the	   helpfulness	   of	   food	  
provided	  through	  the	  FFE	  program	  at	  their	  schools	  (see	  Table	  7).	  When	  asked	  whether	  they	  had	  eaten
any	  food	  at	  home	  on	  the	  morning	  of	  assessment,	  nearly	  all	  of	  3rd graders	  (97.4%)	  and	  6th graders	  (96.2%)	  
indicated	  yes10.	  Fewer	  children	  indicated	   their	   teachers	  had	  given	   them	  any	   food	   (74.7%	   for	  3rd grade;	  
82.5%	  for	  6th grade),	  but	  this	  response	  may	  reflect	  an	  early	  time	  of	  the	  day	  in	  which	  the	  child	  answered	  
the	  questions,	  prior	  to	  being	  served	  food.	  Nearly	  2/3rd of	  3rd graders	  reported	  getting	  food	  at	  school	  for	  
breakfast	   (62.4%)	   versus	   lunch	   (37.6%)	  and	   this	   pattern	  was	   similar	   for	   6th graders	   (58.5%	   vs.	   41.9%).	  	  
Most	  3rd graders	  said	  they	  were	  less	  hungry	  (86.9%)	  with	  the	  project’s	  food,	  while	  fewer	  (73.2%)	  of	  6th
graders	  stated	  they	  were	  less	  hungry.	  Most	  children	  also	  noted	  that	  they	  can	  study	  and	  perform	  better	  
at	  school	  with	  the	  project’s	  food,	  and	  3rd graders	  in	  particular	  said	  they	  liked	  the	  food	  (94.3%)	  with	  6th
graders	   also	   agreeing	   (91.8%).	   A	   few	   students	   noted	   they	   did	   not	   like	   certain	   aspects	   of	   the	   food,	  
particularly	  beans	  and	  rice;	  these	  numbers,	  however,	  were	  small.
Table	  7. Child	  Responses	  to	  Food	  Program
3rd Grade
(%	  responding	  yes)
6th Grade
(%	  responding	  yes)
Did	  you	  eat	  something	  at	  home	  this	  morning? 97.4% 96.2%
At	  school,	  did	  the	  teachers	  give	  you	  any	  food?	   74.7% 82.5%
If	  the	  teachers	  gave	  you	  food,	  was	  it	  for	  breakfast	  or	  
lunch?
BREAKFAST:	  	  62.4% BREAKFAST:	  	  58.5%
LUNCH:	  	  37.6% LUNCH:	  	  41.9%
With	  the	  project´s	  food,	  do	  you	  feel	  less	  hungry	  at	  school? 86.9% 73.2%
With	  the	  project´s	  food,	  can	  you	  study	  or	  perform	  better	  
at	  school?
92.4% 91.8%
Do	  you	  like	  the	  food	  you	  get	  at	  school?	   94.3% 91.8%
If	  you	  do	  not	  like	  food,	  which	  food?	  	   BEANS	  (N=31)
BEANS/RICE	  (N=2)
OTHER	  (N=3)
BEANS	  (N=58)
RICE	  (N=11)
BEANS/RICE	  (N=8)
OTHER	  (N=7)
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   10 Most	  children	  report	  eating	  food,	  but	  as	  shown	  in	  Table	  9,	  the	  food	  items	  can	  be	  coffee	  or	  a	  tortilla.	  Average	  food	  intake	  is
fewer	  than	  5	  items.
19
Principals	  had	  a	  different	  perception	  of	  children’s	  food	  intake.	  When	  asked	  to	  estimate	  the	  percentage	  
of	  children	  in	  each	  grade,	  principals	  on	  average	  reported	  that	  between	  26.0%-­‐30.0%	  of	  children	  did	  not	  
eat	   breakfast	   at	   home,	   with	   the	   rate	   increasing	   for	   younger	   children.	   At	   school,	   however,	   86.3%	   of	  
principals	  reported	  that	  children	  received	  food	  every	  day,	  and	  8.5%	  reported	  that	  children	  received	  food	  
three	  times	  a	  week	  at	  school. Principals	  also	  noted	  that	  children	  were	  less	  hungry	  (86.3%).	  	  
Parents	  were	  asked	  a	   number	   of	   questions	  gauging	   their	   opinions	  of	   the	  FFE	   program	  and	   how	  it	   has	  
impacted	   their	  children	   (see	  Table	  8).	  	  Parents	  were	  overwhelmingly	  positive	  about	   the	  program,	  with	  
nearly	   all	   indicating	   that	   schools	   meals	   help	   improve	   attention	   and	   learning.	   Parents	   almost	   always	  
indicated	   that	   food	   preparation	   is	   well	   organized	   and	   consistently	   done	   by	   community	   members.	  
Individual	  indicators	  were	  summed,	  and	  the	  resulting	  variable	  was	  standardized	  on	  a	  scale	  from	  1-­‐100.	  
Overall,	  parents	  ranged	  in	  their	  opinions	  of	  the	  food	  program	  from	  38%-­‐100%,	  with	  an	  average	  of	  87.9%	  
(SD=12.9%).
Table	  8. Parent	  Responses	  to	  Food	  Program
N Range Mean	  (SD) %	  Agree	  or	  
Strongly	  Agree
Having	  a	  complementary	  meal	  at	  school	  helps	  my	  child	  
pay	  more	  attention	  in	  the	  classroom.
319 2-­‐5 4.5	  (0.6) 96.0%
My	  child	  has	  learned	  more	  at	  school	  since	  receiving	  
complementary	  meals.
319 2-­‐5 4.5	  (0.6) 94.6%
Food	  preparation	  is	  well	  organized	  at	  school. 319 2-­‐5 4.5	  (0.6) 97.5%
Food	  preparation	  is	  consistently	  done	  by	  community	  
members.
319 2-­‐5 4.6	  (0.6) 96.9%
OVERALL	  PARENT	  RESPONSES 319 38%-­‐100% 87.9% (12.9%) -­‐-­‐
In	   regards	   to	   food	   intake,	   children	   were	   asked	   to	   indicate	   the	   type(s)	   of	   food	   they	   had	   eaten	   the	  
morning	  of	  the	  ELGI	  assessment.	  Nearly	  all	  children	  ate	  at	  least	  one	  item	  (97.7%	  for	  6th grade;	  97.1%	  for	  
3rd grade.	  Table	  9 lists	  the	  10	  most	  commonly	  indicated	  foods,	  for	  6th graders	  and	  3rd graders.	  Coffee	  was	  
the	  most	  frequent	  among	  6th graders	  (66.9%),	  followed	  by	  tortillas	  (66.5%),	  bread	  (39.4%),	  eggs	  (36.0%),	  
and	  beans	  (34.9%).	  Sixth	  graders	  ate	  on	  average	  4.6	  food	  items	  on	  the	  day	  of	  assessment	  (SD=3.0), with	  
a	   median	   of	   4.0	   and	   a	   mode	   of	   3.0.	   	   For	   3rd graders,	   tortillas	   and	   coffee	   were	   the	   most	   commonly	  
selected	  (66.7%	  and	  66.5%,	  respectively),	  followed	  by	  beans	  (40.7%),	  tamalitos	  (a	  corn-­‐based	  bread-­‐like	  
food)	  (32.6%),	  and	  eggs	  (31.9%).	  Third	  graders	  ate	  on	  average	  4.7	  food	  items	  on	  the	  day	  of	  assessment	  
(SD=3.8),	  with	  a	  median	  of	  3.0	  and	  a	  mode	  of	  3.0.	  	  
In	   addition,	   a	   Household	   Dietary	   Diversity	   Index	   (HDDS)	   score	   was	   calculated	   for	   all	   3rd and	   6th grade	  
children.	  	  The	  HDDS	  was	  developed	  by	  the	  UN	  Food	  &	  Agriculture	  Organization	  (Kennedy	  et	  al.,	  2011)	  to	  
serve	  as	  a	  rapid	  assessment	  of	  a	  household	  or	  individual’s	  access	  to	  different	  types	  of	   food.	  The	  index	  
clusters	   types	   of	   food	   into	   12	   different	   food	   groups.	   While	   normative	   data	   are	   not	   available	   for	  
comparison,	   3rd graders	   scored	   an	   average	   of	   3.3	   (SD=2.0)	   and	   6th graders	   scored	   an	   average	   of	   3.4	  
(SD=1.6).
20
Table	  9. Child	  Food	  Intake	  on	  Day	  of	  Assessment
N %
6th Grade	  – ANY	  FOOD 1,752 97.7%
Specific	  Foods (Top	  10)
	  	  Café 1,200 66.9%
	  	  Tortillas 1,193 66.5%
	  	  Pan 707 39.4%
	  	  Huevoz 646 36.0%
	  	  Frijoles 626 34.9%
	  	  Tamalitos 573 32.0%
	  	  Fruta 424 23.6%
	  	  Arroz 354 19.7%
	  	  Leche	  o	  Queso 255 14.2%
	  	  Verduras	  de	  hoya	  verde 237 13.2%
INDEX	  OF	  FOODS	  EATEN:	   MEAN=4.6,	  SD=3.0
HOUSEHOLD	  DIETARY	  DIVERSITY	  INDEX	  (HDDS):	   MEAN=3.4,	  SD=1.6
3rd Grade	  – ANY	  FOOD 1,980 97.1%
Specific	  Foods (Top	  10)
	  	  Tortillas 1,360 66.7%
	  	  Café 1,357 66.5%
	  	  Frijoles 831 40.7%
	  	  Tamalitos 665 32.6%
	  	  Huevoz 651 31.9%
	  	  Pan 638 31.3%
	  	  Arroz 467 22.9%
	  	  Verduras	  de	  hoja	  verde 423 20.7%
	  	  Papas 378 18.5%
	  	  Fruta 363 17.8%
INDEX	  OF	  FOODS	  EATEN: MEAN=4.7,	  SD=3.8
HOUSEHOLD	  DIETARY	  DIVERSITY	  INDEX	  (HDDS) MEAN=3.3,	  SD=2.0
When	  asked	  whether	  children	  liked	  the	  food	  given	  to	  them	  through	  FFE,	  91.1%	  of	  responding	  teachers	  
said	   Yes.	   However,	   24.2%	   of	   teachers	   (60	   out	   of	   248)	   indicated	   there	   were	   some	   problems	   with	   the	  
quality	  of	  the	  food,	  and	  59	  provided	  a	  specific	  instance.	  Out	  of	  these	  teachers	  (N=59),	  45%	  of	  teachers	  
noted	  that	  the	  pinto	  beans	  delivered	  to	  the	  schools	  are	  hard	  and	  take	  a	  long	  time	  to	  cook	  and	  therefore	  
uses	   a	   large	   amount	   of	   firewood;	   18.6%	   (11	   teachers	   total)	   mentioned	   the	   food	   arriving rotten	   or	  
expired11;	  and	  15.3%	  (9 teachers	  total)	  mentioned	  the	  food	  coming	  with	  “gorgojos”	  or	  weevils12.
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   11 It	  is	  important	  to	  note	  that	  CRS	  has	  become	  aware	  of	  considerable	  confusion	  among	  teachers	  about	  the	  dates	  listed	  on	  USDA	  
products,	  with	  the	  packaging	  date	  being	  misinterpreted	  as	  the	  expiration	  date.	  	  It	  is	  possible	  that	  these	  responses	  reflect	  this	  
ongoing	  confusion.
21
Principals	  agreed	  that	  children	  mostly	  liked	  the	  food	  provided	  through	  FFE	  (88.0%).	  	  	  All	  but	  4	  of	  the	  117	  
participating	  directors	  knew	  that	  CRS	  implemented	  the	  FFE	  project.	  However,	  37.6%	  (N=44)	  of	  principals	  
noted	  some	  problems	  with	  the	  quality	  of	  the	  food and	  43	  provided	  specific	  examples.	  Most	  commonly,	  
of	  these	  43	  directors,	  36%	  of	  principals	  surveyed	  also	  noted	  that	  the	  pinto	  beans	  delivered	  are	  hard	  and	  
take	   long	   to	   cook; 18.6%	   (N=8)	   of	   principals	   noted	   a	   general	   poor	   quality	   of	   the	   products	   delivered;	  
18.6%	   reported	   coming	  with	  weevils	   (N=6)	   or	   “animals”	   (N=2);	  and	   4.7%	   (N=2)	   reported	   the	   oil	   being	  
expired.13
While	  66%	  of	  PTA	  focus	  groups	  reported	  no	  problems	  with	  food	  quality,	  33%	  specified	  concerns	  similar	  
to	   the	   teachers	  and	   directors.	   	   22%	   of	  groups	   reported	   concerns	  about	   the	   beans,	   ranging	   from	   poor	  
variety	  to	  poor	  cooking	  utility:
• “sometimes	  the	  children	  got	  bored	  of	  so	  many	  beans”;	  
• “we’d	  like	  it	  if	  you	  sent	  us	  another	  variety	  of	  bean,	  so	  we	  can	  give	  other	  types	  to	  the	  children”;	  
• “we	  request	  pressure	  cookers”	  to	  cook	  the	  hard	  bean more	  easily
4	  focus	  groups	  in	  Momostenango	  mentioned	  corn	  coming	  with	  dust	  or	  weevils,	  and	  one	  focus	  group	  in	  
San	  Andres	  Xecul	  said	  that	  rice	  came	  with	  weevils.
CRS	  Food	  Storage, Management,	   and	  Delivery.	  During	   data	   collection,	   the	   lead	  author	  and	  evaluation	  
field	  manager	  were	  provided	  a	  tour	  of	  the	  food	  distribution	  warehouse	  located	  in	  Quetzaltenango. CRS	  
and	   implementing	   partner	   staff	   explained	   the	   process	   by	   which	   food	   items	   were	   stored,	   with	   precise	  
record-­‐keeping	   and	   protocols	   for	   measuring	   the	   amount	   of	   food	   required	   at	   each	   school	   for	   each	  
month.	  	  As	  staff	  explained	  -­‐ and	  as	  observed	  by	  the	  evaluators at	  the	  warehouse	  -­‐ great	  care	  is	  taken	  to	  
ensure	   the	  integrity	  of	   food	  items	   from	  contamination	  at	  every	  point	  in	   the	  supply	  chain,	  with	  several	  
sets	  of	  redundancies	  in	  place	  to	  avoid	  errors.	  	  The	  warehouse	  appeared	  very	  clean	  and	  organized,	  with	  
highly	  competent	  professionals	  who	  demonstrated	  a	  significant	  depth	  of	  knowledge.
STUDENT	  ATTENDANCE	  (RESULT	  1.3)
Student	   Attendance	   (Result	   1.3). Teachers	   were	   asked	   to	   assess	   the	   percent	   of	   time	   over	   the	   year	  
students	   attended	   school,	   in	   3rd and	   6th grades	   (see	   Table	   10). Teachers	   reported	   that	   3rd graders	  
attended	  more	   often	   than	   6th graders,	  and	   that	   boys	  attended	  more	   than	  girls.	  None	   of	   these	  groups	  
reached	  80%	  school	  attendance	  during	  the	  school	  year,	  although	  3rd grade	  boys	  came	  the	  closest.	  Of the	  
301	  teachers	  in	  the	  sample,	  58	  (19.3%)	  reported	  they	  did	  not	  have	  an	  attendance	  notebook.
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   12 CRS	  experienced	  3	  schools in	  year	  1	  of	  FFE that	  reported	  weevils	  in	  the	  corn,	  and	  appropriate	  measures	  were	  taken	  to	  
address	  and	  prevent future	  occurrences	  of	  this issue. No	  other	  issues	  have	  been	  reported	  by	  schools	  to	  CRS. 13 See	  above	  footnote.
22
Table	  10. Student	  Attendance	  (Teacher	  Reports)
3rd Grade
M(SD)
6th Grade
M(SD)
Boys 79.8%	  (31.8%) 75.2%	  (38.9%)
Girls 77.2%	  (33.8%) 73.8%	  (38.9%)
Teachers	  and	  directors	  were	  asked	  to	  identify	  the	  specific	  factors	  that	  helped	  increase	  school	  
attendance	  in	  2015	  (see	  Table	  11). Most	  teachers	  and	  directors	  identified	  school	  food	  as	  the	  primary	  
driver	  of	  increased	  attendance	  (89.1%	  and	  93.9%,	  respectively).	  One	  PTA	  group	  described	  the	  
relationship	  between	  school	  food	  and	  attendance:	  “children	  leave	  home	  without	  breakfast,	  and	  they	  
arrive	  to	  school	  to	  have	  breakfast.” About	  ¼	  of	  teachers	  stated	  that	  the	  Kemom	  Ch’ab’al	  workbooks	  and	  
textbooks	  helped	  increase	  attendance,	  while	  directors	  were	  slightly	  more	  likely	  to	  report	  workbooks	  as	  
being	  helpful.	  Relatively	  few	  teachers	  (12.1%)	  believed	  the	  new	  tools	  and	  techniques	  from	  Kemom	  
Ch’ab’al	  helped	  attendance,	  but	  by	  contrast,	  directors	  were	  almost	  3	  times	  as	  likely	  to	  report	  these	  
techniques	  as	  being	  helpful.	  	  Other	  perceived	  factors	  behind	  attendance	  included	  school	  supplies	  
(average	  of	  15.5%),	  support	  of	  children	  and	  motivation	  of	  parents	  and	  teachers	  (average	  of	  15.8%),	  and	  
institutional	  support	  of	  the	  school	  (average	  of	  12.9%). Finally,	  numerous	  PTA	  focus	  groups	  described	  
their	  role	  in	  supporting	  improved	  boys’	  and	  girls’	  attendance	  through	  family	  support.	  One	  group	  stated,	  
“(We	  provide)	  motivation	  to	  parents	  that	  they	  bring	  children	  to	  school.”	  PTA	  focus	  groups	  also	  described	  
their	  role	  in	  ensuring	  compliance,	  stating:	  “(we	  do	  home	  visits)	  to	  know	  why	  the	  children	  don’t	  attend	  
class.” One	  PTA	  focus	  group	  additionally	  described	  its	  role	  ensuring	  the	  attendance	  of	  teachers	  through	  
home	  visits.	  	  
Table	  11. Perceived	  Factors	  that	  Lead	  to	  Increased	  School	  Attendance14
TEACHERS	   DIRECTORS
School	  food 89.1% 93.9%
Kemon	  Ch´ab´al	  workbooks 24.3% 29.8%
Kemon	  Ch´ab´al	  textbooks 23.8% 23.7%
New	  tools	  and	  techniques	  with	  Kemon	  Ch´ab´al 12.1% 35.1%
Other:	  	  Supplies	  (backpacks,	  sweaters,	  uniforms) 14.2% 16.7%
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  Support	  of	  Children/Motivation	  of	  
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  parents	  and	  teachers
16.7% 14.9%
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  Institutional	  Support 10.9% 14.9%
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   14 Multiple	  responses	  could	  be	  selected	  so	  the	  total	  count	  is	  greater	  than	  100.0%.
23
Student	  Participation	  in	  Extra	  Curricular	  Activities (1.3.1). According	  to	  CRS	  monitoring	  reports	  to	  USDA,	  
2,400 children	  were	  enrolled	   in	   Spaces	   to	  Grow	   in	   school	   years	   2013-­‐2014	  and	   2014-­‐2015	   combined.	  
This	   number	   represents	   an	   increase from	   the	   1,820	   children	   enrolled	   in	   after-­‐school	   activities	   at	  
baseline,	  although	  it	  is	  difficult	  to	  assess	  the	  source	  of	  the	  baseline	  data.	  From	  the	  MTE	  survey,	  24.1% of	  
parents	   reported	   after-­‐school	   activities	   at	   their	   school.	  	   When asked	   whether	   parents	   would	   be	  
interested	   in	   having	   their	   child	   participate	   in	   after-­‐school	   activities,	   88.1%	   said	   yes.	   Parents	   further	  
elaborated	   that	   they	   would	   like	   to	   see	   increased	   academic	   support	   after	   school	   as	   educational	  
reinforcement	   (38.3%),	   cultural	   or	   recreational	   activities	   (18.7%),	   or	   specialized	   courses	   such	   as	  
computer	   skills	   (5.1%).	   Notably,	   a	   small	   percentage	   of	   parents	   (2.3%)	   opposed	   after	   school	   activities	  
because	  children	  did	  not	  have	  enough	  time	  given	  schedules	  and	  chores;	  one	  parent	  also	  observed	  that	  
“there	  is	  much	  danger	  sending	  (the	  child	  to	  school	  in	  the)	  afternoon” but	  did	  not elaborate. Several	  PTA	  
Focus	  Groups	  described	   their	   role	  in	  enhancing student	  participation	  in	  extracurricular	  events,	  via	  PTA	  
support,	   planning	   and	   attendance	   of	   events.	   	   Events	   included	  Mother’s	   and	   Father’s	   Day,	   Day	   of	   the	  
Child,	  sports	  events	  and	  student	  festivals.
Number	  of	  School	  Governments	  Established	  (1.3.1a).	  	  162	  schools	  have	  established	  school	  governments	  
since	  baseline,	  for	  a	  total	  of	  375	  schools with	  school	  governments	  at	  midterm15.	  96.6%	  of	  directors	  and	  
94.0%	   of	   teachers	   stated	   there	   was	   a	   school	   government	   at	   their	   schools.	   Averaged	   together,	   the	  
resulting	  indicator	  is	  95.3%. Directors	  and	  teachers	  scored	  similarly	  on	  most	  answers	  related	  to	  school	  
governments	  (see	  Table	  12). Most	  observed	  that	  school	  governments	  work	  as	  a	  committee,	  and	  nearly	  
every	  director	  and	  most	  teachers	  stated	  that	  the	  school	  government	  is	  composed	  of	  children.	  Girls	  hold	  
a	  number	  of	  offices	  within	  school	  governments,	  primarily	  Vocal	  (over	  50.0%),	  Secretary	  (nearly	  60.0%),	  
Treasurer	   (over	   40%),	   Vice	   President	   (nearly 40%)	   and	   President	   (about	   1/3rd).	   Nearly	   all	   agreed	  that	  
teachers	   support	   children being	   involved	   in	   school	   governments.	   When	   asked	   whether	   school	  
governments	  were	  stronger	  now,	  compared	  with	  the	  last	  academic	  year,	  67.5% of	  directors	  said	  yes.
At	   the	   time	   of	   the	  MTE,	   no	   school	   improvement	   plans	   had	   been	   completed	   since	   baseline.	   The	   total	  
number	  of	  school	  improvement	  plans	  remains	  at	  142 with	  79 remaining	  to	  reach	  the	  final	  target.
Table	  12. School	  Governments
Directors
%	  Yes
Teachers
%	  Yes
Is	  there	  a	  school	  government	  at	  this	  school? 96.6% 94.0%
Does	  the	  school	  government	  work	  as	  a	  committee? 86.3% 82.4%
Is	  the	  school	  government	  composed	  of	  children? 95.7% 93.1%
What	  position/offices	  do	  girls	  hold?
-­‐ President 36.0% 32.3%
-­‐ Vice President 39.6% 36.9%
-­‐ Secretary 58.6% 59.0%
-­‐ Treasurer 41.4% 42.1%
-­‐ Vocal 53.2% 56.0%
Do	  you	  think	  teachers	  are	  interested	  in	  forming	  a	  school	  
government	  or	  council	  with	  children’s	  participation?
99.1% 98.7%
Is	  the	  school	  government	  stronger	  now	  in	  2014-­‐2015	  than	  it	  was	  in	  
2013-­‐2014?
67.5% -­‐-­‐
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   15 This	  information	  was	  provided	  by	  CRS	  based	  on	  records	  kept	  by	  APCC.
24
School	   Days	   Missed	   by	   Students	   Due	   to	   Illness (1.3.2).	  	   When	   asked	   to	   report	   the	   number	   of	   days	  
students	  miss	  school	  because	  of	  illness16,	  teachers	  reported	  that students	  miss	  an	  average	  of	  4.1 days,	  
with	  wide	  variation	  in	  these	  patterns	  (SD=7.4	  days)	  (see	  Table	  13). The	  average	  highest	  missed	  days	  was	  
seen	  in	  1st grade	  (M=5.6,	  SD=11.2)	  and	  declined	  each	  year,	  with	  the	  lowest	  missed	  days	  in	  6th grade	  at	  
2.9	  days	   (SD=3.6).	  The	   result	  indicator	  of %	  missing	   between	   1-­‐5	   days	  is	  66.3% an	  improvement	   from	  
baseline.
Table	  13. School	  Days	  Missed	  Because	  of	  Illness
Mean	  (SD) %	  missing	  1-­‐5	  days
1st Grade 5.6	  (11.2) 63.8%
2nd Grade 5.3	  (11.3) 66.7%
3rd Grade 4.8	  (11.3) 67.0%
4th Grade 3.4	  (3.6) 68.0%
5th Grade 3.1	  (3.6) 66.7%
6th Grade 2.9	  (3.6) 65.3%
OVERALL 4.1	  (7.4) 66.3%
Numerous	   PTA	   focus	   groups	   across	   departments	   noted	   that	   the	   trainings	   they	   received	   helped	   to	  
decrease	   student	   illness,	   owing	   to	   safer	   food	   preparation	   practices.	   Groups	   noted,	   “Regarding	   the	  
theme	   of	   hygiene,	   the	   children	   now	   don’t	   get	   sick,	   and	   they	   remain	   healthier”,	   and “(the	   trainings	  
helped)	   to	   correctly	   prepare	   the	   food	   and	   avoid	   illnesses”.	   	   PTAs	   described	   that,	   after	   training,	   they	  
“wash	  everything	  so	  the	  children	  don’t	  get	  sick”.	  	  They	  describe	  this	  as	  an	  improvement	  upon	  past	  years	  
stating,	   “It’s helped	   because	  in	   past	  years,	  we’ve	   seen	  many	  illnesses in	   the	  educational	   community”;	  
“(training	   has	   helped)	   to	   see	   the	   children	   healthier…	   to	   avoid	   that	   the	   children	   get	   sick.” PTA	   focus	  
groups	  finally	  link	  parental	  satisfaction	  with	  the	  FFE	  program	  to	  illness-­‐ and	  hunger-­‐reduction	  amongst	  
children.	  	  Two	  groups	   from	  Santa	  Lucia	  la	  Reforma	  noted,	  “The	  mothers	  are	  happy	  because	  it’s	  a	  help	  
that’s	  being	  given,	  in	  their	  view.	  Because	  children’s	  weight	  has	  improved.”	  	  Improved	  health	  outcomes	  
were	  frequently	  cited.
Food	   Preparation. In	   terms	   of	   food	   preparation,	   directors	   noted	   that	   food	   was	   prepared	   mostly	   by	  
mothers	   (77.8%)	   or	  mothers	   plus	   contracted	   cooks,	   PTAs, and	   fathers	   (10.3%).	   PTA	   focus	   groups	   also	  
described	   mothers	   as	   primarily	   responsible	   for	   food preparation	   (90%);	   in	   10%	   of	   cases,	   school	   staff,	  
teachers,	  and	  parent	  committee	  members	  were	  named	  as	  food	  preparers.
Most	   commonly	   noted	   problems	   by	   directors, related	   to	   food	   preparation,	   included	   organization	  
(45.9%),	   the	   type	   of	   food	   (35.7%),	   and	   food	   storage	   (16.3%).	   By	   contrast,	   most	   PTA	   groups	   (76%)	  
reported	   no	   problems	   with	   food	   preparation/organization	   in	   the	   school,	   or	   reported	   initial	   problems	  
that	  were	  successfully	  managed.	  Describing	   the	  interrelationship	  between	  successful	   food	  preparation
and	   organization/collective	   work,	   one	   group	   noted,	   “The	   mothers	   come	   to	   prepare	   snacks	   because	  
there’s	   a	   schedule,” and	   “No	   problems	   have	   existed	   for	   the	   moment,	   because	   the	   snack	   preparation	  
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   16 Data	  collection	  supervisors	  reported	  great	  variation	  in	  how	  attendance	  data	  were	  handled	  across	  schools.	  Some	  
had	  attendance	  books	  while	  others	  did	  not.
25
happens	   through	   turn-­‐taking.”	   In	   these	   cases,	   success	   related	   to	   sufficient	   PTA	   organization.	   	   When	  
problems	  did	  exist	  with	  food	  preparation/organization,	  they	  were	  effectively	  resolved:	  “(problems)	  have	  
existed,	  but	  they	  were	  small	  and	  we	  solved	  them.”	  
Still,	   one	   quarter	   of	   PTAs	   (24%)	   reported	   problems	   with	   food	   preparation	   and	   organization.	   	   These	  
problems	   owed	   to	   a	   perception	   of	   some	   parents’	   inadequate	   and	   inconsistent	   participation	   with	  
cooking:	  “Some	  mothers	  don’t	  want	  to	  participate;	  they’re	  irresponsible”;	  “there	  are	  mothers	  who	  are	  
not	   collaborative.” In	   other	   cases,	   PTAs	   cited	   problems	   with	  mothers’	   hygiene	   and	   skill,	   stating:	   “(we	  
have	  problems	  with)	  the	  responsibility	  and	  hygiene	  of	  the	  mothers.	  They	  don’t	  manage	  the	  food	  well.”	  
Infrastructure	   was	   finally	   also	   cited	   as	   a	   problem:	   “The	   stove	   is	   small	   and	   the	   tubing	   where	   smoke	  
should	  exit	  gets	  stuck”;	  “The	  kitchen	  is	  small”;	  “(there’s	  a)	  lack	  of	  potable	  water”;	  “there’s	  no	  stove,	  no	  
utensils,	   and	   no	   space	   for	   a	   kitchen.”	  	   17%	   of	   the	   problems	   cited	   were	   from	   PTA	   groups	   in	  
Momostenango	   (the	   largest	   percentage	   of	   problems),	   while	   36%	   of	   successes	   also	   hailed	   from	   this	  
municipality	   (the	  largest	  percentage	  of	  successes).	  There	  were	  no	  problems	  cited	  in	  San	  Bartolo	  Aguas	  
Calientes.	  	  Food	  storage	  issues	  are	  further	  discussed	  in	  the	  infrastructure	  section.
Frequency of	   food	   preparation	   and	   provision. In	   terms	   of	   food	   distribution	   frequency,	   93%	   of	   PTA	  
groups	   across	   municipalities	   reported	   serving	   food	   in	   the	   school	   daily,	   while	   7%	   of	   groups	   reported	  
serving	   food	   2-­‐3	   times/week.	  When	   PTAs	   serve	   food	   daily,	   the	   primary reasons	   included	   (in	   order	   of	  
frequency):	  
1. Child	   health/nutrition [46%	   of	   respondents	   who	   served	   daily	   reported:	   “we	   were	   trained	   that	  
the	  children	  must	  have	  their	  food	  daily”;	  “it’s	  necessary	  for	  the	  children”]
2. Adequate	   food	   availability [22%	   of	   respondents	  who	   served	   food	   daily	   reported:	   “because	  we	  
have	  enough	  food	  now”;	  “The	  food	  for	  each	  child	  is	  for	  21	  days”17],
3. Institutional	   requirements [22%	   said:	   “because	   there’s	   food	  and	   because	  it’s	  a	   requirement	   of	  
the	  institutions”;	  “Because	  the	  program	  requires	  that	  the	  children	  eat	  all	  throughout	  the	  week”]
4. Community	   collaboration [13%	   of	   groups	   reported:	   “Because	   the	   community	   is	   in	   agreement	  
with	   the	   nutritional/feeding	   (goals)”;	   “because	   we	   can	   count	   on	   the	   mothers’	   help”;	   “the	  
parents	  are	  motivated	  to	  prepare	  the	  food”]
5. Covering	   shortfalls [2%	   noted:	   “because	   there’s	   food	  and	   because	   sometimes	   the	   (food)	   from	  
MINEDUC	  is	  late”]
6. Attention/learning	  goals [2%	  reported:	  “Eating	  food	  in	  school	  improves	  (student)	  attention”].
For	  the	  small	  number	  of	  PTAs	  (7.0%)	  who	  serve	  food	  2-­‐3	  times/week,	  their	  reasons	  included:
1. Scheduling	   limitations	   [50%	   of	   these	   groups	   noted:	   “because	   mothers	   can’t	   come	   in	   that	  
frequently	  to	  cook”;	  “we	  need	  time	  to	  prepare”]
2. Inadequate	   food	   supply	   [33%	  of	  groups	   stated:	  “because	  if	  we	  give	  every	   day,	   there	  won’t	   be	  
enough	  (food)	  for	  the	  students”]
3. Inadequate	   food	  variety	   [17%	  of	  groups	  described	  student	  boredom	  with	  the	   food	  types:	  “(we	  
provide)	  rice	  and	  beans	  (on	  Monday	  and	  Thursday	  only)	  because	  kids	  sometimes	  get	  bored”]
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   17 Food	  provision	  is	  calculated	  based	  on	  a	  21-­‐day	  per	  month	  school	  calendar.
26
School	  infrastructure projects	  undertaken	  or	  completed	  in	  2014-­‐2015,	  as	  reported	  by	  PTA	  focus	  groups,	  
included the	  following:
• In	  Momostenango,	  57%	  of	  focus	  group	  respondents	  undertook	  new	  infrastructural	  projects.	  The	  
most	   frequently	   cited	   were	   kitchen	   and	   bathroom/handwashing	   sink	   construction	   or	  
improvement,	  with	  some	  emphasis	  on	  general	  school	  construction	  and	  repair
• In	   Santa	   Lucia	   la	   Reforma,	   77%	   of	   schools	   reportedly	   had	   infrastructural	   improvements.	  Here,	  
the	  majority	  of	  improvements	  were	  for	  the	  wider	  school	  environment (classroom	  construction,	  
which	  is	  not	  a	  component	  of	  the	  FFE	  program),	  with	  some improvements	  made	  to	  kitchens	  and,	  
in	  less frequency,	  bathrooms.	  
• In	  San	  Bartolo	  Aguas	  Calientes,	  60%	  of	  schools	  sampled	  had	  undertaken	  projects,	  emphasizing	  
kitchen	  and	  stove	  improvements.
• In	  San	  Andres	  Xecul,	  only	  50%	  of	  schools	  had	  undertaken	  projects,	  also	  emphasizing	  kitchen	  and	  
stove	  improvements.
Hygiene	  practices	  of	  food	  preparation. At	  each	  school	  visited	  during	  MTE	  data	  collection,	  data	  collection	  
supervisors	   were	   asked	   to	   assess	   the	   cleanliness	   of	   school	   kitchens	   (see	   Table	   14) and	   the	   hygienic	  
practices	   of	   food	   preparation	   (see	   Table	   15), using	   a	   structured	   questionnaire.	   In	   regards	   to	   school	  
kitchens,	  supervisors	  observed	  some	  problems,	  particularly	  with	  the	  cleanliness	  of	  the	  floor	  (54.1%	  clean	  
or	  very	  clean)	  and	  walls	  (63.0%)	  (see	  Table	  14).	  Stoves	  and	  equipment	  were	   rated	  more	  highly	   (67.5%	  
and	   70.3%,	   respectively)	   but	   still	   well	   below	   80.0%. The	   scores	   for	   each	   indicator	   were	   summed	   and	  
standardized	   to	  a	   score	   ranging	  between	   0%-­‐100%.	  Standardized	  cleanliness	   scores	   ranged	   from	   19%-­‐
100%,	  with	  an	  average	  of	  64.3% (SD=19.3%).
Table	  14. Cleanliness	  of	  School	  Kitchens
N Range Mean	  (SD) %	  Clean	  or	  
Very	  Clean
Stove 120 1-­‐5 3.7	  (0.9) 67.5%
Floor 120 1-­‐5 3.4	  (0.9) 54.1%
Equipment 118 2-­‐5 3.7	  (0.8) 70.3%
Walls 119 1-­‐5 3.6	  (1.0) 63.0%
OVERALL	  CLEANLINESS 117 19%	  -­‐ 100% 64.3% (19.3%) -­‐-­‐
Data	   collection	   supervisors	   also	   conducted	   structured	   observations	   on	   food	   preparation	   and	   hygiene	  
(see	  Table	  15). These	  indicators	  were	  rated	  more	  highly	  than	  the	  cleanliness	  of	  school	  kitchens,	  but	  all	  
indicators	  still	  fell	  below	  80.0%.	  ¾	  of	  food	  preparers	  were	  observed	  to	  be	  wearing	  aprons,	  and	  nearly	  ¾	  
were	  observed	  to	  show	  good	  hygiene	  and	  to	  wash	  their	  hands.	  Just	  over	  half	  of	  food	  preparers	  (56.2%)	  
were	  observed	  to	  use	  hair	  nets	  while	  preparing	  food.	  	  These	  indicators	  were	  summed	  and standardized	  
to	  produce	  an	  overall	  score	  of	   food	  preparation	  and	  hygiene.	  	  Schools	   ranged	   from	  0%-­‐100%,	  with	  an	  
average	  food	  preparation	  and	  hygiene	  score	  of	  65.5% (SD=22.6%).
27
Table	  15. Food	  Preparation	  and	  Hygiene
N Range Mean	  (SD) %	  Agree	  or	  
Strongly	  Agree
Food	  preparers	  show	  good	  hygiene. 104 1-­‐5 3.7	  (1.0) 70.2%
Preparers	  wash	  their	  hands. 77 1-­‐5 3.7	  (1.0) 70.1%
Preparers	  use	  hair	  nets	  to	  keep	  their	  hair	  up 105 1-­‐5 3.3	  (1.3) 56.2%
Preparers	  use	  aprons. 107 1-­‐5 3.8	  (1.2) 75.7%
OVERALL	  FOOD	  PREPARATION &	  HYGIENE 76 0%-­‐100% 65.5% (22.6%) -­‐-­‐
As	  part	  of	   their	  school	  infrastructure	  observations,	  data	  collection	  supervisors	  also	  noted	  a	  number	  of	  
other	  hygiene-­‐ and	  infrastructure-­‐related	  issues	  (see	  Table	  16). A	  small	  number	  of	  kitchens	  (12.5%)	  were	  
observed	   to	  have	  animals,	  although	  80.0%	  of	   these	  were	   flies.	  Half	  of	  kitchens	  were	  observed	   to	  have	  
children	  under	  7	  in	  them.	  On	  average,	  kitchens	  had	  nearly	  2	  young	  children	  in	  the	  kitchen	  at	  the	  time	  of	  
observation,	  with	  a	  range	  of	  between	  1	  and	  6	  children	  in	  the	  kitchen. Most	  kitchens	  had	  water	  available	  
(88.3%),	   and	   water	   was	   predominantly	   used	   for	   handwashing	   (95.3%),	   washing	   dishes	   (93.4%)	   and	  
drinking	   (71.7%).	   Water	   was	   less	   frequently	   used	   for	   washing	   mops	   and	   washing	   the	   floor.	   A	   small	  
number	  of	  schools	  (7.7%)	  were	  observed	  in	  which	  children	  were	  drinking	  water	  directly	  from	  the	  source,	  
most	  commonly	  from	  a	  water	  jet	  (63.6%).	  About	  1/5th of	  schools	  were	  observed	  to	  have	  wasted	  water18,	  
with	   43.5%	   of	   bathrooms having	   leaks	   or	   being	   flooded	   with	   water,	   and	   56.5%	   of	   schools	   having	  
problems	  with	  rusted	  or	  leaking	  pipes	  and	  overflowing	  water	  stacks.
Table	  16. Hygiene	  and	  Infrastructure	  Issues	  at	  Schools
Yes	  
(%)
Details
Animals	  in	  the	  Kitchen 12.5% • Flies	  (80.0%),	  Dogs	  (26.7%)
Children	  Under	  7	  in	  the	  Kitchen 50.8% • Range:	  1-­‐6
• Mean=1.8,	  SD=1.2
Water	  Available 88.3% • Handwashing (95.3%)
• Washing	  dishes (93.4%)
• Drinking	  (71.7%)
• Washing	  mops (35.9%)
• Washing	  the	  floor (29.2%)
Children	  Drinking	  Water	  Directly 7.7% • From	  water	  jet	  (63.6%)
• From	  pipes (36.4%)
• From	  water	  fountain (45.5%)
Waste	  in	  the	  Water 20.8% • Water	  leaking	  in	  bathroom	  (43.5%)
• Problems	  with	  pipes,	  stacks	  (56.5%)
Toilets	  Used	  Separately 89.2% • Boys	  and	  girls	  separately	  (100.0%)
• Children	  and	  teachers	  separately	  (40.2%)
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   18 The	  question	  was	  written,	  “Do	  you	  observe	  waste	  in	  the	  water”?	  Based	  on	  the	  responses,	  it	  seems	  the	  question	  was	  
interpreted,	  “Do	  you	  observe	  water	  being	  wasted?”
28
Condition	  of	  Bathrooms -­‐-­‐ %	  of	  Bathrooms	  which	  contain	  the	  following:
• Towel (0.0%)
• Soap (2.6%)
• Water (48.7%)
• Trash	  can (47.0%)
• Ventilation (79.1%)
• Lighting (64.3%)
Most	   schools	   had	   separate	   bathrooms	   (89.2%)	   for	   boys	   and	   girls	   (100.0%),	   with	   a	   lower	   number	   of	  
separate	   bathrooms	   for	   children	   and	   teachers	   (40.2%).	   Bathrooms	   generally	   were	   observed	   to	   be	   in	  
poor	  condition.	  No	  bathrooms	  were	  observed	  to	  have	  a	  towel,	  and	  only	  2.6%	  had	  soap.	  	  Fewer	  than	  half	  
were	   observed	   to	   have	   water	   (48.7%)	   or	   a	   trash	   can	   (47.0%).	   Most	   bathrooms	   were	   well	   ventilated	  
(79.1%),	  however,	  and	  about	  2/3rd of	  bathrooms	  had	  adequate	  lighting.
Data	  collection	  supervisors	  were	  also	  instructed	  to	  observe	  and	  record	  how	  the	  kitchen	  was	  currently	  
being	  used	  during	  the	  visit.	  	  83%	  of	  schools	  were	  being	  used	  to	  cook	  foods	  or	  snacks,	  9%	  were	  not	  being	  
used,	  and	  7%	  of	  kitchens	  were	  being	  cleaned.	  Supervisors	  were	  also	  asked	  to	  observe	  and	  record	  any	  
other	  uses	  of	  the	  kitchen.	  	  33%	  indicated	  the	  kitchen	  was	  used	  as	  a	  bodega,	  either	  for	  kitchen	  supplies	  
or	  food	  storage.
Despite	  some	  of	  the	  issues	  described	  in	  the	  data	  above,	  100%	  of	  PTA	  focus	  groups	  described	  knowing	  
steps	  in	  food	  preparation,	  emphasizing	  hygiene	  and	  food	  service.	  In	  some	  cases,	  the	  full	  cycle	  of	  food	  
preparation	  and	  hygiene	  was	  mentioned,	  and	  not	  in	  others.	  	  For	  example,	  one	  group	  stated,	  “wash	  
hands;	  wash	  utensils;	  clean;	  cook;	  clean	  again;	  ensure	  all	  children	  receive	  snack.”	  	  Others	  emphasized	  
just	  one	  or	  two	  steps:	  “cook	  the	  food	  well”	  and	  “cook the	  food	  well;	  oversee	  the	  preparation	  
thoroughly.”	  Others	  instead	  described	  the	  opening	  of	  the	  process,	  but	  did	  not	  itemize	  steps	  towards	  
completion,	  as	  in:	  “wash	  hands	  well;	  wash	  utensils	  well;	  put	  on	  aprons	  and	  hairnets.”	  Others	  
emphasized	  the	  importance	  of	  collective	  work	  in	  food	  preparation:	  “by	  groups;	  taking	  turns,”	  or	  “the	  
mothers	  work	  in	  groups.”	  	  
Training	  PTAs.	  98%	  of	  PTA	  groups	  described	  themes	  in	  which	  they	  had	  been	  trained. Fourteen	  PTA	  
groups	  described	  receiving	  training	  primarily	  in	  the	  following:	  
(1) Food	  preparation	  and	  safe	  handling (38%19)	  -­‐ “instructions	  &	  demonstrations	  surrounding	  food	  
prep”;	  “cookie	  recipes”;	  	  “hygiene	  of	  cooking”;	  “Management	  of	  food	  inventory”
(2) Health	  and	  Hygiene (27%)	  -­‐ “hygiene	  (of)	  kids,	  personal,	  food,	  etc.”;	  “cleanliness	  &	  efficiency	  of	  
kitchen”;	  “treatment	  of	  children	  in	  the	  home”
(3) Child	   feeding/nutrition (22%)	   Food/nutrition,	   malnutrition,	   sweets,	   vitamins,	   diverse	   menu	  
“Diminishing	  malnutrition”;”	  Balanced,	  diversified	  diet”;	  “Reduce	   fast	   food	  and	  sweets”;	  “good	  
nutritional	  practices”
(4) Environment/local	   plant	   cultivation	   &	   use (4%)	   -­‐ “Planting	   a	   garden/school	   garden”;	  
“Preparation	  of	  natural	  medicines/plants”
(5) Importance	  of	  child	  education/wellbeing (4%) -­‐ “Educating	  children”;	  “Self-­‐esteem”;	  “Children’s	  
rights”
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   19 Unless	  otherwise	  stated,	  %	  represents	  total	  of	  PTA	  groups	  across	  all	  municipalities.
29
Satisfaction	  with	  Trainings.	  Most	  PTAs	  noted	  that	  these	  trainings	  have	  enhanced	  their	  ability	  to	  do	  their	  
jobs,	  and	  have	  improved	  outcomes.	  Regarding	  food	  preparation,	  a	  PTA	  group	  in	  Momostenango	  
reported:	  
“The	  workshops	  have	  helped	   the	  PTA	  members	  better	  carry	  out	   their	  responsibilities,	   (to)	  know	  how	   to	  
store	  and	  protect	  the	  food	  they	  receive.	  Also,	  to	  help	  the	  parents	  orient	  themselves	  in	  food	  preparation,	  
using	  their	  own	  community	  resources	  combined	  with	  those	  from	  the	  project.”	  	  
Others	  report	  improvements	  in	  the	  food	  preparation	  process:	  “for	  the	  organization	  of	  food	  preparation,	  
it’s	  helped	  a	  lot.”	  One	  group	  in	  San	  Andres	  Xecul	  described	  that	  the	  training	  supports	  their	  management	  
of	  aid	  projects	  overall:	  “(workshops	  have	  helped)	  to	  be	  able	  to	  be	  able	  to	  manage	  the	  help	  that	  (funders)	  
give	   us.”	   	  Regarding	   child	   feeding/nutrition,	   focus	   groups	   reported: “(the	   trainings	   have)	   helped	   a	   lot	  
regarding	   food	  preparation,	   since	   they	  prepare	  it	  with	  great	  variety”,	  and	  “(we)	  prepare	  nutrition	  in	  a	  
better	  way	   (now).”	  	  Focus	  groups	  reported	  improved	  hygiene	  amongst	  the	  mothers	  who	  prepare	   food	  
stating,	   “the	   hygiene	   related	   to	   food	   preparation	   has	   changed	   considerably”,	   highlighting	   that	   “it’s	  
reflected	  in	  the	  cleanliness	  of	  the	  mothers	  and	  the	  care	  they	  take	  to	  prepare	  the	  food”.	  	  
Changes	  were	  also	  noted	  amongst	  children:	  “The	  students	  have	  learned	  tools	  for	  better	  hygiene”	  and	  
“one	  notes	  (the)	  good	  personal	  hygiene	  (changes).”	  Emphasizing	  health,	  groups	  noted,	  “With	  the	  theme	  
of	  hygiene,	  the	  children	  now	  don’t	  get	  sick,	  and	  they	  remain	  healthier”;	  “it’s	  helped	  a	  lot	  to	  have	  a	  
healthy	  school.”	  	  Highlighting	  the	  broad	  reach	  and	  applicability	  of	  the	  program	  to	  support	  children	  in	  the	  
home,	  groups	  described	  the	  trainings	  as	  “helping	  the	  mothers	  with	  the	  guidance	  and	  direction	  of	  their	  
children”.	  They	  stated,	  “(Those	  in	  the	  school)	  try	  to	  apply	  the	  (lessons)	  in	  their	  lives”,	  and	  “they’ve	  
helped	  because	  one	  applies	  what’s	  been	  imparted	  to	  us	  in	  the	  trainings.”
PTA	  ability to	  prepare	  food	  in	  the	  school.	  	  95%	  of	  all	  PTAs	  reported	  that	  mothers20 are	  well	  prepared	  to	  
prepare	  food	  in	  the	  school,	  due	  to	  the	  trainings.	  One	  group	  noted:	  “At	  first,	  (the	  PTA)	  didn’t	  prepare	  it	  
very	  well,	  but	  now	  thanks	  to	  the	  trainings,	  they’ve	  improved	  significantly.”	  The	  respondents	  emphasized	  
the	   improvement	   in	   the	   variability	   of	   the	  menu:	   “With	   the	   trainings,	   focused	   on	   preparing	   food,	   now	  
they	   prepare	   food	   in	   varied	   ways	   that	   they	   didn’t	   know	   before”.	   Others	   emphasized	   that	   food	  
preparation	  occurs	  with	  fidelity	  to	  the	  training:	  “they’re	  following	  the	  instructions	  given	  by	  the	  trainings,	  
and	  applying	  the	  variety	  of	   forms	  to	  prepare	   food.”	  Some	  groups	  emphasized	   fidelity’s	  positive	  impact	  
on	   hygiene	   and	   student	   satisfaction:	   “The	  mothers	   (prepare	   food)	   very	   well,	   because	   they	   have	   good	  
hygiene	  and	  as	  they	  cook, they	  follow	  the	  steps	  that	  they	  should”;	  “they	  are	  preparing	  very	  well…	  Now	  
the	  children	   feel	  satisfied	  with	  what	  they’re	  eating.”	  	  Many	  groups	  noted	  the	  positive	  impact	  of	  “turn-­‐
taking”	  amongst	   PTA	  mothers.	  	  Finally,	  groups	   note	   the	   positive	  impact	   of	  FFE	   on	  motivation:	   “(PTAs)	  
have	  more	  interest	  and	   now	   they	   feel	  motivated	  and	   trained	  when	   they	   prepare	   food.”	  	  In	   the	   5%	   of	  
responses	  (from	  Momostenango)	  that	  did	  not	  endorse	  improvement	  in	  food preparation	  abilities,	  PTAs	  
cited	   (a)	   schedule	   strain	   [“they	   prepare	   (food)	   from	   their	   homes	   because	   in	   the	   morning,	   one	   can’t	  
because	  of the	  early	  morning	  workday.	  Food	  preparation	  is	  always	  difficult”]; and	  (b)	  poor	  attendance	  in	  
trainings	  [“When	  the	  training	  happened,	  not	  everyone	  (was)	  there	  and	  for	  that	  reason,	  they’re	  not	  very	  
well	  trained.”]	  One	  PTA	  group	  in	  San	  Bartolo	  Aguas	  Calientes	  requested	  more	  training.
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   20 90% of	  focus	  groups	  described	  mothers	  as	  primarily	  responsible	  for	  food	  preparation.	  In	  10%	  of	  cases,	  school	  staff,	  teachers,	  
and	  parent	  committee	  members	  were	  cited	  as	  food	  preparers.
30
Number	  of	  educational	  facilities	  rehabilitated	  /	  constructed	  as	  a	  result	  of	  USDA	  assistance	  (Result	  1.3.3).
CRS	   provided	   information	   from	   APCC	   related	   to	   infrastructure	   improvements.	   APCC	   maintains	  
documentation	  of	  all	  infrastructure	  materials	  delivered	  to	  schools.	  This	  documentation	  shows,	  to	  date,	  
that	  244	  facilities have	  been	  constructed	  or	  rehabilitated.	  According	  to	  the	  most	  recent	  CRS	  monitoring	  
report	  to	  USDA for	  2015,	  projects	  included	  18	  kitchens	  built,	  18	  water	  systems	  installed,	  24	  fuel-­‐efficient	  
stoves	  built,	  and	  8	  hand-­‐washing	  stations	  installed.
Food	  Storage	  Hygiene	  and	  Infrastructure. During	  their	  structured	  observations	  of	  school	  infrastructure,	  
data	  collection	  supervisors	  collected	  information	  on	  infrastructure	  improvements	   that	  had	  been	  made	  
at	  the	  school	  related	  to	  the	  project	  in	  2014-­‐2015.	  	  50.0%	  reported	  no	  new	  improvements,	  with	  7.0%	  of	  
these	   schools	   having	   made	   solicitations	   for	   improvements.	   40%	   reported	   construction	   in	   the	   kitchen,	  
which	  could	  have	  involved	  a	  new	  kitchen	  or	  stove	  (30%),	  a	  kitchen	  in	  the	  process	  of	  construction	  (6%),	  
or	  other	  improvements	  (3%	  -­‐ windows,	  bodegas,	  or	  cabinets).	  10%	  reported	  improvements	  to	  the	  school	  
building,	  specifically	  bathrooms,	  sinks	  and	  classrooms.
According	  to	  PTA	  members,	  only	  50%	  of PTA	  focus	  groups	  reported	  complete	  satisfaction	  with	  the	  level	  
of	  cleanliness,	  order,	  and	   space	  of	   the	   food	   storage	  warehouses.	   The	  pattern	  of	   their	   responses	  is	  as	  
follows:
• Positive	   appraisal	   of	   warehouse:	   These	   groups	   reported	   positive	   appraisals	   of	   food	   storage	  
facilities	  stating,	  “yes,	  we	  have	  a	  bodega	  (warehouse)	  and	  every	  time	  that	  we	  do	  an	  inventory,	  it	  
is	  cleaned	  and	  organized”;	  “it’s	  in	  a	  good	  location	  and	  doesn’t	  get	  wet”;	  “it’s	  clean	  and	  of	  a	  good	  
size”.	  	  
• Delimited	  positive	  appraisal:	  16%	  of	  PTAs	  reported	  satisfaction,	  but	  with	  some	  reservation	  due	  
to	  inadequate size	  [“The	  bodega	  is	  very	  good,	  clean,	  orderly,	  but	  the	  size	  is	  inadequate.	  It’s	  very	  
small”],	  or	  inappropriate	  location	  [“yes,	  it’s	  a	  good	  place,	  but	  the	  storehouse	  is	  in	  the	  kitchen”;	  
“it’s	  clean	  and	  orderly,	  but	  the	  space	  is	  inadequate	  because	  it’s	  in	  a	  classroom.”]	  	  
• Negative	  appraisal:	   11%	   of	  groups	   described	   dissatisfaction	  with	   the	   food	  warehouses,	   due	   to	  
inadequate	   facilities	   [“it’s	   a	   kitchen	   storehouse	   made	   up	   of	   tables”],	   and	   poor	   hygiene	  
conditions	  [“We	  need	  a	  bodega	  to	  store	  the	  food,	  because	  the	  current	  one	  doesn’t	  have	  what’s	  
necessary	  to	  store	  the	  food”].
• Lack	  of	  storehouse:	  23%	  of	  PTAs	   report	   the	  lack	  of	  any	  storehouse	   for	   food;	  alternate	  storage	  
locations	   include	   classrooms,	   director	   offices,	   and	   private	   homes	   where	   hygiene	   is	   less	   easily	  
regulated.	  
97%	   of	   PTA	   focus	   groups	   report	   understanding	   appropriate	   conditions	   for	   storing food,	   including	  
protecting	   food	   from	   humidity,	   animals,	   and	   dirt.	   Some	   groups	   report	   planning	   to	   build	   a	   food	  
storehouse	  soon:	  “there	  should	  be	  a	  storehouse.	  Sometimes	  everything	  turns	  upside	  down	  and	  food	  can	  
contaminate	  that	  way.”	  	  
School	   enrollment (Result	   1.3.4).	   According	   to	   DIDEDUC	   student	   enrollment	   data	   for 2014-­‐2015,
enrollment	  dropped	  for	  both	  girls	  and	  boys	  compared	  to	  the	  baseline	  report.	  	  For	  boys,	  2014-­‐2015	  saw	  a	  
1.0% drop	   in	  enrollment	   (N=18,245)	   compared	   with	   baseline	   (N=18,437).	   	  Girls	   saw	   a	   greater	   drop	   in	  
enrollment	  at	  2.6% (N=17,307)	  compared	  with	  baseline	  (N=17,765).
31
CTAs	   were	   also	   asked	   to	   estimate	   the	   percentage	   of	   school	   children	   who	   matriculated	   in	   the	   school	  
years	   2013-­‐2014	   and	   2014-­‐2015	   (see	   Table	   17).	   CTAs	   estimated	   that	   enrollment	   rates	   were	   close	  
between	  girls	  and	  boys,	  in	  both	  2014	  and	  2015,	  at approximately	  50.0%	  for	  all	  groups.	  	  These	  rates	  were	  
consistent	   across	   municipalities,	   although	   CTAs	   noted	   an	   increase	   in	   boys’	   enrollment	   in San	   Andrés	  
Xecul	  from	  2014	  to	  2015	  and	  a	  decrease	  in	  boys’	  enrollment	  in	  Santa	  Lucía	  La	  Reforma during	  the	  same	  
period.
Table	  17. Estimates	  of	  School	  Enrollment
2014 2015
Girls Boys Girls Boys
San	  Andrés	  Xecul 49.0% 47.0% 47.0% 58.0%
Momostenango 49.0% 51.0% 51.0%	   48.0%
Santa	  Lucía	  La	  Reforma 52.0% 51.0% 51.0% 49.0%
San	  Bartolo	  Aguas	  Calientes 48.0% 49.0% 49.0% 51.0%
Average	  enrollment 49.1% 51.4% 50.3%	   49.8%	  
Benefits	  of	  Primary	  Education	  According	  to	  Parents (Result	  1.3.5). During	  interviews,	  parents	  were	  asked	  
to	  name	  the	  benefits	  of	  primary	  education.	  Of	  the	  223	  parents	  surveyed,	  80	  named	  at	  least	  3	  benefits,	  
for	   a	   total	   of	   35.9%.	   This	   rate	   is	   a	   notable	   decrease	   from	   the	   96.4%	   of	   parents	   who	   could	   identify	   3	  
benefits.	   This difference	   should	   be	   interpreted	   cautiously,	   however,	   as	   these	   data	   were	   qualitative	   in	  
nature	  and	  the	  coding	  schemes	  used	  in	  baseline	  and	  midterm	  evaluations	  may	  have	  differed21.	   Another	  
limitation	   is	   that	   not	   all	   enumerators	   were	   fluent	   in	   K’iche’,	   such that	   language	   barriers	   may	   have	  
prevented	  parents	  from	  understanding	  questions	  and	  answering	  appropriately.
Table	   18 displays	   the	   most	   common	   responses	   by	   parents	   by	   municipality	   and	   across	   municipalities.	  
Most	  parents	  across	  municipalities	  mentioned	  some	  aspect	  of	  learning	  as	  a	  benefit	  of	  primary	  education
(86.5%),	  especially	  learning	  to	  read	  (31.5%	  across	  all	  municipalities)	  and	  learning	  to	  write	  (27.0% across	  
municipalities). 8.8%	  of	  parents	  noted	  the	  importance	  of	  developing	  life	  skills,	  5.1%	  mentioned	  having	  a	  
good	  life,	  and	  5.0%	  wanted	  a	  better	  future	  for	  their	  children.	  	  Fewer	  than	  5.0%	  mentioned	  having	  their	  
children	  experience	  less	  suffering,	  enjoy	  greater	  creative	  expression,	  and	  have	  improved	  nutrition.
Some	  differences	  emerged	  across	  municipalities.	  	  All	  parents	  in	  Momostenango	  and	  San	  Bartolo	  Aguas	  
Calientes	   mentioned	   the	   importance	   of	   learning,	   in	   some	   facet,	   yet	   only	   65%	   of	   parents	   mentioned	  
learning	  in	  Santa	  Lucia	  la	  Reforma.	  21%	  of	  parents	  in	  San	  Bartolo	  noted	   the	  importance	  of	  developing	  
life	  skills,	  compared	  with	  only	  5%	  in	  San	  Andres	  Xecul	  and	  0%	  in	  Santa	  Lucia,	  and	  in	  general,	  parents	  in	  
Santa	  Lucia	  were	  less	  likely	  to	  report	  any	  benefits	  compared	  to	  those	  in	  other	  municipalities.	  	  
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   21 These	  qualitative	  data	  were	  also	  collected	  electronically	  via	  iPad,	  and	  enumerators	  may	  not	  have	  entered	  data	  in	  sufficient	  
detail.	  	  This	  and	  other	  limitations	  will	  be	  addressed	  in	  the	  Recommendations section	  of	  the	  report.
32
Table	  18: Parents	  Who	  Named 3	  Benefits	  of	  Primary	  Education:	  By	  Region (N=223)
Momestenango Santa	  Lucia	  
la	  Reforma
San	  Bartolo	  
Aguas	  Calientes
San	  Andres	  
Xecul
ALL	  
REGIONS
Column	  %	  Within	  Regions
Average	  
%	  
N=	  131 N=	  43 N=	  28 N=	  21 N=223
LEARNING	  	  	  	  	  	   100% 65% 100% 81% 86.5
	  	  General	  learning 23% 12% 4% 14% 13.3%
	  	  Learning	  to	  read 37% 21% 39% 29% 31.5%
	  	  Learning	  to	  write 27% 14% 29% 38% 27.0%
	  	  Other	  (Spanish,	  add,	  subtract,	  
homework,	  communicate,	  etc.) 21% 18% 28% 10% 19.3%
DEVELOPING	  LIFE	  SKILLS 9% 0% 21% 5% 8.8%
GOOD	  LIFE 4.5% 0% 11% 5% 5.1%
BETTER	  FUTURE 6% 2% 7% 5% 5.0%
GOOD	  PERSON 4% 0% 9% 0% 3.3%
LESS	  SUFFERING	  IN	  LIFE	  THAN	  
PARENTS/BETTER	  LIFE 5% 2% 0% 5% 3.0%
CREATIVE	  EXPRESSION 	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  5% 0% 0% 0% 1.3%
NUTRITION 	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  2% 0% 0% 0% 0.5%
PTA	   groups	   described	   contributing	   towards	   raising	   parents’	   awareness	   about	   the	   importance	   of	  
education.	   	   One	   group	   described,	   “(we)	   carry	   out	   general	   meetings	   with	   parents	   to	   raise	   their	  
consciousness	   and	   make	  them	   see	   the	   necessity	   and	   importance	   of	   the	   education	   of	   their	   children”.	  
Groups	  described	   their	  roles	  with	  parents	  as	  varied,	  including	  “encourage”,	  “lead”,	  “train”,	  “organize”,	  
“motivate”,	  “collaborate	  with”,	  and	  “reach	  agreement”	  with	  parents.	  PTAs	  also	  described	  linking	  parents	  
to	  the	  school,	  which	  may	  result	  in	  better	  understanding	  school’s	  benefit.	  	  One	  group	  noted,	  “(we)	  raise	  
the	  consciousness	  of	  parents,	   so	   that	   they	  visit	   their	  children	  in	   school,	   (to	   see)	  how	   their	   studies	  are	  
going.”
INCREASED	  CAPACITY	  OF	  PTAS	  AND	  GOVERNMENT	  OFFICIALS	  (RESULT	  1.4)
Number	  of	  Government	  Staff	  Who	  Have	  Increased Their	  Capacities	  (Result	  1.4.1). In	  total,	  14	  staff have	  
been	   trained.	   12	   staff	   were	   trained	   by	   PRODESSA	   in	   workshops	   related	   to	   the	   Kemom	   Ch’ab’al	  
methodology,	   and	   14	   staff	   were	   trained	   by	   APCC	   on	   school	   garden	   implementation	   and	   food	  
management22.	  All 9	  CTAs	  reported	  being	  trained	  as	  part	  of	  DIDEDUC	  related	  to	  this	  project.	  CTAs	  were	  
also	   asked	   to	   list	   the	   trainings	   in	   which	   they	   have	   taken	   part	   (see	   Table	   19). 8	   of	   9	   CTAs	   have	   been	  
trained	   on	   the	   application	   of	   the	   Kemom	   Ch’ab’al	   methodology,	   and	   7	   have	   been	   trained	   on	   use	   of	  
reading	  materials.	  	  6	  have	  been	  trained	  on	  supervising	  the	  application	  of	  Kemom	  Ch’ab’al,	  followed	  by	  
use	   of	   tools	   to	   test	   reading	   (N=4),	   data	   logging and	   data	   analysis	   (N=3	   for	   each),	   roles	   and	  
responsibilities	  (N=2),	  and	  school	  supervision	  (N=1).	  
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   22 This	  information	  was	  provided	  by	  CRS	  based	  on	  PRODESSA	  and	  APCC	  workshop	  plans	  and	  lists	  of	  participants.
33
Table	  19. Trainings	  of	  CTAs
TOPIC N %
Application	  of the	  Kemom	  Ch’ab’al	  methodology 8 88.9
Use	  of	  the	  reading	  materials 7 77.8
Supervising	  the	  application	  of	  the	  Kemom	  Ch’ab’al	  
methodology
6 66.7
The	  use	  of	  tools	  to	  test	  reading 4 44.4
Data	  logging 3 33.3
Data	  analysis 3 33.3
Your	  roles	  and	  responsibilities 2 22.2
School	  supervision 1 11.1
CTAs	  were	  also	  asked if	   they	  had	  been	   trained	  as	  part	  of	  DIGEFOCE	   staff.	  	  Only	   1	  CTA	   reported	  being	  
trained	  in	  this	  capacity.
CTAs	   were	   asked	   to	   rate	   the	   level	   of	  sustainability	   of	   the	   overall	   FFE	   project,	   and	   to	   explain	   their	  
answer.	   Of	   the	   9	   CTAs	   interviewed,	   6	   (66.7%)	   indicated	   the	   program	   was	   sustainable,	   or	   very	  
sustainable.	  One	  CTA	  explained,	  “Its	  methodology	  is	  sustainable.	  The	  teachers	  have	  taken	   from	  it	   (and	  
use	   it).	   The	   food	   component	   is	   sustainable	   due	   to	   parents'	   participation	   (in	   the	   program).” CTA	  
respondents	   similarly	   described	   sustainability	   in	   terms	   of	   a	   blend	   of	   teacher-­‐learned	   techniques,	   PTA	  
leadership,	   and	   community	   involvement.	   Another	   CTA	   noted,	   “One	   can	   continue	   the	   system,	   and	   the	  
enforcement	   of	   the	  methodology	   on	   Kemom	   Ch'ab'al.	  In	   relation	   to	   the	   food/nutrition	   (components),	  
sustainability	  can	  be	  achieved	  via	  local	  management	  by	  the	  PTA	  groups	  who	  are	  involved	  with	  helping,	  
and	  (via)	  the	  contribution	  of	  parents,	  like	  in	  the	  case	  of	  how	  they	  prepare	  food.”	  	  Parental	  involvement	  
is	  emphasized	  as	  an	  essential	  component	   to	  sustainability	   throughout	   these	  comments:	  “The	  moment	  
that	   the	   institutions	   that	   (financially)	   support	   this	   project	   withdraw,	   the	   parents	   of	   the	   families	   (will)	  
have	  applied	  the	  knowledge	  that	  has	  been	  shared	  with	  them	  in	  relation	  to	  the	  preparation	  of	  simple	  yet	  
nutritious	  foods.”	  	  
Number	  of	  MINEDUC	  Disbursements	  That	  Arrive	  on	  Time	   (1.4.3).	  Directors	  were	  asked	  the	  percentage	  
of	   disbursements	   from	   MINEDUC	   that	   arrived	   on	   time.	   21.4% of	   directors	   stated	   that	   disbursements	  
arrived	   on	   time,	   an	   improvement	   from	   the	   baseline	   evaluation.	   Those	   directors	   for	   whom	  
disbursements	  were	  late	  were	  asked	  to	  speculate	  as	  to	  the	  reason.	  	  54	  directors	  (46.2%)	  noted	  a	  lack	  of	  
government	  interest	  in	  providing	  the	  funds	  or	  materials,	  or	  a	  lack	  of	  efficiency	  in	  the	  process,	  or	  political	  
corruption.	   	   10	   directors	   (8.6%)	   noted	   a	   lack	   of	   funds	   on	   the	   part	   of	   MINEDUC	   to	   provide	   the	  
disbursements.
Number	  of	  PTAs	  Contributing	  to	  Their	  Schools	  (1.4.4).	  	  According	  to	  CRS	  monitoring	  data	  maintained	  by	  
APCC,	  215	   schools have	   PTAs	   that	   have	   contributed	   to	   their	   school.	  100.0%	   of	   directors	   stated	   that	  a	  
PTA	  had	  been	  established	  in	  their	  schools.	  93%	  of	  PTA	   focus	  groups	  reported	  participating	  in	  activities	  
that	   support	   education. 23 Primary	   areas	   of	   educational	   support	   and	   involvement	   included:	   (1)	  
Improvements	   to	   the	   school	   building	   environment	   via	   infrastructure,	   maintenance	   and	   safety	  
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   23 7%	  of	  PTA	  focus	  groups	  reported	  no	  participation	  in	  activities	  that	  support	  education:	  “up	  to	  this	  moment,	  (PTA)	  hasn’t	  
carried	  out	  any”	  and	  “we’re	  new.”
34
enhancements	   (35%	   across	   municipalities);	   (2)	   Food	   preparation,	   handling	   and	   management	   services	  
(38%	   across	   municipalities); and	   (3)	   Educational	   support	   via	   teacher	   and	   parent	   collaboration	   (22%	  
across	  municipalities).	  
There	  was	   some	  variance	  in	   the	   communities,	  where	   schools	  in	  Momostenango balanced	   these	   three	  
arenas	   in	   similar	   proportion	   (37%,	   24%,	   30%),	   whereas	   San	   Bartolo	   Aguas	   Calientes	   favored	   food-­‐
handling	   priorities	   (26%,	   58%,	   16%).	   	   Perceptions	   of,	   and/or	   material	   access	   to	   influence	   in	   the	  
educational	  environment	  varied	  by	  school,	  as	  illustrated	  by	  diverse	  word	  choices	  related	  to	  interactions	  
with	   teachers,	   connoting	   diverse	   power	   relationships:	   (“overseeing”	   versus	   “collaborating	   with”	   and	  
“supporting”).	   Likewise,	  perceptions	  of	  roles	  in	  food	  preparation	  varied	  from	  “leadership”	  to	  “support”,	  
“advisory”,	  “direct	  service,”	  and	  “donation	  provision”	   [“economic	  contribution	   to	  buy	  other	   foodstuffs	  
to	  complement	  the	  food”].
Number	   of	   PTAs	   That	   Have	   Developed	   a	   School	   Improvement	   Plan	   (Result	   1.4.4a). According	   to	  
directors,	  62	  schools (53.0% of	  sampled	  schools) have	  PTAs	  that	  helped	  develop a	  school	  improvement	  
plan,	   compared	   with	   18 at	   baseline.	   	   Likewise,	   44%	   of	   PTA	   focus	   groups	   reported	   having	   a	   school	  
improvement	  plan.	  Santa	  Lucia	  la	  Reforma	  is	  the	  only	  municipality	  that	  primarily	  endorsed	  the	  existence	  
of	  a	  plan;	  all	  other	  municipalities	  primarily	  endorsed	  the	  absence	  of	  a	  plan.	  	  	  
From	   focus	   groups,	   PTAs	   primarily	   understood	   their school	   improvement	   plans in	   terms	   of	  
infrastructural	  projects;	  86%	  cited	  infrastructural	  projects	  ranging	  from	  kitchen	  and	  stove	  improvements	  
to	  bathroom,	  water	  systems,	  and	  food	  storehouse,	  as	  well	  as	  general	  repairs	  and	  improvements	  on	  the	  
school’s	  internal	  and	  external	  environment	  [ex:	  “for	  the	  growth	  of	  the	  school,	  we	  have	  planned	  to	  buy	  
another	  premises,	   to	  construct	  more	  school	  buildings”].	  	  8%	  of	  PTAs	   reported	  no	  school	  improvement	  
plans.	   Finally,	   6%	   described a	   plan	   centered	   on students/teachers,	   or	   on	   improving	   nutrition	   and	  
management	   at	   the	   school.	   	   In	   terms	   of	   student/teacher	   focus,	   groups	   described	   aspirations	   for	  
improved	  teacher/student	  attendance	  [“That	  teachers	  complete	  their	  workday	  hours,	  and	  that	  children	  
come	   to	   school”],	  and	  improved	   student	  enrollment	   [“That	   the	  boys	  and	  girls	  keep	   studying.	  That	   the	  
teachers	  be	  from	  the	  community”;	  “raise	  awareness	  in	  the	  community	  so	  that	  they	  sign	  their	  children	  up	  
for	  school”].	  	  Plans	  to	  improve	  nutrition	  and	  school	  management	  were	  added	  [“I	  continued	  requesting	  
more	  food,	  at	  least	  meat	  for	  variety,	  two	  times	  per	  month”;	  “Construction	  of	  a	  school	  exclusively	  for	  an	  
evening	  schedule,	  or	  at	  least	  a	  kitchen	  for	  the	  night	  shift”].
According	   to	  PTA	  focus	  group	  data,	  only	  42%	  of	  groups	   reported	  participating	  in	   trainings	   related	   to	  a	  
school	   improvement	   plan.	   	   The	   topics	   primarily	   revolved	   around	   infrastructural	   projects	   [“requesting	  
(funds/materials	   for)	   past	   projects”;	   “buying	   a	   filter	   to	   have	   potable	   water”;	   “yes,	   (about	   how)	   to	  
request	  a	  kitchen,	   handwashing	   sink	  and	   bathrooms”].	  	   58%	   of	  groups,	   however,	   reported	   not	   having	  
attended	  trainings,	  or	  related	  training	  not	  being	  available	  [“we	  haven’t	  participated,	  nor	  have	  we	  gotten	  
together	  for	  this”;	  “there	  haven’t	  been	  any	  trainings”].	  In	  another	  case,	  there	  was confusion	  about	  the	  
location	   of	   the	   plan	   [“We	   were	   trained.	   We	   made	   a	   plan	   that	   contemplated	   fencing	   the	   school,	  
construction	  of	  the	  storehouse,	  and	  window	  balconies.	  But	  we	  believe	  that	  the	  teacher	  has	  it.”]	  	  	  
35
MULTIVARIATE	  STATISTICAL	  MODELS
Datasets	   for	   all	   respondents	   (children,	   parents,	   teachers,	   and	   directors)	   were	  merged,	   along	   with	  the	  
infrastructure	   observation	   dataset,	   for	   3rd graders	   and	   6th graders,	   respectively.	   	   After	   accounting	   for	  
missing	   data,	   the	   analysis	   dataset	   contained	   N=1,962	   children within	   N=112	   schools	   (3rd grade),	   and	  
N=1,694	  children	  within	  N=110	  schools	  (6th graders).	  Children’s	  ELGI	  scores	  are	  the	  dependent	  variable,	  
with	  the	  following	  independent	  variables:	  
Child	   Level:	   child’s	  gender;	   child’s	  Household	  Diet	  Diversity	  Score	   (HDDS);	   children’s	   opinions	   of	   being	  
less	  hungry	  and	  being	  able	  to	  study	  better	  because	  of	  the	  program	  (5-­‐Likert	  Scale	  items);	  
School	  Level:	  	  averaged	  teachers’	  observations	  of	  attendance	  for	  boys	  and	  girls	  (3rd grade	  and	  6th grade,	  
respectively);	  standardized	  scores	  of	  child	  attentiveness	  within	  schools	  created	  for	  this	  study	  (.00-­‐1.00);	  
standardized	   scores	   of	   classroom	  materials	  and	   conditions	   created	   for	   this	   study	   (.00-­‐1.00);	  directors’	  
estimates	   of	   average	   teacher	   attendance;	   standardized	   scores	   of	   school	   cleanliness	   created	   for	   this	  
study	   (.00-­‐1.00);	   	   the	   number	   of	   classrooms	   within	   each	   school;	   standardized	   measures	   of	   kitchen	  
cleanliness	  and	   food	   preparation	   hygiene	   created	   for	   this	   study	   (.00-­‐1.00	   for	  each);	  kitchen	  issues (an	  
index	  of	  3	  variables:	  no	  water,	  animals	  in	  kitchen,	  and	  children	  younger	  than	  7	  in	  kitchen;	  higher	  scores	  
are	   worse);	   average	   parent	   satisfaction	   with	   FFE	   at	   each	   school;	   and	   standardized	   scores	   of	   parents’	  
opinions	  of	  FFE	  created	  for	  this	  study	  (.00-­‐1.00).
The	  analytical	  approach	  used	  a	  linear	  mixed	  model	  to	  account	  for	  children	  nested	  within	  schools	  within	  
municipalities.	  	  For	  3rd graders,	  a	  2-­‐level	  model	  was	  used	  (children	  within	  schools)	  because	  no	  significant	  
differences	   among	   ELGI	   scores	   were	   found	   across	  municipalities.	   For	   6th graders,	   a	   3-­‐level	  model	   was	  
used	   (children	   within	   schools	   within	   municipalities)	   because	   ELGI	   scores	   were	   significantly	   different	  
across	  municipalities	  (p<.001).
Our	  research	  questions	  are	  as	  follows:
(1) What	   are the	   influences	   of	   food	   intake	   (i.e.,	   HDDS	   score)	   and	   children’s	   opinions	   about	   the	  
helpfulness	  of	  FFE	  on	  ELGI	  scores,	  for	  3rd and	  6th graders?
(2) To	  what	  extent	  does	  attendance	  (teacher	  and	  aggregated	  student)	  influence	  ELGI	  scores?
(3) What	  is	  the	  influence	  of	  the	  school	  environment	  on	  ELGI	  scores?
(4) How	  are	  parents’	  opinions	  related	  to	  ELGI	  scores?
Child	   Level	   Results.	   	   For	   3rd graders,	   no	   child-­‐level	   results	   were	   statistically	   significant	   at	   the	   level	   of	  
p<.05.	  	  The	  p	  value	  of	  HDDS	  was	  .085,	  which	  suggests	  there	  may	  be	  a	  trend	  in	  the	  relationship	  between	  
food	   intake	   on	   the	   day	   of	   ELGI	   assessment	   and	   ELGI	   scores.	   For	   6th graders,	   the	   only	   statistically	  
significant	  relationship	  was	  for	  the	  self-­‐report	  of	  being able	  to	  study	  better	  (p=.001)	  (see	  Table	  20).
School	   Level	   Results.	   	   For	   3rd graders,	   no	   school-­‐level	   results	   were	   statistically	   significant,	   except	   for	  
average	   parent	   satisfaction.	   For	   this	   variable,	   higher	   parent	   satisfaction	   within	   schools	   significantly	  
predicts	  higher	  ELGI	  results	  for	  individual	  3rd graders	  (p<.05).	  A	  number	  of	  relationships	  were	  statistically	  
significant	  for	  6th graders.	  Higher	  number	  of	  classrooms	  within	  schools	  predicts	  lower	  ELGI	  performance	  
(p<.01).	  Greater	  average	  teacher	  attendance	  at	  schools	  also	  predicts	  lower	  ELGI	  scores	  (p<.01).	  Average	  
higher	  boys’	  attendance	  rates	  at	  schools	  predicts	  slightly	  higher	  ELGI	  scores	  (p<.05),	  while	  average	  
36
higher	   girls’	   attendance	   rates	   predicts	   slightly	   lower	   scores	   (p=.05). Counter	   intuitively,	   higher	   school	  
scores	  on	  classroom	  conditions	  predict	  lower	  ELGI	  scores	  (p<.05)	  as	  do	  higher	  kitchen	  cleanliness	  scores	  
(p<.05)	  (see	  Table	  20).
Table	  20. Predictors	  of	  Children’s	  Literacy	  in	  Totonicapán Department
Variables
3rd Grade
N=1,962
6th Grade
N=1,694
b(SE) p b(SE) p
Intercept** 19.0	  (7.5) .104 47.0	  (15.7) .004
CHILD
Gender	  (1=female) 0.9	  (0.7) .222 -­‐0.8	  (0.7) .260
Household	  Dietary	  Diversity	  Score	  (HDDS) 0.3	  (0.2) .085 -­‐0.1	  (0.3) .757
Child	  reports	  being	  less	  hungry -­‐0.9	  (1.2) .474 0.0	  (0.9) .972
Child	  reports	  being	  able	  to	  study	  better** -­‐1.2	  (1.7) .504 4.4	  (1.3) .001
SCHOOL
Number	  of	  classrooms** -­‐0.1	  (0.1) .509 0.5	  (0.2) .005
Average	  teacher	  attendance* 6.1	  (5.2) .248 -­‐14.6	  (6.3) .024
Average	  boys’	  attendance* 0.0	  (0.0) .326 0.3	  (0.1) .042
Average	  girls’ attendance* -­‐0.1	  (0.0) .178 -­‐0.2	  (0.1) .050
Classroom	  Attentiveness	  Score 0.9	  (11.1) .934 -­‐16.1	  (14.4) .273
Classroom	  Conditions	  Score* -­‐8.7	  (7.0) .224 18.8	  (8.0) .024
Kitchen	  Cleanliness	  Score* -­‐4.2	  (3.6) .245 -­‐10.4	  (4.1) .014
Food	  Preparation/Hygiene	  Score 3.0	  (3.6) .415 3.8	  (3.3) .267
Index	  of	  Kitchen	  Issues -­‐1.6	  (0.9) .081 -­‐0.2	  (1.2) .983
Average	  parent	  satisfactionϮ 12.4	  (6.0) .045 -­‐4.5	  (9.9) .651
Parent	  FFE	  Opinions	  Score -­‐9.4	  (6.6) .160 -­‐7.6	  (6.7) .264 Ϯ
p<.05	  for	  3rd graders
*p<.05,	  **p<.01	  for	  6th graders
To	  explore	  these	  findings	  further,	  post-­‐hoc	  bivariate	  correlation	  analyses	  were	  conducted.	  No	  bivariate	  
relationships	  were	  found	  between	  ELGI	  scores	  and	  attendance	  (either	  child	  or	  teacher)	  or	  with	  kitchen	  
cleanliness.	  A	  positive	  but	  weak	  correlation	  was	  found	  between	  ELGI	  and	  classroom	  conditions	  (opposite	  
of	  the	  relationship	  in	  the	  statistical	  model).	  Number	  of	  classrooms	  was	  positively	  but	  weakly	  correlated	  
with	  ELGI.
Given	  these	   findings,	   the	   results	   from	   the	   statistical	  models	   warrant	   further	   scrutiny,	   and	   need	  more	  
time	  than	  currently	  allowed to	  provide	  stable	  estimates.	  These	  results	  should	  therefore	  be	  interpreted	  
very	  cautiously.
37
DISCUSSION
The	   discussion	   of	   results	   is	   organized	   by	   the	   results	   and	   indicators	   framework,	   as	   well	   as	   further	  
statistical	  analyses.	  We	  will	  discuss	  implications	  for	  findings	  in	  the	  following	  areas:	   (1)	  Level	  of	  student	  
reading	   performance;	   (2)	   Quality	   of	   literacy	   instruction;	   (3)	   Student	   attentiveness;	   (4)	   Student	  
attendance;	   and	   (5)	   Capacity	   of	   government	   officials.	   Given	   the	   concerns	   over	   the	   statistical	   models,	  
those	  results	  will	  not	  be	  covered	  here.
Level	  of	  Student	  Reading	  Performance.	  	  Reading	  assessment	  scores	  increased	  significantly	  from	  baseline	  
for	   6th grade	   boys	   and	   girls.	   The	   implication	   is	   that,	   at	   midterm,	   children	   have	   on	   average	   achieved	  
64.0%	  of	  the	  final	  target	  of	  +10	  points	  (34.8%).	  	  While	  girls’	  scores	  were	  slightly	  higher	  at	  baseline,	  boys	  
and girls	  have	  virtually	  equal	   scores	  at	  midterm.	  Scores	   for	  3rd grade	  children	  also	  increased	  but	  were	  
under	  20%	  for	  both	  boys	  and	  girls.	  	  In	  regards	  to	  the	  +10	  point	  final	  target,	  3rd graders	  at	  midterm	  have	  
on	  average	  achieved	  90.2%	  of	  the	  final	  target	  of	  19.0%.	  
However,	  no	  3rd graders	  achieved	  the	  national	  literacy	  standard	  of	  60.0%,	  and	  only	  29	  6th graders	  (1.6%	  
of	   the	   6th grade	   sample)	   achieved	   60.0%	   or	   higher.	   	   Given	   the	   substantial	   gains	   in	   literacy	   between	  
baseline	  and	  midterm	  towards	  the	  final	  target,	  and	  pending	  results	  of	  a	  final	  evaluation,	  future	  program	  
planning	   might	   benefit	   from	   higher	   targets	   and	   additional	   focus	   on	   quality	   instruction	   to	   increase	  
literacy	   even	   further.	  While	   the	   results	   of	   the	   MTE	   cannot	   prove that	   FFE	   caused	   changes	   in	   literacy	  
(because	  of	  limitations	  with	   the	   research	  design),	   the	  evidence	  is	  clear	   that	  children	  made	   substantial	  
gains	  in	  literacy	  rates	  from	  2013-­‐2014	  to	  2014-­‐2015.
Quality	  of	  Literacy	  Instruction.	  	  The	  data	  on	  quality	  of	  literacy	  instruction	  show	   that	  several	  indicators	  
have	   met	   or	   surpassed	   their	   final	   targets24.	   87.5%	   of	   teachers	   report	   using	   higher	   quality	   teaching	  
techniques,	  surpassing	  the	  final	  target	  of	  80.0%.	  Teachers	  and	  directors	  also	  surpassed	  their	  final	  targets	  
in	   using	   the	   Kemom	   Ch’ab’al	   methodology.	   According	   to	   their	   reports,	   however,	   significant	   numbers	  
report	   not	   following	   all	   of	   the	   steps	   of	   the	   methodology,	   a	   situation	   which	   may	   require	   further	  
reinforcement	  by	  implementing	  partners.	  	  	  
Teacher	  attendance	  has	  emerged	  as	  an	  issue,	  however.	  	  The	  baseline	  rate	  was	  88.8%,	  nearly	  at	  the	  final	  
target	  of	  90%.	  	  At	  midterm,	  this	  attendance	  rate	  dropped	  to	  63.2%	  of	  teachers	  attending	  90%	  of	  school	  
days,	  even	  when	  the	  school	  year	  is	  calculated	  at	  170	  days	  instead	  of	  180.	  Some	  caveats	  may	  apply:	  (1)	  
These	   data	  are	   based	   on	   directors’	   reports,	  which	  are	   of	   unknown	   reliability;	  and	   (2)	  There	  may	   have	  
been	  differences	  in	  how	  teacher	  attendance	  was	  measured	  between	  baseline	  and	  midterm,	  which	  affect	  
the	  rates.	  	  In	  any	  case,	   teacher	  attendance	  -­‐ and	  measuring	  attendance	  -­‐ have	  both	  emerged	  as	  areas	  
needing	  further	  attention.
The	  issue	  of	  improved	  instructional	  materials	  showed	  mixed	  results.	  	  91.5%	  of	  directors	  reported	  having	  
materials,	  but	  only	  47.0%	  said	  these	  materials	  were	  sufficient.	  	  Structured	  observations	  of	  classrooms	  
also	  resulted	  in	  a	  standardized	  score	  of	  66.2%.	  	  On	  average,	  these	  findings	  produced	  an	  indicator	  result	  
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   24 Direct	  observation	  of	  teaching	  techniques was	  initially	  considered	  in	  the	  research	  design,	  but	  the	  decision	  was	  
made	  instead	  to	  ask	  teachers	  and	  directors	  about	  specific	  techniques.	  A short	  observation	  would	  be	  unlikely	  to	  
capture	  multiple	  techniques,	  and	  our	  data	  collectors	  would	  have	  required	  additional	  training	  to	  recognize	  and	  
document	  these	  techniques.
38
lower	  than	  the	  baseline.	  	  Yet,	  it	  is	  unclear	  to	  us	  how	  the	  indicator	  of	  75.4%	  in	  the	  baseline	  	  was	  reached;	  
according	  to	  baseline	  data,	  only	  17.0%	  of	  directors	  stated	  they	  had	  sufficient	  materials,	  in	  which	  case	  the	  
MTE	  findings	  are	  a	  substantial	  increase.
About	  1/4th of	  directors	  reported	  having	  Spaces	  to	  Grow	  in	  their	  schools,	  a	  rate	  that	  surpasses	  the	  target	  
of	  17.8%. A	  minority	  of	  overall	  directors	  knew	  about	  Spaces	  to	  Grow,	  yet	  nearly	  80.0%	  of	  directors	  
expressed	  interest	  in	  having	  the	  program at	  their	  schools.	  	  This	  may	  be	  an	  important	  extracurricular	  
activity	  that	  also	  promotes	  practical	  skill-­‐building,	  but	  the	  program	  needs	  further	  reinforcement	  at	  
schools.
Student	  Attentiveness.	  Data	  related	  to	  student	  attentiveness	  showed	  strong	  results.	  Based	  on	  teachers’	  
observations	  of	  students’	  staying	  attentive	  for	  15	  minutes	  at	  a	  time,	  this	  indicator	  increased	  from	  27.0%	  
at baseline	  to	  82.2%	  at	  midterm,	  surpassing	  the	  final	  target	  of	  80.0%.	  	  The	  measure	  of	  classroom	  
observations	  (which	  includes	  the	  teacher	  item	  plus	  a	  number	  of	  other	  questions)	  resulted	  in	  a	  score	  of	  
70.3%,	  which	  when	  averaged	  with	  the	  single-­‐item	  teacher	  question,	  resulted	  in	  an	  indicator	  of	  76.3%,	  
still	  very	  close	  to	  the	  final	  target.	  Evidence	  clearly	  shows	  an	  increase	  in	  student	  attentiveness,	  based	  on	  
teacher	  reports	  and	  on	  external	  observations	  by	  enumerators.
The	  number	  of	  students	  who	  reported	  not	  being	  hungry	  during	  the	  school	  day	  jumped	  tremendously	  
from	  baseline	  to	  midterm	  (average	  12.0%	  at	  baseline	  to	  average	  80.1%	  at	  midterm),	  surpassing	  the	  final	  
target	  by	  33.3%.	  Students	  clearly	  report	  being	  less	  hungry	  at	  school	  by	  a	  significant	  margin.
About	  1/4th of	  teachers	  and	  1/3rd of	  directors	  noted	  issues	  related	  to	  the	  food	  provisions.	  Of	  those	  
mentioning	  specific	  issues,	  nearly	  half	  of	  the	  teachers	  interviewed	  noted	  that	  the	  pinto	  beans	  provided	  
are	  difficult	  and	  slow	  to	  cook,	  which	  then	  takes	  more	  fuel	  for	  the	  stoves.	  18.6%	  of	  teachers	  mentioned	  
the	  food	  arriving	  rotten	  or	  expired	  (a	  perception	  possibly	  related	  to	  confusion	  about	  packaging	  vs.	  
expiration	  dates);	  and	  15.3%	  mentioned	  the	  food	  coming	  with	  weevils.	  	  These	  observations	  were	  also	  
reflected	  through	  directors’	  interviews,	  and	  to	  a	  smaller	  degree, among	  PTA	  focus	  groups.	  	  Focus	  groups	  
also	  noted	  that	  a	  variety	  of	  different	  types	  of	  beans	  would	  also	  be	  helpful,	  as	  children	  get	  bored	  eating	  
the	  same	  type	  of	  beans.	  Some	  also	  requested	  meat.
Student	   Attendance.	   	   By	   a	   wide	   margin,	   teachers	   and	   directors	   noted	   food	   provision	   as	   the	   greatest	  
driver	   of	   school	   attendance.	   The	   rates	   of	   children	   attending	   school	   80%	   increased	   for	   all	   groups.	  	  
Overall,	  boys	  on	  average	  increased	  their	  attendance	  to	  78.8%	  from	  60.0%	  in	  the	  baseline,	  such	  that	  they	  
are	  75.2%	  of	  the	  way	  towards	  the	  target	  of	  85.0%	  attendance.	  	  Girls’	  attendance	  is	  slightly	  lower,	  with	  
an	  average	  attendance	   rate	   of	   74.1%,	  a	   figure	   only	   2.4%	   higher	   than	   the	   baseline.	  	  The	   differences	  in	  
increased	  attendance	  rates	  between	  boys	  and	  girls	  may	  reflect	  an	  artificially	  low	  rate	  at	  baseline,	  or	  they	  
may	   suggest	   that	   girls	   experience	   more	   difficulty	   in	   increasing	   their	   school	   attendance	   than	   boys.	   At	  
baseline,	  girls	  80%	  attendance	  rate	  was	  at	  71.7%,	  11.7%	  higher	  than	  boys.	  At	  midterm,	  girls	  were	  about	  
6.0%	  lower	  in	  attendance	  rates	  than	  boys,	  a	  situation	  that	  may	  warrant	  increased	  efforts	  to	  encourage	  
girls	  to	  attend	  school. Enrollment	  dropped	  for	  all	  students	  at	  an	  average	  rate	  of	  8.3%	  compared	  with	  the	  
baseline,	  and	   girls	   dropped	  at	  a	   steeper	   rate	   than	   boys.	  This	   significant	   drop	   in	  enrollment	   should	   be	  
explored	  further,	  ideally	  using	  official	  Ministry	  of	  Education	  data.
In	   regards	   to	   increasing	   incentives	   (and	   decreasing	   disincentives)	   for	   school	   attendance,	   75.4%	   of	  
parents	   reported	   that	   no	   extracurricular	   activities	   exist	   at	   their	   schools.	   	   This	   figure	   is	   difficult	   to	  
compare	  with	  the	  baseline	  study	  which	  reported	  counts	  of	  children.	  Yet,	  the	  qualitative	  data	  suggest	  a	  
number	  of	  potential	  activities	  parents	  would	  like	  to	  see	  offered:	  extra	  studying	  support;	  development	  of	  
39
specific	  skills,	  such	  as	  working	  with	  computers;	  and	  cultural	  opportunities	  (handicrafts,	  dance,	  music).	  A	  
smaller number	  of	  parents	  stated	  that	  children	  were	  too	  busy	  for	  such	  activities,	  given	  their	  chores	  and	  
difficulties	  working	  around	  school	  schedules.
Average	  health-­‐related	  absences	  increased	  from	  2.5	  days	  at	  baseline	  to	  4.1	  days	  at	  midterm,	  a	  cause	  for	  
potential	  concern.	  Yet,	  with	   the	  parameter	  of	  percent	  of	  children	  missing	  between	  1-­‐5	  days,	  a	  smaller	  
number	   at	   midterm	   fall	   within	   this	   window,	   possibly	   because	   of	   an	   increase	   in	   children	   missing	   6	   or	  
more	   days.	   Nevertheless,	   from	   PTA	   focus	   groups,	   parents	   indicated	   they	   are	   better	   informed	   about	  
health	  and	  hygiene	  issues,	  so	  the	  increase	  in	  health-­‐related	  absences	  is	  surprising.	  This	  issue	  should	  be	  
explored	  in	  greater	  detail,	   to	  examine	  whether	   there	  has	  been	  an	  overall	  increase	  in	  health	  problems	  
among	  children.
In	  relation	  to	  food	  preparation,	  there	  seems	  to	  be	  a	  discrepancy	  between	  how	  directors	  and	  parents	  see	  
organization.	   Most	   parents	   feel	   it	   is	   well	   organized,	   while	   fewer	   than	   half	   of	   directors	   agree.	  
Nevertheless,	   1/4th of	   parents	   did	   perceive	  a	  problem	  with	   organizing	   food	   preparation,	  and	   said	   that	  
other	  parents	  lacked	  motivation	  and	  skill	  around	  food	  preparation	  and	  hygiene.	  	  These	  problems	  were	  
noted	  especially	  in	  Momostenango.
According	  to	  CRS	  monitoring	  reports,	  68	  facilities	  have	  been	  constructed	  or	  rehabilitated.	  About	  1/3rd of	  
directors	  reported	  improvements	  to	  infrastructure,	  compared	  with	  0%	  at	  baseline.	  	  Yet,	  PTA	  focus	  
groups	  reported	  significantly	  higher	  rates	  of	  infrastructure	  improvements:	  57%	  in	  Momostenango,	  77%	  
in	  Santa	  Lucia	  la	  Reforma,	  60%	  in	  San	  Bartolo	  Aguas	  Calientes,	  and	  50%	  in	  San	  Andres	  Xecul.	  The	  reason	  
for	  the	  discrepancy	  between	  directors’	  and	  parents’	  observations	  is unclear,	  but	  one	  explanation	  is	  that	  
parents	  might	  attribute	  some	  changes	  in	  infrastructure	  to	  a	  program	  other	  than	  FFE	  also	  operating	  in	  
the	  school	  by	  another	  NGO.
Compared	  with	  baseline,	  the	  number	  of	  parents	  who	  could provide	  3	  benefits	  of	  primary	  education	  
decreased	  drastically,	  from	  96.4%	  in	  baseline	  to	  35.9%.	  	  Differences	  in	  qualitative	  coding	  procedures	  
between	  baseline	  and	  midterm	  evaluations	  may	  account	  for	  this	  difference.	  	  In	  addition,	  enumerators	  
using	  iPads	  in	  the	  midterm	  may	  not	  have	  recorded	  answers	  in	  full	  enough	  detail	  to	  capture	  parents’	  
answers.	  	  This	  change	  from	  baseline	  to	  midterm	  may	  reflect	  an	  actual	  decrease,	  but	  also	  may	  reflect	  
measurement	  differences	  between	  baseline	  and	  midterm,	  and	  issues	  around	  data	  collection.
On	  average,	  95.3%	  of	  directors	  and	  teachers	  stated	  that	  a	  school	  government	  had	  been	  established	  at	  
their	  school.	  Only 61.5%	  of	  directors	  said	  that	  their	  schools	  had	  developed	  a	  school	  improvement	  plan;	  
this	  number	  is	  comparable	  to	  the	  number	  at	  baseline	  related	  to	  overall	  schools	  (142/221=64.3%).
Increased	   Capacity	   of	   Government	   Officials.	   21.4%	   of	   directors	   indicated	   that	   materials	   or	  
disbursements	  arrived	  on	  time	  from	  MINEDUC.	  	  While	  this	  number	  is	  low,	  it	  is	  an	  increase	  compared	  to	  
the	  baseline	  number	  of	  13.1%,	  and	   represents	  a	  93.0%	  achievement	   towards	   the	   target	  of	  +10.0%	   (or	  
23.1%).	  100%	  of	  directors	  said	  that	  their	  schools	  had	  a	  PTA,	  and	  53.0%	  said	  their	  PTAs	  contributed	  to	  a	  
school	   improvement	   plan,	   a	   substantial	   increase	   from	   the	   baseline	   number	   of	   8.1%	   (13/221).	   In	  
addition,	   100%	   of	   CTAs	   have	   been	   trained	   since	   baseline.	   Notably,	   2/3rd of	   CTAs	   stated	   that	   the	   FFE	  
program	  is	  sustainable	  but	  entirely	  dependent	  on	  parent	  involvement	  after	  the	  program	  ends.
40
RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendations	  for	  FFE	  Program
(1) Increase	   efforts	   to	   support	   girls	   to	   attend	   school,	   and	   explore	   barriers	   to	   girls’	   school	  
attendance.
Girls	  and	  boys	  fared	  the	  same	  on	  literacy	  at	  midterm,	  but	  boys	  made	  a	  greater	  leap	  from	  baseline.	  Girls	  
fared	  worse	  at	  midterm	   on	  attendance,	   despite	   having	  much	   higher	  attendance	  at	   baseline.	   	  These	   2	  
indicators	  suggest	  that	  girls	  may	  be	  experiencing	  more difficulty	  in	  increasing	  their	  school	  attendance,	  as	  
well	   as	   their	   literacy	   rates.	   Efforts	   should	   be	   made,	   in	   concert	   with	   implementing	   partners	   and	   with	  
consensus	  from	  parents,	  to	  explore	  the	  issue	  of	  gender	  differences	  in	  education	  with	  CTAs	  and	  principals	  
and	  identify	  root	  causes.	  Identifying	  these	  causes	  can	  then	  form	  the	  basis	  of	  a	  strategy	  moving	  forward	  
during	  Year	  3	  of	  FFE.
(2) Explore	  health-­‐related	  school	  absences.
The	  average	  number	  of	  health	  related	  absences	  increased	  to	  4.1	  days	  at	  midterm,	  compared	  to	  2.5	  days	  
at	  baseline.	  This	  is	  a	  particularly	  strange	  result	  given	  the	  increased	  infrastructure	  and	  trainings	  around	  
hygiene	  and	  health.	   As	  a	  caveat,	  some	  of	  these	  data	  were	  provided	  as	  estimates	  in	  the	  absence	  of	  
systematic	  data	  collection.	  Nevertheless,	  efforts	  should	  be	  made	  to	  communicate	  with	  CTAs	  and	  
directors	  regarding	  their	  observations	  on	  illnesses	  in	  the	  community.	  If	  available,	  public	  health	  data	  
could	  also	  be	  examined	  to	  look	  for	  trends,	  or	  public	  health	  officials	  could	  be	  contacted	  to	  get	  their	  
assessments	  of	  community	  health.	  A	  related	  recommendation	  is	  to	  change	  or	  eliminate	  the	  indicator	  of	  
1-­‐5	  days	  absences	  – this	  recommendation	  will	  be	  discussed	  in	  the	  Recommendations	  for	  Research	  and	  
Evaluation,	  below.
(3) Examine	  reasons	  for	  the	  drop	  in	  teacher	  attendance,	  and	  consider	  incentivizing	  attendance.
The	  midterm	  evaluation	  observed	  a	  drop	  in	  teacher	  attendance	  from	  the	  baseline.	  	  These	  numbers	  were	  
provided	   by	   directors’	  estimates,	   and	   it	  might	   be	   worth	   following	   up	   with	   directors	   (possibly	  through	  
CTAs)	   to	   ask	   directly	   whether	   they	   have	   observed	   a	   drop	   in	   teacher	   attendance	   since	   last	   year.	  	  
However,	  relying	  solely	  on	  directors’	  observations	  may	  have	  implicit	  and	  unknown	  biases,	  and	  it	  would	  
be	   preferable	   to	   have	   a	   standardized	   way	   of	   collecting	   data	   from	   schools	   (see	   Recommendations	   for	  
Research	   and	   Evaluation).	   Regardless,	   assuming	   that	   the	   data	   are	   accurate,	   it	   may	   be	   helpful	   to	  
incentivize	  teacher	  attendance.	  One	  strategy	  would	  be	  to	  reward	  teachers	  each	  semester	  who	  have	  90%	  
or	   more	   attendance.	   	   Another	   strategy	   would	   be	   to	   offer	   in-­‐school	   trainings	   to	   assist	   teachers	   in	  
obtaining	  specialized	  certifications.	  	  Another	  strategy	  would	  be	  to	  offer	  teachers	  take-­‐home	  rations,	  the	  
amount	  of	  which	  is	  linked	  to	  their	  attendance.
(4) Reinforce	   food	   preparation	   and	   hygiene	   protocols	   with	   parent	   volunteers,	   particularly	   in	   San	  
Bartolo	  Aguas	  Calientes.
Perhaps	  related	  to	  Recommendation	  #2	  is	  the	  need	  to	  reinforce	  food	  preparation	  and	  hygiene	  protocols	  
with	   parent	   volunteers.	   This	   issue	   is	   especially	   pertinent	   in	   San	   Bartolo	   Aguas	   Calientes,	   which	   on	  
average	   scored	   lower	   in	   issues	   related	   to	   kitchen	   cleanliness	   and	   hygiene	   to	   a	   statistically	   significant	  
degree,	   compared	   with	   other	   municipalities.	   Further	   efforts	   should	   therefore	   be	   made	   to	   reinforce	  
capacity	   building	   regarding	   healthy	   food	   practices	   with	   volunteers,	   and	   to	   support proper	   building	  
41
facilities	   and	   appropriate	   operations.	   Other	   issues	   that	   emerged	   at	   midterm	   are	   an	   apparent	  
discrepancy	   between	   how	   principals	   and	   parents	   perceive	   organization	   of	   food	   preparation,	   with	  
principals	   expressing	   greater	   concern;	   and	   a	   potential	   need	   to	   address	   problems	   among	   parent	  
volunteers	  in	  terms	  of	  work	  sharing,	  particularly	  in	  Momostenango.
(5) Consider	  providing	  a	  wider	  variety	  of	  beans.
Most	  children	  said	  they	  enjoyed	  the	  food	  provided	  through	  the	  program.	  Yet,	  almost	  half	  of	  teachers	  
said	  the	  pinto	  beans	  were	  difficult	  to	  cook	  and	  required	  a	  significant	  amount	  of	  fuel	  for	  ovens.	  Parents	  
also	  indicated	  that	  children	  get	  bored	  eating	  the	  same	  type	  of	  beans,	  and	  would	  like	  to	  see	  some	  variety.	  
Anecdotally,	  we	  also	  heard	  that	  pinto	  beans	  are	  not	  a	  cultural	  norm	  in	  Totonicapán.	  One	  
recommendation	  is	  to	  provide	  a	  combination	  of	  both	  pinto	  and	  black	  beans	  to	  give	  children	  greater	  
variety	  and	  more	  cooking	  options	  for	  parent	  volunteers.
(6) Conduct	  outreach	  with	  teachers	  and	  directors	  to	  educate	  them	  on	  USDA	  packaging	  dates,	  and	  to	  
report	  immediately	  to	  CRS	  any	  issues	  with	  food	  spoilage.
Given	   the	   confusion	   around	   USDA	   packaging	   dates	   being	  misinterpreted	   by	   school	   staff	   as	   expiration	  
dates,	   school	   staff	   need	   to	   be	   educated	   on	   how	   to	   interpret	   the	   different	   dates	   on	   USDA	   packages.	  
Directors	  and	  parents	  reported	  that	  food	  spoilage	  could	  be	  as	  high	  as	  25.0%,	  but	  it	  is	  difficult	  to	  assess	  
whether	   this	   perception	   related	   to	   actual	   food	   spoilage	   or	   confusion	   about	   the	   dates	   stamped	   on	  
packaged.	  Educating school	  staff	  could	  be	  done	  through	  implementing	  partners’	  meeting	  with	  directors	  
and	  teachers to	  discuss	  the	  issue	  specifically,	  and	  also	  by	  creating	  and	  disseminating	  a	  1-­‐page	  document
or	  poster that	  illustrates	  the	  different	  meanings	  of	  various	  dates	  (Sell	  By,	  Best	  If	  Used	  By,	  Used	  By,	  Lot	  
Code).	  If	  food	  is	  actually	  spoiled	  and	  the	  dates	  not	  misinterpreted,	  school	  staff	  should	  be	  instructed	  to	  
inform	   CRS	   and	   implementing	   partners	   immediately	   of	   the	   issue,	   and	   the	   problem	   should	   be	  
investigated	  closely	  to	  determine	  the	  source	  of	  the	  problem.
(7) Reinforce	  the	  benefits	  of	  education	  with	  parents.
At	  midterm,	  only	  35.9%	  of	  parents	  were	  able	  to	  identify	  at	  least	  3	  benefits	  of	  education,	  compared	  with	  
96.4%	   reported	   at	   baseline.	   While	   measurement	   differences	   between	   baseline	   and	   midterm	   might	  
account	   for	   some	   of	   this	   different,	   this	   drop	   is	   still	   noteworthy	   as	   parents	   are	   critical	   resources	   in	  
children’s	   education.	   It	   is	   recommended	   that	   CRS	   and	   implementing	   partners	   conduct	   more	   specific	  
outreach	   to	   parents,	   to	   educate	   them	   on	   the	   benefits	   of	   education	   for	   their	   children	   – not	   simply	  
focused	  on	  literacy, but	  on	  the	  lifelong	  benefits	  education	  can	  provide	  for	  children	  over	  the	  life	  course.
(8) Reinforce	  steps	  of	  Kemom	  Ch’ab’al	  methodology	  with	  teachers	  and	  directors
Most	  teachers	  and	  directors	  report	  using	  the	  Kemom	  Ch’ab’al methodology,	  and	  believe	  it	  is	  helpful	  as	  
well	   as	   culturally	   relevant.	   However,	   relatively	   few	   follow	   all	   of	   the	   steps	   of	   the	   methodology.	  
Anecdotally,	  and	  also	  based	  on	  the	  Education	  Specialist’s	  report	  (see	  Appendix	  A),	  communication	  and	  
follow-­‐up	  with	  schools	   regarding	   Kemom	   Ch’ab’al	   seems	  lacking,	   such	   that	   teachers	  and	   directors	  are	  
unsure	   how	   best	   to	   implement	   the	   methodology.	   Implementing	   partners	  should	   provide	   a	  refresher	  
training	   to	   directors	   and	   possibly	   to	   teachers	   on	   the	   steps	   of	   the	   methodology	   and	   why	   they	   are	  
important,	   and	   maintain	   regular	   communication	   with	   schools	   to	   ensure	   sound	   execution	   of	   the	  
methodology. Professional	   development	   and	   on-­‐the-­‐job	   coaching	   and	  mentoring	   activities	   would	   also	  
help	   reinforce	   the	   methodology.	   It	   is	   also	   recommended	   for	   future	   production	   of	   Kemom	   Ch’ab’al	  
42
materials	   that	   there	   be	   a	   thorough	   revision	   by	   a	   specialist	   in	   the	   K’iche’	   language	   to	   ensure	   correct	  
grammatical	  uses	  of the	  language.
(9) Reinforce	  the	  Spaces	  to	  Grow	  program,	  by	  highlighting	  the	  potential	  benefits	  to	  directors	  and	  
teachers
The	  number	  of	  schools	  implementing	  Spaces	  to	  Grow	  exceeded	  the	  midterm	  target,	  and a	  majority	  of	  
directors	  expressed	  interest	  in	  starting	  the	  program.	  	  Efforts	  could	  be	  made	  to	  expand	  this	  program	  to	  
more	  schools,	  and	  reinforce	  the	  program	  in	  existing	  schools,	  as	  a	  means	  of	  promoting	  community	  and	  
building	  practical	  skills.	  Spaces	  to	  Grow	  might	  also	  be	  a	  centerpiece	  around	  which	  further	  extracurricular	  
activities	  could	  be	  built	  (also	  see	  Recommendation	  #8).
(10) For	  parents,	  reinforce	  the	  potential	  benefits	  of	  after-­‐school	  activities	  for	  children.
Many	   parents	   supported	   the	   idea	   of	   extracurricular	   activities	   for	   their	   children,	   particularly	   if	   these	  
activities	   supported	   further	   studying	   and	   academic	   work,	   practical	   skills,	   or	   cultural	   activities.	   Some	  
parents	  expressed	  doubts	  about	  after-­‐school	  programs	  because	  children	  were	  too	  busy	  with	  chores	  and	  
other	   obligations.	   	   Outreach and	   capacity-­‐building	   should	   be	   provided	   to	   parents	   to	   reinforce	   the	  
potential	   life-­‐long	   benefits	   of	   education	   for	   children,	   and	   balancing	   educational	   demands	   versus	  
household	   or	   other	   demands. These	   efforts	   should	   also	   be	   helpful	   in	   addressing	   girls’ attendance	  
(Recommendation	   #1)	   as	   well	   as	   identifying	   and	   addressing root	   causes	   for	   school	   absences	  
(Recommendation	  #2).
(11) Articulate	   what	   sustainability	   looks	   like	   for	   the	   FFE	   program	   and	   communicate	   this	   with	  
beneficiaries.
One	   of	   the	   cross-­‐cutting	   evaluation	   questions	   for	   the	   midterm	   evaluation	   relates	   to	   the	   long-­‐term	  
sustainability	  of	  the	  program.	  	  2/3rd of	  CTAs	  stated	  their	  belief	  that	  the	  program	  is	  sustainable	  in	  terms	  
of	  educational	  methodology	  and	  health	  and	  food	  improved	  practices,	  but	  will	  be	  entirely	  dependent	  on	  
the	   continuation	   of	   parent	   volunteers	   who	   have	   been	   trained	   and	   have	   experience	   with	   food	  
preparation	  and	  hygiene.	  At	  this	  stage	  of	  the	  program,	  it	  would	  be	  helpful	  to	  articulate	  the	  meaning	  of	  
the	  concept	  of	  sustainability,	  so	   that	  expectations	  and	  outputs	  could	  be	  anticipated	  post-­‐support.	  	  For	  
example,	  sustainability	  will	  likely	  involve	  ongoing	  parent	  participation,	  and	  peer	  leadership	  and	  training.	  	  
However,	  the	  provision	  of	   food	  supplies	  in	  the	  quantities	  currently	  delivered	  will	  be	  difficult	  to	  sustain	  
by	  communities,	  and	  in	  a	  post-­‐support	  phase,	  one	  can	  imagine	  a	  steep	  decline	  in the	  amount	  of	   food	  
available.	  Beneficiaries	  should	  be	  aware	  of	  expectations	  for	  their	  involvement	  if	  and	  when	  support	  ends,	  
particularly	  as	  related	  to	  provision	  of	  food,	  but	  also	  to	  education	  materials	  and	  techniques.
(12) Link improvements	  plans	  and	  education	  benefits	  for	  parents.
Only	   60	   per	   cent of schools	   have	   plans	   for	   school	   improvement.	   Efforts	   should	   be	  made	  to	   increase	  
these	   improvement	   plans,	   possibly	   by	   linking	   improvement	   plans	   to	   the	   establishment	   of	   active PTAs	  
which	   currently	   account	   for	   only	   half	   of	   all	   established	   PTAs.	   In	   terms	   of	   school	   improvement plans,	  
parents	  should	  also	  be	  encouraged	  to	  focus	  not	  only on improving	  infrastructure	  and	  food	  preparation,	  
but	   also	   on	   issues	   around	   improved	   curricula,	   teaching,	  student	   attendance,	   teacher	   attendance,	   and	  
academic	  performance.	  	  In	  doing	  so,	  parents	  would	  be	  able	  to	  gain	  a	  better	  understanding	  of	  education	  
benefits	  for	  their	  child	  and	  how	  the	  school	  environment	  could	  best	  support	  this	  education.	  
43
(13) Target	  school	  infrastructure	  improvements	  and	  food	  storage	  facilities
Improvements	  in	  school	  infrastructure are	  still	  below	  the	  expected	  level at	  midterm related	  to facilities	  
constructed	  or	  rehabilitated;	  based	  on	  MTE	  data,	  fewer than	  40%	  of	  schools	  have	  these	  improvements	  
completed.	   Efforts should	   be	   made	   to	   move	   planned	   constructions	   forward	   with	   parent	   committees’
involvement	  in	   these	  improvements.	  Additionally,	  it	  is	   recommended	   that	   the	   project	   should	  improve	  
coordination	   between	   parent	   committees	   and	   directors	   related	   to	   allocation	   of	   facilities	   for	   food	  
storage;	   about	   half	   of	   committees	   are	   dissatisfied	   on	   how	   food	   storage	   has	   been	   handled	   to	   date,	  
especially	  related	  to	  assigning	  designated	  places	  for	  storage	  in	  terms	  of	  cleanliness,	  order	  and	  space.
Recommendations	  for	  Research	  and	  Evaluation
(1) Aim	  for	  more	  rigorous	  research	  design	  in	  evaluation.
One	   of	   the	   difficulties	   of	   the	   midterm	   evaluation is	   that	   the	   methodology	   relies	   on	   a	   point-­‐in-­‐time	  
analysis	  (although	  aggregate	  results	  can	  be	  compared	  with	  baseline,	  a	  key	  dynamic).	  Another	  difficulty	  is	  
the	   lack	   of	   a	   comparable	   group	   who	   did	   not	   receive	   the	   intervention.	   	   This	   evaluation	   attempted	   to	  
correct	  for	  this	  problem	  through	  the	  use	  of	  multivariate	  statistical	  modeling,	  with	  mixed	  results.	  In	  the	  
future,	  it	  would	  be	  preferable	  to	  create	  a rigorous evaluation	  design	  alongside	  the	  implementation	  plan	  
of	   the	   program.	  	  While	  a	   randomized	   controlled trial	  is	  likely	   not	   possible	  in	   this	   context,	  it	  would	   be	  
possible	  (in	  theory)	  to	  conduct	  a	  phased	  design.	  	  In	  this	  type	  of	  design,	  the	  program	  would	  be	  rolled	  out	  
in	  phases,	  with	  multiple	  points	  of	  data	  collection	  over	  time	  in	  all	  sites.	  	  Sites	  would	  be	  randomly	  assigned	  
to	   phases	   of	   implementation.	  In	   this	  way,	   it	  would	   be	   possible	   to	  examine	   sites	  at	   different	   points	   of	  
development,	   over	   time,	   and	   attribute	   greater	   causality	   in	   changes	   in	   outcomes	   to	   the	   FFE	   program	  
itself,	   rather	   than	   unknown	   variables.	   This	   type	   of	   approach	   also	   avoids	   the	   ethical	   problems	   of	  
randomly	  assigning	  some	  groups	  to	  a	  condition	  of	  food	  provision,	  and	  others	  to	  a	  condition	  of	  receiving	  
no	   food,	  because	  all	  groups	  will	  eventually	  receive	   food.	  As	  mentioned	  in	  this	  report,	  with	  the	  current	  
design	   limitations,	   we	   can	   observe	   changes	   both	   positive	   and	   negative,	   but	   we	   cannot	   say	   that	   FFE	  
caused	  those	  changes.
(2) Consider	   mandating	   the	   use	   of	   attendance	   and	   achievement	   databases	   at	   randomly	   selected	  
schools.
The	  midterm	   saw	   some	  changes	  in	  both	   student	  and	   teacher	  attendance.	  	  Yet,	  as	   stated	  above,	  given	  
that	   these	   data	   were	   provided	   by	   teachers’	   and	   principals’	   estimates,	   the	   results	   are	   of	   unknown	  
reliability	  and	  validity.	  	  One	  way	   to	  ensure	  greater	  data	  validity	  is	   to	  mandate	   the	  use	  of	  databases	  in	  
schools,	   such	   that	   directors	   could	   oversee	   collection	   of	   data	   for	   attendance	   (teacher	   and	   student)	   as	  
well	  as	  student	  achievement	  and	  FFE	  program	  outputs.	  	  As	  an	  example,	  the	  lead	  author	  has	  a	  colleague	  
who	  founded	  a	  school	  feeding	  program	  (Mil	  Milagros25)	  in	  4	  schools	  in	  Sololá.	  Each	  Mil	  Milagros	  school	  
has	  a	  database,	  and	  directors	  are	   required	   to	  provide	  quarterly	   reports	  using	  data	  collected.	  	  While	  it	  
may	  not	  be	  feasible	  to	  require	  a	  database	  at	  every	  FFE	  school,	  given	  the	  costs	  of	  computers	  and	  training,	  
some	  randomly	  selected	  schools	  could	  being	  using	  databases	  to	  track	  attendance	  and	  achievement	  as	  a	  
pilot.	  	  Implementing	  databases	  at	  schools	  could	  be	  fairly	  straightforward	  by	  expanding	  the	  iFormBuilder	  
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   25 http://www.milmilagros.org/
44
platform	   to	  allow	   teachers	  and	  directors	  access	   to	   forms	  customized	   for	  attendance	  data.	  	  Part	  of	   this	  
project	  might	  entail	  providing	  iPads	  to	  directors	  and	  teachers	  for	  data	  collectors.	  Standardized	  means	  of	  
data	  collection	  would	  ensure	  greater	  data	  validity,	  and	  it	  may	  even	  improve	  outcomes	  for	  students,	  as	  
“what	  gets	  measured	  gets	  done.”
(3) Clarify	  and	  better	  operationalize	  selected	  indicators	  for	  measurement.
During	   the	   analysis	   and	   reporting	   phase	   we	   discovered	   that	   some	   indicators	   may	   introduce	   some	  
confusion.	  For	  example,	  indicator	  1.3.2	  (Reduced	  health-­‐related	  absences)	  requires	  the	  mean	  number	  of	  
days	  children	  were	  absent	  because	  of	  illness,	  which	  we	  believe	  is	  appropriate.	  	  However,	   the	  baseline	  
also	   included	   the	   indicator	   of	   percent	   of	   children	   missing	   between	   1-­‐5	   days.	   	   The	   midterm	   average	  
number	  of	  absences	  increased	  compared	  with	  baseline,	  but	  decreased	  in	  the	  1-­‐5	  day	  window,	  which	  we	  
believe	  paints	  an	  inaccurate	  picture	  of	  attendance	  (because	  more	  kids	  at	  midterm	  are	  likely	  to	  miss	  6+	  
days	  of	  school,	  and	   they	  will	  not	  be	  accounted	   for – plus	   the	  indicator	  looks	  better	  when	  it	  is	  actually	  
worse).	  	  We	  are	  aware	  that	  this	  issue	  may	  be	  related	  specifically	  to	  the	  baseline	  and	  not	  to	  a	  required	  
indicator.
Another	  issue	  is	   related	   to	  indicator	  1.1.3b	   (improved	  literacy	  materials),	   that	   requests	  2	  items	  in	  one	  
question:	  (1)	  whether	  schools	  received	  materials;	  and	  (2)	  whether	  materials	  were	  sufficient	  for	  effective	  
instruction.	  	  We	  advise	  splitting	  this	  indicator	  into	  2	  components,	  one	  asking	  about	  receiving	  materials,	  
and	   the	   other asking	   about	   sufficiency	   of	   materials.	   Again,	   this	   issue	   may	   be	   specific	   to	   evaluation	  
methodology	  and	  so	  not	  necessarily	  relevant	  to	  the	  larger	  program.
(4) Allow	  more	  time	  for	  evaluation	  planning	  and	  implementation.
For	   an	   evaluation	   project	   of	   this	   scale,	   the	   timeline	   for	   execution	   was	   extremely	   ambitious.	   Allowing	  
more	   time	   for	  planning,	  earlier	  in	   the	  year,	  would	  ensure	  a	  more	   reflective	  and	  planful	  process.	  Given	  
the	  Guatemala	  elections	   on	   September	   6,	   it	   was	   important	   to	   conclude	   data	   collection	   by	   the	  end	   of	  
August.	   	  Yet,	   the	   contract	   was	   not	   signed	   until	   July	   27	   and	   data	   collection	   was	   not	   able	   to	   start	   until	  
August	  17.	  	  This	  timeline	  made	  it	  difficult	  to	  recruit	  and	  properly	  train	  the	  staff	  prior	  to	  collecting	  data.	  
In	   addition,	   universities	   often	   engage	   in	   lengthy	   contract	   negotiations,	   and	   also	   require	   review	   of	   all	  
studies	  by	  Institutional	  Review	  Boards	  (IRBs)	  which	  sometimes	  can	  take	  a	  month	  or	  longer.	  Also,	  in	  using	  
electronic	   data	   collection, we	   saved	   a	   tremendous	   amount	   of	   time	   in	   data	   entry.	   	   Yet,	   we	   also	  
encountered	  unexpected	  issues	  with	  some	  iPads	  not	  registering	  data	  when	  entered.	  Had	  we	  had	  more	  
time	  in	  the	  process,	  we	  could	  have	  addressed	  these	  issues	  more	  proactively,	  possibly	  through	  refresher	  
trainings	  and	   field-­‐based	   troubleshooting.	  We	  also	   discovered	   that	   qualitative	   data	  entered	  into	  iPads	  
tended	  to	  be	  thin	  and	  of	   fairly	  low	  quality,	  another	  issue	  we	  could	  have	  addressed	  and	  corrected	  with	  
data	  collectors,	  or	  even	  formulated	  an	  alternative	  plan.	  In	  an	  ideal	  world,	  it	  would	  be	  preferable	  to	  allow	  
6	  months	  for	  planning	  and	  implementation	  of	  a	  project	  this	  size.	  	  If	  data	  needed	  to	  be	  collected	  no	  later	  
than	  August,	  this	  would	  imply	  an	  April	  start date.	  	  Nevertheless,	  we	  are	  proud	  of	  the	  work	  we	  did	  under	  
the	  current	  timeline	  and	  are	  appreciative	  of	  CRS’s	  logistical	  support.
45
References
Alderman,	  H.,	  &	  Bundy,	  D.	  (2012).	  School	  feeding	  programs	  and	  development:	  Are	  we	  framing	  the	  
question	  correctly?	  World	  Bank	  Research	  Observer, 27(2),	  204-­‐221.	  
Brown,	  J.L.	  &	  Pollitt,	  E.	  (1996,	  February).	  Malnutrition,	  poverty,	  and	  intellectual	  development.	  Scientific	  
American.	  38-­‐43.	  Retrieved	  from	  http://www18.homepage.villanova.edu/diego.fernandezduque/
Teaching/PhysiologicalPsychology/ AllPhysio/Ll11b_Eating/a12_Malnutrition/Malnutrition.pdf.
Cheung,	  M.	  &	  Perrotta,	  M.	  (2010).	  The	  impact	  of	  food	  for	  education	  program	  on	  schooling	  in	  Cambodia.	  
Working	  paper	  from	  Department	  of	  Economics,	  Stockholm	  University.
Essuman,	  A.,	  &	  Bosumtwi-­‐Sam,	  C.	  (2013).	  School	  feeding	  and	  educational	  access	  in	  rural	  Ghana:	  Is	  poor	  
targeting	  and	  delivery	  limiting	  impact?	  International	  Journal	  of	  Educational	  Development, 33(3),	  253-­‐
262.
Jyoti,	  D.,	  Frongillo,	  E.,	  & Jones,	  S.	  (2005).	  Food	  insecurity	  affects	  school	  children's	  academic	  
performance,	  weight	  gain,	  and	  social	  skills.	  Journal	  of	  Nutrition, 135(12),	  2831-­‐2839.
Kennedy,	  G.,	  Ballard,	  T.,	  &	  Dop,	  M.	  C.	  (2011).	  	  Guidelines	  for	  measuring	  household	  and	  individual	  dietary	  
diversity.	  Nutrition	  and	  Consumer	  Protection	  Division,	  Food	  and	  Agriculture	  Organization	  of	  the	  United	  
Nations.
Ruel,	  M. T.,	  &	  Alderman.	  (2013).	  Nutrition-­‐sensitive	  interventions	  and	  programmes:	  How	  can	  they	  help	  
to	  accelerate	  progress	  in	  improving	  maternal	  and	  child	  nutrition?	  The	  Lancet, 382(9891),	  536-­‐551.
Swindale,	  A.,	  &	  Bilinsky,	  P. (2006).	  Household	  Dietary	  Diversity	  Score	  (HDDS)	  for	  measurement	  of	  
household	  food	  access:	  Indicator	  guide (v.2). Washington,	  D.C.:	  FHI	  360/FANTA.
UNICEF.	  (n.d.).	  Guatemala	  overview:	  Malnutrion.	  Retrieved	  from	  http://www.unicef.org/guatemala/
english/ overview_18012.htm.
World	  Food	  Programme	  (2015).	  Guatemala:	  Overview.	  Retrieved	  from	  http://www.wfp.org/countries/
guatemala/overview.
46
APPENDIX	  A. Report	  on	  Kemom	  Ch’ab’al	  Methodology
Quetzaltenango,	  Guatemala,	  August	  28,	  2015.
Lic.	  Gómez	  Gaspar	  Tambriz
Education	  Specialist
The	  Education	  Specialist	  for	  the	  Mid-­‐Term	  Evaluation	  of	  the	  “Learning	  for	  Life”	  project	  through	  CRS	  was	  
contracted	  through	  Boston	  College,	  lead	  by	  Dr.	  Thomas	  Crea.	  Interviews	  were	  conducted	  with	  CTAs	  
(Administrative	  Technical	  Coordinators) and	  other	  key	  stakeholders	  in	  the	  Ministry	  of	  Education,	  CRS	  
and	  its’	  partners	  APCC	  and	  PRODESSA.	  The	  Education	  Specialist	  also	  had	  the	  opportunity	  to	  participate	  
in	  the	  interview	  conducted	  by	  the	  Context	  Specialist	  with	  the	  Departmental	  Coordinator	  of	  PRODESSA	  
based	  in	  the	  provincial	  capital	  of	  Totonicapan,	  on	  the	  specific	  issue	  of	  the	  Kemom	  Ch’ab’al	  methodology.	  
Through	  interviews	  with	  these	  stakeholders;	  the	  appreciation,	  experiences,	  observations	  and	  
recommendations	  on	  the	  progress	  of	  the	  methodology	  of	  Kemom	  Ch'ab'al	  were	  collected.	  
A. Interviews	  with	  CTA’s	  (Administrative	  Technical	  Coordinators)
• The	  CTAs	  noted	  that	  they	  have	  participated	  in	  different	  trainings	  since	  implementation	  
of	  the	  “Learning	  for	  Life”	  project.	  CTAs noted	  that	  this	  was	  an	  important	  step	  in	  the	  
process	  of	  applying	  the	  Kemom	  Ch'ab'al	  methodology	  through	  working	  together	  with	  
the	  principals	  and	  teachers	  of	  schools	  in	  the	  coverage	  of	  this	  CRS	  project,	  in	  the	  
application	  of	  the	  Kemom	  ch'ab'al	  methodology,	  the	  use	  of	  reading	  materials,	  and	  the	  
monitoring	  of	  this	  methodology.
• In	  relation	  to	  the	  Kemom	  Ch'ab'al methodology	  itself,	  all	  CTA	  interviewees	  expressed	  
that	  the	  methodology	  has	  been	  well	  accepted	  by	  principals,	  teachers,	  and	  parents	  of	  the	  
schools	  where	  the	  project	  has	  CRS	  coverage.	  This	  can	  seen	  through	  appropriate	  
attendance	  from	  the	  “Learning	  for	  Life”	  program	  in	  all	  aspects	  associated	  with	  the	  
development	  process	  of	  this	  methodology.
• It	  was	  noted	  through	  the	  CTA	  interviews	  that	  due	  to	  the	  Kemom	  Ch'ab'al	  methodology	  	  
being	  accessible	  to	  all	  members	  of	  the	  educational	  community,	  there	  is	  an	  aspect	  of	  
empowerment that	  exists	  among	  principals,	  teachers,	  and	  children	  due	  to	  the	  
curriculum	  being	  practical	  and	  understandable.
• In	  terms	  of	  sustainability,	  some	  CTAs	  noted	  that	  they	  perceived	  the	  project	  to	  be	  
sustainable,	  while	  others	  remained	  neutral	  on	  the	  topic	  due	  to	  the	  project	  support	  
being	  temporary.	  These	  CTAs	  who	  remained	  neutral	  noted	  that	  if	  CRS	  is	  removed,	  the	  
schools	  are	  only	  left	  with	  the	  Ministry	  of	  Education	  which	  would	  make	  sustainability	  
difficult	  to	  envision	  due	  to	  lack	  of	  funds.
• When	  asked	  about	  materials,	  the	  CTAs	  noted	  that	  the	  materials	  are	  sustainable	  due	  to	  
the	  support	  of	  PRODESSA,	  CONRADO	  de	  la	  CRUZ	  and	  CRS	  while	  the	  project	  exists.	  The	  
Kemom	  Ch'ab'al	  methodology	  workbooks, however,	  will	  stay	  with	  the	  students	  until	  
they	  are	  completed.	  The	  CTAs	  also	  noted	  that	  they	  felt	  that	  the	  teachers	  can	  continue	  to	  
use	  the	  Kemom	  Ch'ab'al	  methodology	  even	  if	  the	  project	  does	  not	  continue.	  
Observations	  
• In	  regards	  to	  facilitating	  the	  workshops,	  it	  was	  observed	  that	  there	  were	  some	  failures	  
on	  the	  part of	  those	  teaching	  these	  workshops	  on	  the	  Kemom	  Ch'ab'al Methodology.
Teachers	  reported	  that	  workshop	  facilitators	  were	  sometimes	  unprepared	  or	  unable	  to	  
47
answer	  questions.	  This	  situation	  led	  to	  confusion	  for	  teachers	  on	  how	  best	  to	  implement	  
the	  methodology.
Recommendations
• In	  relation	  to	  the	  Kemom	  Ch’ab’al	  methodology	  ,	  monitoring	  and	  support	  in	  the	  
classrooms	  and	  the	  presence	  of	  technicians	  in	  schools	  are	  recommended	  in	  order	  to	  
ensure	  proper	  implementation	  of	  the	  methodology.
B. Interview	  with	  the	  Departmental	  Coordinator	  of	  PRODESSA	  based	  in	  Totonicapan:
• It	  was	  noted	  that	  the	  Kemom	  Ch'ab'al	  methodology	  has	  been	  well	  accepted	  in	  all	  
schools	  during	  the	  two	  years	  of	  its	  work	  in	  the	  program	  in	  the	  four	  municipalities	  in	  
which	  the	  CRS	  project	  has	  coverage,	  and no	  director	  has	  removed	  the	  methodology	  
from	  their	  schools.
• It	  was	  noted	  that	  through	  the	  children	  demonstrated	  that	  through	  their	  reading skills in	  
K’iché	  that	  there	  is	  implementation of	  the	  methodology	  at	  the	  classroom	  level	  which	  
allows	  the	  children	  to read	  and	  write	  in	  K’iché,	  as	  well	  as	  tell	  stories	  in	  K’iché.	  It	  was	  
noted	  that	  this	  implementation	  appears	  to	  be	  assisting	  the	  children	  to	  use	  and	  rescue	  
the	  native	  K’iché	  language	  in	  their	  communities.
• It	  was	  noted	  that	  some	  of	  the	  teachers	  who	  are	  implementing	  the	  methodology	  are	  
monolingual	  in	  Spanish.	  Although	  they	  are	  monolingual,	  they	  are	  seeking	  strategies	  to	  
manage	  K’iché’	  literacy	  in	  their	  classrooms.	  For	  example,	  there	  was	  a	  monolingual	  
teacher	  who	  was	  looking	  for	  strategies	  in	  which	  to	  implement the	  methodology	  and	  she	  
did	  so	  by	  asking	  her	  husband	  for	  support	  in	  helping	  her	  to	  practice	  reading	  K’iché	  with	  
students	  in	  the	  classroom	  due	  to	  him	  being	  a	  native	  K’iche’	  speaker.
Challenges	  in	  the	  implementation	  of	  the	  Kemom	  Ch’ab’al	  methodology:
• It	  was	  noted	  that	  there	  was	  some	  resistance	  to	  the	  use	  of	  K’iché	  in	  certain	  classrooms	  at	  the	  
beginning	  of	  the	  project.	  However,	  teachers	  were	  made	  aware	  of	  benefits	  of	  the	  program	  and	  
now	  all	  the	  teachers	  attend	  all	  program	  trainings	  and	  workshops.
• It	  was noted	  that	  now	  that	  teachers	  have	  all	  accepted	  the	  methodology,	  their	  motivation	  is	  
reflected	  in	  their	  students
• With	  the	  parent	  participation,	  it	  was	  difficult	  at	  first	  to	  gain	  their	  participation	  in	  assisting	  in	  
receiving	  the	  educational	  materials.	  However,	  with	  the	  support	  from	  members	  of	  the	  
educational	  community,	  other	  parents,	  CTAs,	  principals	  and	  teachers,	  they	  are	  now	  supporting	  
this	  process.	  It	  was	  noted	  that	  PRODESSA	  was	  going	  to	  facilitate	  the	  use	  of	  a	  pick-­‐up	  truck	  to	  
transport	  the	  materials.	  	  However,	  the	  CTAs	  mentioned	  that	  they	  preferred	  to	  continue	  with	  
their	  usual	  procedure	  in	  order	  to	  avoid	  confusion	  with	  transportation	  when	  the	  project	  ends.	  
C.	  Observations	  on	  the	  Kemom	  Ch’ab’al	  Texts	  for	  Children:	  
• The	  Education	  Specialist	  noted	  that	  at first,	  the	  content	  of	  all	  textbooks was	  all	  in	  K’iché,	  
but	  later	  the	  content	  was	  changed	  to	  50%	  in	  K’iché	  and	  50%	  in	  Spanish,	  due	  to this	  
version	  being	  better	  accepted	  by	  teachers.	  It	  was	  also	  observed	  that	  due	  to	  the	  
48
materials	  provided	  by	  the	  MINEDUC	  through	  the	  DIGEBI	  not	  having	  arrived	  for	  each	  
grade,	  there	  was	  no	  training	  on	  how	  to	  complete	  the	  materials	  for	  all	  teachers.
• The	  former	  director	  of	  education	  in	  the	  department	  of	  Totonicapan	  requested	  that	  this	  
program	  become	  widespread	  throughout	  the	  department,	  which	  would	  mean	  an	  
increase	  of	  population	  to	  be	  served	  by	  50%.
Positive	  observations	  of	  the	  Kemom	  Ch’ab’al	  methodology:
• The	  promotion	  of	  values:	  The	  value	  of	  reading	  to	  learn	  was	  promoted	  instead	  of	  solely	  
reading	  to	  read.
• Although	  machismo	  is	  very	  marked	  in	  Totonicapan,	  through	  this	  material,	  boys	  and	  girls	  
are	  encouraged	  to	  collaborate	  and	  work	  together	  due	  to	  the	  material	  disclosing	  the	  
great	  importance	  of	  the	  K’iché	  culture,	  language	  and	  the	  Guatemalan	  context.
• When	  the	  program,	  “Let's	  Read	  Together”,	  was	  first	  implemented	  from	  the	  Ministry	  of	  
Education,	  it	  was	  noted	  that	  there	  was	  some	  confusion	  experienced	  by	  various	  teachers.	  
These	  teachers	  understood	  that	  there	  were	  two	  different	  periods	  that	  they	  had	  to	  
attend	  in	  order	  to	  teach	  the	  methodology	  and	  that	  this	  would	  create	  more	  time	  
consuming	  work.	  However,	  it	  was	  noted	  that	  the	  Kemom	  Ch'ab'al	  methodology	  actually	  
strengthened	  the	  program	  “Let's	  Read	  Together”	  because	  it	  is	  systematic in	  its	  layout.	  
This	  can	  be	  reflected through	  reading	  workshops	  being	  implemented	  as	  is	  reflection	  by	  
the	  teachers	  on	  the	  use	  of	  this	  program	  is	  encouraged.
• The	  Kemom	  Ch'ab'al	  methodology	  consists	  of	  six	  steps,	  five	  of	  which	  are	  the	  most	  
applicable,	  although	  step	  0	  is	  more	  applicable	  when	  applied	  to	  grades	  4	  and	  6.	  This	  
modeling	  strategy	  outlines	  comparisons,	  analyses,	  discussion,	  and	  debate;	  the	  teacher	  
exemplifies	  this	  and	  shows	  the	  students	  what	  they	  need	  to	  do.	  The	  aforementioned	  five	  
steps	  can	  be	  found	  below:
1)	  Exploration	  of	  reading:	  Consists	  of	  observing	  the	  graphic	  material,	  the	  titles,	  
what	  experiences	  to	  recognize,	  and	  observing	  what	  the	  student	  can	  predict	  will	  
happen	  or	  think	  will	  happen.
2)	  Actual	  reading:	  which	  can	  be	  individually,	  in	  pairs,	  quietly,	  loudly,	  etc.
3)	  Exercises	  in	  the	  Textbooks:	  the	  children	  can	  put	  into	  practice	  what	  they	  
learned.
4)	  The	  review	  of	  the	  exercises:	  This	  is	  done	  through	  self-­‐assessment	  or	  peer	  
assessment.
5)	  Workshops:	  these	  can	  highlight	  the	  values	  and	  which	  situations	  apply	  such	  as	  
logical	  thinking,	  human	  rights,	  culture	  of	  peace,	  and	  multiculturalism	  among	  
others.	  
• Each	  teacher	  was	  provided	  with	  a	  guide	  to	  assist	  him	  or	  her	  in	  implementing	  the	  
methodology.	  This	  includes	  their	  teaching	  sheet	  as	  well	  as	  trainings	  to	  use	  and	  manage	  
this	  methodology	  well.
• Teachers	  have	  received	  five	  workshops;	  one	  for	  each	  of	  the	  aforementioned	  steps	  in	  the	  
application	  of	  the	  methodology.
• It	  was	  noted	  that	  the	  results	  from	  this	  bilingual	  education	  appear	  to	  be	  long-­‐term.
Therefore	  it	  is	  recommended	  that	  CRS	  conduct	  project	  monitoring	  for	  the	  methodology	  
implementation.	  Through	  project	  monitoring,	  a	  full	  cohort	  from	  first	  grade	  until	  sixth	  
grade	  would	  be	  able	  to	  be	  observed	  and	  complete	  results	  would	  be	  established,	  making	  
a	  more	  thorough	  evaluation	  possible	  due	  to	  the	  ability	  to	  measure	  the	  results	  of	  all	  
elementary	  school	  students.	  
49
• It	  was	  noted	  that	  within	  DIGEBI	  there	  are	  people	  who	  are	  familiar	  with	  the	  program	  and	  
the	  methodology	  and	  are	  capable	  of	  continue	  in	  middle	  management.	  It	  was	  also	  noted	  
that	  some	  schools	  might	  be	  able	  to	  continue	  the	  program	  themselves,	  by	  promoting	  it,	  
advocating	  for	  it	  and	  then	  requesting	  an	  allocation	  through	  the	  Ministry	  of	  Education.
• The	  overall	  perception	  on	  the	  project	  that	  was	  documented	  was	  that	  community	  and	  
school	  authorities	  have	  accepted	  the	  project	  and	  see	  many	  benefits	  of	  it	  being	  present	  
in	  the	  schools.	  Despite	  the	  program	  being	  influenced	  by	  the	  food	  delivery,	  it	  was	  
observed	  that	  authorities	  see	  the	  benefits	  of	  the	  program	  and	  feel	  that	  the	  children	  will	  
benefit	  from	  the	  program	  and	  leave	  school	  well	  prepared.
• It	  was	  also	  perceived	  that	  the	  teachers	  were	  receptive	  of	  the	  Kemom	  Ch’ab’al	  
methodology	  due	  to	  positive	  responses.	  As	  a	  result	  of	  their	  training	  with	  the	  curriculum,	  
the	  teachers	  have	  encompassed	  the	  Kemom	  Ch'ab'al	  methodology	  and	  they	  value	  it	  due	  
to	  it	  being	  the	  only	  methodology	  that	  that	  provides	  materials	  and	  trainings.
Recommendations:
• It	  is	  recommended	  that	  there	  be	  an	  increase	  in	  the	  amount	  of	  technical	  and	  educational	  support	  
in	  schools	  on	  behalf	  of	  the	  Ministry	  of	  Education.	  There	  are	  now	  only	  six	  technicians	  and	  twenty	  
temporary	  staff,	  which	  demonstrates	  that	  the	  amount	  of	  support	  for	  the	  teachers	  implementing	  
the	  methodology	  is	  weak.
• It	  is	  recommended	  that	  there	  be	  a	  way	  to	  support	  the	  teachers	  with	  a	  diploma	  in	  K’iché	  literacy	  
or	  deploy	  a	  virtual	  system	  to	  strengthen	  the	  work	  in	  schools,	  so	  they	  can	  improve	  their	  skills.
D)	  Interview	  with	  Director	  and	  Deputy	  Director	  of	  the	  Department	  of	  Education	  in	  Totonicapán:
Result	  indicators	  from	  the	  “Learning	  for	  Life”	  program:	  
• It	  was	  noted	  that	  there	  were	  training	  of	  teachers,	  principals,	  and	  CTAs	  in	  the	  delivery	  of	  
materials	  for	  both	  children	  and	  for	  teachers.
• It	  was	  noted	  that	  there	  was	  an	  empowerment	  of	  teachers	  and	  principals	  through	  the	  use	  of	  the	  
the	  Kemom	  Ch'ab'al	  methodology.	  It	  was	  also	  seen	  that	  the	  children	  were	  empowered	  through	  
the	  provision	  of	  materials	  such	  as	  the	  textbooks,	  workbooks,	  and	  backpacks.
• It	  was	  mentioned	  through	  this	  interview	  that	  a	  text/manual	  on	  nutrition	  has	  been	  developed.	  
However, the	  printing	  and	  distribution	  of	  this	  is	  pending.	  Prior	  to	  printing,	  a	  commission	  was	  
appointed	  to	  review	  it,	  but	  now	  the	  developers	  of	  the	  manual	  are	  waiting	  for	  a	  response	  from	  
PRODESSA.
Lessons	  learned	  to	  date:
• It	  was	  noted	  that	  there	  existed	  strong	  two-­‐way	  communication	  with	  PRODESSA,	  Conrado	  de	  la	  
Cruz	  and	  the	  school	  and	  community	  authorities	  due	  to	  the	  development	  of	  an	  agreement	  on	  a	  
work	  schedule	  to	  avoid	  overlapping	  of	  activities	  with	  different	  organizations.
• It	  has	  been	  observed	  that	  the	  program	  has	  complied	  with	  all	  activities	  in	  schools	  and	  has	  
delivered	  corresponding	  reports	  where	  applicable.
• It	  was	  noted	  that	  a	  benefit	  of	  the	  project	  was	  that	  CRS	  trained	  teachers	  hired	  by	  PRODESSA,	  as	  
well	  as	  CTAs	  and	  directors	  in	  the	  implementation	  of	  the	  Kemom	  Ch’ab’al	  Methodology.
50
Opportunities	  of	  sustainability	  as	  visualized	  by	  the	  Ministry	  of	  Education:
• An	  empowerment	  has	  been	  manifested	  from	  the	  use	  of	  the	  methodology	  by	  techs	  and	  teachers,	  
due	  to	  them	  planning	  to	  stay	  with	  the	  methodology	  and	  continue	  to	  apply	  it	  in	  the	  future.
• The	  Kemom	  Ch'ab'al	  methodology	  is	  strengthening	  Bilingual	  Education	  in	  Totonicapan.
• The	  participation	  of	  the	  community,	  parents,	  and	  especially	  mothers	  who	  are	  participating	  in	  
the	  preparation	  of	  food	  in	  schools	  for	  children	  is	  very	  notable.
• The	  collaboration	  of	  CRS	  and	  other	  institutions	  has	  assisted	  schools	  in	  coordinating	  	  and	  
organizing	  different	  activities.
As	  a	  challenge	  to	  promote	  the	  methodology	  of	  bilingual	  literacy	  in	  schools	  in	  Totonicapan,	  it	  can	  be	  
mentioned:
• This	  process	  has	  already	  begun	  through	  CRS’s	  support	  in	  training	  the	  CTAs	  and	  teachers.	  It	  was	  
noted	  that	  many	  were	  in	  favor	  of	  expanding	  the	  coverage	  of	  the	  methodology	  throughout	  the	  
entire	  department	  of	  Totonicapan.
• Better	  preparation	  of	  the	  CTAs	  to	  be responsible	  for	  replicating	  what	  principals	  and	  teachers	  
do.
Recommendations:
• In	  relation	  to	  nutrition,	  CTAs	  suggest	  that	  the	  menu	  be	  varied.
• It	  is	  recommended	  that	  the	  motivation	  of	  the	  teachers	  is	  maintained.	  For	  example,	  the	  director	  
of	  the	  Department of	  Education	  of	  Totonicapan	  shared	  that	  on	  Teacher's	  Day,	  gifts	  were	  given	  
to	  each	  teacher	  who	  was	  participating	  in	  the	  project,	  such	  as	  a	  button	  and	  a	  typical	  sweater	  or	  a	  
shall.	  In	  that	  sense	  the	  Director	  felt	  that	  there	  was	  conviviality	  felt	  by	  the	  teachers	  for	  the	  
project.
• It	  is	  recommended	  that	  the	  project	  coverage	  area	  expand	  within	  the	  eight	  municipalities.