BASELINE SURVEY 
ON SCHOOL 
CANTEENS
EBCS 2016
McGovern-Dole PROJECT
Côte-d’Ivoire
REPORT
Data gathered from 
21 April to 03 May 2016
BASELINE SURVEY 
ON SCHOOL 
CANTEENS
EBCS 2016
McGovern-Dole PROJECT
REPORT
Côte-d’Ivoire
Agreement Number: FFE-681-2015/006-00
4
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
MAMADOU Fofana Director of Strategy, Planning and StaƟ sƟ cs at the NaƟ onal Ministry of 
EducaƟ on, Member of the CoordinaƟ on CommiƩ ee
Ms Karidia Kone 
SOUKOULE
Director of School Feeding at the NaƟ onal Ministry of EducaƟ on, Member 
of the CoordinaƟ on CommiƩ ee
ChrisƟ an TAPE Engineer specialising in StaƟ sƟ cs and Economics, Director of Studies, 
Research and Engineering at INS, Member of the CoordinaƟ on CommiƩ ee
Yapo ASSI StaƟ sƟ cal Analyst and Demographer, Deputy Director of Social StaƟ sƟ cs 
at the INS, Project Team Leader
Moyabi SYLLA Demographer, NaƟ onal Administrator in Charge of Monitoring, EvaluaƟ on 
and Analysis of Vulnerability at WFP, Member of the Technical Team
Emmanuel Doré AKA Demographer, Deputy Director for Demography at the INS, Member of 
the Technical Team
Henri Tanontchi ABOU Communicator, Head of the Governance StaƟ sƟ cs Department at INS, 
Member of the Technical Team
Joëlle GOUALI Lou Engineer specialising in StaƟ sƟ cs and Economics, Study Manager at the INS
Michel AMANI Engineer specialising in StaƟ sƟ cs, Deputy Director at the INS, Member of 
the Technical Team
Charles AkpoƟ ki KOFFI Engineer specialising in StaƟ sƟ cs, Study Manager at the INS, Member of 
the Technical Team
Amadou TOURE Engineer specialising in StaƟ sƟ cs, Study Manager at the INS
Wilfried AFFELI
Engineer specialising in StaƟ sƟ cs, Programme Monitoring/EvaluaƟ on 
Assistant - Vulnerability Analysis and Mapping at WFP, Member of the 
Technical Team
Ms Fatoumata COULIBALY 
Epse SILUE 
Manager of the NaƟ onal Centre for Training and ProducƟ on of Teaching 
Materials (CNFPM) at the Directorate of Pedagogics and ConƟ nuing 
educaƟ on (DPFC) at the NaƟ onal Ministry of EducaƟ on
Soumaïla KANE
Head of the Programmes Department at the Centre for AnimaƟ on 
and Pedagogic Training (CAFOP) at the Directorate of Pedagogics and 
ConƟ nuing EducaƟ on (DPFC) at the NaƟ onal Ministry of EducaƟ on
Pascal Assi TOTO 
StaƟ sƟ cian. Study Manager at the Directorate for Strategy, Planning and 
StaƟ sƟ cs at the NaƟ onal Ministry of EducaƟ on, Member of the Technical 
Team
Yanou Nagneniga YEO Head of Monitoring and EvaluaƟ on Division at the School Feeding 
Directorate, Member of the Technical Team
THE FOLLOWING PERSONS TOOK PART IN FIELD DATA COLLECTION PERSONNEL 
MANAGEMENT, DATA EXPLOITATION AND DRAFTING THE BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL 
CANTEENS / MGD PROGRAMME 2016.
5
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
Charlemagne Kouamé 
NDRI 
Head of Monitoring and EvaluaƟ on Sub-Division of the Integrated 
Programme for Sustainable School Feeding at the School Feeding 
Directorate. Member of the Technical Team
Josué Mardoché AJAVON Computer ScienƟ st, Study Manager at the INS, Member of the Technical 
Team
Elly BAHATI Head of EducaƟ on Project at AVSI, Côte d’Ivoire, Member of the Technical 
Team
Jean Paul II Hermann 
Brou YAPI
Monitoring and EvaluaƟ on Manager at AVSI, Côte d’Ivoire, Member of 
the Technical Team
Adama Sié YEO Monitoring and EvaluaƟ on Assistant at AVSI, Côte d’Ivoire, Member of 
the Technical Team
Michaela Gulemetova, PhD Research Associate; EducaƟ on Research; IMPAQ InternaƟ onal
6
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
CONTENTS
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .............................................................................................9
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................10
BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION..............................................................................11
2. AIMS OF THE SURVEY ..............................................................................................12
3. SURVEY METHODOLOGY ..........................................................................................13
3.1 SAMPLING IN THE CASE OF SCHOOL FEEDING ......................................................................13
3.2 SAMPLING FOR THE READING TEST ……………………………………………………….. ............................16
3.3 PREPARATORY ACTIVITIES .....................................................................................................16
3.4 DATA COLLECTION ..................................................................................................................16
3.5 DATA PROCESSING AND ANALYSIS ........................................................................................16
3.6 LIMITATIONS ...........................................................................................................................16
4. RESULTS OF THE SURVEY ..........................................................................................17
4.1 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE HOUSEHOLDS SURVEYED .................................................................17
4.1.1 Households’ demographic characterisƟ cs ..............................................................................17
4.1.2 Household income and assets ................................................................................................19
 4.1.3 DomesƟ c water use and faciliƟ es (shower/WC) .....................................................................21
4.2 SCHOOL-AGE CHILDREN’S READING SKILLS ................................................................................23
4.2.1 Assessment of pupils’ level of reading ability .........................................................................23 
4.2.2 Assessment of pupils’ concentraƟ on ......................................................................................23
4.2.3 Pupils’ aƩ endance ..................................................................................................................26 
4.2.4 Teachers’ aƩ endance ..............................................................................................................31
4.2.5 Assessment of teachers’ access to training on preventaƟ ve health topics. ...........................32
4.2.6 Quality of reading educaƟ on ..................................................................................................32
4.3 INCREASED USE OF HEALTH AND NUTRITION PRACTICES ...........................................................34
4.3.1 Management commiƩees’ level of awareness of good pracƟ ce in terms of health 
 and hygiene. ...........................................................................................................................34 
4.3.2 Level of knowledge of best pracƟ ce in the healthy preparaƟ on of foods and food storage ..36
4.3.3 Variety of diet at school ..........................................................................................................37 
4.3.4 Access to drinking water and hygiene condiƟ ons...................................................................38 
4.3.5 Access to prevenƟ ve health measures ...................................................................................39
4.3.6 Access to preparaƟ on and storage equipment .......................................................................40
4.3.7 Agricultural groups supporƟ ng school canteens ....................................................................41
4.4 FOOD SECURITY AND NUTRITION ..............................................................................................42
4.4.1 Household food consumpƟ on score .......................................................................................42
4.4.2 Household dietary diversity score ..........................................................................................43
4.4.3 Coping strategies ....................................................................................................................45
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS .....................................................................46
7
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES 
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1: Main activities providing sources of households’ income according to school type (%) ...........19
Table 4.2: Breakdown of households in terms of number of activities and type of school (%) ..................20
Table 4.3: Assets owned by households by type of school .........................................................................20
Table 4.4: Availability of water in localities by school type ........................................................................21
Table 4.5: Households’ main sources of water according to school type (%) .............................................21
Table 4.6: Perception of conditions of access to water by school type ......................................................21
Table 4.7: Frame of reference for reading ability .......................................................................................23
Table 4.8: Literacy by level ..........................................................................................................................24
Table 4.9: Results of pupils’ reading tests ..................................................................................................25
Table 4.10: Literacy by level and sex...........................................................................................................25
Table 4.11: Household dietary diversity score (average), by school type ...................................................43
Table 4.12: Household dietary diversity score (average) for girls in 4th+5th grade, by school type ..........43
Table 4.13: Reduced coping strategies index (average), by school type .....................................................45
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.1: Age structure of heads of household .......................................................................................17
Figure 4.2: Gender distribution of heads of household .............................................................................17
Figure 4.3: Marital status of heads of household .......................................................................................18
Figure 4.4: Educational level of heads of household ..................................................................................18
Figure 4.5: Dependency ratio of household members depending on school type .....................................19
Figure 4.6: Main reason for difficulty accessing water, by school type ......................................................22
Figure 4.7: Households’ sanitation facilities, by school type ......................................................................22
Figure 4.8: Distribution of reading ability by level (percentages of pupils) ................................................24
Figure 4.9: Proportion of pupils identified as attentive in class by their teachers by level and by sex. .....26
Figure 4.10: Proportion of pupils identified as attentive in class by their teachers by level, sex 
 and type of school. .................................................................................................................26
Figure 4.11: Pupils’ attendance rate by sex, according to school type .......................................................27
Figure 4.12: Pupils’ attendance rate by level of schooling, according to school type ................................27
Figure 4.13: Proportion of pupils attending school regularly (80%) by sex, according to school type .......28
Figure 4.14: Proportion of pupils attending school regularly (80%) by sex and level of schooling, 
according to school type .........................................................................................................28
Figure 4.15: Proportion of pupils accumulating more than 10 days’ absence, by sex and school type .....29
Figure 4.16: Proportion of pupils accumulating more than 10 days’ absence, by level, sex and 
 school type .............................................................................................................................29
8
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
Figure 4.17: Reasons for pupils’ absence from beneficiary schools, by sex ...............................................30
Figure 4.18: Teachers’ attendance rate by school type ..............................................................................31
Figure 4.19: Proportion of teachers who attend and teach at least 90% of school days ...........................31
Figure 4.20: Proportion of schools with teachers who have been trained, according to topic 
and school type ......................................................................................................................32
Figure 4.21 Proportion of schools with a canteen management committee .............................................34
Figure 4.22: Proportion of canteen managers having received at least one training course .....................35
Figure 4.23: Proportion of members having received the various training courses ...................................35
Figure 4.24: Managers’ level of knowledge of health and hygiene best practice ......................................36
Figure 4.25: Level of knowledge of storage best practice ..........................................................................36
Figure 4.26: Proportion of managers with a good knowledge of best practice in the safe 
preparation of food ................................................................................................................37
Figure 4.27: Proportion of school children who consume the following food groups through
the school meals programme .................................................................................................38
Figure 4.28: Proportion of schools with a water supply and main water sources ......................................38
Figure 4.29: Proportion of schools with sanitary facilities .........................................................................39
Figure 4.30: Proportion of schools having benefited from preventive health measures ...........................40
Figure 4.31: Type of storage equipment .....................................................................................................40
Figure 4.32: Quality of household’s food consumption, by school type ....................................................42
Figure 4.33: Proportion of households with inadequate food consumption (poor or borderline), 
by type of school ....................................................................................................................42
Figure 4.34: Proportion of households of girls in 4th+5th grade with inadequate food consumption 
(poor or borderline), by type of school ..................................................................................42
Figure 4.35: Proportion of households having consumed food groups, by school type ............................43
Figure 4.36: Proportion of households of girls in 4th and 5th grades at MGD schools having consumed 
each food group ......................................................................................................................44
Figure 4.37: Proportion of households of girls in 4th and 5th grades at non-MGD schools having 
consumed each food group ....................................................................................................44
Figure 4.38: Reduced coping strategies index (average) of households of girls in 4th and 5th grades, 
by school type .........................................................................................................................45
Figure 4.39: Coping strategies in relation to food adopted by households (MGD schools) .......................45
Figure 4.40: Coping strategies in relation to food adopted by households (non-MGD schools) ................45
9
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 
ABBREVIATION DEFINITION
ANADER Agence NaƟonale d’Appui au Développement Rural 
(NaƟ onal Rural Development Support Agency)
ASER Annual Status of EducaƟ on Report
CE Elementary schooling
CE1 First year of elementary schooling (grade 2)
CE2 Second year of elementary schooling (grade 3)
CM Fourth and fiŌ h grade
CM1 First year of middle school (grade 4)
CM2 Second year of middle school (grade 5)
CP First grade/primary 
CP1 First year of primary schooling
CP2 Second year of primary schooling
DCS School Feeding Directorate
DPFC DirecƟon de la Pédagogie et de la FormaƟ on ConƟ nue 
(Directorate of Pedagogics and ConƟ nuing EducaƟ on) 
DSPS DirecƟon de la Stratégie, de la Planifi caƟ on et des 
StaƟ sƟ ques (Directorate of Strategy, Planning and StaƟ sƟ cs) 
EBCS Baseline survey on school canteens
EGRA Early Grade reading Assessment
FCS Food consumpƟ on score
INS InsƟ tut NaƟ onal de la StaƟ sƟ que (NaƟ onal InsƟ tute of 
StaƟ sƟ cs)
MEN NaƟonal Ministry of EducaƟ on
MGD McGovern-Dole
RCSI Reduced coping strategy index
SODECI Société de DistribuƟon d’Eau en Côte d’Ivoire (Côte d’Ivoire 
Water DistribuƟ on Company)
WFP World Food Programme
UNDP United NaƟons Development Programme
USDA United States Department of Agriculture
10
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The baseline survey on school canteens in the Mc Govern Dole (USDA) programme – in the regions of 
BOUNKANI, GONTOUGO, BAFING, CAVALLY, PORO, BAGOUE and TCHOLOGO – collected data between
21 April and 5 May 2016, yielding the following fi ndings:
1. Heads of the households in the survey are adults (average age of 47 years), mainly male (90%),
married or living in union (90%) and with a low level of educaƟ onal aƩ ainment (almost 70% have no
schooling);
2. Among households with children aƩ ending school, the main acƟ vity observed remains the producƟ on
or sale of subsistence crops (around 40% of surveyed households). These characterisƟ cs barely vary
depending on the status of the school. Moreover, it was observed that in these households one
person is in work for every 3.4 dependent individuals;
3. In terms of WASH infrastructure, the results of the study highlight that there are approximately just
four water points per village for domesƟ c use, of which 71% are protected sources; in 33% of cases,
households do not have latrines and resort to open defecaƟ on (sanitaƟ on risk);
4. In the case of school infrastructure, 58% of schools have a water point on the school premises, while
in 42% of cases the water point is some distance from the school. Moreover, 35% of schools report
diffi culƟ es (at the Ɵ me of the survey) accessing water, mainly due to breakdowns of the village pump
and water sources drying up.
5. The situaƟ on regarding hygiene condiƟ ons is worrying. Less than half of the schools (47%) have
latrines. Schools in the intervenƟ on are beƩ er equipped with latrines than control schools. In most
cases, latrines have been constructed taking boys’ and girls’ specifi c needs into account.
6. In the case of reading ability, both girls and boys have very weak reading skills. What is more, in all
grades, girls meet fewer of the prerequisites than boys. In the case of the second year of primary
(CP2) 13% and 16% of girls and boys, respecƟ vely, are able to read, and in grade 3 (CE1) the fi gures
are 19% and 25%. This skill is also higher among pupils who have books at home (17%) than among
their peers who do not (9%).
7. The study shows that the overall aƩ endance rate is 99% for both sexes at all levels. Nevertheless,
the level of reading ability is very low. Absences, however, are mainly due to illness/health problems
(84.8% among boys and 84.4% among girls) and households’ work in the fi elds (8.4% among boys
and 6.6% among girls);
8. Analysis of survey data indicates that 62.2% of canteen managers have at least received training on
how to carry out their tasks. Moreover, 74.1% of them are able to list at least three best pracƟ ces for
the storage and conservaƟ on of both foods and non-foods, and 72.2% are aware of best pracƟ ce in
healthy food preparaƟ on;
9. The study also highlights the fact that 23% of school canteens are built from temporary materials
and in 19% of schools, pupils eat their lunch in the classroom.
11
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
1. BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION 
10. In order to raise school aƩ endance rates in primary educaƟ on and to ensure pupils remain in school 
for the duraƟ on of their course, since 1989 the Ivorian Government has been engaged on a large￾scale programme to develop school canteens, with the support of the World Food Programme (WFP). 
This programme is being executed by the School Feeding Directorate (DCS) under the auspices of the 
NaƟ onal Ministry of EducaƟ on.
11. Since 1998, the naƟ onal school feeding programme has included a sustainability component through 
the strengthening of the capacity of agricultural groupings supporƟ ng school canteens. The pillars 
of the school feeding programme’s acƟ viƟ es are educaƟ on, nutriƟ on, agricultural producƟ on and 
capacity-building.
12. In April 2012, the NaƟ onal Ministry of EducaƟ on, through the School Feeding Directorate (DCS), with 
technical support from WFP and the United NaƟ ons Development Programme (UNDP), prepared a 
NaƟ onal School Feeding Strategy (SNAS) for the period 2012-2017.
13. In parƟ cular, the SNAS defi ned the priority intervenƟ on areas by jointly analysing levels of food 
insecurity, prevalence rate of chronic malnutriƟ on, enrolment rates and the poverty rate in the 
various regions of the country.
14. Thus, for this study, the intervenƟ on areas have been defi ned and prioriƟ sed according to the state 
of degradaƟ on of these indicators. The fi rst three are: priority 1 (Cavally, Guémon, Poro, Bagoué, 
Tchologo, Bafi ng, Bounkani), priority 2 (Worodougou, Béré) and priority 3 (Gontougo).
15. Through the WFP country offi ce, Côte d’Ivoire has recently been granted fi ve-year funding from the 
United States Department of Agriculture (McGovern-Dole/USDA project) to enable it to intervene 
in these areas facing pressures, within the specifi c framework of support to the school feeding 
programme. This funding will make it possible to run the school feeding programme in seven (7) 
priority regions (Poro, Bagoué, Tchologo, Bounkani, Gontougo, Bafi ng and Cavally). A total of 613 
(rural) state primary schools will be covered, with around 125,000 pupils benefiƟ ng from school 
meals. AddiƟ onally, 10,000 girls in fourth and fiŌ h grade in three regions (Bagoué, Poro and Tchologo) 
will also benefi t from annual supplies of dry raƟ ons. 
16. As well as the nutriƟ on component (canteens and dry raƟ ons), the project will implement a teaching 
component allowing improvements in the reading skills of pupils at benefi ciary schools.
17. An evaluaƟ on plan has been drawn up to assess the project’s relevance, eff ecƟ veness, effi ciency, 
sustainability and impact. This evaluaƟ on plan includes a baseline evaluaƟ on (year 0), a mid-term 
evaluaƟ on (year 3) and a fi nal evaluaƟ on (year 5).
18. For this purpose the terms of reference prepared by WFP has been forwarded to the NaƟ onal InsƟ tute of 
StaƟ sƟ cs (INS), the lead contractor to which the baseline survey on school canteens has been entrusted. 
19. The aim of the baseline evaluaƟ on is to obtain reference data on the socio-demographic characterisƟ cs 
of the benefi ciaries and households, project output indicators and other relevant indicators (food 
security). The study covers all the benefi ciary regions of the MGD project.
20. The study will be carried out as a parƟ cipatory process with three NaƟ onal Ministry of EducaƟ on 
structures: the School Feeding Directorate (DCS), the Directorate of Strategy, Planning and StaƟ sƟ cs 
(DSPS), and the Directorate of Pedagogics and ConƟ nuing EducaƟ on (DPFC).
21. The evaluaƟ on for the reading skills component was carried out using the Annual Status of EducaƟ on 
Report (ASER) method, which was judged relevant by the stakeholders, and thus replaced the 
Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA) method iniƟ ally planned. The INS has benefi ted from the 
experƟ se of the partner AVSI/IMPAQ. IMPAQ was AVSI’s partner in the execuƟ on of the reading 
evaluaƟ on. IMPAQ was also involved in data collecƟ on for this report.
12
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
2. AIMS OF THE SURVEY
22. The overall objecƟ ve of the baseline survey is to measure the reference indicators at the level of 
individuals, schools, households, management commiƩ ees, producer groups supporƟ ng school 
canteens, and communiƟ es. It addresses educaƟ on, nutriƟ on, food security, health, livelihoods, and 
all other relevant informaƟ on for the project.
23. Specifi cally, it entails:
- assessing pupils’ level of reading ability;
- determining the prevalence of food insecurity among households in the PORO, BAGOUE, TCHOLOGO, 
BOUNKANI, GONTOUGO, BAFING and CAVALLY regions;
- establishing the profi le of households facing food insecurity (level of educaƟ on, occupaƟ ons, etc.);
- confi rming trends among pupils enrolled at the various primary schools (boys and girls) according to 
the informaƟ on in the database;
- evaluaƟ ng the aƩ endance rate among pupils and teachers enrolled during the 2015-2016 academic year;
- evaluaƟ ng the condiƟ ons under which the school feeding programme can be made effi cient 
(existence of basic infrastructure, moƟ vaƟ on of the community, accessibility of schools, existence of 
agricultural producer groups, existence of a school canteen management system, etc.);
- collecƟ ng data allowing determinaƟ on of gender indicators;
- measuring the empowerment of women in women’s agricultural groups.
13
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
3. SURVEY METHODOLOGY
24. The diff erence in diff erence method will be used to measure the impact of the project. This consists 
of:
ei) forming two groups with the same socio-economic characterisƟ cs: a control group and an 
 intervenƟ on group;
e(ii) comparing the two groups before and aŌ er the project in order to measure the project’s impact;
e(iii) evaluaƟ ng the impact by comparing changes in the direct eff ects observed over Ɵ me between the 
 control group and the intervenƟ on group.
25. On the basis of the method described above, the two groups consƟ tuted in the baseline survey are: 
the control group (non-benefi ciary schools) and the intervenƟ on group (benefi ciary schools), both 
having the same socio-economic characterisƟ cs.
26. Thus, fi ve types of survey have been run: (i) data collecƟ on with head teachers and school director 
based on a detailed individual interview; (ii) data collecƟ on from canteen managers; (iii) data 
collecƟ on from various women’s agricultural groups; (iv) data collecƟ on from a sample of pupils on 
reading skills; and (v) data collecƟ on from households of a sample of pupils, some of whom have 
taken a reading test.
3.1 SAMPLING IN THE CASE OF SCHOOL FEEDING
3.1.1 Geographical coverage and sampling 
27. The study relates to rural primary schools in the following regions: PORO, BAGOUE, TCHOLOGO, BOUKANI, 
GONTOUGO, BAFING and CAVALLY. These regions have been selected as strata during sample selecƟ on.
3.1.2 Choice of primary units and sample size
28. The staƟ sƟ cal units selected for the administraƟ on of the school, canteen and grouping quesƟ onnaires 
and the reading tests were primary schools, school canteens and women’s agricultural groups, on 
the one hand, and pupils at diff erent levels of schooling and their households, on the other. 
29. All 613 primary schools benefiƟ ng from the World Food Programme were included in the treatment 
group sample. Moreover, in order to establish the control group, it was decided that a sample be 
taken with a size equivalent to a third of that of the treatment group (i.e. around 200 schools) based 
on a selecƟ on of 1075 schools that are not benefi ciaries of the WFP programme.
14
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
30. The table below describes the control and treatment groups and the sampling frame and data 
collecƟ on tools used in more detail:
TREATMENT GROUP CONTROL GROUP
StaƟ sƟ cal 
Units
Primary schools in rural areas benefiƟ ng 
from WFP assistance 
Primary schools in the same rural areas but 
not benefiƟ ng from WFP assistance
Sampling 
frame
613 WFP benefi ciary schools 1075 non-WFP benefi ciary schools
Data 
collecƟ on 
tools
- School quesƟ onnaire: addressed to 
head teachers;
- Canteen quesƟ onnaire: addressed to 
school canteen managers;
- Grouping quesƟ onnaire: addressed to 
members of women’s groups supporƟ ng 
the school canteen at the surveyed 
school;
- Pupil scoring scale: used only to mark 
the reading test carried out by pupils 
sampled for the reading test;
- Household quesƟ onnaire: to survey 
households of sampled pupils.
- School quesƟ onnaire: addressed to head 
teachers;
- Pupil scoring scale: used only to mark the 
reading test carried out by pupils sampled 
for the reading test;
- Household quesƟ onnaire: to survey 
households of sampled pupils.
31. The selecƟ on method for the household sampling is as follows: 
Sample size
The opƟ mal sample size is obtained using the formula:
or,
n= sample size;
z = 1.96 is the confi dence level (probability value associated with a confi dence interval of 95%);
p = 0.5 is the iniƟ al level of the indicators (on the hypothesis that no previous data on the target 
populaƟ on is available);
k = 1.5 allows the adjustment to be made relaƟ ve to the sampling plan (cluster eff ect);
d = 0.05 margin of error;
32. In order to ensure the esƟ mates by school level and sex are suffi ciently accurate, the sample size is 
mulƟ plied by the school level number (primary, elementary and middle school) for each sex, i.e. six 
classes in all.
33. To take into account the expected number of responses, the sample size has been divided by the 
expected response rate. We have assumed a 5% non-response rate (i.e. a response rate of 95%).
34. The opƟ mal sample size is 3,636 pupils, i.e. 225 primary schools selected with 3,636 pupils and their 
associated households. 
15
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
35. On the fi rst level, schools were selected proporƟ onally (to take into account the weight of each 
region) in each of the regions/strata (BOUKANI, GONTOUGO, BAFING, CAVALLY, PORO, BAGOUE 
and TCHOLOGO). On the second level, in the regional strata (BOUKANI, GONTOUGO, BAFING and 
CAVALLY), 12 households associated with each of the schools were selected. In order to ensure a 
suffi cient number of girls in the 5th and 6th grade classes (so as to have relevant indicators enabling 
girls to be selected), the number of households associated with each school in the PORO, BAGOUE 
and TCHOLOGO regions was 24.
36. The following table summarises the sample of schools selected and the number of households 
surveyed per region: 
SAMPLE OF BENEFICIARY SCHOOLS
Regions/strata Number of schools 
selected
Number of pupils per 
school selected Number of households to survey
PORO 39 24 936 
BAGOUE 22 24 528 
TCHOLOGO 17 24 408 
BOUKANI 22 12 264 
GONTOUGO 47 12 564 
BAFING 13 12 156 
CAVALLY 9 12 108 
Total 169 2,964 
SAMPLE OF NONͳBENEFICIARY SCHOOLS
PORO 11 12 144 
BAGOUE 4 12 60 
TCHOLOGO 9 12 96 
BOUKANI 4 12 36 
GONTOUGO 14 12 132 
BAFING 6 12 60 
CAVALLY 8 12 144 
Total 56 672 
Grand Total 225 3,636 
37. Three Regional Directorates for NaƟ onal EducaƟ on (DREN), PORO, TCHOLOGO and BAGOUE were 
re-sampled to take into account the THR component. To do so, in addiƟ on to four pupils selected per 
level, in these DREN 12 pupils will be added for the 4th and 5th grade (6 per sex). In the remaining 
DREN, four pupils will be selected per level and sex. 
38. Moreover, for the 613 benefi ciary schools, all the schools (household surveys and school surveys), 
all the women’s agricultural groups and canteen management commiƩ ees idenƟfi ed previously will 
be interviewed. The aim is to make the acƟ vity of women’s agricultural groups sustainable. It is 
expected that over a period of fi ve years, 250 groups will benefi t from support (50 groupings a 
year). As regards non-benefi ciary schools, without a school canteen (control groups), all 200 schools 
(household survey and school survey) will be interviewed.
16
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
3.1.3 Size of primary units
39. In short, for each primary unit a fi xed number of households was interviewed. 225 primary schools 
out of 813 schools were selected and for each school 12 households were surveyed in the BOUKANI, 
GONTOUGO, BAFING and CAVALLY regions, and 24 households for each school in the PORO, BAGOUE 
et TCHOLOGO regions. 
3.2 SAMPLING FOR THE READING TEST
40. The same sampling frame was used as for the collecƟ on of data on school canteens in order to assess 
reading skills (see second paragraph of secƟ on 3.1.2 Choice of primary units and sample size). 100 
schools were selected (50 benefi ciaries and 50 controls) for the reading test to be applied. 
41. In each school selected, 12 pupils were selected at random. More precisely, in each school, 2 pupils 
were selected from each year of the two years of primary and elementary schooling and two from 
fourth grade and two from fiŌ h grade. To ensure equal proporƟ ons of boys and girls, one boy and 
one girl was selected in each class. The total sample was therefore 1,200 pupils in 100 schools.
3.3 PREPARATORY ACTIVITIES 
42. These were essenƟ ally devoted to designing the data collecƟ on tools, raising awareness among 
educaƟ onal system actors and training fi eld agents.
3.4 DATA COLLECTION
43. Data collecƟ on for the baseline survey on school canteens in the BOUNKANI, GONTOUGO, BAFING, 
CAVALLY, PORO, BAGOUE and TCHOLOGO regions took place over the period from 21 April to 5 May 
2016. The results of the data collecƟ on have been set out in a table (see Annex 1). 
3.5 DATA PROCESSING AND ANALYSIS
44. The outcome of this data collecƟ on process was the creaƟ on of fi ve databases: (i) household’s fi le; (ii) 
school’s fi le; (iii) school canteen manager’s fi le; (iv) pupil’s fi le; and (v) women’s agricultural groups 
fi le. The next step was to clean up the data. This consisted fi rstly of merging the various databases 
and then converƟ ng them using the SPSS soŌ ware package, which was used as the analysis soŌ ware. 
45. The editorial board, comprising members of the project team, carried out the survey data analysis work. 
An analysis plan prepared for this purpose was validated by the technical team. The work was distributed 
in such a way as to allow each member of the commiƩ ee to draŌ his/her chapters. The fi rst draŌ obtained 
following a knowledge-sharing workshop yielded the study results presented in the following chapters. 
However, it should be noted that certain limitaƟ ons emerged over the course of project implementaƟ on. 
3.6 LIMITATIONS
46. Of the 813 schools in the sample, 801 were surveyed correctly (610 benefi ciary schools and 191 non￾benefi ciary schools), i.e. a 98.4% achievement rate. At the level of household surveys, of the 3,636 
households iniƟ ally envisaged, 3,624 households were ulƟ mately interviewed, making a response 
rate of 97.6% (which is within the acceptable limits described in the methodology). 
47. As regards the reading assessment, of the 100 schools iniƟ ally envisaged, 99 schools (56 benefi ciary 
schools and 43 control schools) were surveyed. Also, 1181 pupils fi nally took the reading test, out of 
an expected number of 1200.
48. These limitaƟ ons do not aff ect the quality of the esƟ mates made based on the data collected.
17
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
4. RESULTS OF THE SURVEY
4.1 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE HOUSEHOLDS SURVEYED
49. Knowledge of the target populaƟ on in a baseline study is a determining factor in the conduct of future 
acƟ ons. Accordingly, this chapter addresses the demographic profi le (age and sex structure, marital 
status and level of educaƟ onal aƩ ainment) and economic profi le (main acƟ vity) of households in 
survey regions.
4.1.1 Households’ demographic characterisƟ cs
50. The age structure of the heads of household surveyed reveals a strong predominance of adults in 
the 35-59 year age range, represenƟ ng 71% and 69% of heads of households whose children aƩ end 
benefi ciary and non-benefi ciary schools, respecƟ vely. Also, 16% to 17% of heads of household are 
young, i.e. in the 18-34 age range; 13% to 14% of heads of household are elderly, i.e. aged over 60 
years. The average age of the heads of household in the sample is around 47 years.
51. In terms of gender, the majority of households have been observed to be headed by men. Indeed, 
90% of households are headed by men. This trend is idenƟ cal regardless of school status.
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.1: Age structure of heads of household
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.2: Gender distribuƟ on of heads of household
18
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
52. The distribuƟ on of heads of household by marital status shows a predominance of persons who are 
married or living in union, irrespecƟ ve of school status: thus, in the case of benefi ciary and non￾benefi ciary schools, respecƟ vely, 89% and 91% were married or living together. However, there is 
a non-negligible proporƟ on of single-parent households, i.e. 12% and 9% of heads of household, 
respecƟ vely, are (i) divorced/separated or (ii) widowed or unmarried, with almost equal proporƟ ons 
in the case of both benefi ciary and non-benefi ciary schools.
53. Overall, the level of educaƟ onal aƩ ainment of heads of household in the survey was low, all the more 
so given that 7 to 8 households out of 10 – respecƟ vely, for benefi ciary and non-benefi ciary schools 
– never aƩ ended school, so have no level of educaƟ onal aƩ ainment. Those with primary educaƟ on 
account for 20% and 15% in the case of benefi ciary and non-benefi ciary schools, respecƟ vely. Those 
with secondary or higher are esƟ mated to be just 15% and 9%, respecƟ vely, for benefi ciary and non￾benefi ciary schools.
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.3: Marital status of heads of household
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.4: EducaƟ onal level of heads of household
19
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
4.1.2 Household income and assets
54. The dependency raƟ o is the raƟ o of the total number of persons in the household engaged in an 
acƟ vity to the size of the household. This raƟ o is esƟ mated at 3.4. On average, households have 
approximately ten members, of whom three are engaged in an acƟ vity. This implies that each person 
in work supports 3.4 individuals.
55. Around 69% of households obtain their income mainly from the producƟ on and sale of agricultural 
produce. When stock rearing and sale of the products of livestock are included, approximately three 
quarters of households obtain their incomes from farming. The second largest source of households’ 
income is commerce (9%). Income in the form of civil servants’ salaries and from small trades 
accounts for a marginal share (6%).
56. The trends observed among the localiƟ es of benefi ciary and non-benefi ciary schools are idenƟ cal to 
those described above. Agricultural acƟ vity comes in fi rst place, followed by commerce, then civil 
servants’ salaries and small trades.
Table 4.1: Main acƟ viƟ es providing sources of households’ income according to school type (%)
MAIN ACTIVITIES (households’ source of income) BENEFICIARY 
SCHOOL
NONͳBENEFICIARY 
SCHOOL TOTAL 
ProducƟ on/sale of subsistence crops 38.4 40.4 39.0 
ProducƟ on/sale of cash crops 29.7 30.8 30.0 
Commerce (market stall, peddling, shops) 9.5 7.9 9.0 
Rearing/sale (stock and fowl) 5.58 4.49 5.22 
Civil servants (including pensioners) and small trades 
(builders, etc.) 6.7 5.0 6.2 
Other acƟ viƟ es 10.2 11.3 10.6 
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
57. Households usually pursue more than one acƟ vity. The table below shows that almost half of 
households (49.9%) have two acƟ viƟ es, 22.4% have three acƟ viƟ es, and 10% have four acƟ viƟ es. In 
total, over 80% of households have at least two income-generaƟ ng acƟ viƟ es.
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.5: Dependency raƟ o of household members depending on school type
20
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
Table 4.2: Breakdown of households in terms of number of acƟ viƟ es and type of school (%)
NUMBER OF INCOMEͳGENERATING 
ACTIVITIES IN THE HOUSEHOLD BENEFICIARY SCHOOL NONͳBENEFICIARY 
SCHOOL TOTAL
0 0.4 - 0.3 
1 18.5 14.9 17.4 
2 51.4 46.6 49.9 
3 20.8 26.0 22.4 
4 8.9 12.5 10.0 
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 
Average number of income-generaƟ ng 
acƟ viƟ es in the household 2.2 2.4 2.2 
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
58. In order to assess households’ standard of living, they were asked about their ownership of durable 
goods. The survey found that most households in the localiƟ es concerned owned very few durable 
goods. Apart from bicycles (owned by 71% of households) and motorcycles (68%), other goods are 
very rare in rural areas. 
59. Thus, by order of importance, households owned crop sprayers (22%), carts (18%), ploughs (17%) 
and wheelbarrows (16%). Less than 5% of households own other assets. The trend is the same in 
both benefi ciary and non-benefi ciary school areas. 
Table 4.3: Assets owned by households by type of school
ASSETS 
SCHOOL TYPE
TOTAL 
BENEFICIARY SCHOOL NONͳBENEFICIARY SCHOOL
Sewing machine 3.1 2.9 3.0 
Mill 1.4 0.7 1.2 
Canoe 0.8 0.9 0.9 
Bicycle 70.6 73.0 71.4 
Cassava press 1.0 2.0 1.3 
Tractor 0.6 0.4 0.5 
Seed drill 4.9 5.8 5.2 
Car 1.8 1.0 1.5 
Grinder/chipper 1.3 3.4 2.0 
Crop sprayer 20.6 25.9 22.2 
Fishing net 2.1 2.2 2.1 
CulƟ vator 1.5 0.6 1.2 
Moped/motorcycle 69.9 63.9 68.0 
Cart 17.9 17.2 17.7 
Tricycle 5.1 2.9 4.4 
Plough 17.8 15.7 17.1 
Wheelbarrow 16.1 14.6 15.7 
IrrigaƟ on system 0.3 0.1 0.2 
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
ParƟ al conclusion: households whose children aƩ end both benefi ciary and non-benefi ciary schools are 
primarily involved in farming. These households’ sources of income are primarily based on the producƟ on and 
sale of farm produce. The most widely-owned assets among rural households are bicycles and motorcycles.
21
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
4.1.3 DomesƟ c water use and faciliƟ es (shower/toilet)
60. The informaƟ on collected on the existence of water points and sanitary installaƟ ons is important 
in so far as it allows households’ living standards to be assessed. Indeed, 93% of rural households 
covered by the study have water supply points, whereas 7% do not. This situaƟ on does not vary by 
type of school (benefi ciary or non-benefi ciary).
61. The number of water points is therefore an important indicator in enabling the populaƟ on’s degree of 
access to water to be assessed. On average, there are around four water points per village. Once again, 
in localiƟ es with a non-benefi ciary school, the average is observed to be close to three water points.
Table 4.4: Availability of water in localiƟ es by school type
SCHOOL TYPE
ARE THERE WATER DISTRIBUTION 
POINTS IN YOUR LOCALITY? AVERAGE NUMBER OF WATER POINTS 
 Yes No 
Benefi ciary school 96.2 3.8 4.1 
Non-benefi ciary school 87.2 12.8 2.7 
 Total 92.8 7.2 3.6 
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
62. The household’s main source of water gives an indicaƟ on of the quality of the water consumed. The 
study found that the majority of households have access to a protected water supply (71%). The 
safest water supply is either a standpipe (64%) or a contract with the water uƟ lity SODECI (7%). 
Table 4.5: Households’ main sources of water according to school type (%)
SCHOOL TYPE 
WHAT IS YOUR HOUSEHOLD’S MAIN SOURCE OF WATER?
 TOTAL 
SODECI TAP STANDPIPE WELL RIVER, POND OTHER
Benefi ciary school 12.8 61.1 12.3 2.9 10.9 100.0
Non-benefi ciary school 6.9 69.9 14.2 5.9 3.2 100.0
Total 11.0 63.8 12.9 3.8 8.5 100.0
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
63. Households were asked to give their point of view on condiƟ ons of access to water in 2016 compared 
to 2015. Their opinions suggested that in most cases condiƟ ons of access to water had remained 
unchanged (47%), while almost a third felt they had worsened and 22% that they had improved. 
Table 4.6: PercepƟ on of condiƟ ons of access to water by school type
SCHOOL TYPE
HOW DO YOU JUDGE YOUR CONDITIONS OF 
ACCESS TO WATER IN 2016 COMPARED TO 2015? TOTAL 
WORSE UNCHANGED BETTER
Benefi ciary school 30.3 49.0 20.7 100.0
Non-benefi ciary 
school 34.8 41.6 23.6 100.0
Total 31.7 46.7 21.6 100.0
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
22
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
64. The study sought to determine the main reasons for the perceived deterioraƟ on in the condiƟ ons of 
access to water. The study found “insuffi cient quanƟ ty of water” (54%) and “frequent breakdowns” 
(16%) to be the main reasons. This trend was observed in all localiƟ es regardless of school type 
(Table 5.1.3.1)
65. In terms of access to sanitaƟ on, it was observed that just 24% of households have adequate sanitary 
installaƟ ons (fl ushing toilet or latrine). Of these, 21% of households use latrines. Almost 43% do not 
have appropriate sanitaƟ on (soak away) and 33% resort to open defecaƟ on. 
ParƟ al conclusion: The study shows that the majority of localiƟ es have water access points. By contrast, 
however, access to sanitary faciliƟ es remains a serious problem. Less than a quarter of households have 
adequate sanitary faciliƟ es (i.e. a fl ushing toilet or latrine).
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.6: Main reason for diffi culty accessing water, by school type
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.7: Households’ sanitaƟ on faciliƟ es, by school type
23
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
4.2 SCHOOLͳAGE CHILDREN’S READING SKILLS
66. Reading ability at the end of the fi rst two years of primary educaƟ on is a key MGD performance 
indicator. Consequently, the AVSI team will examine how reading ability in the fi rst and second years 
changes over the programme duraƟ on. 
67. The aim will be to analyse reading ability levels, concentraƟ on, and aƩ endance among children, 
together with teachers’ aƩ endance. 
4.2.1 Assessment of pupils’ level of reading ability
68. Analysis of assessment of pupils’ level of reading ability is based on the reading skills frame of 
reference in order to determine the indicators of the proporƟ on of pupils (boys and girls) who, aŌ er 
two years of primary schooling, demonstrate that they are able to read and understand the meaning 
of a text appropriate to their level of schooling.
69. The ASER reading assessment used assigns a level of reading ability to each pupil. This level may be 
compared with the thresholds expected for the pupil’s level of educaƟ onal aƩ ainment based on the 
curriculum and NaƟ onal Ministry of EducaƟ on standards. Reading ability is defi ned as a set of skills 
a pupil needs to idenƟ fy leƩ ers/sounds and decode a message at or above the level expected for a 
given class. 
The table below presents the frame of reference:
Table 4.7: Frame of reference for reading ability
FRAME OF REFERENCE FOR READING ABILITY
LEVEL: CORRESPONDING GRADE READING ABILITY
Level 0 None None
Level A Year one of primary (CP1) – Lower level Is able to idenƟ fy leƩ er-sound combinaƟ ons
Level B Year one of primary (CP1) – Upper level Is able to read simple leƩ er-sound combinaƟ ons 
Level C Year two of primary (CP2) – Lower level Is able to read complex leƩ er-sound 
combinaƟ ons
Level D Year two of primary (CP2) – Upper level Is able to decode simple words (1-2 syllables) 
Level E Grade 2 (CE1) – Lower level Is able to decode complex words (2-3 syllables) 
Level F Grade 2 (CE1) – Upper level Is able to read simple sentences
Level G Grade 3 (CE2) – Lower level Is able to read complex sentences
Level H Grade 3 (CE2) – Upper level Is able to read simple stories
Level I Grade 4 (CM1) – Lower level Able to answer comprehension quesƟ ons on 
simple stories
Level J Grade 4 (CM1) – Upper level Is able to read complex stories
Level K Grade 5 (CM2) Able to answer comprehension quesƟ ons on 
complex stories
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
70. During a preparatory workshop in April 2016 (Ministry of EducaƟ on – AVSI), the acceptable threshold 
level of reading ability for each class was determined according to the guidelines of the Côte d’Ivoire 
programme. 
24
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
71. In Figure 4.8, which presents the results of the test, the threshold for each class is represented by 
a verƟ cal line. For instance, at the end of grade 1 (CP1) a pupil will be deemed competent if he/she 
has aƩ ained at least level B. This corresponds to a pupil’s showing they are able to read simple leƩ er￾sound combinaƟ ons.
4.2.1.1 Level of ability through qualiƟ es
72. Figure 4.8 shows the distribuƟ on of the results of the ASER literacy assessment and the acceptable 
thresholds per level. Just 5% of grade 1 (CP1) pupils have an acceptable level of reading ability (level 
B). Among those who do not have an acceptable level, 60% have no level, i.e. they are unable to 
idenƟ fy leƩ ers of the alphabet.
73. At grade 2 (CP2) 14% of pupils have an acceptable level of reading ability. Of these, 9% have a level 
higher than the grade 2 (CP2) threshold (level D). Among pupils with a level below the threshold, 
36% are unable to idenƟ fy leƩ ers of the alphabet (level 0). 
74. Figure 4.8 shows how, at levels of schooling above grade 1 (CE1), less than 10% of pupils have shown 
beƩ er reading ability.
75. Table 4.8 shows the populaƟ on of pupils who have demonstrated the best reading ability from grade 
1 (CP1) to grade 5 (CM2). The data show that most pupils, whatever their level of schooling, have 
not passed the required reading ability threshold. In fact, just 6% of grade 4 (CM1) pupils could read 
complex stories and answer comprehension quesƟ ons aŌ er fi ve years of schooling. Compared with 
other levels of primary schooling grade 3 (CE1) pupils obtained slightly beƩ er results, with 23% 
being able to read beyond the threshold level (reading simple sentences).
Table 4.8: Literacy by level
PROPORTION OF PUPILS WITH READING ABILITY 
APPROPRIATE TO THEIR LEVEL PERCENTAGE
 Year one of primary (CP1) 5%
 Year two of primary (CP2) 14%
 Grade 2 (CE1) 22%
 Grade 3 (CE2) 11%
 Grade 4 (CM1) 6%
 Grade 5 (CM2) 8%
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.8: DistribuƟ on of reading ability by level (percentages of pupils)
25
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
4.2.1.2 Comparison group
76. In the light of Table 4.9, there is no signifi cant diff erence between the control groups and the 
benefi ciary groups as regards the various indicators of reading ability. 
77. However, the proporƟ on of pupils who said they enjoyed reading was lower in the treatment group 
than in the control group.
Table 4.9: Results of pupils’ reading tests
READING ABILITY BY GRADE Έ% OF PUPILSΉ NONͳBENEFICIARY 
SCHOOLS
BENEFICIARY SCHOOLS
Year one of primary (CP1) 4% 5%
Year two of primary (CP2) 15% 14%
Grade 2 (CE1) 17% 25%
Grade 3 (CE2) 11% 11%
Grade 4 (CM1) 3% 7%
Grade 5 (CM2) 11% 6%
 4.2.1.3 Gender analysis of reading ability
78. Girls showed weaker reading ability than boys at all levels of schooling.
Table 4.10: Literacy by level and sex
PROPORTION OF PUPILS WITH APPROPRIATE READING ABILITY, BY SEX GIRLS BOYS
Year one of primary (CP1) 4% 5%
Year two of primary (CP2) 13% 16%
Grade 2 (CE1) 19% 25%
Grade 3 (CE2) 11% 11%
Grade 4 (CM1) 6% 8%
Grade 5 (CM2) 7% 8%
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
4.2.2 Assessment of pupils’ concentraƟ on
*Indicator: ProporƟ on of pupils idenƟfi ed as aƩ enƟ ve in class by their teachers as a whole.
79. In order to assess pupils’ concentraƟ on in class, the baseline survey asked each teacher to state the 
number of children who were aƩ enƟ ve in class during the day preceding the survey.
80. Overall, the proporƟ on of pupils idenƟfi ed as being aƩ enƟ ve by their teachers was 78.5%, thus falling 
short of the target of 90%. The proporƟ ons of girls and boys idenƟfi ed as being aƩ enƟ ve was almost 
the same. However, it is observed that the proporƟ on of aƩ enƟ ve pupils tends to rise with level. The 
value of the indicator rises from 76.2% in year one of primary (CP1) to 86.3% in grade 5 (CM2).
26
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
81. DisaggregaƟ ng the proporƟ on of pupils that teachers idenƟfi ed as aƩ enƟ ve in class by level and 
type of school shows pupils of benefi ciary schools to be reported to be more aƩ enƟ ve (83.4%) than 
those of non-benefi ciary schools (62.8%). Pupils in grade 5 (CM2) at benefi ciary schools are the most 
aƩ enƟ ve (88.6%).
4.2.3 Pupils’ aƩ endance
82. To study pupils’ aƩ endance, the baseline survey collected data on pupils’ absences. AƩ endance 
is analysed in this report by means of pupils’ aƩ endance rates, based on the proporƟ on of pupils 
aƩ ending regularly and the proporƟ on accumulaƟ ng a total of ten days’ absence. A secƟ on will be 
devoted to the reasons for pupils’ absenteeism.
4.2.3.1 Pupils’ aƩ endance rate
83. The aƩ endance rate measures how frequently pupils are present in class. The higher the aƩ endance 
rate, the beƩ er placed pupils are to acquire the knowledge they are being taught.
84. Overall, the aƩ endance rate is 99% for boys and girls on all levels of schooling. However, pupils at 
non-benefi ciary schools have a slightly higher (99.2%) aƩ endance rate than those at benefi ciary 
schools (98.9%).
85. This result may be due to pupils present in classes at the Ɵ me of the survey not being properly 
counted. Errors or other incorrect fi lling out of aƩ endance registers is a bias that needs to be taken 
into consideraƟ on. The analysis commiƩ ee has decided that it is worth retaining the results of 
aƩ endance analysis despite its limitaƟ ons. A new method (survey and regular monitoring) for 
measuring pupils’ aƩ endance is envisaged during the fi rst half of 2017, bearing in mind the new 
methodological approach and pending confi rmaƟ on of the baseline indicators.
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.9: ProporƟ on of pupils idenƟfi ed as aƩ enƟ ve in class by their teachers by level and by sex
Figure 4.10: ProporƟ on of pupils idenƟfi ed as aƩ enƟ ve in class by their teachers by level, sex and type of school
27
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
86. Analysing the aƩ endance rate more closely shows that it is not infl uenced by either sex or level of 
schooling. Indeed, the rates observed per level for each school type are almost the same as those 
observed overall for each type.
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.11: Pupils’ aƩ endance rate by sex, according to school type
Figure 4.12: Pupils’ aƩ endance rate by level of schooling, according to school type
28
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
4.2.3.2. ProporƟ on of pupils regularly aƩ ending classes 
87. Overall, the proporƟ on of pupils regularly aƩ ending (i.e. more than 80% in the classroom) was 98%. 
The level of the indicator is almost the same in both treatment schools (98.1%) and control schools 
(97.6%).
88. The presentaƟ on of the proporƟ on of pupils regularly aƩ ending school, broken down by sex and 
school type, shows that values are in the 97% to 99% range on all levels of schooling and for both 
girls and boys.
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.13: ProporƟ on of pupils aƩ ending school regularly (80%) by sex, according to school type 
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.14: ProporƟ on of pupils aƩ ending school regularly (80%) by sex and level of schooling, according to school type
29
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
4.2.3.3. ProporƟ on of pupils missing more than 10 days school a year.
For pupils to learn eff ecƟ vely, they must not be absent from lessons.
89. Overall, the results show that the proporƟ on of students with more than 10 days absence is (2%) 
lower than the target set by the project (10%). This rate varies by type of school. It is 1.9% for 
benefi ciary schools and 2.4% for non-benefi ciary schools. Thus, there are relaƟ vely more pupils who
are absent for more than 10 days in non-benefi ciary schools than those who are in benefi ciary schools.
90. The survey data allow the proporƟ on of pupils accumulaƟ ng more than ten days’ absence to be 
presented by sex, level of schooling and school type. This shows that with respect to the target, which 
is to situate this indicator below 10%, the values yielded by the baseline survey are saƟ sfactory, as by 
level and by sex and school type, the highest proporƟ on is 3.7%, which is that among boys in grade 
3 (CE1) at non-benefi ciary schools.
 
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.15: ProporƟ on of pupils accumulaƟ ng more than 10 days’ absence, by sex and school type
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.16: ProporƟ on of pupils accumulaƟ ng more than 10 days’ absence, by level, sex and school type
30
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
4.2.3.4. Reasons for absence 
91. The reasons for absence are pracƟ cally the same, regardless of pupils’ sex, at all schools (benefi ciary 
and non-benefi ciary). Absences are mainly due to illness/health problems (84.8% among boys and 
84.4% among girls) and households’ work in the fi elds (8.4% among boys and 6.6% among girls);
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.17: Reasons for pupils’ absence from benefi ciary schools, by sex
31
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
4.2.4 Teachers’ aƩ endance
4.2.4.1 Teachers’ aƩ endance rate
93. Overall, the aƩ endance rate among teachers is 94.5%. However, this indicator diff ers between 
benefi ciary and non-benefi ciary schools, such that teachers’ aƩ endance is higher overall in non￾benefi ciary schools (95.9%) than benefi ciary schools (94.2%).
4.2.4.2 ProporƟ on of teachers in targeted schools who aƩ end and teach on at least 90% of regular school days.
94. Overall, 90.9% of teachers aƩ end and teach on at least 90% of school days. This translates into 
approximately nine teachers out of 100 teaching at least 90% of school days. This number is the same for 
benefi ciary schools. To meet its target, project implementaƟ on needs to bring this fi gure down to fi ve.
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.18: Teachers’ aƩ endance rate by school type
Figure 4.19: ProporƟ on of teachers who aƩ end and teach on at least 90% of school days
32
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
4.2.5 Assessment of teachers’ access to training on preventaƟ ve health topics.
95. The baseline survey is also interested in the presence in schools of teachers who are trained in 
various parƟ cular areas of knowledge:
- Health educaƟ on based on the acquisiƟ on of know-how and soŌ skills; 
- NutriƟ onal educaƟ on;
- Deworming;
- HIV/AIDS prevenƟ on;
- Malaria prevenƟ on.
96. Apart from training on malaria prevenƟ on, on which around 11% of both benefi ciary and non￾benefi ciary schools have received training, a larger proporƟ on of benefi ciary schools had received 
training in other areas. Training on deworming had been provided in two thirds of benefi ciary 
schools, compared with 36.8% of non-benefi ciary schools. In the case of nutriƟ onal educaƟ on, the 
proporƟ on of benefi ciary schools having received it (38.5%) is more than three Ɵ mes that of non￾benefi ciary schools (11.1%).
4.2.6 Quality of reading educaƟ on
97. The quality of reading educaƟ on is shown by the situaƟ onal analysis of the assessment of pupils’ 
reading skills, assessment of pupils’ concentraƟ on, pupils’ aƩ endance rates, teachers’ aƩ endance 
rates, and an assessment of teacher training.
98. Given that the schools in the survey are equipped with desks and benches and have a minimum of 
teaching material; the results of the survey show that pupils’ and teachers’ aƩ endance rates are on 
the whole acceptable.
99. Consequently, many pupils do not have the basic level of reading required, even though they aƩ end 
classes beyond year one of primary (CP1). Several factors are responsible for these problems:
e lack of quality training of teachers (some have been recruited without training: volunteers);
e inadequate training (one year’s training at vocaƟ onal learning and training centres - CAFOP);
e lack of capacity-building of teachers in the fi eld (ongoing training);
e lack of adequate management of educaƟ onal advisers and IEP;
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.20: ProporƟ on of schools with teachers who have been trained, according to topic and school type
33
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
e lack of adequate teaching material for reading educaƟ on/teaching in class (boards, exercise books, 
programmes, text books, teachers’ guides, etc.);
e lack of adequate supplies available to pupils (notebooks, pens, exercise books);
e poverty of pupils’ parents;
e poor pracƟ ce of the teaching method (“syllabic” method);
e lack of books in the pupil’s environment apart from school textbooks at home;
e lack of school libraries;
e illiteracy of parents, parƟ cularly of the mother.
 Thus, for improvement of children’s reading in school age, quality reading educaƟ on is needed, 
based on:
e quality teacher training;
e two years training at vocaƟ onal learning and training centres (CAFOP);
e capacity-building of teachers in the fi eld through ongoing training;
e adequate management of educaƟ onal advisers and the InsƟ tute for Popular EducaƟ on (IEP);
e supporƟ ng schools with adequate teaching material for reading educaƟ on/teaching in class 
(boards, exercise books, programmes, text books, teachers’ guides, etc.).
e adequate supplies available to pupils (notebooks, pens, exercise books);
e creaƟ on of income-generaƟ ng acƟ viƟ es for pupils’ parents;
e verifi caƟ on of good pracƟ ce of the teaching method (“syllabic” method);
e supporƟ ng the supply of books in the pupil’s environment apart from school textbooks at home;
e supporƟ ng the seƫ ng up of school libraries;
e supporƟ ng parents’ literacy training of parents, parƟ cularly of mothers.
34
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
4.3 INCREASED USE OF HEALTH AND NUTRITION PRACTICES
100. The canteen management commiƩ ee in each locality comprises fi ve members from the community 
who assist the canteen manager (a teacher) and canteen staff (a cook and a helper) collecƟ ng and 
managing community donaƟ ons and from producƟ on groups supporƟ ng the canteen. With a view 
to the local communiƟ es’ gradually taking over the canteen supply and management, the seƫ ng 
up of management commiƩ ees has been encouraged at all the school canteens in the country.
4.3.1 Management commiƩ ees’ level of awareness of good pracƟ ce in terms of health 
 and hygiene.
4.3.1.1 Existence of management commiƩ ees at project benefi ciary canteens 
101. Among MGD programme benefi ciary schools, 67.3% state that they have a management commiƩ ee.
102. The objecƟ ve at the end of the project is to have set up a management commiƩ ee in each school 
over the fi ve-year duraƟ on of the project. Therefore, the bodies responsible for implemenƟ ng these 
commiƩ ees will work towards achieving this objecƟ ve by supplying informaƟ on, raising awareness, 
mobilising communiƟ es and providing training.
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.21 ProporƟ on of schools with a canteen management commiƩ ee
35
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
4.3.1.2 Training of canteen managers 
103. The smooth running of the school feeding programme by the management commiƩ ees requires 
adequate knowledge of issues such as stock control, nutriƟ on, health, hygiene, healthy food 
preparaƟ on and food safety.
104. The analysis of survey data indicates that 62.2% of both men and women asked have received at 
least one training course as part of their canteen management tasks.
105. In this regard, the objecƟ ve of the MGD project is for each project benefi ciary locality to have a 
management commiƩ ee trained in best pracƟ ce on canteen management.
106. During implementaƟ on, eff orts should be made to update the members of the 37.8% of management 
commiƩ ees who have not received any training and, if necessary, to strengthen the capacity among 
management commiƩ ee members who state that they have received at least one course from the 
package of knowledge required.
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.22: ProporƟ on of canteen managers having received at least one training course
Figure 4.23: ProporƟ on of members having received the various training courses
36
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
4.3.1.3 Managers’ level of knowledge of health and hygiene good pracƟ ce
107. As regards the knowledge of health and hygiene pracƟ ces, the target for the indicator is for 90% of 
members of management commiƩ ees to master at least three good pracƟ ces. The survey shows 
that almost all the members of the management commiƩ ees have a good knowledge of the subject. 
Indeed, 89.6% of men and women on each management commiƩ ee know about at least three good 
pracƟ ces. The target value has almost been met. During the implementaƟ on, as well as enabling 
the members of new management commiƩ ees to reach the required share of members with good 
pracƟ ce, it would be worth strengthening the capacity of the members of exisƟ ng management 
commiƩ ees so as to pass the target value.
4.3.2 Level of knowledge of best pracƟ ce in the healthy preparaƟ on of foods and food storage
4.3.2.1 Knowledge of storage best pracƟ ce
108. Storage best pracƟ ce covers all the arrangements for the proper storage and conservaƟ on of food 
and non-food products.
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.24: Managers’ level of knowledge of health and hygiene best pracƟ ce
Figure 4.25: Level of knowledge of storage best pracƟ ce
37
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
109. The fi ndings of the baseline survey indicate that 74.1% of men and women on management 
commiƩ ees are able to cite at least three best pracƟ ces for the storage and conservaƟ on of food 
and non-food products that they apply on a daily basis in their canteens. 
110. The level of knowledge of food storage and conservaƟ on aimed for in the MGD project, is: 90% 
of men and 90% of women members of canteen management commiƩ ees master and adopt at 
least three best pracƟ ces in the management of their canteens. The various training courses and 
capacity-building envisaged in project implementaƟ on should therefore allow commiƩ ee members’ 
knowledge to be improved in this respect.
4.3.2.2 Managers’ level of knowledge of healthy food preparaƟ on best pracƟ ce
111. The baseline situaƟ on as regards benefi ciary school canteen management commiƩ ee members’ 
knowledge is as follows: 72.2% of men and women members of the school canteen management 
commiƩ ees have good knowledge of best pracƟ ce in the healthy preparaƟ on of foods (knowledge 
of at least three best pracƟ ces according to the MGD indicator). That proporƟ on of members of 
management commiƩ ees with best pracƟ ce in the healthy preparaƟ on of foods should be improved 
over the course of MGD project implementaƟ on to achieve at least the target of 90% of men and 
women set for the MGD indicator. 
4.3.3 Variety of diet at school
112. In order to assess the variety of school meals supplied to children at school, data on the average 
number of school days a month during which mulƟ -forƟfi ed or at least four food groups were 
supplied to children were collected during the baseline survey in the 613 treatment schools. 
113. The seven food groups considered were cereals, tubers and root vegetables, legumes and nuts, 
dairy products, meat, fi sh and off al, eggs, high vitamin A fruit and vegetables, and other fruit and 
vegetables.
114. Analysis of the data from the baseline survey shows that the average number of school days on 
which at least four food groups or mulƟ -forƟfi ed foods were served to children at MGD school 
canteens was an average of 4 out of 6 days of operaƟ on during March 2016 (the month prior to the 
survey). 
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.26: ProporƟ on of managers with a good knowledge of best pracƟ ce in the safe preparaƟ on of food
38
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
115. The target for this indicator is that children consume at least four food groups or mulƟ -forƟfi ed 
foods on at least 80% of the days the school canteen is operaƟ ng each month. Thus, 47.1% of MGD 
schools have provided pupils at least four food groups or mulƟ -forƟfi ed foods in their canteens on 
at least 80% of the days canteens were operaƟ ng in the month of March 2016 (the month prior to 
the survey). 
116. At the 47.1% of school canteens where the diet is varied, the most frequently consumed food groups 
were: cereals (97.7%); meat, fi sh and off al (81.8%); high vitamin A fruit and vegetables (79.5%); 
legumes and nuts (75%); and other fruit and vegetables (68.2%). Tubers and root vegetables are 
consumed at very few schools (11%).
4.3.4 Access to drinking water and hygiene condiƟ ons
117. To measure access to drinking water and hygiene condiƟ ons, the baseline survey examined both in 
benefi ciary and non-benefi ciary schools.:
e ProporƟ on of schools with a water point 
e ProporƟ on of schools with suitable latrines
The survey found that less than half of schools had a water point. 
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.27: ProporƟ on of schoolchildren who consume the following food groups through the school meals programme
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.28: ProporƟ on of schools with a water supply and main water sources
39
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
118. The main sources of water remain village pumps/boreholes, taps (running water from the water 
uƟ lity SODECI) and in some cases improved or tradiƟ onal wells. Most of these water supply points 
are located on the school premises (58%), while others (42%) involve travelling a certain distance to 
reach the water supply. Despite the availability of water points, 35% of schools report diffi culƟ es (at 
the Ɵ me of the survey) accessing water, mainly due to breakdowns of the village pump and water 
sources drying up. 
119. The situaƟ on regarding hygiene condiƟ ons is worrying. Less than half of the schools (47%) have 
latrines. Schools in the intervenƟ on are beƩ er equipped with latrines than control schools. In most 
cases, latrines have been constructed taking boys’ and girls’ specifi c needs into account. Thus, the 
majority of latrines have been built such that boys and girls have separate blocks. However, eff orts 
need to be made to ensure there are separate blocks for teachers and pupils.
120. AddiƟ onally, at almost all schools, children wash their hands before meals. However, the data 
do not say whether or not there are adequate hand-washing faciliƟ es at the schools. ParƟ cular 
aƩ enƟ on should be paid to this informaƟ on at the follow-up stage.
4.3.5 Access to prevenƟ ve health measures
121. Pupils are given access to prevenƟ ve health measures through prevenƟ ve health training, deworming 
and with the provision of micronutrients. In the case of the laƩ er, pupils received deworming and 
micronutrients at 67% and 47% of schools. Schools in the intervenƟ on benefi ted more from these 
measures than control schools.
122. As regards training on prevenƟ ve health, only a third of schools benefi ted from training of pupils 
on health educaƟ on (37%), HIV/AIDS prevenƟ on (37%), and malaria prevenƟ on (27%). These 
proporƟ ons did not vary between intervenƟ on and control schools. Training on prevenƟ ve 
healthcare was provided to teachers to enable them to off er pupils beƩ er prevenƟ ve healthcare 
guidance.
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.29: ProporƟ on of schools with sanitary faciliƟ es
40
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
4.3.6 Access to preparaƟ on and storage equipment
123. The majority of schools targeted by the intervenƟ on have storage and preparaƟ on equipment.
124. As regards storage equipment, among schools with a food storage area, 60% have stores and 40% 
have other venƟ lated premises. Only 17% of schools use modern pallets, compared with 83% that 
use tradiƟ onal ones. These data show that while schools have storage premises, in most cases they 
are precarious.
125. As regards preparaƟ on equipment, over three quarters of schools have a kitchen. In terms of where 
meals are eaten, more than half of schools (58%) have solidly constructed dining rooms, while 23% 
are built from temporary materials. And in 19% of schools, pupils eat their meals in the classroom.
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.30: ProporƟ on of schools having benefi ted from prevenƟ ve health measures
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.31: Type of storage equipment
41
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
4.3.7 Agricultural groups supporƟ ng school canteens
126. Of the 613 primary schools targeted by the McGovern-Dole project, 202 schools benefi t from the 
support of an agricultural group, represenƟ ng a coverage rate of 33%. This proporƟ on varies from 
region to region. Thus, the regions of Bagoué (42%) and Bounkani (41%) have the highest coverage 
rates, exceeding the average of the seven regions addressed by the McGovern-Dole project as a 
whole. 
127. The majority of the agricultural groups supplying canteens (84%) are run by women, most of whom 
have no schooling. The average size of these groups is 91 people. These are generally women (85) 
accompanied by a minority of men (6). Agricultural group members are relaƟ vely young, with the 
majority (60%) in the 15 to 40 year age range. However, 7% of members are aged over 60. 
128. As regards their funcƟ oning, more than half of these groups (69%) have legal status and 45% have 
a savings account. More than half of agricultural groups (64%) have benefi ted from support in 
the form of materials for farming (82%) or stock-rearing (8%), fi nance (9%) or training (37%). This 
support has been provided by DCS, WFP and certain NGOs.
129. Agricultural groups face constraints that limit their acƟ viƟ es. Access to land is one of the biggest 
constraints 52% of groups have to face (as they are not landowners). Of these groups, 46% borrow 
land and 6% rent it for cash. In addiƟ on to this constraint, the groups face problems of availability 
of seeds, ferƟ lisers and plant health products, small agricultural items, problems managing water 
and technical management.
42
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
4.4 FOOD SECURITY AND NUTRITION
4.4.1 Household food consumpƟ on score
130. The analysis of households’ food insecurity in this report is based on the use of the food consumpƟ on 
score (FCS) as a proxy for food insecurity. FCS is a composite indicator simultaneously refl ecƟ ng 
food diversity, the frequency and relaƟ ve nutriƟ onal contribuƟ on of each product and food group 
consumed by a household over the seven days preceding the survey. The method of calculaƟ ng the 
food consumpƟ on score is set out in the WFP food security analysis guidelines.1
131. The fi ndings of the baseline survey show households’ and children’s food consumpƟ on to be good. 
Just 3.7% of households of MGD school pupils and 4.2% of households of non-MGD school pupils 
(Figure 4.42) had inadequate food consumpƟ on (poor or borderline). 
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.33: ProporƟ on of households with inadequate food consumpƟ on (poor or borderline), by type of school
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.34: ProporƟ on of households of girls in grades 4 and 5 with inadequate food consumpƟ on (poor or borderline), 
by type of school
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.32: Quality of household’s food consumpƟ on, by school type
1
United NaƟ ons World Food Programme (WFP). January 2009. Comprehensive Food Security & Vulnerability Analysis Guidelines. Rome, Italy.
43
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
132. The project aims to ensure that the proporƟ on of households of pupils at benefi ciary schools whose 
food consumpƟ on is inadequate does not exceed 20%. The reference level for food consumpƟ on is 
posiƟ vely well below this target (see Figure 4.34).
133. The MGD project envisages providing take-home dry raƟ ons for households of girls in grades 4 and 5.
134. The fi ndings of the baseline survey show that the proporƟ on of households of girls in grades 4 and 
5 with inadequate food consumpƟ on (poor or borderline) varies greatly according to school type. 
While well below the target (<20%), the proporƟ on of households of girls in grades 4 and 5 at non￾MGD schools with inadequate food consumpƟ on is higher than that of girls in grades 4 and 5 at 
MGD schools. 
4.4.2 Household dietary diversity score
135. With a view to measuring the quality of households’ diets and compleƟ ng the analysis of food 
consumpƟ on performed using the food consumpƟ on score, the dietary diversity score was also 
collected during the baseline survey. This measures the number of diff erent food groups consumed 
by the household in the seven days prior to the survey. 
Table 4.11: Household dietary diversity score (average), by school type
MGD SCHOOLS NONͳMGD SCHOOLS TARGET
Dietary diversity score (average) 6.01 6.06 ≥4,5
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
136. Out of a total of 7 food groups used to calculate the score, the average baseline dietary diversity 
score is 6, irrespecƟ ve of school type. This value is above the target (≥4.5) set for this indicator.
 Table 4.12: Household dietary diversity score (average) for girls in 4th+5th grade, by school type
MGD SCHOOLS NONͳMGD SCHOOLS TARGET
Grade 4 (CM1) 6.13 5.86 ≥4.5
Grade 5 (CM2) 6.06 5.94 ≥4.5
Grades 4&5 (CM) 6.09 5.89 ≥4.5
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
137. Table 4.20 gives the dietary diversity score of the households of girls in 4th and 5th grades. The 
situaƟ on is the same for households of girls in 4th and 5th grades in MGD schools (6.09) and non￾MGD schools (5.89), which both remain above the target (≥4.5).
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.35: ProporƟ on of households having consumed food groups, by school type
44
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
138. The most frequently consumed food groups by households of pupils of both MGD and non-MGD 
schools are cereals and tubers, vegetables (high vitamin A, green vegetables, etc.), animal proteins 
(meat, off al, fi sh and shellfi sh), and fruit (high vitamin A and other fruit). Legumes and dairy 
products are consumed by two out of three households. 
139. Overall, almost all households consume foods rich in micronutrients, parƟ cularly those rich in 
vitamin A, proteins and iron. 
140. The dietary diversity of households of girls in 4th and 5th grades at schools targeted by the MGD 
project was slightly higher than that of households of girls in 4th and 5th grades at non-benefi ciary 
schools. These diff erences have been observed for all food groups and equally for micronutrient￾rich foods (see Figures 4.46 and 4.47). 
4.4.3 Coping strategies
141. Households used various strategies over the course of the seven days preceding the survey to 
cope with the food diffi culƟ es they face (subsƟ tuƟ on, reducƟ on of the quanƟ ty of food or number 
of daily meals, reducƟ on in the share eaten by the adults so as to allow more for the children). 
Households’ behaviour has been evaluated using a score (reduced coping strategies index - RCSI) 
refl ecƟ ng the frequency with which adaptaƟ on strategies are resorted to and the perceived risks of 
these strategies. The higher the score, the higher the level of food insecurity.
142. In order to measure households’ level of vulnerability to food shortages that can cause behaviour 
changes that are frequently harmful for the household, the baseline survey calculated the reduced 
coping strategies index. For more informaƟ on on the reduced coping strategies index, please refer 
to the CSI manual.2
143. The baseline survey found the average coping strategies index for MGD school households (3) to be 
slightly higher than that of households of pupils at non-benefi ciary schools (2.8). 
2 Daniel Maxwell, Richard Caldwell. January 2008. The Coping Strategies Index Field Methods Manual. CooperaƟ ve for Assistance and Relief Everywhere, Inc. (CARE).
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016 Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.36: proporƟ on of households of girls in 4th and 5th 
grades at MGD schools having consumed each food group
Figure 4.37: proporƟ on of households of girls in 4th and 5th 
grades at non-MGD schools having consumed each food group
45
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
 Table 4.13: Reduced coping strategies index (average), by school type
MGD SCHOOLS NONͳMGD SCHOOLS
Reduced coping strategy index (average) 3 2.8
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
144. Households of girls in grades 4 and 5 have less recourse to coping strategies than households 
overall. As Figure 4.38 below shows, those in MGD schools (2.4) have more recourse to strategies 
than those in non-MGD schools (2.2).
145. Analysing the coping strategies adopted by households of MGD school pupils, the strategies most 
oŌ en used are the consumpƟ on of less favoured, i.e. cheaper, foods (25.7%), reducing the quanƟ ty 
of food served at meals (19.1%), and reducing the quanƟ ty of food served to adults in favour of 
young children (13.9%).
146. As regards non-MGD schools, they have had more recourse to cheaper, less favoured, foods 
(26.4%), reducing the amount of food served at mealƟ mes (15.5%) and aid from relaƟ ves or friends 
(13.4%). 
147. Reducing the number of meals a day is the least used strategy by both MGD households (8.6%) and 
non-MGD households (5.7%).
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.38: Reduced coping strategies index (average) of households of girls in 4th and 5th grades, by school type
Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016 Source: EBCS/MC GOVERN DOLE, 2016
Figure 4.39: Coping strategies in relaƟ on to food 
adopted by households (MGD schools)
Figure 4.40: Coping strategies in relaƟ on to food 
adopted by households (non-MGD schools)
46
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The results of the baseline survey leads to the following observaƟ ons, as well as strategic and operaƟ onal 
recommendaƟ ons:
ObservaƟ ons
• Both girls and boys have very weak reading skills.
• Food management and handling by school cooks is at an acceptable level with 62% of canteen 
managers having at least received training in healthy food preparaƟ on, storage and conservaƟ on of 
both foods and non-food items.
• The provision of diverse and nutriƟ ous meals requires improvement with less than half of schools 
having a good dietary diversity.
• Some schools lack the availability of adequate canteens for children to have their school lunches, 
noƟ ng that 23% of school canteens are built from temporary materials and in 19% of schools, pupils 
eat their lunch in the classroom.
• Access to water and sanitaƟ on faciliƟ es remains a challenge noƟ ng that only 58% of schools have a 
water point on the school premises and less than half of the schools (47%) have latrines.
RecommendaƟ ons
Strategic
• Strengthen alignment between the next naƟ onal school canteens strategy with the naƟ onal educaƟ on 
strategy to provide quality educaƟ on to all Ivorian children.
• Strengthen alignment between the next naƟ onal school canteens strategy with the mulƟ -sectoral 
naƟ onal nutriƟ on plan to integrate nutriƟ on-sensiƟ ve approaches at community level.
• Strengthen coordinaƟ on with educaƟ on development partners to support the Ministry of NaƟ onal 
EducaƟ on in addressing the gaps in the educaƟ on sector.
• Establish a coordinaƟ on mechanism that fosters eff ecƟ ve linkages between the key sectors, 
specifi cally EducaƟ on, Health, Infrastructure, Agriculture, Social Aff airs, Animal and Fish Resources, 
Women, Water and Forestry, that are involved in creaƟ ng a healthy, safe environment for students, 
and enhance opportuniƟ es for improved learning through an integrated school canteens programme. 
• Develop a naƟ onal strategy to support small-holder agriculture producers linked with the naƟ onal 
school canteens programme for a sustainable home-grown model.
OperaƟ onal
• Increase coverage of training of canteen managers in hygiene, healthy food preparaƟ on, storage and 
conservaƟ on of food. 
• Promote collaboraƟ on with other educaƟ on sector actors (AFD, UNICEF) through the educaƟ on 
working group to synergize acƟ ons in areas of conversion, including improving access to water and 
sanitaƟ on faciliƟ es, as well as programmes that improve the quality of educaƟ on. 
• Encourage and involve the local communiƟ es in the schools infrastructure building and rehabilitaƟ on.
• Encourage community parƟ cipaƟ on in the provision of diverse food commodiƟ es to the school 
canteens through agricultural groups. 
• Ensure the eff ecƟ ve implementaƟ on of the reading-learning curriculum to improve the reading skills 
of girls and boys.
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
ANNEX I: Baseline and target for output and outcomes indicators
48
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
48
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
49
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
49
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
50
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
50
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
51
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
51
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
52
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
ANNEX II
53
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
54
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
55
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
56
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
57
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
58
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
59
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
60
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
ANNEX III: School canteen manager quesƟ onnaire 
61
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
62
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
63
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
64
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
ANNEX IV: Women producƟ on group quesƟ onnaire 
65
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
66
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
67
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
68
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
ANNEX V: Household quesƟ onnaire
69
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
70
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
71
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
72
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
73
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
74
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
75
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
76
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
77
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
78
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
79
CÔTEͳD’IVOIRE ͳ BASELINE SURVEY ON SCHOOL CANTEENS ͳ EBCS 2016 ͳ REPORT
ANNEX I: Baseline and target for output and outcomes indicators
Photo Credits- Front and back cover: WFP/Olivier Flament