BENIN McGovern-Dole International Food 
for Education and Child Nutrition Program
Keun Faaba Project 
Midterm Evaluation
5/6/2021
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 report can be request by emailing FAS. 
Monitoring.Evaluation@usda.gov.
Midterm Report – Keun Faaba Project in Benin, McGovern-Dole 
Program
Program: McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition
Agreement Number: FFE-680-2017/027-00
Funding Year: Fiscal Year 2017
Project Duration: 5 Years
Implemented by: Catholic Relief Services
Evaluation Authored by: Evaluation Technology for Development (Et4d)
Karla Giuliano Sarr, Isabelle McMahon, Michel Rousseau, Alice Michelazzi
iii
Table of Contents
List of Figures................................................................................................................................................ v
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................... vii
List of Acronyms........................................................................................................................................... ix
Executive Summary...................................................................................................................................... xi
Project Background and Purpose............................................................................................................. xi
Evaluation Questions, Design, Methods and Limitations........................................................................ xi
Findings and Conclusions........................................................................................................................ xii
Performance Measurement Plan Update........................................................................................... xii
Relevance............................................................................................................................................xiii
Coherence ...........................................................................................................................................xiii
Effectiveness.......................................................................................................................................xiii
Efficiency .............................................................................................................................................xiv
Impact .................................................................................................................................................xiv
Sustainability....................................................................................................................................... xv
Recommendations..................................................................................................................................xvi
1. Introduction and Purpose .....................................................................................................................1
1.1. Project Context .............................................................................................................................1
1.2. Project Description........................................................................................................................2
1.3. Results Framework........................................................................................................................4
1.4. Purpose of the Evaluation.............................................................................................................6
2. Evaluation Design and Methodology ....................................................................................................6
2.1. Evaluation Questions....................................................................................................................6
2.2. Evaluation Design..........................................................................................................................9
2.3. Sampling Methods........................................................................................................................9
Quantitative sample..............................................................................................................................9
Qualitative sample ..............................................................................................................................11
2.4. Data Collection Methods ............................................................................................................12
Fieldwork.................................................................................................................................................14
Evaluation Team......................................................................................................................................15
Quality Control and Review Board..........................................................................................................15
Assuring an ethical approach—Review Board....................................................................................15
iv
Field quality control ............................................................................................................................16
Data quality control ............................................................................................................................16
2.5. Data Analysis Methods ...............................................................................................................16
Quantitative analysis...........................................................................................................................16
Qualitative analysis.............................................................................................................................17
2.6. Evaluation Limitations.................................................................................................................17
3. Findings...............................................................................................................................................19
Performance Measurement Plan Update – Indicator Review................................................................19
Evaluation Questions..............................................................................................................................21
1. Relevance....................................................................................................................................21
2. Coherence ...................................................................................................................................41
3. Effectiveness...............................................................................................................................45
4. Efficiency .....................................................................................................................................64
5. Impact .........................................................................................................................................77
6. Sustainability...............................................................................................................................98
4. Recommendations............................................................................................................................109
Annex 1: Keun Faaba Theory of Change ...................................................................................................114
Annex 2: Details of Quantitative Sample ..................................................................................................117
Annex 3: Details of Qualitative Sample.....................................................................................................123
Annex 4: List of document reviewed ........................................................................................................125
Annex 5: Evaluation matrix .......................................................................................................................129
Annex 6: Data Collection Tools.................................................................................................................136
Annex 7: Additional Health & Hygiene test results...................................................................................205
Annex 8: COVID Protocol for Data Collection ...........................................................................................207
Annex 9: Et4d Team members for mid-term evaluation..........................................................................209
Annex 10: Statistical weighting & adjustment factors..............................................................................212
Annex 11: Indicator analysis details..........................................................................................................214
Annex 12: Additional quantitative tables and graphs...............................................................................215
Annex 13: Overview of literacy achievement index .................................................................................219
Annex 14: Comprehensive EGRA Results..................................................................................................220
Annex 15: Terms of Reference..................................................................................................................230
Annex 16: Conflict of Interest Form..........................................................................................................255
v
List of Figures 
Figure 1: Intervention Map ...........................................................................................................................1
Figure 2: Results Framework.........................................................................................................................5
Figure 3: Data collection methods used in midterm evaluation ................................................................13
Figure 4: Percentage of respondents very satisfied with Keun Faaba activities by type............................22
Figure 5: Stakeholder perceptions of the utility of alternative radio programming ..................................33
Figure 6: Teacher and head teacher perceptions that programming will help students catch up ............33
Figure 7: Extent to which Keun Faaba activities promoted continued engagement during closures........33
Figure 8: Posters publicizing school feeding outside Benin's congressional building ................................37
Figure 9: Keun Faaba activities functioning well according to teachers (n=100) .......................................47
Figure 10: Difficulties WASH Clubs face according to principals (n=28).....................................................49
Figure 11: Community Library.....................................................................................................................53
Figure 12: Literacy techniques teachers report implementing most effectively (n=87) ............................57
Figure 13: Comparison of project and control parents’ views on whether teacher absenteeism is a 
recurring problem at their school...............................................................................................................60
Figure 14: Comparison of teacher-reported absences at project and control schools..............................60
Figure 15: Volunteers’ satisfaction with compensation (%) .......................................................................67
Figure 16: Latrines Built with CLTS..............................................................................................................72
Figure 17: School Garden in Malanville ......................................................................................................78
Figure 18: Unfinished Headteacher House .................................................................................................79
Figure 19: Comparison of project and control group parents' perceptions of the importance of education 
for boys and for girls...................................................................................................................................84
Figure 20: Comparison of children’s handwashing and latrine use for CLTS and non-CLTS project schools
....................................................................................................................................................................85
Figure 21: Ways teaching has improved due to Keun Faaba trainings according to principals and teachers
....................................................................................................................................................................86
Figure 22: Teacher and principal perceptions of Keun Kaaba's impact on quality instruction ..................88
Figure 23: Covid Procedure for Food Distribution ......................................................................................89
Figure 24: Teachers’ and principals’ perceptions on if project activities affected girls and boys differently
....................................................................................................................................................................91
Figure 26: Teachers' impressions of proportions of students aware of and applying good hygiene 
practices......................................................................................................................................................96
vi
Figure 26: Activities in which parents participated voluntarily within past three years, according to 
principals (n=50) .......................................................................................................................................103
Figure 28: Principals' perceptions of the compatibility of Keun Faaba methods with national education 
objectives, in particular the reading curriculum (n=50) ...........................................................................106
Figure 29: Principals' awareness of strategies promoting girls' education (n=31)...................................108
vii
List of Tables 
Table 1: Overview of midterm evaluation participants............................................................................... xi
Table 2: Key Keun Faaba Indicators with baseline and midterm measures............................................... xii
Table 3: Literacy index per school type ...................................................................................................... xv
Table 4: Distribution of control and treatment schools by zone and commune........................................10
Table 5: Midterm quantitative sample broken down by activity (includes project and control schools)..10
Table 6: Summary of key informant interviews by category and gender...................................................11
Table 7: Summary of focus group discussions by category and gender.....................................................11
Table 9: Limitations, challenges and mitigation strategies.........................................................................17
Table 10: Key Keun Faaba indicators with baseline and midterm measures .............................................20
Table 11: Summary of school feeding programs in Benin ..........................................................................38
Table 12: Comparison of original and actual project milestone dates.......................................................64
Table 13: Comparison table of baseline, project monitoring and midterm indicators with life-of-project 
(LOP) targets ...............................................................................................................................................81
Table 14: Comparison of EGRA subtask results by school type..................................................................87
Table 15: Literacy index per school type ....................................................................................................87
Table 16: Literacy index per school type and gender.................................................................................91
Table 17: Mean scores by school type and gender.....................................................................................91
Table 18: Comparison of baseline and midterm proportions of students meeting benchmark for 
comprehension ...........................................................................................................................................94
Table 19: Mean scores on comprehension subtask (%) by school type, gender and evaluation timepoint
....................................................................................................................................................................95
Table 20: Summary of nutrition, health and hygiene-related indicators ..................................................95
Table A1: Target quantitative sample size and minimum detectable effect size .....................................117
Table A2: School enrollment characteristics.............................................................................................117
Table A4: Teacher summary statistics ......................................................................................................119
Table A5: Teacher age and years of experience .......................................................................................119
Table A6: Principal summary statistics .....................................................................................................119
Table A7: Parent summary statistics.........................................................................................................120
Table A8: Classroom observation and student summary statistics..........................................................121
Table A9: EGRA sample summary statistics..............................................................................................122
viii
Table A10: Detailed list of key informant interviews by category and gender.........................................123
Table A11: Detailed list of focus group discussions by category and gender...........................................123
Table A12: Data collection sources informing indicator results...............................................................214
Table A13: WASH Clubs’ level of activity by zone (n=49) .........................................................................215
Table A14: Comparison of control and project parents' responses to "Teacher absence is a recurring 
problem in your school"............................................................................................................................216
Table A15: Food groups consumed by children, control schools compared with project schools ..........218
Table A16: Number of meals consumed by children, control schools compared to project schools ......218
Table A17: Literacy achievement index point scale..................................................................................219
Table A18: Proportion of Students Meeting the Improved Literacy Indicator.........................................220
Table A20 Distribution of Reading Comprehension Scores by School Type.............................................220
Table A21: Mean Scores by School Type ..................................................................................................221
Table A22: Mean Scores by School Type and Gender ..............................................................................221
Table A23: Mean Scores by School Type and Urban/Rural Location........................................................222
Table A24: Zero Scores by School Type ....................................................................................................222
Table A25: Zero Scores by School Type and Gender ................................................................................223
Table A26: Zero Scores by School Type and Urban/Rural Location..........................................................223
Table A27: Percentage of student per reading category .........................................................................224
Table A28: Literacy Index Per School Type ...............................................................................................225
Table A29: Literacy Index Per School Type and Gender ...........................................................................225
Table A30: Literacy Index by Commune for Control Schools....................................................................226
Table A31: Literacy Index by Commune for Program Schools..................................................................226
Table A32: Literacy Index by Commune for Program Schools by Location (Urban/Rural).......................226
Table A33: Regression Coefficient for Student Characteristics ................................................................227
Table A34: Regression Coefficient for Reading in Class............................................................................227
Table A35: Regression Coefficient for French Reading Books at Home ...................................................228
Table A36: Regression Coefficient for Family Literacy..............................................................................228
Table A37: Regression Coefficient for Home Study and Reading Habits..................................................228
Table A38: Regression Coefficient for Good Grades.................................................................................229
Table A39: Regression Coefficient for Bad Grades...................................................................................229
ix
List of Acronyms 
Acronym Full Term
AAM Assessor Accuracy Measurement
AME Mothers’ Association (Association des Mères d'Élèves)
APE Parents’ Association (Association des Parents d'Élèves)
ATPC Community Led Total Sanitation (Assainissement Total Par la Communauté)
CCS Head of School Districts (Chef de circonscription)
CRP Education District Officer (Chef de Région Pédagogiques)
CI Grade 1 (Cours d’Initiation)
CLTS Community Led Total Sanitation (idem ATPC)
CP Grade 2 (Cours Préparatoire)
CP Educational Adviser (Conseiller pédagogique)
COGES Canteen Management Committee (Comité de Gestion des Cantines scolaires)
CRS Catholic Relief Services
CSO Civil Society Organization
CWPM Correct Words per Minute
DANA Direction of Food and Applied Nutrition
DAS Direction of School Feeding (Direction de l’Alimentation Scolaire)
DDEMP Departmental Direction of Preschool and Primary Education (Directon 
Départemental des Enseignements Maternal et Primaire)
DDHAS Direction of Basic Hygiene and Sanitation (Direction département de l'hygiène et 
de l'assainissement de base)
DEP Direction of Primary Education
DEMP Direction of Preschool and Primary Education
DIIP Direction of Pedagogical Inspection and Innovation
EGRA Early Grade Reading Assessment
Et4d Education Technology for Development
FADEC Commune Development Support Funds (Fonds d'Appui au Developpement des 
Communes)
FFE Food for Education
FGD Focus Group Discussion
ICC Intraclass Correlation Coefficient
INFRE National Institute for Training and Research in Education
x
Acronym Full Term
KII Key Informant Interviews 
MEMP Ministry of Preschool and Primary Education
MT Metric Tons
ORF Oral Reading Fluency 
PfD Partners for Development
PHAST Participatory Health and Sanitation Transformation
PMP Performance Monitoring Plan
PNASI National Integrated School Feeding Programme (Programme National 
d’Alimentation Scolaire Intégré)
PPS Probability Proportion Sample
THR Take Home Ration
TOR Terms of Reference
UP Unité Pédagogique
URP Union Régionale des Producteurs
USDA United States Department of Agriculture
WASH Water Sanitation and Hygiene
WEI World Education, Inc.
xi
Executive Summary 
Project Background and Purpose 
Catholic Relief Services (CRS) is implementing a five-year (2018–2022) United States Department of 
Agriculture (USDA) McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Program (MGD) 
award. The project’s local name is Keun Faaba, which means “supporting education.” The key objective 
of the McGovern-Dole program is to reduce hunger and improve literacy in primary education. Keun 
Faaba provides school meals, teacher training, health, sanitation and hygiene interventions as well as 
other activities. Keun Faaba is currently in its fourth year. Project funding is just over US$21 million. CRS 
Benin works with sub-recipients World Education Inc. (WEI), Caritas Kandi, the Regional Union of 
Producers (Union Régionale des Producteurs Borgou-Alibori, URP-BA) and Partners for Development 
(PfD). The intended beneficiaries of the McGovern-Dole program are about 46,118 individuals, including 
primary and preschool schoolchildren, parents/caregivers, community farm producers and government 
officials. Keun Faaba targets 144 pre-primary and primary schools in 97 communities within the two 
departments of Borgou and Alibori. The project intervenes with the same primary schools and 
preschools as the previous project phase. It is important to note that the outbreak of the COVID-19 
pandemic resulted in a five-month closure of preschools and primary schools beginning March 30, 2020.
This midterm evaluation took place in January-February 2021 with the aim to ascertain (1) the current 
state of activity implementation related to effect and impact indicators; (2) the relevance of all 
interventions; (3) the effectiveness of implementation strategies and activities; and (4) project 
efficiency. The main audience for this evaluation is CRS and its implementing partners, including Benin’s 
relevant ministries, as well as the donor, USDA.
Evaluation Questions, Design, Methods and Limitations 
The midterm study is an impact evaluation with a quasi-experimental design. Six Development 
Assistance Committee criteria guide the evaluation: relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, 
impact and sustainability. Thirty-six detailed evaluation questions can be found within the main report.
The methodology is consistent with the mixed-methods approach used at baseline and combines key 
informant interviews, focus group discussions and document review with results from an Early Grade 
Reading Assessment (EGRA), surveys, school observations and attendance data. A total of 100 schools 
(50 project schools and 50 control schools), selected via two-stage cluster sampling, made up the 
quantitative sample. Purposeful selection guided the qualitative sample. Table 1 provides an overview. 
Table 1: Overview of midterm evaluation participants
Quantitative Sample Qualitative Sample
• 3,522 students
• 1,028 parents
• 100 principals
• 205 teachers
• 106 cooks
• 38 storekeepers
• 19 WASH Club members
• 37 parents
• 26 teaching staff
• 3 international officials
• 5 national officials
• 12 regional officials
• 32 program staff
• 2 donor staff
Evaluation Technology for Development (Et4d), an evaluation firm based in the United States, led both 
the baseline and midterm studies. The evaluation team was able to mitigate certain study limitations 
through the triangulation of multiple data sources and methods. These limitations included the 
unintended influence of enumerator presence during classroom observation and response bias, that is, 
xii
participants responding in a manner favorable to the evaluand. Findings from qualitative data are also 
not strictly representative, but they may be transferable and connect to the experiences of others. In 
addition, due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the study faced logistical challenges including a 
delayed evaluation start and the need to negotiate both remote data collection and quarantine 
measures. The evaluation team benefited from a close relationship with CRS, established at baseline, to 
mediate these issues. It is important to note that the COVID-19 pandemic presented limitations to both 
the evaluation and project implementation, as discussed below, however there were no schools closed 
during the evaluation.
Findings and Conclusions 
Performance Measurement Plan Update
Analysis of eight key project indicators demonstrates few improvements between midline and baseline 
results. Notable positive changes were observed for three indicators: indicator 3, percentage of students 
in target schools identified as attentive during class/instruction, and indicator 4, percentage of schools 
with soap and water at a handwashing station commonly used by students. This latter indicator saw a 40 
percentage point increase since baseline. The average student attendance rate also increased slightly. 
Table 2 displays baseline and midline indicator results. Later sections identify delays as well as 
challenging operational circumstances which may also account for lack of progress.
Table 2: Key Keun Faaba Indicators with baseline and midterm measures1
Indicator Baseline 
Value
Midline 
Value
Endline
Target
1 MGD INDICATOR 1: Percentage of students who, by the end of 
two grades of primary schooling, demonstrate that they can 
read and understand the meaning of grade level text 
Benchmark: 60% (3/5 correct answers)
1% 0.8% 10%
2 Percentage of parents who report spending time on literacy 
activities with their students in the preceding three days
31.1% 31.0% 45%
3 Percentage of students in target schools who are identified as 
attentive during class/instruction
67.6% 73.8% 75%
4 Percentage of schools with soap and water at a handwashing 
station commonly used by students
54.4% 94.1% 68%
5 Percentage of students in target schools who achieve a 
passing score on a test of good health and hygiene practices
Passing Score: 70%
34% 29.5% 40%
6 Literacy Achievement Index 35 33 45
7 MGD INDICATOR 2: Average student attendance rate in USDA￾supported classrooms/schools
88.2% 90% 95%
1 Green coloring indicates that results are improving. Bright green (#4) indicates that the midline value has 
surpassed the endline target. Yellow indicates maintenance of baseline results. Red indicates a decrease.
xiii
Indicator Baseline 
Value
Midline 
Value
Endline
Target
8 Percentage of Children receiving a minimum acceptable diet2 68.9% 51.6% 75%
Relevance
Findings demonstrate that the Keun Faaba project fulfills expectations and proves highly relevant in 
terms of intervention objectives and the project design responding to the needs of beneficiaries. The 
project approach is comprehensive and builds on previous projects. The Government of Benin’s action 
plan for the National Integrated School Feeding Program (PNASI) shows that CRS supports a highly 
visible and important initiative for the country and constitutes an integral component of the 
government’s strategy. Survey results also demonstrate generally very high parental and teacher 
satisfaction with Keun Faaba activities and that they find COVID-19 adaptations useful. Findings caution, 
however, against the overly simplistic view that improved school attendance will translate to improved 
educational outcomes. Rather, many other supporting factors also need to be in place for students to 
thrive. Specifically in regard to project adaptations addressing school closures during COVID-19, the 
evaluation concludes that measures remain imperfect but did respond to challenging circumstances.
Coherence
Findings from close analysis of relevant project and policy documents combined with findings from 
targeted interviews to demonstrate strong relationships between the Keun Faaba project and 1) the CRS 
2030 strategy and 2) the Government of Benin’s policy on school feeding programs. Keun Faaba aligns 
with the three principal components of Benin’s school feeding strategy, so that the government sees 
Keun Faaba as an extension of its reach. The limited scope of the Keun Faaba project allows CRS and 
partners to provide inspiration and innovation, further enhancing the Government of Benin’s strategy. 
Effectiveness
Phase II of the MGD17/Keun Faaba project has a heightened focus on WASH activities at both the school 
and community levels. Most notably, findings demonstrate an increased emphasis on handwashing 
stations at school, creative approaches to helping younger children learn to use school latrines and 
WASH Clubs’ essential role in Keun Faaba’s approach. In terms of teachers promoting children’s literacy, 
Keun Faaba training has fostered the development of enhanced skills, though 15 percent of teachers 
surveyed did not benefit from any training. Self-reporting from teachers and school principals indicates 
that more than two-thirds (67%) of teachers regularly practice the integration of the five components of 
reading in their classrooms, while less than half (45%) use instructional games. In addition, the Keun 
Faaba approach promotes techniques inherent to the Ministry of Education’s newly developing￾curriculum focusing on phonics-based learning. As a result, Keun Faaba teachers are proactively 
preparing to implement important revisions to Benin’s reading strategy. Nonetheless, it bears mention 
that the time for teachers to implement new strategies has been limited, due in large part, to COVID-19 
school closures, and may partly account for limited visibility of the effects of newly adapted strategies.
2 Because of a change in the indicator calculation methodology, the indicator values are not comparable
xiv
“It’s the repetition that I liked. It’s the method, ‘I do, we do, you do,’ that motivates 
kids, and they find it interesting. All the kids get involved. I really like this method. It’s 
not just that some kids learn, it’s that all the kids learn." (Teacher, focus group)
As holds true for many early-grade reading projects, unpredictable teacher mobility remains a major 
hindering factor. Mobility refers to both project trained teachers leaving project schools for non-project 
schools as well as other teachers joining the school mid-year and not being able to benefit from training. 
While Keun Faaba plans major advocacy efforts to limit the mobility of trained teachers, COVID-19 
complications have delayed the launch of these efforts, leaving little time to address a complex issue. 
COVID-related delays have also greatly hampered the effectiveness of Keun Faaba’s strategies to 
improve teacher and student attendance as well as community engagement efforts. Nonetheless, 
findings demonstrate that project teachers are nearly half as likely to report being absent as teachers at 
control schools (32% compared to 59%), indicating that conditions in Keun Faaba schools foster better 
teacher attendance. At the same time, while great enthusiasm exists for incentives aimed at increasing 
student attendance, spot-checks at the time of data collection confirm no meaningful improvement in 
student attendance at project schools. Similarly, the evaluation finds that more than two-thirds of 
parents (67%) indicated having no knowledge of Keun Faaba activities and most notably amongst 
parents with the least amount of education. An improved communication strategy is warranted.
Efficiency
The midterm-evaluation examination of project efficiency in terms of time and financial resources finds 
the project to be extraordinarily delayed though on track financially. The project has suffered delays of 
up to 21 months for new activities and some project milestones, shortening the project’s time for 
implementation and target attainment. Internal factors hindering efficiency include contracting 
challenges that have delayed contract signature and payments, recruiting challenges related to the 
location of key positions in remote Kandi and a difficult rollout of a new finance and procurement 
system that has further aggravated initial delays. Significant external factors also complicate project 
implementation including lengthy teacher strikes at the very beginning of the project, insecurity, 
flooding, and of course, COVID-19. In addition, while improvements have been made, the project’s 
staffing structure of thematically specialized field agents for large areas of project communities requires 
revisiting to further enhance efficiency. The project’s infrastructure activities have also suffered multiple 
setbacks dating back to the previous MGD 2014 award. In terms of volunteer management, findings 
reveal that most School Canteen Management Committees and their volunteers report satisfactory 
efficiency, even though the rigor may not be as high as the project intended. Findings indicate that CLTS 
activities will likely fail in urban and peri-urban areas without a major change in approach. The 
evaluation team urges the project to consider advocacy efforts to foment political will for waste￾management campaigns in more populous areas. Lastly, infrastructure constitutes the greatest 
challenge facing Keun Faaba programming in the months ahead. The FY2021 work plan indicates that 
borehole/water points are still needed for 50 schools, while 9 schools must be connected to existing 
water systems, and 54 latrine cabins are to be constructed by March 2021.
Impact
The midterm evaluation identifies successful strategies that may be contributing to project results 
including the consultative process informing the WASH strategy, student WASH clubs that may lead to 
xv
improved student confidence and cleaner school environments and the promotion of CLTS in well-suited 
communities. The overall school-feeding activity also seems to be a success, with school gardens and 
community farms warranting special mention. In terms of measured impacts, however, findings show no 
to modest progress across project components at Year 4. While testimonials of parents’ heightened 
awareness of the importance of education exist, the midterm evaluation finds no statistically significant 
difference between Keun Faaba and control-group parents’ perceptions of the importance of education. 
Some promising findings regard educators asserting an improvement in the quality of their teaching as 
well as higher proportions of students in project groups saying that they are being called on daily by 
teachers. Similarly, the project also seems to be making gains in terms of children having accessible 
books at home and reading or studying French after school. EGRA results do not yet follow, however, 
and literacy index scores, as displayed in Table 3, show that project schools have lost the advantage they 
had at baseline over control schools and that comprehension scores have not improved. 
Table 3: Literacy index per school type
Baseline Control
Mean
Baseline Project
Mean
Difference Midterm
Control Mean
Midterm
Project Mean
Difference
Literacy Index 30.3 35.0 4.7* 34.2 32.7 -1.5
*p<0.05
Survey data and EGRA results in particular demonstrate no meaningful distinction in how the project’s 
various components affect girls and boys at midterm. As indicated above, however, school closures have 
stalled teacher trainings and greatly limited the time for teachers to implement new strategies, perhaps 
delaying the appearance of visible literacy-related results. Community engagement efforts similarly 
were stunted. Within this challenging operating environment, much effort and impeccable 
implementation are required for the project to catch up and demonstrate impact at endline.
Sustainability
Even with project delays and substantial obstacles to project implementation, findings from the 
midterm evaluation demonstrate important early indications of sustainability at all levels of project 
implementation. Nonetheless, no project-wide sustainability framework or plan exists, leaving each 
project component with its own conception of sustainability without a coherently articulated vision. 
Government officials have embraced the project’s WASH-Nutrition Integration Guide, and INFRE is 
revising its national curriculum to closely resemble Keun Faaba’s phonics-based approach. At the same 
time, the Government of Benin should consider further strengthening its policies and efforts to support 
local food provision and procurement.
“Everywhere I see that the project confirms the government’s attitudes towards 
education. I believe that the project even prepared us before the [COVID-19] virus 
arrived. So, everywhere the project conforms with the Benin education curriculum.” 
(Chief of Pedagogical Region, interview)
xvi
Recommendations 
The findings and conclusions lead to the following abridged recommendations. A more comprehensive 
list can be found within the main report. Where not explicit, parentheses indicate responsible parties.
Remaining project time:
a) Continue to focus education efforts on strong teacher training and efforts at the school-level to 
support changes in teacher practice. In-person and remote-communities of practice should be 
further leveraged, building on the positive experiences teachers reported during the school￾closure period. Further strengthen community engagement initiatives.
b) Develop a rapid reading diagnostic tool for use by teachers and chiefs of pedagogical regions.
c) CRS and its partners should keep working on improving the collaboration among the various 
sector field agents to bolster the overall efficiency of programming at the local level.
d) CRS should increase support for WASH Clubs to capitalize on positive experiences, particularly in 
terms of student-to-student learning. Suggestions include developing a guide for teacher 
advisors and providing training for teachers who support WASH club activities.
e) CRS needs to investigate and rectify its internal approval process for payment processing.
f) CRS and partners should increase efforts and resources available for advocacy efforts to address 
1) teacher-mobility policy, 2) waste management and 3) policies supporting local commodity 
provision and procurement. In terms of teacher mobility, support strategies that have worked in 
other settings including working closely with the government to ensure that project teachers are 
not transferred to non-project schools.
g) CRS should lead the articulation of a sustainability plan that will strengthen cohesion and guide 
project implementation until project close.
Future MGD projects:
h) Balance formal training activities with coaching and strengthening head teachers’ abilities to 
provide support. Concrete suggestions include using tablets with pre-loaded training resources 
and specific trainings for school principals to better support teacher colleagues.
i) Put into place a strategy to identify students with the greatest need and provide appropriate 
remedial support. Teacher training should emphasize formative assessment and mediation 
strategies.
j) At the end of project, Keun Faaba schools should transition to PNASI. In the event of a new 
project, the implementing partners should work with a new cohort of schools. (USDA)
k) Articulate a clear gender-equity strategy for future projects.
l) CRS should conduct needs assessments and feasibility studies for infrastructure components 
prior to project design to ensure appropriateness.
1
1.Introduction and Purpose 
1.1. Project Context 
Benin is one of the world’s poorest countries, with an annual gross domestic product (GDP) per capita of 
US$1,219, placing it below the Sub-Saharan Africa average of US$1,596.0F
3
The United Nations 
Development Program (UNDP) ranks it 158 out of 189 countries on the Human Development Index.1F
4
Poverty is highest in northern Benin, where Catholic Relief Services’ (CRS) McGovern-Dole program is 
implemented.
French is the official government language of Benin and the 
only language of instruction. However, indigenous 
languages such as Fon and Yoruba are commonly spoken, 
and Benin has more than 50 indigenous languages in total. 
In the northern region, the four most common languages 
are Bariba, Dendi, Peulh and Mokole. It is important to 
note that almost none of children entering primary school 
speak French at home. 
The north lacks social services, exemplified by an 
insufficient number of primary schools. Although the four 
targeted departments (regions)2F
5
in northern Benin 
represent almost 75 percent of Benin’s land mass, fewer 
than half (48%) of the country’s primary schools3F
6
are 
located there, resulting in schools’ extreme remoteness
for many school-aged children. Local customs and beliefs 
place little value on education, and parents—most of 
whom are poorly educated themselves—are generally not 
involved in their children’s education.4F
7 Moreover, poor 
nutrition due to lacking food availability and dietary 
diversity is a major issue in some areas of Benin, and 
3 The statistics provided in this section come from the latest World Bank Database (2019) 
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?locations=ZG
4 UNDP Human Development Report: Benin (2020), http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/Country￾Profiles/BEN.pdf
5 Northern Benin includes four departments (or regions): 1) Atakora, 2) Alibori, 3) Donga and 4) Borgou.
6 Benin’s primary school system has three cycles featuring six types of introductory, preparatory, elementary and 
middle-level classes with the following levels: Grades 1-2 (Cours d’initiation – CI, Cours préparatoire – CP)), Grades 
3—4 (Cours élémentaire - CE1, CE2) Grades 5-6 (Cours moyen - CM1-CM2).
7 Advisem Services, Inc. (2018). Endline Evaluation of Catholic Relief Services’ Food for Education (FFE) Benin 
Project.
Figure 1: Intervention Map
2
chronic malnutrition has been growing.5F
8
In general, rural areas are hit harder than urban ones, and boys 
suffer worse than girls. This situation is compounded by a severe annual dry season (December to April), 
affecting children’s ability to learn and grow. Borgou and Alibori Departments, in particular, receive little 
assistance from either the government or non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to support their 
school canteens.
In 2000, the Government of Benin made an important political commitment when it initiated a school 
feeding program. The government further strengthened the Programme National d’Alimentation 
Scolaire Intégré (PNASI) (National Integrated School Feeding Program) in 2017 when it entered into 
partnership with the World Food Programme (WFP). The initial budget for the project was 27 billion 
Francs CFA, which increased to 48 billion in 2018 due to monetary infusions from additional partners.6F
9
As discussed in greater detail below, three actors interact in the school feeding sector. The government 
oversees PNASI with assistance from the WFP, which serves as implementing partner. The third actor in 
operation is CRS.
1.2. Project Description 
Catholic Relief Services (CRS) is implementing a five-year (2018–2022) United States Department of 
Agriculture (USDA) McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Program (MGD) 
award. The project’s local name is Keun Faaba (Supporting Education in Bariba, the most commonly 
spoken language in the project’s implementation zone). The key objective of the McGovern-Dole 
program is to reduce hunger and improve literacy in primary education. Keun Faaba provides school 
meals, as well as teacher training, health, sanitation, and hygiene interventions and other activities. 
Keun Faaba is currently in its forth year. Project funding is just over US$21 million, with nearly 16 million 
identified as operating costs.
The objectives of the Keun Faaba project are to
• improve the literacy of school-age children by increasing the quality of literacy instruction,
attentiveness, and student attendance;
• improve student attentiveness by providing school meals;
• improve student attendance through raising awareness of the importance of education, creating 
enrollment campaigns and training parent-teacher associations;
• increase the use of health and dietary practices by improving knowledge of health and hygiene 
practices, increasing knowledge of safe food-preparation and storage practices, as well as of 
nutrition and increasing access to clean water and sanitation services, as well as to requisite 
food-preparation and storage tools and equipment.
8 The Government of Benin references EMICoV (2011) ad MICS (2014) data to show that chronic malnutrition or 
stunting went from 32 percent in 2011 to 34.4 percent in 2014 (p. 9.) (Source: Government of Benin (2017), 
Programme National d’alimentation scolaire integré (PNASI).)
9 World Food Programme. (2019). Evaluation décentralisée: Evaluation conjointe à mi-parcours du Programme 
National d’Alimentation Scolaire Intégré (PNASI). https://docs.wfp.org/api/documents/WFP￾0000112478/download/
3
The following activities are being implemented to achieve Keun Faaba objectives: 
1. Building/Rehabilitation: latrines 
2. Building/Rehabilitation: wells and water stations/systems 
3. Capacity Building: local, regional and national level 
4. Creation of WASH-friendly schools 
5. Distribution: school supplies and materials 
6. Establishment of activities to promote literacy 
7. Establishment and maintenance of school gardens 
8. Establishment of community farms 
9. Promotion of teacher attendance 
10. Provision of school meals 
11. Provision of take-home rations 
12. Raising Awareness of the importance of education 
13. Training: food preparation and storage practices 
14. Training: good health and sanitation practices 
15. Training: parent-teacher associations 
16. Training: teachers and school administrators 
CRS Benin is working with sub-recipients World Education Inc. (WEI), Caritas Kandi, the Regional Union 
of Producers (Union Régionale des Producteurs or URP) and Partners for Development (PFD). WEI, in 
turn, works with two additional local organizations, DERANA and ALAFIA. CRS is also leading the project 
implementation in partnership with the Ministry of Preschool and Primary Education (MEMP), the
Direction of Food and Applied Nutrition (DANA), the Departmental Direction of Preschool and Primary 
Education (DDEMP),7F
10 the National Institute for Training and Research in Education (INFRE), the 
Direction of Pedagogical Inspection and Innovation (DIIP), the National Council, the Ministry of 
Secondary Education and Vocational Training, the Ministry of Health and the Direction of the Family and 
Social Affairs (DGFAS) of the Ministry of Work and the Public Function and Social Affairs Ministry of 
Agriculture, Livestock, and Fisheries. 
The intended beneficiaries of the McGovern-Dole program are about 46,118 individuals, including
primary and preschool schoolchildren, parents/caregivers, community farm producers and government 
officials. Keun Faaba targets 144 pre-primary and primary schools in 97 communities within the two 
departments of Borgou and Alibori. The project intervenes with the same primary schools and 
preschools as the previous project phase referred to as Food for Education (FFE I). In addition to 
partners in the government ministries and departments listed above, Keun Faaba works closely with 
school principals, teachers and parent groups to promote improved literacy instruction, attentiveness 
and attendance. 
It is important to note that the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic led to the closure of preschools 
from March 30 through September 28, 2020, and of primary schools from March 30 through August 10, 
2020. Grade 6 students started back at school on May 10 for one month to complete the 2019-2020 
school year and take exams to determine advancement to the next cycle. The beginning of the 2020-
10 Since baseline, DDEMP has incorporated two key offices in charge of school feeding programs: the Direction of 
School Feeding (DAS) and its regional services (SAS). 
4
2021 school year officially began on September 28, 2020. School closures left many vulnerable students 
without food. CRS, with the approval of USDA, distributed the commodities corresponding to Quarter 3 
(Q3) as take-home rations (THRs). This approach was determined as the best method to get the much￾needed food to the program beneficiaries during school closures. As the period of distribution also 
aligned with the hungry season in northern Benin, this approach was seen as contributing to increased 
food security during a challenging time. Finally, in an effort to prevent and manage the spread of this 
pandemic in Benin, the Government of Benin forbade any large gatherings of people. These preventive 
measures further hampered and delayed the implementation of several project activities.
1.3. Results Framework 
An articulated theory of change and a results framework guide the work of CRS and its partners as they 
implement the Keun Faaba project. The theory of change builds on monitoring and evaluation (M&E) 
data, stakeholder consultations and analyses of progress, successes and lessons learned from the 
previous FFE I project. The full theory of change is included in Annex 1. The main statement of the 
theory of change argues that
• If teachers are rationally assigned to the project’s underserved departments in northern Benin; and if
they are trained using effective adult education principles and practices (learning needs assessments, 
relevance, immediacy), and if they have access to improved literacy materials, and if they are given 
post-training supportive supervision,
• if canteen management committees and cooking teams are trained in school canteen management 
and food preparation and safety and demonstrate application of knowledge and skills, and if cooking 
teams access protein-rich, diverse, and micronutrient-rich food from imports, local purchases and 
school gardens and farms,
• if potable water systems are installed, and if school committees are trained to maintain these, and if
more students have access to improved latrine facilities, and if training of students and teachers in 
hygiene behaviors using an evidence-based curriculum takes place, and if WASH structures are 
available at all schools (tippy-taps, etc.) and if Community Led Total Sanitation and Participatory 
Health and Sanitation Transformation activities are held in communities,
• if evidence-based social and behavior change activities targeting influential individuals and groups, 
using multiple communication channels (mass media, census campaigns, interpersonal 
communication, small group dialogue, peer learning) are carried out that address key determinants 
affecting household decision-making on school enrollment and retention and parent engagement in 
school activities, and if teachers and administrators are trained in child protection measures and if
students are trained in age-appropriate life skills, and if AMEs/APEs are further trained to advocate, 
and if parents are trained in improved communication and positive parenting skills and if
communication is improved between parents and students and among communities, teachers and 
school administrators,
• if national and local governments prioritize increased spending for training teachers, constructing 
classrooms, and school mandated, and if national and local governments integrate WASH and 
menstrual hygiene management activities in their transition plans, and if school district officials are 
equipped with the skills necessary to provide quality teacher training and supportive supervision in 
literacy instruction, and if parents and community producer groups are provided with the agriculture 
skills and accompaniment necessary for increased economic incentive to support school feeding,
• THEN there will be sustained delivery of quality literacy education in a healthy and enabling school, 
home, and community environment for children in Benin’s poorest school districts.
5
Figure 2 depicts Keun Faaba’s results framework visually and reiterates the project’s two main strategic 
objectives (SO):
• Strategic Objective 1: improved literacy of school-age children; and
• Strategic Objective 2: increased use of health and dietary practices
Figure 2: Results Framework8F
11
As part of its design, CRS identifies two critical assumptions that undergird its theory of change, as well 
as the achievement of Keun Faaba’s strategic objectives. These assumptions focus on amenable climatic 
conditions and successful mitigation efforts for teacher strikes. More specifically, the theory of change 
details these assumptions as 1) “climatic conditions, such as drought, flooding and severe winds, will not 
have extensive negative impacts on household income and food security nor extensively damage school 
infrastructure” and 2) “the effect of teacher’s strikes on project outputs and outcomes will be mitigated 
by careful implementation planning and accelerated project implementation (e.g. teacher training) 
when necessary” (MTE terms of reference, p. 25). It may be worth noting that, as for many projects, 
mitigation efforts to address a deadly pandemic do not figure among critical assumptions. (See Annex 1 
for further details.)
11 Source: TOR, p. 19
6
1.4. Purpose of the Evaluation 
The midterm evaluation is both retrospective and prospective in nature. Its purpose is to evaluate the 
processes, intermediate results and some effects (outcomes) that should be perceptible at this stage of 
the project's implementation. Although this midterm exercise addresses impact and sustainability to the 
extent possible at this point, the final evaluation will more fully address these topics. Instead, this 
midterm evaluation focuses on the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and some intermediate effects of 
project activities, as well as a few early signs of sustainability. More specifically, its purpose will be to 
assess the following: 
(1) the current state of activity implementation related to effect and impact indicators; 
(2) the relevance of all interventions; 
(3) the effectiveness of implementation strategies and activities; and 
(4) project efficiency. 
The evaluation also serves to document lessons learned and provides recommendations for mid-course 
corrective actions necessary to effectively and efficiently meet the project objectives and results. The 
midterm evaluation further establishes the values of key indicators that form part of the project’s 
performance-monitoring plan and were collected at baseline. This study was conducted more than two 
years after the project’s baseline, which occurred in November- December 2018.9F
12 The main audience 
for this evaluation is CRS and its implementing partners, including Benin’s relevant ministries, World 
Education, Caritas, Partners for Development and Regional Producers Union-Borgou/Alibori, as well as 
the donor, USDA. The evaluation contributes to informing USDA’s learning agenda in that results 
address noted gaps in the evidence of high-level impacts of school-meal programs on student learning 
and cognition. Given the longer duration of CRS programming in Benin, findings also offer insights into 
longer-term measures. Finally, the evaluation provides valuable information to other organizations and 
donors active or interested in becoming active in supporting holistic approaches to improved learning, 
namely, school feeding programs. 
2.Evaluation Design and Methodology 
2.1. Evaluation Questions 
The evaluation questions and sub-questions are based on the Organization for Economic Co-operation 
and Development (OECD) Development Assistance Committee (DAC) evaluation criteria. The midterm 
evaluation addresses six categories: relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and 
sustainability. The detailed evaluation questions that guide the process are presented below, with 
definitions of each criterion provided as additional context.10F
13 The questions address various facets of Keun 
12 The date of the evaluation was pushed back given the COVID-19 pandemic, with the rationale that delaying the 
midterm evaluation may allow for more accurate reading of project progress as it would have more time to 
recover from COVID-related disruptions.
13 See OECD Home: Evaluation Criteria: 
https://www.oecd.org/dac/evaluation/daccriteriaforevaluatingdevelopmentassistance.htm
7
Faaba’s results framework, and the associated findings provide an indication of the project’s progress 
toward achieving the project’s strategic objectives of improved literacy in school-age children and an
increased use of health and dietary practices. Questions are also attentive to equity issues and potential 
unintended consequences of the project.
1. Relevance—The extent to which the intervention objectives and design respond to beneficiaries’, 
global, country’s and partner/institution’s needs, policies and priorities, and will continue to do so if 
circumstances change.
1. Are stakeholders (PTAs, mothers’ associations, teachers and local authorities) satisfied with 
their participation in the project? Why or why not?
2. To what extent will the project activities and expected results have the potential to solve the 
problems that gave rise to the project?
3. Are the changes made to activities (design and implementation) due to COVID-19 relevant?
4. To what extent do the project interventions help address student hunger and attentiveness 
challenges?
5. To what extent is the MGD17/Keun Faaba project aligned with the government's canteen 
action plan?
6. Is our theory of change relevant?
2. Coherence—The compatibility of this intervention with other interventions in a country, sector or 
institution.
1. To what extent is this intervention coherent with other CRS Benin interventions and, 
specifically, the CRS Vision 2030?
2. To what extent is the intervention coherent with the government policy on school feeding?
3. Effectiveness—The extent to which the intervention achieved, or is expected to achieve, its 
objectives and results, including any differential results across groups.
1. Has WASH received a heightened focus as a need raised in MGD17/Keun Faaba? What is 
working well and what needs to be changed? To what extent are the WASH strategies likely 
to remove gender-linked barriers?
2. How has COVID-19 impacted the WASH strategy?
3. Do literacy-promotion activities help improve the reading and writing skills of students? 
4. Does the teaching of life skills help improve the reading and writing skills of students?
5. To what extent are teachers implementing literacy techniques acquired through the project?
6. Which strategies have been (or should be) put in place to effectively monitor teachers’ 
attendance? Has project implementation been effectively monitored? How well has the M&E 
mechanism helped project implementation, and what improvements could be made, if any? 
Have challenges of FFE I been addressed, namely: tracking teacher and student attendance?
4. Efficiency—The extent to which the intervention delivers, or is likely to deliver, results in an 
economic and timely way.
1. Is the project being implemented as planned (timeline and budget)? If not, why not? Has the 
project been implemented in the most efficient way possible?
2. Is there another way to make food-management committees more efficient considering the 
literacy levels of committee members and parents?
8
3. How has the project responded to date in terms of key community stakeholders’ requests for 
material incentives? Is there a better approach to do this?
4. Have there been internal and/or external factors that have hindered the efficient 
implementation of project activities?
5. What are the obstacles/challenges/risks to implementation and how can they be overcome 
in the remaining duration of the project? 
5. Impact—The extent to which the intervention has generated or is expected to generate significant 
positive or negative, intended or unintended higher-level effects.
1. To date, which strategies have demonstrated success, and which have not been successful in 
achieving the project objectives and results? What best practices have been identified so far? 
Which issues should the project team focus its efforts on to achieve greatest impact?
2. How likely is the project to achieve strategic objectives and contribute significantly to 
intended purpose ?
3. What is the contribution of the radio broadcasts and the listening groups in the awareness 
raising on the importance of education?
4. What is the contribution of the Community Led Total Sanitation (CLTS) approach to changes 
in children's hygiene behavior at school?
5. What is the contribution of the training of teachers/administrators to the quality of teaching 
and the outcome of school children’s literacy levels?
6. How successful has the project been in improving the quality of literacy instruction?
7. To what extent did COVID-19 affect project implementation and performance?
8. Has the project affected girls and boys differently? If so, how? 
9. Has the project had any unintended negative effects? (Question asked to ensure the project 
is doing no harm and to update our theory of change understanding the full effect of the 
program.) 
10. What are the project’s major limitations, and how is the project team addressing those 
challenges? 
11. To what extent have students (boys and girls) increased their reading comprehension 
compared to the baseline?
12. To what extent have students improved their nutrition, health, and hygiene-related 
practices?
6. Sustainability 
1. How has this project defined sustainability? Do all stakeholders share a common vision and 
understanding of the vision, as well as the pathway to get there?
2. What are the early indications of sustainability at this point in the project? Is there evidence 
of more community capacity for sustainability communities ready to take over? Is there 
willingness of community members to participate without financial expectations? Are there 
any spontaneous actions of the PTAs and AMEs to ensure the maintenance of school 
infrastructures or other critical school improvement activities? Are the PTAs and AMEs now 
demonstrating application of the organizational competencies the project has passed on to 
them since FFE I?
3. What policies favor the sustainability of school canteen projects?
4. Are the policies and actions implemented at the educational level in line with the objectives 
at the national level?
9
5. Have inclusive or gender-sensitive strategies been implemented in view of sustainability 
among identified specific groups if there is any? (E.g., case of Fulani/Peulh communities?)
2.2. Evaluation Design 
The midterm study is an impact evaluation with a quasi-experimental design. The study also benefits 
from a convergent mixed-methods approach in which qualitative data from key informant interviews
(KIIs), focus group discussions (FGDs) and document review join with quantitative data to respond to the 
above evaluation questions. The methodology is the same as used at baseline. Evaluation Technology 
for Development (Et4d), an evaluation firm based in the United States, led both the baseline and 
midterm studies. The baseline data was collected in November-December 2018, while midterm data 
collection followed just over two years later, between January 6 and February 12, 2021. The diverse 
methods as well as the range of stakeholders who participated in the evaluation allow for triangulation,
enhancing the reliability and comprehensiveness of the findings. The design also follows a two-pronged 
methodology that addresses both the assessment of midterm indicators and the exploration of 
evaluation questions.
2.3. Sampling Methods 
This section describes the basic sampling strategy employed by the evaluation team. We provide an 
overview of both quantitative and qualitative samples.
Quantitative sample
Control schools used at midline were the same ones chosen at baseline, with two exceptions.1F
14 The 
baseline selection of schools utilized a probability proportionate to size (PPS)12F
15 sampling method to 
randomly select a sample of both program and control schools from the CRS project-implementation 
area. Recall that Keun Faaba’s 144 schools in 97 communities served as the initial sampling frame. At 
baseline, Et4d excluded from the population schools with fewer than 120 students enrolled. These 
schools were likely to be new schools with only a few active grades or the numbers of students required 
for the sample were not likely to be available. CRS provided a list of potential control schools, among 
which the schools were randomly selected also using a PPS approach, taking into consideration the 
urban/rural ratio of the project. As Table 4 indicates, control schools were all located in different 
communes from project schools. As such, the local populations would often speak different languages 
and socioeconomic conditions would also differ slightly, possibly explaining some differences between 
groups in the evaluation results. 
14 Two schools from the baseline control group were replaced at midline. The first was replaced because it was 
found in 2018 that it had a functioning school canteen. The second had experienced flooding and had just recently 
reopened, presenting unique circumstances not amenable to comparison.
15 PPS: Probability proportionate to size is a sampling method in which the probability of selecting a unit is directly 
proportional to the unit's measure of size, the number of students per school, in this situation.
10
Table 4: Distribution of control and treatment schools by zone and commune
Departments Rural Urban Total
Control Schools 27 23 50
Banikoara 7 8 15
Bembereke 6 5 11
Nikki 0 10 10 
Sinende 14 0 14
Project Schools 24 26 50 
Gogounou 4 8 12
Kalale 4 2 6
Kandi 8 11 19
Malanville 8 5 13
Total 51 49 100 
We applied a two-stage cluster sampling, with project and control schools as the primary sampling unit 
and pupils as the secondary unit. The baseline sample included a total of 49 project schools and 50 
control schools plus an additional 10 replacement schools in each category. The schools within the 
midterm sample remained the same as for the baseline sample. One hundred schools (50 project 
schools and 50 control schools) and a total of 1,526 students in Grade 3 were randomly selected to 
participate in the Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA) using a random number generator. At the 
school level, a randomized selection of 10 parents were surveyed. Similarly, at each school visited, two 
teachers participated in the teacher questionnaire. (See Table 5 for more information.) To better assess 
Keun Faaba’s teacher-training initiatives, selection prioritized Grade 1 and 2 teachers and, in case of 
their absence, any other teacher within the school who was not the school principal. For the classroom 
observation, two classes from each of the Grades 4, 5 and 6 were randomly sampled. After drawing the 
classroom and assigning a number to every child, 10 children were randomly sampled using a random 
number generator. Data collectors paid attention to gender equity and once the maximum (five 
students) was reached for one gender, selection focused solely on the other gender. The design 
privileged older students as they were most likely to be able to respond to questions concerning hygiene 
and nutrition. Principals (also described as school directors) also participated in the midterm data 
collection. Lastly, Et4d data collectors where possible surveyed all cooks and storekeepers supporting 
the Keun Faaba program who were present at the time of a school visit. Annex 2 provides additional 
details of the quantitative sample. 
Table 5: Midterm quantitative sample broken down by activity (includes project and control schools)
Questionnaire Male Female Total
Principal 86 14 100
Teacher 116 89 205
Parent 646 382 1028
EGRA + child survey 768 758 1526
Attention + child survey 991 1005 1996
11
Questionnaire Male Female Total
Cooks 0 106 106
Storekeepers 35 3 38
School observation N/A N/A 100
Attendance N/A N/A 100
Qualitative sample
The sampling of qualitative participants was purposeful and focused both on beneficiaries and
implementers. To the extent possible, selection criteria emphasized that individuals participating in 
interviews and focus groups should be knowledgeable stakeholders who have actively taken part in the 
project and could best contribute a valuable input. At the beneficiary level, the evaluation team also 
sought representativity in terms of geography, ethnicity, gender and age. A parent’s level of 
engagement in the school, such as being part of the parents’ association (APE) and mothers’ association 
(AME) and/or school-management committee also served as an important criterion for selection so as to 
obtain the richest data possible. As indicated in Table 6, overall, the qualitative data-collection 
component solicited the views of 136 individuals, including 49 women. The team conducted 34 key 
informant interviews (KIIs) and 12 focus group discussions (FGDs). (See Tables 6 and 7 for more 
information and Annex 3 for a more detailed summary.) Fifteen interviews were conducted remotely to 
accommodate scheduling and distance from stakeholders, as well as to make best use of the quarantine 
period required for the Project Director and Field Coordinator on arrival in Benin.
Table 6: Summary of key informant interviews by category and gender
Category Number
KII/FGD
Female
Total 
Male
Total
Participant
Total
International Officials (World Bank, World Food Program) 2 3 0 3
National Officials (DANA, DEMP, INFRE) 3 1 4 5
Regional Officials (DDEMP-CRP, DDEMP-DAS) 6 3 9 12
Story hour volunteer 1 0 1 1
Program Staff (CRS and Partners) 19 10 22 32
Teaching Staff (PNASI, Head Teacher) 2 0 3 3
Donor 1 2 0 2
Grand Total 34 19 39 58
Table 7: Summary of focus group discussions by category and gender
Category Number
of FGD
Female
Total 
Male
Total
Participant
Total
Parent (APE/AME; Farmers) 5 14 22 36
Student WASH Clubs 3 12 7 19
Teaching Staff 4 4 19 23
Grand Total 12 30 48 78
12
The next section provides more details of the data-collection methods used. 
2.4. Data Collection Methods 
The midterm evaluation of the Keun Faaba project followed a convergent mixed-methods design that 
implemented four principal data collection methods: 1) document review, 2) qualitative interviews, 3) 
questionnaires, and 4) the Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA) (see Figure 2). Et4d conducted a 
document review that began with files shared by CRS and expanded to additional documents 
encountered during data collection (see Annex 4 for a full list). In addition, the Et4d team developed 
interview protocols based on the evaluation questions. These protocols were further honed with input 
from CRS and partners during the inception phase. The questionnaires that Et4d employed covered five 
categories of stakeholders: teachers, headteachers, parents, students and cooks. Baseline tools served 
as the foundation for these questionnaires and provided assurances of cultural appropriateness, since 
they had already been tested in the field. Additional question items were added to be able to fully 
respond to the evaluation questions and to take into account the changing context since baseline, in 
particular that related to COVID-19. Surveys were further assessed during pre-testing, which took place
on February 15, 2021, and were refined further during data-collection training. In addition, the student, 
parent and volunteer questionnaires were translated into four local languages and thoroughly tested 
during training. These processes assured the contextualization and cultural appropriateness of question 
items. Finally, Et4d also employed the same EGRA tool used at baseline to assure comparability with 
measures at the beginning of the program13F
16
. Like at baseline, the assessment items were in French,
while the instructions were translated into four local languages. An evaluation framework matrix 
detailing the data-collection method used for each evaluation question can be found in Annex 5.
The Et4d team employed great sensitivity during data collection to ensure diversity within the sample, 
particularly along gender lines. Two evaluation questions, in particular, required the application of a 
gender lens and merit specific emphasis here:
• Impact 5.8: Has the project affected girls and boys differently? If so, how? 
• Impact 5.11: To what extent have students (boys and girls) increased their reading 
comprehension compared to baseline?
The use of the gender lens carried into the analysis and reporting phases as well. In addition to 
disaggregation by other variables, all quantitative data were disaggregated by gender, and to the extent 
relevant for qualitative stakeholders, analysis took into account gender.
16 Et4d was required to develop a new version of the EGRA tool at baseline because the prior tool had already been 
used multiple times and there was concern for contamination. Et4d adapted the tool with CRS’ consent, 
particularly the listening and reading passages, as well as the comprehension questions. Unfortunately, WEI or 
INFRE did not validate the instrument, since the timing of the evaluation did not allow for an instrument design 
workshop or piloting.
13
Figure 3: Data collection methods used in midterm evaluation
Table 8 provides an overview of the instruments used for the midterm evaluation of the Keun Faaba 
project. Full copies of evaluation tools are included in Annex 6.
Table 8: Detailed overview of instruments
Name of Instrument Description Application14F
17
EGRA Subtasks include vocabulary, letter name, 
letter sound, familiar words, invented words, 
story reading, comprehension
Project schools, 
control schools
Student Questionnaire EGRA Survey questions on demography , 
absenteeism, homework, nutrition, 
socioeconomic status
Project schools, 
control schools
Student Questionnaire 
Hygiene
Survey questions on demography, nutrition, 
hygiene, health and nutrition practices, test 
of knowledge, socioeconomic status
Project schools, 
control schools
Head Teacher Questionnaire Survey questions on demography, school 
characteristics, parent associations, teacher 
absenteeism, health and hygiene, 
participation in Keun Faaba 
Project schools, 
control schools
Teacher Questionnaire Survey questions on demography, class 
characteristics, absenteeism, parental 
engagement and help for homework, health 
and hygiene
Project schools, 
control schools
Parent Questionnaire Survey questions on demography, child 
characteristics, child health, hygiene and 
nutrition practices, engagement and help for 
homework, participation in Keun Faaba
Project schools, 
control schools
17 Where applicable, questionnaires administered to project schools included project-specific questions.
Document review Interviews Questionnaires
Early Grade 
Reading 
Assessment 
(EGRA)
14
Name of Instrument Description Application14F
17
Cook or Storekeeper 
Questionnaire
Survey questions on demography, 
participation in canteen activities (cooking or 
food storage)
Project schools
KII Guide for Implementing 
Partners
Semi-structured interview guide with 
questions related to the DAC criteria: 
1. relevance, 2. coherence, 3. 
effectiveness, 4. efficiency, 5. impact 
and 6. sustainability
Implementing 
partners
FGD Guide for Parents Project schools
FGD Guide for Teachers or 
KII Head teacher
Project schools
FGD Guide for Student Wash 
Club
Project schools
School Observation Inventory of school sanitary equipment, 
availability of water, condition of kitchen and 
storage area
Project schools, 
control schools
Fieldwork 
Data collection took place over a period of five weeks in January and February 2021 and included in￾person activities as well as remote communications. Prior to data collection, Et4d held an enumerator 
training workshop in Kandi from January 18 to 23, 2021. The workshop was attended by the M&E staff 
from CRS, 44 enumerators and 5 supervisors who had been preselected to participate in the training by 
Et4d. Females made up about two-fifths of the fieldwork team (20 of 49). In addition, nearly two-thirds 
(32, or 65 percent) of the data collectors had participated in the baseline evaluation, allowing for 
continuity between datapoints. The selection of data collectors was made taking into account gender, 
language spoken, previous experience and familiarity with technology.
Training covered an introduction to the project and to data-collection tools and methods, practical 
application among trainees, field practice, debriefing and quiz sessions, constructive feedback and 
logistics. Training also allowed data collectors to become familiar with two data-collection applications: 
Tangerine (for EGRA)15F
18 and SurveyCTO (for all other survey tools).
A CRS-approved COVID-19 protocol was implemented for the duration of the training. During training 
sessions, trainees and trainers were required to wear face masks at all times, a handwashing station was 
placed outside the training venue and temperatures were taken before the start of the day. During 
school-based practical exercises, enumerators were required to practice implementing the COVID-19 
protocol that they would follow during data collection (see Annex 8 for COVID-19 protocol).
Enumerators received disinfectant to sanitize the stimuli between each pupil’s assessment.
Qualitative and quantitative data collection occurred simultaneously, though quantitative data 
collection was more intensive. The evaluation team began KIIs with critical stakeholders on January 6,
prior to deployment, and continued on international colleagues’ departure from Benin until February 
12. In addition to taking notes, evaluators recorded interviews and audio files, which they later uploaded 
to Trint, a subscription-based transcription service. The evaluation team later carefully reviewed and 
18 Tangerine® is a mobile data-collection app developed by RTI, used to collect EGRA data.
15
refined transcripts. School-level data collection began on January 25 and continued through February 5, 
lasting two weeks. Data collectors were expected to upload data daily to SurveyCTO and Tangerine’s 
servers as internet connectivity allowed. Enumerators continued to practice COVID-19 protocols 
throughout in-person data collection.
Evaluation Team
The Et4d evaluation team comprised five team members, four of whom took part in the CRS Keun Faaba
baseline evaluation and therefore had a very good understanding of the program and its context. Ms. 
Isabelle McMahon acted as Project Director and served as the point of contact between CRS Benin and 
the Et4d team of consultants. She coordinated the activities of the key consultants and monitored
project deliverables and timelines. She also led the development of data-collection tools and the
training for the survey tools. She performed a selection of key informant interviews and focus groups. 
Dr. Michel Rousseau, an experienced psychometrician, served as the Technical Lead for the evaluation. 
He oversaw all sampling and statistical aspects of the project. Dr. Karla Giuliano Sarr served as the 
Research Lead and advised the project team on education-specific requirements and research methods. 
She also led the mixed-methods analysis and report writing, with input from Ms. McMahon and the 
Field Coordinator, Ms. Alice Michelazzi. Ms. Michelazzi led the enumerator training, overseeing data 
collection and quality control throughout, in addition to leading focus group discussions and key 
informant interviews. Mr. Apallo Appolinaire, a Beninese researcher and field technician, seconded Ms. 
Michelazzi as Field Coordinator. Drs. Rousseau and Giuliano Sarr provided remote support throughout 
the evaluation. (For complete backgrounds of team members, see Annex 9.)
Quality Control and Review Board 
Assuring an ethical approach—Review Board
The midterm evaluation ensured utmost adherence to international ethical standards for research 
involving human subjects through several mechanisms. Firstly, CRS received ethical approval for the 
study through the National Statistics Counsel (Conseil National de la Statistique), while Et4d ensured 
compliance with best practices throughout the evaluation process. This included how monitoring, 
evaluation and research were planned and conducted. Such an approach proves particularly critical with 
regard to activities involving children and vulnerable groups. Et4d ensured that provisions were made to 
protect the confidentiality of those people involved through a consistently applied informed-consent 
process. Et4d was also attentive to administrative, technical and physical safeguards to protect the 
confidentiality of the data in its storage and disposal. In the written report, identities of individuals are 
masked, though the unique positions of some (e.g., leadership in national departments or Keun Faaba 
partner organizations) may make these individuals identifiable. This possibility was discussed with 
interview participants during the informed-consent process. 
Et4d also carefully trained enumerators to ensure compliance with the Ethical Conduct for Research 
Involving Humans, including respect for human dignity, respect for free and informed consent, respect 
for vulnerable persons, respect for privacy and confidentiality and respect for justice and inclusiveness, 
recognizing the potential for harm and maximizing benefits for all involved. CRS sought permission from 
school principals for the Et4d team to visit the schools and enumerators received permission from the 
principals to conduct interviews with students. The enumerator training reviewed appropriate ethical 
conduct. Enumerators also worked in pairs in order to ensure accountability.
16
Field quality control
Enumerators were observed during the first day of data collection and remained in regular contact with 
the CRS M&E team who accompanied data collection throughout the entire two weeks of school-level 
surveys. The CRS M&E team assured that enumerators were working as intended and followed 
appropriate procedures. CRS notified Et4d any time an enumerator was not following the proper 
protocol, so that Et4d could efficiently address the issue and reinforce the importance of following 
consistent protocol in the sampling or administration of the survey. Et4d and CRS observed that 
expected procedures and protocols were enforced, including the strict COVID-19 measures indicated 
above, and that quality-assurance processes described in the training manuals were followed. 
Et4d assisted the teams throughout the data-collection process to ensure its smooth operation and to 
address any issues the teams encountered, especially in terms of managing the schedule, due to 
unplanned school closures for professional development meetings through teachers’ communities of 
practice (unité pédagogique, UP). 
Data quality control
Et4d also enacted a number of techniques throughout the evaluation process to ensure data quality 
control. For example, Tangerine data were downloaded daily and analyzed to ensure respect for the 
three-second rule.16F
19 Data from SurveyCTO were also downloaded daily for quality checks. This process 
sought to ensure that no data went missing by comparing the school summary sheet, which showed all 
surveys and assessments completed by the team, and the actual data available on the server. Other 
quality checks included cross-checking attendance with sampling sheets and verifying that the data from 
school observation sheets matched the data from each survey. Qualitative data quality was ensured as 
team members listened to audio recordings from interviews alongside transcripts to ensure fidelity. Et4d 
also reviewed the uploading of qualitative data to SurveyCTO and subsequently into an Excel database 
to assure conformity with transcripts. 
2.5. Data Analysis Methods 
The convergent mixed-methods design of the evaluation permitted simultaneous analysis of 
quantitative and qualitative data. The sections below lay out these distinct processes. It is also worth 
noting that the evaluation team paid close attention to instances in which findings from the two strands 
seemed to contradict each other. As applicable, analysis within the later findings section explores such 
cases, providing possible explanations. 
Quantitative analysis
Before conducting statistical analysis, survey weights were computed and added to the datasets, and all 
analysis took into consideration the survey design when running all statistical analysis. Recall that the 
schools remained the same from baseline but that a different cohort of students were used for the 
analysis. Impact analysis using a difference in differences approach (DiD) was conducted at the school 
level. Covariates were added to the regression analysis so as to control for characteristics that could 
19 The three-second rule refers to enumerators moving on to the next question item after a child is not able to 
answer within three seconds.
17
influence students’ learning. For performing comparisons between control and program schools, an 
independent sample t-test was performed with continuous outcome, and a chi-square test with 
categorical outcome. For the comparisons between two groups for indicators, linear regression was 
used for continuous outcome and logistic regression for dichotomous outcome. (See Annex 9 for more 
details on statistical weighting.)
Qualitative analysis
All qualitative interviews and focus groups were first transcribed, then the data were input into 
SurveyCTO and finally they were transferred to Excel for a thematic analysis guided by evaluation 
questions. This process allowed for the rapid sorting of the data by interview question as well as by 
stakeholder profile (type of stakeholder, gender, location, etc.) The evaluation team next generated 
preliminary findings that informed the creation of formal codes. Columns were inserted within the Excel 
workbook to capture coding, also making it possible to see trends across stakeholder profiles. This 
approach allowed data collected from each source to be analyzed separately and then examined in 
relation to other sources to determine convergence and divergence and general trend trajectories. As 
relevant, analysis assumed a gender lens to consider whether and how gender played a factor in the 
results. The evaluation team also took into account outliers, recognizing that the qualitative sample was 
not representative and, moreover, that outlying cases may provide important insights for the larger 
population. This may hold particularly true in the case of beneficiaries and other stakeholders who may 
be harder to reach for a variety of reasons. Finally, illustrative quotes were identified to provide further 
context for report findings and to take full advantage of the thick description that a mixed-methods 
analysis makes possible.
2.6. Evaluation Limitations 
The midterm evaluation process encountered a number of challenges and limitations. Table 9 presents 
these issues alongside mitigation strategies employed by the Et4d team. The COVID-19 pandemic of 
course presented unique and substantial challenges . 
Table 9: Limitations, challenges and mitigation strategies
Limitation/Challenge Mitigation Strategy
Response bias: Many stakeholders participating 
in the evaluation have an interest in seeing the 
program succeed. Those most engaged with CRS 
partners may be positively biased toward the 
programming, particularly if they are currently 
receiving financial support.
Elicit explicit examples from evaluation 
participants, stressing confidentiality and the 
importance of objectivity to improving the 
program as a whole. Additionally, the evaluation 
team draws on multiple data sources, 
triangulating findings to answer EQs.
Remote data collection, timeframe and access:
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, 15 interviews 
were conducted from afar through remote 
platforms (Skype, Google, Zoom, WhatsApp) as 
well as phone calls as appropriate, even if the 
evaluators were in country. The participation of 
stakeholders depended on their availability 
Ensuring as much flexibility as possible within 
the process. For example, the team utilized 
Zoom, an online platform easily accessible to all 
respondents, and shared clear instructions for 
navigating the platform with all participants in 
advance of the session. Phone calls were also 
made. Note that when interviews were 
conducted by the Project Director and Field 
18
Limitation/Challenge Mitigation Strategy
within the timeframe of the evaluation, as well 
as their access to technology for virtual sessions.
Coordinator during their quarantine in Benin 
that Et4d’s local Project Coordinator was able to 
attend and facilitate these interviews in person, 
greatly enhancing their quality.
Selection/Sampling bias: As with most 
qualitative research, because of a purposive 
sampling, the results are not generalizable.
This limitation is a characteristic of a qualitative 
approach. Analysis accentuates that qualitative 
findings, while not strictly representative, may 
be transferable and connect to the experiences 
of others, thereby providing valuable insights 
applicable to other stakeholders.
Control group: Given the nature of the project 
and educational programming, it is impossible to 
be certain that the control group is isolated from 
other variables. Control schools, like target 
schools, continue to evolve and responsible to 
external factors that include insecurity and 
climate issues among others. They may also 
benefit from support from other programs 
unknown to CRS or the evaluation team. In 
addition, after submission of the first report 
draft, the evaluation team learned through CRS 
that Educo, an NGO working in Benin, provides 
educational activities to many of the control 
schools.
Analysis takes into consideration these 
limitations. Results indicate correlations but 
cannot connote causation. Moreover, findings 
report comparisons between midline and 
baseline measures in addition to project/control 
comparisons. This analysis helps provide a more 
holistic understanding of possible project 
contributions.
Inter-rater reliability: Inter-rater reliability (IRR) 
can be a concern when gathering data as a team 
of data collectors.
The evaluation team paid special to IRR during 
training and frequent answers were pre-coded 
for questionnaires. Assessor Accuracy 
Measurement (AAM ) was performed for EGRA.
Enumerators scoring above 90% in the AAM 
exercise were retained for data collection.
COVID-19 quarantine required: The 
international members of the Et4d team were 
required to spend a week in quarantine on 
arriving in Benin. This inconvenience delayed 
their actual field deployment and limited time 
for the piloting of tools.
The evaluation team mediated this issue through 
extensive dialogue with CRS leadership about 
the tools during their development and by 
soliciting feedback from the Beninese Project 
Coordinator. Changes were also made to the 
tools as required following practical in-school 
exercises during data collector training. 
Parent attrition: We were concerned that 
parents may have been occupied by many other 
We oversampled parents at each school,
selecting the parents of 15 children so as to get 
about 10 parents, which we did. This approach 
resembled convenience sampling, and it is likely 
19
Limitation/Challenge Mitigation Strategy
concerns or were not interested in participating 
in the evaluation.
that parents who did not participate are
different from other parents who did. 
Representativeness may be biased. 
Recall bias: Students and other stakeholders 
might face difficulties recalling certain details of 
their behaviors, for instance, what they ate the 
previous day. The nutrition tool also asks
students about categories of food, which might 
not be an easy concept. 
The team mitigated this limitation by providing 
guidance to enumerators during the training on 
how to help the students remember what they 
ate and convert their food intake into food 
categories.
Attentiveness evaluation: Gauging student 
attentiveness required classroom observation by 
trained enumerators. This approach may cause 
distraction for the students in the room.
This is a very common issue with classroom 
observation. We mitigated it through 
triangulation and asking both teachers and head 
teachers about student attentiveness.
3. Findings 
The findings section is informed by both an update of critical project indicators from baseline and
responses to evaluation questions. The first, indicators section provides a skeletal overview of project 
developments. The second, evaluation-question section provides a more comprehensive treatment, 
including a greater contextualization of the findings that may help explain indicator results. 
Performance Measurement Plan Update – Indicator Review 
The mid-term evaluation report provides an update to eight key indicators from baseline. As applicable, 
the analysis draws on findings from related indicators to contextualize results. Table 10 provides an 
overview of these indicators and their baseline and midline values. The third column, the proposed 
target, provides a point of comparison across timepoints. (For more information about the data￾collection tools that informed the various sources, see Annex 11.)
20
Table 10: Key Keun Faaba indicators with baseline and midterm measures
Indicator Baseline 
Value
Midline 
Value20
Endline
Target
1 MGD INDICATOR 1: Percentage of students 
who, by the end of two grades of primary 
schooling, demonstrate that they can read and 
understand the meaning of grade level text 
Benchmark: 60% (3/5 correct answers)
1% 0.8% 10%
2 Percentage of parents who report spending time 
on literacy activities with their students in the 
preceding three days
31.1% 31.0% 45%
3 Percentage of students in target schools who are 
identified as attentive during class/instruction
67.6% 73.8% 75%
4 Percentage of schools with soap and water at a 
handwashing station commonly used by students
54.4% 94.1% 68%
5 Percentage of students in target schools who 
achieve a passing score on a test of good health 
and hygiene practices
Passing Score: 70%
34% 29.5% 40%
6 Literacy Achievement Index 35 33 45
7 MGD INDICATOR 2: Average student 
attendance rate in USDA-supported 
classrooms/schools
88.2% 90% 95%
8 Percentage of Children receiving a minimum 
acceptable diet21
68.9% 51.6% 75%
Results indicate that few improvements have been observed at midline compared to baseline results. At
midline, results resemble what was observed at baseline for the following indicators:
1) MGD Indicator 1 : Percentage of students who, by the end of two grades of primary schooling,
demonstrate that they can read and understand the meaning of grade level text ;
2) Indicator 2: Percentage of parents who report spending time on literacy activities with their
students in the preceding three days ;
20 Green coloring indicates that results are improving. Bright green (#4) indicates that the midline value has 
surpassed the endline target. Yellow indicates maintenance of baseline results. Red indicates a decrease.
21 Because of a change in the indicator calculation methodology, the indicator values are not comparable
21
3) Indicator 6: Literacy Achievement Index ; and
4) MGD Indicator 2: Average student attendance rate in USDA-supported classrooms/schools.
A notable improvement was observed for three cases, including indicator 3: Percentage of students in
target schools who are identified as attentive during class/instruction. At midline, 73.8 percent of the
students were identified as attentive, compared to 67.6 percent during the baseline. Indicator 4 also
saw an important increase. This indicator measured the percentage of schools with soap and water at a
handwashing station commonly used by students. The percentages of schools who met this indicator
went from 54.4 percent at baseline to 94.1 percent at midline. There was also a slight increase in the
average student attendance rate.
Unfortunately, the opposite held true for two indicators where results were lower at midline compared
to baseline values. For indicator 5: Percentage of students in target schools who achieve a passing score
on a test of good health and hygiene practices, while 34 percent of the students showed a passing score
at baseline, this proportion had dropped to 29.5 percent at midline. (See Annex 7 for additional results
on this specific indicator). Finally, for the last indicator, Percentage of children receiving a minimum
acceptable diet, the proportion went from 68.9 percent at baseline to 51.6 percent at midline. Note that
the way this last indicator is computed has changed since baseline. This indicator now includes whether
or not a child eats three meals per day. To be receiving a minimum acceptable diet, a child needs to
have had at least 3 meals and be eaten at least 4 of the 7 main food groups. This computation change
may explain the difference observed. Additionally, data collection took place in January rather than
November, a seasonal difference, which may have influenced results. If we use the same information as
for the baseline (eating food from four or more different groups), the observed proportion would stand
at 63.2 percent at midline. In either case, the proportion has decreased since 2018, although this
difference is not statistically significant. (See additional tables in Annex 12 for an indication of
differences between control and project groups by food group as well as number of meals consumed.)
This section provided an overview of midterm indicator values and changes to these key indicators since
the baseline evaluation. The next section addresses a series of evaluation questions and will provide
greater context for understanding this variation in indicators.
Evaluation Questions 
This midterm evaluation addresses a series of questions based on six of the OECD DAC criteria of (1) 
relevance, (2) coherence, (3) effectiveness, (4) efficiency, (5) impact and (6) sustainability. Each question 
is answered individually below, making reference to previously mentioned results as necessary. This 
analysis reflects the mixed-methods approach that guided this impact evaluation, as both quantitative 
and qualitative data sources inform findings. Where relevant, analysis explores contradictions and 
complexities between findings.
1. Relevance
According to the OECD, the DAC criteria of relevance addresses the “extent to which the intervention 
objectives and design respond to beneficiaries’, global, country, and partner/institution needs, policies, 
22
and priorities, and continue to do so if circumstances change.”17F
22 Six evaluation questions comprise this 
section.
1.1 Are stakeholders (PTAs, mothers’ associations, teachers, and local authorities) satisfied with their 
participation in the project? Why or why not?
When asked if they were satisfied with their participation in the project, stakeholders unanimously 
replied positively. The midterm evaluation implemented surveys that asked head teachers, teachers and 
parents to rate their satisfaction with the program in terms of its activities to improve reading, its 
community-support activities, the school canteen activity and hygiene initiatives. With one exception, as 
Figure 3 indicates, at least three-quarters of all three stakeholder categories reported high satisfaction
with all initiatives. The only exception was that while 66 percent of head teachers expressed satisfaction 
with efforts to increase community support for education, the remaining 34 percent replied that they 
were “ more or less” satisfied. Only parents were asked about children’s hygiene practices outside of 
school, and 81 percent of parents felt very satisfied with the approach.
Figure 4: Percentage of respondents very satisfied with Keun Faaba activities by type
Responses to the cook-storekeeper survey also demonstrate a long-term relationship between these 
individuals and their roles, which may also speak to their satisfaction with the project. For example, of 
the 106 cooks who responded to surveys, 87 cooks (82.1 %) have participated in food preparation for 
four years or more. Similarly, 30 of 38 storekeepers (78.9 %) have been performing their duties for three
years or more.
General satisfaction for Keun Faaba activities among key stakeholders also applies across stakeholder 
groups within the qualitative sample. The sample includes student WASH Clubs, teachers, parents, local 
authorities, ministerial partners and NGO partners. The evaluation team met with three student WASH 
22 This definition and susbsequent definitions were informed by the following resource: OECD Home: Evaluation 
Criteria, https://www.oecd.org/dac/evaluation/daccriteriaforevaluatingdevelopmentassistance.htm
98%
66%
76%
89% 86% 85%
93%
88% 92%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Reading instruction Community support Hygiene at school
Head Teacher (n=50) Teacher (n=100) Parent (n=504)
23
clubs. Two of these clubs responded to this specific question and, like other stakeholders, both 
expressed satisfaction with their participation in the program. Both focus groups also expressed that the 
schools were cleaner due to WASH Club actions. An excerpt from one of the focus groups proves 
particularly descriptive and provides insights into project accomplishments from a primary student 
perspective:
Student 1: "I am very happy with my participation. I think it has helped to reduce 
illness. Children now wash their hands before eating. Children have become 
accustomed to it. Most of them have become aware of it.
Student 2: Also the cleanliness of the classroom and the yard has changed a lot. Now 
you don't even have to ask them.
Student 3: The latrines are also clean. There is a change. Before they were so dirty 
that children did not want to use them. Children don't want to be seen defecating. 
We are inducting Grade 1 and Grade 2 children to go to the latrine." (Student WASH 
Club, focus group)
Parent focus groups, which included PTA members, also overwhelmingly expressed satisfaction,
mentioning that their children were able to eat during the day and that the schools had become cleaner 
due to the project. One of the groups also mentioned that they saw more children going to school than 
previously and that more children expressed the desire to attend school. This same group also noted 
that they felt that students were able to read and write earlier than before due to project initiatives. 
Teachers echoed similar satisfaction in all four focus groups with teaching staff.18F
23 Teachers most 
frequently commented that they were pleased to see students coming to school regularly (three
groups), followed by children improving their reading and writing practices (two groups) and children 
not being hungry (two groups). Pedagogical counselors are located at the department level and play a 
key role coaching school directors and teachers. The four pedagogical counselors interviewed 
individually expressed similar reasons for satisfaction, including that children were learning faster, 
teachers were benefitting from helpful trainings and students had improved their awareness of personal 
hygiene and school cleanliness. 
In addition, local authorities described their satisfaction with the project in terms of outputs. One 
department-level Direction of Preschool and Primary Education (DDEMP) official expressed satisfaction 
with the infrastructure installed at schools by CRS (latrines, wells, etc.). Another department-level 
DDEMP official explained how the school gardens proved very beneficial. The latter remarked,
23 Recall that for efficiency, the evaluation team conveyed school directors and teachers for four focus groups. Only 
one school director sat for an individual interview. 
24
“We are very satisfied, especially with the gardens. The canteens are well maintained 
and they work well. When we compare, we have less problems with the CRS canteens 
than with the PNASI canteens.” (DDEMP Official, interview)
At the national level, ministerial officials explained their satisfaction with their participation in Keun 
Faaba because of its support to vulnerable communities and those with weaker educational results 
(interviews, DEMP and INFRE). Similarly, officials from DANA and DEMP lauded the project for extending 
the government’s resources to address a problem they felt handicapped to resolve. One individual 
explained,
"We ourselves feel that this is a gap that needs to be filled. Limited resources do not 
allow us to cover all the schools. Already CRS has taken the initiative to cover a 
number of schools, so we appreciate being able to work with them in the project 
schools. (DANA Official, interview)
Lastly, two of the NGO partners further clarified that they drew satisfaction from Keun Faaba’s 
objectives aligning with their own, likely a sentiment that also applies to the other NGOs and civil society 
organizations (CSOs) involved in the project. Finally, field agents discussed their satisfaction in terms of 
being able to reach communities.
1.2 To what extent will the project activities and expected results have the potential to solve the 
problems that gave rise to the project?
To address this question, the evaluation team focused on three main strands of the Keun Faaba project: 
1) school feeding, 2) education and 3) WASH activities. We provide an overview of each of these project 
components based on document review19F
24 and then explore findings from qualitative interviews and 
quantitative surveys. Recall that Keun Faaba aims to implement 16 principle activities:
1. Building/Rehabilitation: latrines 
2. Building/Rehabilitation: wells and water stations/systems 
3. Capacity Building: local, regional and national level 
4. Creation of WASH-friendly schools 
5. Distribution: school supplies and materials 
6. Establishment of activities to promote literacy 
7. Establishment and maintenance of school gardens 
8. Establishment of community farms 
9. Promotion of teacher attendance 
10. Provision of school meals 
24 Document review for this evaluation question draws heavily upon the CRS agreement and amendment with 
USDA as well as project work plans for FY2019, 2020 and 2021.
25
11. Provision of take-home rations 
12. Raising Awareness of the importance of education 
13. Training: food preparation and storage practices 
14. Training: good health and sanitation practices 
15. Training: parent-teacher associations 
16. Training: teachers and school administrators 
School feeding
Overview of school feeding activities 
School feeding has as its objective to improve student attendance as a critical component to education
and refers specifically to the provision of midday meals at school to pre-primary and primary students,
as well as to the provision of home rations as incentives to support student attendance. School feeding 
relates to activities #10 and #11, as well as to trainings for food preparation and storage practices (#13). 
In addition, the establishment and maintenance of school gardens (#7) and the establishment of 
community farms (#8) also contribute to providing nutritionally balanced and locally sourced meals to 
students. Keun Faaba’s various training initiatives further support school feeding. 
CRS aims to provide meals five days a week to all 144 targeted schools. Cooks and storekeepers, 
identified at each school, play key roles in maintaining the quality of commodities and preparing food 
for the children. Schools have additionally developed Canteen Management Committees (CGCS) to 
support these efforts and should be receiving training from CRS during the 2021 fiscal year. In addition 
to meals provided to children during the day, Keun Faaba also aims to improve student attendance 
through the provision of take-home rations offered to both male and female students in Grades 4, 5 and 
6 who achieve 95 percent or better attendance rates during a three-month period. Rations take the 
form of four liters of vegetable oil per student. CRS is scheduled to provide these rations quarterly. In 
addition, to incentivize cooks and storekeepers to continue their support for the school feeding 
program, they receive “3.75 kg of vegetable oil and the equivalent of 3 daily rations for the other foods” 
on a monthly basis.20F
25 As indicated above, school gardens and community farms also contribute to the 
vision of a locally sourced and sustainable approach to school feeding. Among the 144 target schools, 
CRS provides technical support to 84 gardens21F
26. A key component of this support is working with 
communities to develop a plan for the sourcing of seeds, as well as to use organic manure rather than 
chemical fertilizers in gardens. Dedicated field agents support these efforts, and CRS works closely with 
the Department of School Feeding (Direction de l’Alimentation Scolaire, DAS) to support school gardens
by employing dedicated field agents. CRS has also planned awareness-raising activities, including 
exchange and supervision visits to support school garden efforts. 
Two sub-recipients, Partners for Development (PfD) and Union Régionale des Producteurs (URP) are 
leading the initiative to develop 12 farms. They similarly employ field agents and work closely with 
counterparts from the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries. The establishment of a 
management and monitoring committee for each farm—as well as trainings to promote group￾management and land-management practices, strong agricultural practices, pest management, storage 
25 CRS Benin MGD Work plan FY2021, p. 19.
26 CRS Benin Semi-annual report October-March 2019.
26
and conservation techniques and financial management—also constitute key aspects of support. These 
farms aim to provide both products and financial resources to support school meals2F
27
. 
Potential of school feeding activities
In regard to whether or not school feeding has the potential to solve the problems that gave rise to the 
project, the evaluation team spoke with teaching staff, government officials and World Education 
International (WEI), the main implementing partner for teaching- and learning-focused activities. Three 
focus groups with teachers and a KII with a school director commented on the relevance of the school
feeding program for promoting improved reading performance. Two of these discussions highlighted 
that when children are able to eat at school, they appear more likely to come regularly. One of these 
discussions also underlined that children who eat well do better overall, not only in reading. Another 
group brought up a common belief that children who do not eat during the day will have difficulties 
staying awake. In this group, a teacher commented that 
“Here we see that children who are hungry go to sleep, but if they have eaten they do 
not fall asleep.” (School Staff, focus group)
In turn, children who eat will be more able to stay awake and participate in learning activities. 
In response to this same question, conversations within four of five interviews with department-level 
and national authorities also emphasized these same arguments—that children who ate regularly would 
increase their school attendance and prove more intellectually capable. The remaining interviewee felt 
that teachers were better placed to make the determination and did not comment. One department￾level official from the Department of School Feeding was particularly eloquent. Clearly an advocate of 
school feeding, this official shared that 
"Yes, it helps to improve. Children who are not malnourished have the necessary 
nutrients for their mental development. Even if at home it is lacking, at least the child 
makes up for it at school. Children need nutrients for mental development, for their 
social balance. If a child lacks all this at a certain time of life, it is a catastrophe. The 
canteen saves them." (DDEMP School Feeding Official, interview)
In an interview with three WEI staff members, one revealed a unique and nuanced perspective. This 
individual argued that while midday meals possibly provided incentives for children to come to and stay 
at school, the link to improved literacy was not entirely clear. This perspective calls attention to the 
more holistic and internationally recognized understanding that other teaching and learning factors also 
27 Note that the farms are distinct from school gardens which provide diversity to school meals. Farms, on the 
other hand, provide supplemental food (maize for morning porridge) and for sale in the local market to help run 
and augment the capacity of school canteens.
27
need to be in place to achieve reading gains. The next section explores the potential of this aspect of 
Keun Faaba interventions to reach desired results.
Education
Overview of education activities
Keun Faaba’s first strategic objective is to improve literacy among school-age children. In this respect, all 
activities support education. Four activities, however, more specifically support teaching and learning: 
the distribution of school supplies and materials (#5), the establishment of activities to promote literacy 
(#6), the promotion of teacher attendance (#9) and raising awareness of the importance of education 
(#12). Project training activities are also designed to support educational practices and a healthy and 
safe school environment. 
WEI leads educational activities as a sub-recipient and works through two local NGO partners, ALAFIA
and DERANA. The provision of school supplies and materials promotes the result of better access to 
learning supports. WEI works with mothers’ and parents’ associations (Association des Mères d’élèves, 
AME; Association des Parents d’élèves, APE) to develop educational materials, such as alphabet cards 
and letter blocks, for students using local resources. WEI trains kindergarten teachers to use 
manipulatives and educational games. In addition, Keun Faaba distributes booklets approved by the 
National Institute for Training and Research in Education (INFRE) and the Ministry of Preschool and 
Primary Education (MEMP) to Grade 1 and Grade 2 students for use in and out of school. WEI also 
distributes booklets to Grade 1 and 2 classrooms for use by teachers and provides related trainings on 
how to integrate materials into lessons. Booklets support the national curriculum and provide families 
with the opportunity to support literacy development at home.23F
28 Keun Faaba also promotes literacy 
through activities outside of school, including a weekly radio hour featuring storytelling based on project 
booklets and books, the promotion of listening groups and community libraries that support children 
and their families’ reading practices.
In an effort to support improved teacher attendance, Keun Faaba intends to implement advocacy efforts 
with MEMP to promote revisions to the teacher placement policy that would allow an exploration of
teachers’ location preferences. Keun Faaba also plans to support strong teaching performance through a 
merit system, issuing merit certificates for best-performing teachers. Both of these initiatives have been 
delayed due to COVID-19 closures. Originally, WEI also sought to establish radio messages as a feedback 
mechanism and to encourage AMEs/APEs to use the mechanism to report teacher attendance issues. As 
findings indicate, this strategy later changed.
Finally, Keun Faaba incorporates an activity to increase awareness of the importance of education 
through multiple-level advocacy that includes engagement with local opinion leaders, radio 
programming and associated listening groups and the promotion of children’s rights. The latter supports 
Benin Law No. 2015-08 on the Code of Children, as well as other related government policy texts and 
the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
28 The 2021 work plan provides for all 144 targeted schools to receive materials. This is an improvement from the 
original cooperative agreement, the amendment and earlier work plans that specified that only a select number of 
schools would receive booklets.
28
Potential of Education Activities
Discussions with a variety of stakeholders about the potential for education activities to achieve results 
revealed positive responses. Most notably, all four discussions with department-level chiefs of 
pedagogical region and three of the four discussions with teaching staff emphasized the phonics method 
promoted by Keun Faaba as not only having the potential to improve students’ learning but already 
showing results at the time of data collection. One chief of pedagogical region highlighted that he 
supported the approach because of its broad use in other contexts and its demonstrated results. A focus 
group with teaching staff also emphasized that the phonics approach allowed students to gradually build 
reading skills starting with certain letters and combinations of letters. A chief of pedagogical region
similarly added that this step-by-step approach helped children who may not speak the language of 
instruction (French) at home learn in a systematic way. 
“For example, the technique “I do, we do, you do” encourages children to participate 
in masse. In the class, for those who do not speak, it allows all of them to speak. It 
also allows children to be able to read easily, because we no longer put sounds that
we have not studied on the board. All that the child will read on the board is 
something they have already studied and that allows them to decode and read 
easily.” (Teaching Staff, focus group)
At the same time, another teacher applauded the approach focused on decoding as allowing students to 
learn easily. 
Stakeholders also found Keun Faaba’s approach to education relevant because it aligned with the 
national curriculum. This aspect was emphasized by the two national-level officials (from DEMP and 
INFRE, respectively) who responded to this specific question. A chief of pedagogical region shared their
point of view. An interview with a school principal and a teacher focus group also emphasized that the 
materials provided by Keun Faaba promoted students’ reading. A teacher provided an especially 
poignant commentary, making comparisons with their previous experience, and accentuating the 
benefit of students being able to continue reading at home. This teacher commented that
"I have to add also that before, when you work with kids at school, you leave the 
classroom and it’s over. Today, with the booklets, the children are still busy at home. 
They have the booklets that they take home and they continue to read. They didn’t 
have that before. Manuals remained at the school. You finished and they remained at 
the school. Today, it becomes the property of the child who can always keep it where 
they want it. It is also appropriate to mention that there are the communities of 
practice that periodically take place, so we can have an exchange about what is 
working and what can be done to improve. This is really good.” (Teaching Staff, focus 
group)
29
Lastly, WEI staff members also shared that the approach provided teachers with innovative training 
methods that motivated them and kept them engaged.
WASH
Overview of WASH activities
WASH activities support the project’s second strategic objective to increase the use of health and 
dietary practices among beneficiaries. All four training activities and capacity building, as well as three 
WASH-specific project activities, contribute to this strategic objective: the building/rehabilitation of 
latrines (#1), the building and rehabilitation of wells and water stations/systems (#2), and the creation of 
WASH-friendly schools (#4). Together, these activities support the results of “reduced health-related 
absences,” “increased knowledge of safe food-preparation and storage practices” and “increased access 
to clean water and sanitation services.”24F
29 CRS articulated a WASH strategy in September 2019 in 
response to recommendations from the baseline evaluation. According to the 2021 work plan, the 
strategy was launched in January 2020 and provided an opportunity for local authorities to commit to 
supporting Keun Faaba’s WASH activities.
A review of the cooperative agreement and project work plans provide additional details. In terms of 
building and rehabilitating latrines, CRS is focusing on a selection of 54 schools for latrine construction 
and of 23 schools for rehabilitation based on established criteria.25F
30 Communities are expected to 
contribute materials and labor equal to 20 percent of the total costs of the inputs for latrine 
construction. Advocacy efforts to promote the inclusion of school latrines in Commune Development 
Support Funds (Fonds d'Appui au Développement des Communes, or FADEC) and the building of latrines 
in national school construction policy also contribute to the CRS approach. Similarly, CRS intends to 
“support a total of 57 schools with new or rehabilitated wells and/or connections to functioning village 
water systems” over the life of the project.26F
31 To this end, CRS works closely with the Ministry of Energy, 
Water and Mines to ensure alignment with national policy. To promote sustainability, CRS also works
with communities to develop a plan for maintenance and access to healthy drinking water post project. 
The construction or rehabilitation of 20 boreholes was planned to begin in January 2021 per the most 
recent work plan.
In addition, CRS works closely with AMEs and APEs in all targeted schools to develop action plans with 
the goal of developing WASH-friendly schools. This approach follows USAID’s Hygiene Improvement 
Project (HIP) model while adding an additional emphasis on nutritional diversity. Furthermore, CRS 
activities focus on supporting a subgroup of 60 schools with identified high potential to achieve “WASH￾29 CRS MGD Work plan, FY 2021, pp. 6-9.
30 The agreement amendment identifies these criteria as : “(1) number of cabins already existing in the school, (2) 
number of students at the school, and (3) coverage by other actors” (p. 3).
31 The criteria for a school’s selection for support with its well and water station/system are: “(1) number of 
students at the school, (2) distance between the school and the nearest water point access, and (3) whether the 
nearest villages have a potable water source” (Agreement amendment, p. 3).
30
friendly” status.27F
32 Support for student WASH Clubs constitutes a key aspect of this activity, along with 
trainings for AMEs and APEs. Field agents also ensure that handwashing stations, latrines and water 
systems in schools function properly, are regularly maintained and are used by school actors. These 
same field agents also ensure nutrition-related activities. A key aspect of this work in all target schools 
includes the reinforcement of WASH and nutrition messages within existing curricula and the 
development of a unique teaching guide, as well as related trainings for teachers, school principals and 
pedagogical advisors. Education and support for culturally appropriate messaging on menstrual 
hygiene–management practices and information on puberty for boys also form part of project 
initiatives. Later sections within the report provide more information about the impact of these 
activities.
Potential of WASH Activities
Three interview responses from teaching staff specifically addressed the potential of WASH activities to 
deliver results at the classroom level. One school principal expressed how work obviously improved 
when the environment was healthy. Another teacher focus group spent time discussing how the 
curriculum also supported WASH activities. Perhaps most notably, a teacher in a different focus group 
emphasized how WASH activities helped students stay healthy and eliminate some distractions at 
school. This teacher expressed how
“It’s been a while since I’ve had any sick children in my class. They are not sick 
anymore. The fact that they wash themselves every day when they leave the toilet
and before eating—they don't have any more problems. No more ‘I have a tummy 
ache!’ and ‘I'm sick!’ in my class. It actually improves children’s participation. The 
fact that they practice good hygiene. They are frequently present in class.” (Teaching 
Staff, focus group)
This contribution emphasizes the connection between students practicing hygiene and their more active 
participation and greater attendance in school.
1.3 Are the changes made to activities (design and implementation) due to COVID-19 relevant?
Like many countries around the world, Benin has seen its school operations and many other facets of 
daily life affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. To answer evaluation question 1.3, this section first 
outlines the modifications made to activities and then explores the relevancy of those adaptations. A 
later evaluation question (4.7) will specifically address how COVID-19 affected program implementation. 
Some overlap between these two sections cannot be avoided.
32 Note that this figure was updated in the FY2021 work plan from the original 40 schools identified in the
amendment to the cooperative agreement. The selection of WASH-friendly schools has been rescheduled to the 
FY2021 fiscal year and had not yet been completed at the time of data collection. Notes from an August 2020 
workshop on the WASH strategy identify considerations for certification of WASH-friendly schools including access 
to a water point within the school, equitable access to a sufficient number of latrines for girls (25) and boys (50).
31
According to Keun Faaba’s semi-annual report (April–September 2020), the national government 
enacted prohibitions against large gatherings in March and closed schools beginning March 30. 
Preschools remained closed through September 28 and Grades 1 to 5 through August 10, while Grade 6 
resumed classes on May 10, recognizing the importance of exam preparation. September 28 marked the 
beginning of the new 2020-2021 school year.28F
33 CRS and partners adapted programming in many ways to 
respond to the quickly evolving context of implementation. A contingency plan was developed with 
approval from USDA and put into place in July. COVID-19 prevention measures sought to align with 
guidelines set out by the WHO and the Government of Benin. Document review and qualitative 
interviews identify the following significant adaptations:
• Events such as trainings and student meetings were revised so that groups were smaller and 
did not exceed the maximum of 50 individuals per room.
• Short-term educational radio programming for Grades 1 and 2 was implemented for all 
target areas.
• The distribution of makeup dry food rations took place in July, during the hungry season.
• Teacher communities of practice occurred remotely via WhatsApp.
• Communications with APE/AME, opinion leaders and other community discussions occurred
remotely using mobile phones
• Additional sensibilization programs were implemented to reinforce the importance of 
hygiene, including the printing of posters for each classroom and the provision of toolkits to 
communities (for more information see EQ 2.2 below).
• School directors, with support from field agents, made a special distribution of Grade 1 and 
Grade 2 booklets directly to students.
• Staff planning and coordination meetings moved online, to the extent possible.
• The midterm evaluation was pushed back, with data collection taking place in January 2021.
Qualitative interviews with various stakeholders at the school, implementation partners, department￾and national-level government counterparts and USDA confirmed the findings from the document 
review. Participants identified ways project activities were modified to adapt to the new situation. 
Some of the modifications included cancellations of activities (site visits, trainings), reduced participant
numbers at gatherings, handwashing, mask wearing, and information sharing. 
Two major program modifications stand out as innovative and making the best use of technology to 
adapt activities. Firstly, WEI developed a “home care program for first and second grade schoolchildren 
with the objective to maintain the reading and writing abilities gained before the school closure.”29F
34 The 
program included six broadcasts and was aired in July 2020 for three weeks for students in Kandi and 
Gogounou communes and for two weeks in Malanville commune. Programming built on decodable 
books and the radio storytelling hour. Modifications included teachers recording instructions for parents 
in local languages, so that parents could better support their children’s learning at home, as well as the 
rescheduling of booklet distribution, so that children could have books at their disposal during the 
extended school closure. Broadcasts took place multiple times throughout the day and included 
33 CRS MDG Semi-Annual Report (April–September 2020), p. 2.
34 CRS MGD Benin Semi-Annual Report (April – September 2020), p. 2.
32
application exercises. WEI also provided children with a notebook to assist with exercises. Secondly, 
teacher communities of practice moved online using synchronous WhatsApp group conversations as a 
way to exchange ideas among reduced-size groupings of Grade 1 and Grade 2 teachers, respectively. 
This mode also allowed for additional key stakeholders to participate in these sessions, including INFRE 
representatives. 
In addition, adaptations made to the school feeding program demand particular mention, given their 
centrality to the MGD approach. As indicated above, Keun Faaba adapted to schools being home by 
providing take-home rations to students. Distribution occurred in the month of July 2020.30F
35 No food 
assistance was provided during the three-month period between March 30, the day of school closures,
and this special distribution. The rations included rice, soy-fortified cornmeal, lentils, green split peas, 
and vegetable oil. The rationale for this approach is laid out in the amendment to the cooperative 
agreement: “Take-home rations are the best method to get food to the program beneficiaries before 
the expiration of commodities, and will provide heightened household-level food security to families 
during these unforeseen school closures.”31F
36 School meals resumed when schools reopened in 
September after the establishment of COVID-19 protocols and relevant training for cooks, storekeepers 
and other personnel. The evaluation teams’ review of the protocol for food distribution at schools finds 
it to be comprehensive. The protocol is a five-page document designed as s table with five key steps, 
bullet point instructions and the identification of the various actors involved. The document addresses 
the entire process of meal distribution, from calculating student attendance to entering the food storage 
area, food preparation, the service of meals and cleanup. Guidance for students includes maintaining 
two meters between persons at all times, handwashing, wearing a face mask at all times, avoiding 
touching the front of the mask, lowering the mask to eat, briefly washing hands again, eating, raising the 
mask and washing hands. 
In terms of the relevancy of these adaptations, the majority of stakeholders interviewed seemed to feel 
that modifications made sense given the challenging operating climate. For example, an INFRE official 
expressed during an interview that modifications supported government efforts and particularly cited 
the use of radio programming: 
"The changes are relevant and in line with government regulations. When schools 
were closed, the project broadcasted educational radio programs on community 
radio stations" (INFRE Official, interview)
Figure 5 presents complementary survey findings about the utility of alternative radio programming 
during school closures for parents, teachers and head teachers. As the figure indicates, nearly all 
teachers and parents felt that programming was useful, though head teachers appeared less convinced 
35 There is some discrepancy as to the timing of these take-home rations (THR). The CRS MGD Benin Work plan 
2021 indicates that THR distribution occurred for three weeks when schools resumed in August (p. 18), although 
other sources, including qualitative interviews and the Semi-Annual Report, place this distribution in July.
36 Amendment to Cooperative Agreement. (July 2020), p. 9. 
33
of their utility, registering only 58 percent satisfaction. Responses, when respondents were asked 
whether or not project activities would help students catch up showed similar discrepancies, as 
identified in Figure 6 below. Accordingly, 86 percent of teachers felt that Keun Faaba initiatives would 
help students catch up while less than half (46 percent) of school directors held this opinion. Figure 6
displays similar findings when teachers and head teachers were asked to what extent project activities 
helped them stay engaged with the school during school closures. Similarly to the above two questions, 
teachers strongly outnumber head teachers in their assertion that Keun Faaba helped with engagement, 
84 versus 54 percent, respectively (see Figure 7). Lastly, survey results report on the perceived 
usefulness of take-home ration distributions. As might be expected, these results are quite high, with 
teachers unanimously replying that take-home distributions proved useful during the school closures, 
followed by 99 percent of parents and 97 percent of head teachers. 
Figure 5: Stakeholder perceptions of the utility of alternative radio programming
Figure 6: Teacher and head teacher perceptions that programming will help students catch up
Figure 7: Extent to which Keun Faaba activities promoted continued engagement during closures
40%
82%
90%
18%
14%
8%
21%
2%
2%
21%
2%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Head teacher
Teacher
Parent
Very More or less Not much Not at all
23%
63%
23%
23%
40%
10%
14%
4%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Head Teacher
Teacher
Very More or less Not much Not at all
26%
74%
28%
14%
35%
7%
11%
5%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Head Teacher
Teacher
Very More or less Not much Not at all
34
Qualitative findings provide additional information. Teachers in a focus group also expressed satisfaction 
with the adaptations, in particular, that they were easy to follow. One teacher stressed that it was 
reasonable to keep drawing students’ attention to barrier measures, which continued to be relevant. 
This teacher said,
“Every Monday morning, we make the children aware of needing to respect hygiene 
measures. We are not tired yet. We are doing well." (Teaching Staff, focus group)
USDA also expressed satisfaction with the ability of CRS and its partners to adapt programming. The 
USDA representative commented that
“Yes, they were adaptive to the situation. Original plans were made and then had to 
be shifted. It also affected the timing of the evaluation, too. Radio programming is 
pretty much in line with what I saw for other countries. . . .I remember being really 
impressed. They quickly had information about schools that resumed school meals. I 
was impressed by how timely everything was.” (USDA Staff, interview) 
Nonetheless, the issue of equity, notably reliable internet access, was raised as a weakness of this 
approach. To illustrate, WEI staff interviewed raised the challenge of some teachers residing in more 
remote areas and therefore not being able to effectively participate in WhatsApp community of practice 
groups.
“All the teachers participated. It is true that there were some absent, because 
sometimes they are in very remote areas and in these areas, there is often no internet 
connection.” (WEI Staff, interview)
This same staff member also pointed to evaluations of radio programming that indicated weak 
listenership results. The semi-annual report identifies that radio broadcasts had a low impact, “as 57% of 
first grade level schoolchildren stated that they had not followed any of the programs.”32F
37 The report also 
posits that “seasonal family labor conducted during this period of the year, whereby both parents and 
children [sic] are heavily engaged in farm work due to the onset of the rainy season,”3F
38 make for a likely 
reason for low participation. The effectiveness of this and other adaptations will be further explored in 
later sections.
37 Ibid, p. 2.
38 Ibid, p. 2.
35
1.4 To what extent do the project interventions help address student hunger and attentiveness 
challenges?
Both quantitative and qualitative results demonstrate near unanimous affirmation that Keun Faaba 
interventions both address student hunger and attempt to mitigate related barriers to student 
attentiveness. When asked if the school feeding program helped reduce hunger, survey results prove 
decisive: nearly all parents (97 percent) and even more teachers (99 percent) agreed that the project 
could reduce hunger. Moreover, 87.5 percent of parents and 92 percent of teachers responded “yes, 
very much,” followed by 9.3 percent of parents and 7 percent of teachers who said, “Yes, more or less.” 
Participants in all 15 interview activities relevant to this evaluation question agreed that school feeding 
addressed hunger and that the communities served by Keun Faaba were resource-strapped ones in 
which children may have difficulties getting enough to eat. These individuals represent a diverse array of 
stakeholders including parents (AME and APE groups), teaching staff, department-level and regional 
officials, project management and USDA. 
When asked to provide more information, participants in nearly half (6) of the interview activities 
expressed that providing a midday meal to students motivated more children to attend and, for those 
already enrolled at school, to come more regularly. Similarly, three of four teaching staff focus groups in 
an interview with department-level DDEMP officials emphasized that students often had difficulties 
returning to school on time when they go home during the lunch break, especially because some 
students may live far away from school. Some parents, teachers and school directors also clarified that 
students may not readily have someone at home to prepare a hot meal for them during the break. 
According to parents, this is due to parents often needing to tend to the fields during the day, leaving 
the children with grandparents or perhaps even alone, which can lead to difficulties obtaining a meal. 
When the children came back home, mothers had gone to the fields. The fathers were 
not there. The grandmothers have to prepare for them and then they have to go to 
school again. It was problematic. (Parents, focus group)
In addition, a few groups raised the idea that providing meals for children at schools allows parents to
instead pay attention to other responsibilities, allowing them to ultimately care better for their children. 
The national-level DEMP official made a particularly compelling argument:
"If we want to fight hunger, but we do not allow parents to find the energy to take 
care of their children and continue at home what they have been doing at school, the 
parents risk abandoning the child and going to the fields to look for their livelihood. If 
the system allowed parents to stay at home with their children, it would allow for 
better monitoring of the children. (DDEMP Official, interview)
Similarly, some stakeholders viewed the take-home rations as reducing hunger for the entire family. One 
teacher, for example, explained how parents had called to complain about their child not qualifying for 
the ration, subsequently feeling motivated to better support their child’s attendance. It is worth noting 
36
that teachers in one focus group lamented that meat was not part of the school meal offerings, 
indicating that few students saw lentils and peas as an adequate replacement.
With regard to whether or not Keun Faaba initiatives proved relevant for improving students’ 
attentiveness, participants were again emphatic. In response to a survey question asking if children were 
more attentive in class due to the school feeding program, an overwhelming 94 percent of teachers 
responded affirmatively, though with slightly less conviction than for the previous question about 
addressing hunger, as 72 percent of teachers responded “yes, very much” and 22 percent responded 
“yes, more or less.” When given the choice to identify why students were more attentive, 72.3 percent 
of the teachers who had responded in the affirmative (n=94) replied that it was because students were 
full, while 61.7 percent said it was because students were more alert. Teachers could provide multiple 
answers.
Again, qualitative findings substantiate and fill out quantitative findings. More than half of the 15 
relevant interview activities featured discussions of how the provision of midday meals may improve 
children’s attentiveness and cognitive abilities. 
“With the canteen children are attentive. In the past, we knew that the children were 
a bit tired. Now, as much as possible, children’s faces actually have more and more 
energy and they are attentive.” (Teaching Staff, focus group)
A national-level Department of Food and Applied Nutrition official further elaborated, noting that when 
children don’t have to worry about food, they are likely to be more attentive. This official stated,
"Children don't have to worry about whether they will find something to eat for 
lunch. Of course, this has a great effect. It improves the quality of children’s 
education and intelligence. Because if children eat well, they can study well, follow 
what the teacher says at school." (DANA Official, interview)
Finally, a common refrain among stakeholders provides a summary for these arguments: a hungry 
stomach has no ears.34F
39
1.5 To what extent is the MGD17/Keun Faaba project aligned with the government's canteen action 
plan?
The Government of Benin has developed a feeding policy with the goal of reaching 100 percent of 
primary public schools in rural zones. To this end, the government has created the National Integrated 
School Feeding Program (Programme National d’Alimentation Scolaire Intégré, PNASI). PNASI is a high￾level program that enjoys much publicity in Benin. Figure 78 shows a photograph of large posters lining, 
39 Le ventre affamé n’a point d’oreilles.
37
the Palais du Congrès, a prominent conference center. The poster on the left refers to school feeding 
and says, “School canteens for our children.” 
Figure 8: Posters publicizing school feeding outside Benin's congressional building
An analysis of the strategy itself is the focus of the coherence evaluation question 2.2 below. This 
particular question instead focuses on the PNASI action plan, which can be found as Annex III within the 
2017 strategy document.35F
40 The action plan lays out three specific objectives: 
1. Ensure regular provision of school meals to students in public elementary schools and 
increase their academic performance;
2. Utilize schools as an entry point for bringing together support for education, agriculture 
and health; and
3. Invest in the development of the institutional framework and improve the steering, 
coordination and monitoring of the school feeding program in Benin.36F
41
The plan, organized as a table, also identifies activities, indicators, organizations responsible and the 
timeframe for implementation of these objectives. A comparison of activities identified within the action 
plan with Keun Faaba activities shows them to be identical for the first and second objectives, while the 
third objective also proves very similar, with distinctions being the development of a sustainability 
40 PROGRAMME NATIONAL D’ALIMENTATION SCOLAIRE INTEGRE (PNASI) Project Document. (November, 2017), 
pp. 44-45.
41 Translation provided by evaluation team.
38
strategy and an action plan. The difference between an NGO-led project operation and a country-wide 
government initiative, particularly given the issue of scale, may account for discrepancies. Lastly, 
government documents incorporate the Keun Faaba project as a partner for achieving their goal. CRS is 
included within the strategic plan as well as within a summary table of school canteens. We reprint the 
summary table here:
Table 11: Summary of school feeding programs in Benin37F
42
# Beneficiary schools Students benefitting Program
1 3234 Schools with canteens 538,105 students fed PSNASI funding
3 618 Schools with canteens 104,537 students fed WFP funding
3 144 Schools with canteens 44,231 students fed WFP funding [sic] –
Correction: USDA 
funding
Total 3996 Schools with canteens 686,873 students fed School feeding 
program in Benin
This document, as well as an interview with a national DEMP official, identify that currently 54 percent 
of Beninese primary schools benefit from school feeding programming. It is worth noting that while the 
Government of Benin financially supports PNASI schools, the WFP—in concert with subcontracting 
NGOs38F
43—provide the actual implementation. Interviews with stakeholders further support the 
alignment between the Keun Faaba project and the government’s canteen action plan. In practice, 
stakeholders did not distinguish between the strategy and the action plan. For this reason, the response 
to evaluation question 2.2, focusing on the strategy, provides a more detailed account of these 
qualitative findings below. 
1.6 Is our theory of change relevant?
The present midterm evaluation offered the opportunity for project stakeholders to revisit the theory of 
change, notably, the problem Keun Faaba intends to solve, the solutions identified and the assumptions 
about external conditions necessary for project success. The theory of change can be found in Annex 1 
of this report. To answer this evaluation question, the evaluation team has studied the theory of change 
and asked related questions of key implementers in interviews. 
A study of the theory of change reveals a dense document that includes:
• a statement of the project’s strategic objectives;
• a series of five IF statements, followed by 
42 Source: Ecoles Primaires Publiques à Cantine au Benin: Tableau Synthèse. Updated January 2021. Translated by 
evaluation team.
43 Discussions with WFP revealed that there were five NGO partners last year and eight in the current year (2020-
2021).
39
• one THEN statement related to the project’s overall goal;
• a paragraph on the evidence base underlying the linkages between the IF and THEN
statements;
• a statement listing the project’s inputs and the target beneficiaries for those inputs;
• a bullet point list of outputs;
• two paragraphs identifying critical assumptions: climate conditions and teacher strikes and 
absences, the degree to which they might affect the project and mitigation strategies.
Analysis of the theory of change shows that it contains all the necessary sections: inputs, activities, 
outputs, outcomes and impacts. The theory of change also aligns with USDA’s general theory of change. 
At the same time, the format of the theory of change makes it challenging to digest. More important, 
the linkages between the inputs, activities, outputs and impacts are not clearly delineated; rather, these 
sections are grouped as standalone elements. While the IF statements are very descriptive and include 
references to inputs, activities, outputs and outcomes, the linkages between the IF and THEN
statements could be further elaborated to more clearly depict the causal assumptions and intermediate 
outcomes that connect them. A close analysis of the critical assumptions also demonstrates that these 
assumptions and their related mitigation strategies could be further articulated. Based on interview 
findings as well as a close analysis of the theory of change, the evaluation team suggests that some 
critical assumptions are missing including:
• requisite skill level and competence of teachers
• consistent teacher attendance and limited turnover
• schools remaining open during expected periods of the school year (including that they do not 
close due to teacher strikes, pandemics, insecurity or other reasons)
• environment allows access to schools for project implementation and monitoring (stable 
security environment, road access – not comprised by flooding or heavy rains)
• existence of political will at the community, regional and national levels for engaging and 
supporting project activities
• absence of a community health crisis
This last assumption is particularly significant given the current COVID-19 pandemic and one that likely 
has been overlooked by many development actors. 
Finally, the evaluation team discussed the theory of change with relevant Keun Faaba stakeholders, 
namely, the management teams from CRS, Caritas, PfD and WEI. In general, colleagues are satisfied with 
the theory of change and find that it generally addresses the main elements of the Keun Faaba project. 
Members of the CRS leadership emphasized that all the elements necessary to a theory of change are 
present, that hypotheses are appropriate, and that the statement takes into account relevant actors. At 
the same time, participants identified some areas for further strengthening. Firstly, one participant 
noted that while training for teachers is important, the hypothesis relevant to teachers also needs to 
account for other prerequisites, such as appropriate teacher recruitment and teachers’ fulfillment of 
their teaching assignment at the indicated school. A WEI staff member also mentioned that assumptions 
about teacher qualifications and professionalism could be further articulated to identify absenteeism of 
any kind as a challenge, not just strike-related absences. A member of the CRS leadership further 
referred to the uncertainty of government capacity to fully take over the project, as well as of its 
timeline to integrate CRS schools into its feeding program. We have incorporated these findings into the 
comments above. Interviews also revealed that PfD and Caritas staff were unaware of the overall 
40
project’s theory of change and seemingly to the relationship of their organizations’ specific efforts to 
other long-term outcomes. This finding signals the need for more participatory review and discussion of 
the project’s theory of change.
Conclusion: Relevance
In terms of intervention objectives and the project design responding to the needs of beneficiaries, 
partners, policies and changing circumstances, findings demonstrate that the Keun Faaba project fulfills 
expectations and proves highly relevant. The project approach is comprehensive and builds on previous 
projects. A review of the Government of Benin’s action plan for the National Integrated School Feeding 
Program (PNASI) shows that CRS supports a highly visible and important initiative for the country and 
constitutes an integral component of the government’s strategy. A comparison of CRS activities with 
action-plan activities shows near perfect alignment. 
Survey results also demonstrate generally very high parental and teacher satisfaction with Keun Faaba 
activities and that they find COVID-adaptations useful. School principals are less enthusiastic in their 
responses to these same questions, indicating a positive but more critical attitude toward Keun Faaba 
programming and perhaps a more realistic one regarding school closures. Qualitative interviews also 
reveal enthusiasm for Keun Faaba among beneficiaries, including government officials, teachers, 
students and parents. These stakeholders are pleased with infrastructure initiatives and the emphasis 
on improved hygiene. Satisfaction and support are unequivocal for the provision of midday meals and 
take-home rations, the latter of which help families at large. Beneficiaries and other key stakeholders 
generally associate these initiatives with improved student attendance and potential for positively 
addressing student learning outcomes. Stakeholder responses also point to possible indirect impacts,
including relieving parents from concerns around midday meals, thereby allowing them to provide 
better care in other ways, including possibly increased engagement with children’s schooling.
Findings caution, however, against the overly simplistic view that improved school attendance will 
translate to improved educational outcomes. Rather, many other supporting factors also need to be in 
place for students to thrive. While later sections of the midterm report will reveal the results of student 
assessments, qualitative findings demonstrate support for Keun Faaba’s use of the phonics method and 
the “I do, we do, you do” technique for beginning readers and for boosting student participation. 
Similarly, Keun Faaba’s distribution of booklets to children, especially during school closures, met with 
strong praise. 
Specifically in regard to project adaptations addressing school closures during COVID-19, the evaluation 
concludes that measures remain imperfect but did respond to challenging, unforeseen circumstances. It 
is unfortunate that students and families did not have access to USDA provisions between March and 
July, surely a time of great uncertainty for many families. Nonetheless, CRS and the Government of 
Benin’s continuation of school-meal provision when classes resumed with well-elaborated safety 
protocols and trained cooks and storekeepers provides support to students and their families during a 
period of heightened economic instability. In this respect, Benin offers a positive example for other 
countries in the region that may be reticent to resume school feeding. Keun Faaba also shifted to a brief 
period of school instruction delivered via radio based on already existing project activities and materials. 
Indications are that the programming made for a laudable attempt, though it lacked the interactive 
nature of a more formally designed Interactive Radio Instruction (IRI) program. Participation data is low, 
but this is not inconsistent with findings from COVID-mediation programming in other African countries, 
such as Mali and the DRC. The radio programming effort is noteworthy for addressing COVID-19 closures 
41
but likely will have little impact, which signals the need for more comprehensive contingency 
brainstorming and planning with partners at the project-design stage.
A theory of change can prove complicated for a multisectoral and multifaceted project like Keun Faaba,
and close review reveals that CRS has included all the necessary elements. At the same time, analysis 
demonstrates that the current theory of change is difficult to access in its current form. Rather, a 
diagram would help better depict the relationship between inputs, activities, outputs and impacts, and it 
would clarify linkages with intermediate outcomes, in particular. It could also show the roles of various 
stakeholders contributing to the project.39F
44 Similarly, expanding the list of critical assumptions and their 
related mitigation measures, particularly around health crises and unanticipated school closures, would 
allow Keun Faaba to be better prepared and more nimble in the case of crisis, minimizing ruptures in 
project activities and services. 
2. Coherence
According to the OECD, the DAC criteria of coherence addresses the compatibility of the intervention 
with other interventions in a country, sector or institution. The Keun Faaba midterm evaluation 
addresses two specific areas of intervention: 1) those internal to CRS, and 2) the Government of Benin’s 
school feeding program.
2.1 To what extent is this intervention coherent with other CRS Benin interventions and, specifically, 
the CRS Vision 2030?
In 2019, CRS laid out a 10-year strategy which acknowledges the organization’s mission, its Catholic 
identify and commitment to guiding principles, as well as the changing contexts in which CRS operates. 
The strategy also indicates that “partnership and capacity strengthening are at the heart of our 
approach.”40F
45 The strategy document goes on to state that 
“We believe that it is only through strong collaborative relationships across civil 
society and the public and private sectors that lasting, positive solutions to poverty 
and injustice can be achieved.” (CRS 2030 Strategy, p. 9). 
The strategy lays out five goals for the coming decade: 
1. All people live in just and peaceful societies
2. All people survive and thrive in the face of disasters
3. All people achieve dignified and resilient livelihoods in flourishing landscapes
4. All children reach their full health and development potential in safe and flourishing families 
and
44 Examples of various types of diagrams useful for theory-of-change development can be found at Better 
Evaluation: Describe the Theory of Change, https://www.betterevaluation.org/en/node/5280).
45 CRS 2030 Strategy, https://www.crs.org/about/agency-strategy, p. 9.
42
5. All youth are empowered to thrive41F
46
A close analysis of goal 4 within the strategy document identifies six priority areas, of which all but one 
align with Keun Faaba’s strategic goals and objectives. All priority outcomes for goal 4 are listed below. 
The evaluation team has highlighted those that are specific to the MGD program:
• Children and adolescents enjoy optimal health, free from preventable diseases.
• Children and adolescents at risk for HIV are tested and receive appropriate care and 
treatment.
• Nutrition is improved among vulnerable populations (particularly infants and young 
children, adolescent girls, and pregnant and nursing mothers).
• All children and adolescents have improved opportunities to learn.
• Families provide safe and nurturing care for children and adolescents.
• People have adequate and equitable access to safe water, sanitation and hygiene.42F
47
Only the second outcome, specific to HIV, has no relevance to the Keun Faaba project.
Interviews with CRS staff confirm this analysis. Participants within all six pertinent interviews agreed that 
the Keun Faaba project aligns with the CRS 2030 strategy. They cited Keun Faaba’s emphasis on 
partnership and collaboration at the school, community, regional and national levels. Another CRS staff 
member mentioned the desire for CRS to be more active in Benin’s education sector but recognized that 
the organization is pleased to collaborate with WEI, the leading actor within the sector. Stakeholders 
also expressed that Keun Faaba aligned with the CRS 2030 strategy’s commitment to equity, a 
commitment demonstrated by the decision to work within vulnerable and resource-poor communities. 
Lastly, another actor made a connection to goal 4 described above. These findings, along with the 
excerpts and analysis of the 2030 CRS strategy document above, confirm strong coherence between 
Keun Faaba and the organization’s long-term vision.
2.2 To what extent is the intervention coherent with the government policy on school feeding?
Building on the response to 1.5 above, according to government policy documents, the Government of 
Benin’s school feeding strategy includes three main components: 1) achieving control of the supply 
process and the delivery of food within schools, 2) providing information and assuring communication 
between stakeholders, and 3) capacity building of actors to support the operations and monitoring of 
school feeding.43F
48 A review of Keun Faaba’s objectives and activities demonstrates that CRS Benin 
interventions also accentuate these elements. The Government of Benin policy does not make a direct 
46 Sources: CRS Commitments to the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals, 
https://www.crs.org/sites/default/files/usops-resources/sdg_crs_goal_alignment.pdf; In their own hands: CRS 
2030 Strategy, https://www.crs.org/about/agency-strategy. 
47 CRS 2030 Strategy, p. 20.
48 Programme National d’Alimentation Scolaire Intégré (PNASI) Project Document. (November, 2017), p. 22. 
43
linkage, however, with Keun Faaba’s strategic objectives to improve literacy skills or to increase the use 
of positive health and dietary practices.
When asked whether or not Keun Faaba interventions are coherent with the government’s school 
feeding policy, interview responses were unanimously positive. All nine interviews with a diverse array 
of actors, including government officials, implementing partners and donors, overwhelmingly confirm 
that CRS objectives and interventions align with the Government of Benin’s school feeding strategy. Like
the national education official excerpted below, many stakeholders expressed strong affirmation, using 
phrases like “perfect symbiosis” and “fits perfectly.” 
“Keun Faaba's project fits perfectly into the government's policy on school canteens, 
but the government does not necessarily have the same means and has more schools 
to cover.” (National DANA Official, interview)
“The goals of the government and CRS are in perfect harmony, and CRS has even 
opened the government's eyes to the possibility of feeding schoolchildren locally 
grown food. CRS has shown us that it is possible to feed schoolchildren with local 
products.” (National DEMP Official, interview)
Interview findings describe how stakeholders see Keun Faaba as extending the government’s resources 
while also going beyond the government’s school feeding strategy to promote literacy as well as hygiene 
and WASH. They see these initiatives very positively, particularly since CRS operates in extremely 
vulnerable communities.
Stakeholders also repeatedly praised CRS for the innovativeness of its programming, adding that both 
the Government of Benin and the World Food Program (WFP) find the program approach and activities 
inspirational. The same national-level DEMP official quoted earlier referred to this phenomenon as 
“positive contamination” between the three approaches. Innovations offered by CRS include a 
comprehensive approach to community engagement, the local sourcing of food through school gardens 
and community farms and the provision of consistent incentives to cooks and storekeepers. CRS is well 
aware of the advantages it may have over the government’s approach, particularly given the resources 
available for each community, but it also sees these activities as potential growth areas for the 
government, as evidenced by the quote below.
"However, the two proposals/strategies diverge a little in terms of details. The 
government will not be able to implement things in the same way because the 
government does not have the means to mobilize communities through training, nor 
the means to prepare management committees in relation to the management of the 
canteen and fundraising. There is also no diversification and enrichment of the menu 
provided by the gardens. This remains a challenge to address in the government's 
program." (Chief of Party, CRS, interview)
44
Discussions with WFP and government actors also revealed a close relationship and collaboration among 
the three entities. The WFP staff interviewed spoke of a coordination committee that had helped to 
organize activities and avoid duplication in implementation. They also described how the entities share 
documents with each other and provide information during evaluations. Nonetheless, it seems that 
coordination may have been stronger in previous years. 
Finally, discussions about the coherence of the CRS strategy with that of the Beninese government 
revealed important differences in project implementation. Findings demonstrate that CRS schools 
receive much more assistance and have real kitchens and storage, while in government schools, the 
community must build the latter. The type of food is similar, but CRS canteens offer a more structured 
menu, with a well-defined nutrition approach. Some CRS schools also have gardens and/or farms that 
provide condiments to supplement school feeding provisions. Often the food is stored in the director’s 
office or the home of the APE president. This arrangement can prove challenging, as occasionally goods 
get misdirected, which has led to the public shaming of suspected individuals on the radio and, as a 
result, to reluctance among stakeholders to become involved. In government canteens, cooks volunteer 
or are designated by the community, and they may rotate responsibilities. Identifying cooks proves
difficult, because they receive no compensation, while CRS’s cooks receive five liters of oil per month. In 
addition, in some PNASI schools, head teachers and a designated teacher coordinator have to play an 
important role supporting the school canteen. In addition, sometimes older students, largely female, are 
required to help in the kitchen. Despite these differences, it is important to note that interview findings,
as well as a visit to a PNASI school, also indicated great diversity among government canteens. The 
PNASI school visited by the evaluation team proved exceptionally well managed and could easily 
compare with a CRS canteen. Additional inquiry would be required to determine how much this case 
was an outlier.
Conclusion: Coherence
The midterm evaluation addresses compatibility between the CRS Keun Faaba project and 1) the CRS 
2030 strategy and 2) the Government of Benin’s policy on school feeding programs. Findings from close 
analysis of relevant project and policy documents combine with findings from targeted interviews to 
demonstrate strong relationships with both policies. Keun Faaba’s interventions appear nearly in 
lockstep with CRS’ fourth strategic goal for the coming decade, which promotes the full health and 
development of children. The CRS approach in Benin that emphasizes partnership clearly echoes the 
same emphasis in the organization’s strategy. 
Similarly, the CRS school feeding program aligns with the three principal components of Benin’s school 
feeding strategy, so that the government sees Keun Faaba as an extension of its reach. Keun Faaba also 
moves beyond the government’s strategy to address improved literacy, health and dietary practices as 
well as infrastructure. In this respect, CRS and USDA view school feeding as a stepping-stone to other 
long-term goals. Interviews indicate that CRS is highly respected for its approach. At the same time, the 
difference in scope between CRS, WFP and Government of Benin school coverage merits further 
attention. The CRS coverage of 144 schools represents just 3.6 percent of all schools with canteens. 
While CRS is able to provide closer coordination and more support than its counterparts with 618 and 
3,234 schools, respectively, the McGovern-Dole Benin project, in comparison, remains a pilot, while the 
Government of Benin goes to scale with WFP as its main implementing partner. This distinction presents 
a challenge for sustainability as schools used to this much support may find it difficult to transition to a 
more self-driven approach. Nonetheless, it is critically important to note that the limited scope of the 
45
Keun Faaba project also allows CRS and its implementing partners to provide inspiration and innovation,
further enhancing the Government of Benin’s strategy. 
3. Effectiveness 
The DAC criteria of effectiveness is defined as “the extent to which the intervention achieved, or is 
expected to achieve, its objectives, and its results, including any differential results across groups.” 
Effectiveness focuses more closely on outputs and attributable results than impact. Six questions inform 
the analysis of the effectiveness of Keun Faaba at midterm. They explore the implementation of WASH 
and education strategies and the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on project activities.
3.1 Has WASH received a heightened focus as a need raised in MGD17/Keun Faaba? What is working 
well and what needs to be changed? To what extent are the WASH strategies likely to remove 
gender-linked barriers?
Multiple project documents, as well as findings from interviews and focus groups, attest to this second 
phase of the Benin McGovern-Dole project, Keun Faaba, as having a great emphasis on water, sanitation 
and hygiene. Project documents substantiating this shift include the WASH strategy and, perhaps most 
notably, a success story accompanying the October 2019-March 2020 semi-annual report. This one-page 
document highlights a Community Led Total Sanitation project (CLTS) activity and provides a succinct 
overview of the change in shift from MGD 2014 to MGD 2017. The document states as follows,
“Under MGD 2014, the WASH strategy focused solely on the school environment and 
did not link to WASH activities in the communities. To maximize health impact, in 
MGD 2017 the WASH friendly school approach is complemented by the Community 
Led Total Sanitation (CLTS). By combining these two approaches, MGD 2017 aims to 
create better conditions for behavior change related to good hygiene and sanitation 
practices for schoolchildren and their parents—both at school and at home—in terms 
of access to clean water, latrines, hand washing systems and cleaned living 
environment.” (p. 1)
The WASH strategy further identifies closer coordination and concertation with local authorities as one 
of its main tenets.4F
49 The increased attention to WASH is also clearly perceived at the school level. Nearly 
all teachers (97 percent) agreed with a survey question asking if they thought that Keun Faaba had made 
more efforts focusing on hygiene during the second phase of the MGD project, beginning with 
implementation in September 2019. A high proportion of teachers (89%) felt very strongly that this was 
the case, responding, “yes, really.” Analysis of project documents as well as interviews demonstrate that 
the activities that receive more focus include 
• WASH Clubs
• WASH-friendly school certification
49 CRS Keun Faaba WASH Strategy (January 2020), p. 4.
46
• Menstrual-hygiene management
• Working with community health workers to assist students and families with puberty issues
• Water sanitation within schools, including securing reliable water access
WASH activities working well
Midterm evaluation interview activities solicited stakeholder viewpoints about Keun Faaba activities 
that were working well. Stakeholders at the school, departmental education office and implementing 
partner level largely identified actions to foster clean school environments, improved access to clean 
drinking water, promotion of good handwashing practices and WASH Clubs as effective. Three additional 
points require specific attention. First, while open urination continues to persist at some schools, 
teachers, a CRS field agent and a focus group with a student WASH Club all cited a creative and effective 
remedy of older students training younger kids on how to use the latrine. Second, discussions largely 
with Keun Faaba staff signaled the importance of teachers able to advise and champion WASH efforts 
within the school. Accordingly, one field agent recommends that WASH advisors be more involved at 
trainings and clarified that these advisors can be more influential within the school than the school 
principal. Finally, all three focus groups with teaching staff noted how helpful the field agents were in 
supporting WASH efforts at the school level. As a teacher in one focus group contributed,
"CRS officials do a good job of making sure the rules are followed." (Teaching Staff, 
focus group) 
This quote demonstrates the importance of field agents in promoting enhanced WASH practices at the 
school level. At the same time, it should alert Keun Faaba implementing partners to the need for a 
transition plan to school-level accountability at the end of the project. 
By comparison, as Figure 9 indicates, survey results show that more than half of teachers (57%) 
identified the installation of COVID handwashing stations as an effective Keun Faaba activity, while just 
under half (48%) cited how Tippy Taps or handwashing stations always having water as effective. Two 
other activities gained notice among more than one-third of teachers: that Tippy Taps and handwashing 
stations are in good condition (40%) and that students correctly use these stations (40%). Notably, only 
11 percent of teachers identified teacher support of WASH Clubs as effective. The impact of COVID-19 
on stakeholders’ perceptions of WASH activities is the subject of the next question and may also suggest 
why teacher responses focus most on handwashing activities.
47
Figure 9: Keun Faaba activities functioning well according to teachers (n=100)45F
50
In addition to these activities, project documents46F
51 suggest that the CLTS initiative may also have proven 
effective, though perhaps not as visible to school-level actors and education officials, which may explain 
their lack of commenting on this initiative. Caritas is responsible for CLTS programming. A Keun Faaba 
success story document points to how on March 7, 2020, communities in four departments had 
organized community cleaning days. The Keun Faaba theory of change specifies that a healthier 
schooling environment may contribute to improved student attendance. As of July 2020, 19 localities 
had also been certified as “Open-Defecation Free.”47F
52
50 Graph shows results for responses receiving 10 percent or more.
51 Largely the semi-annual report for October 2019–March 2020, accompanying the CLTS success story, and the 
April-September 2020 semi-annual report. 
52 Criteria for pre-certification include 1) absence of human excrement in the targeted locality, 2) access to a 
functional latrine by each household, 3) proper maintenance of latrines built, 4) latrines equipped with functional 
and maintained handwashing devices and 5) environmental sanitation. (Source: April–September 2020 Semi-annual 
Report and Caritas interview).
57%
48%
40%
34%
30%
30%
24%
23%
16%
16%
14%
14%
11%
10%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Installation of COVID handwashing stations
Tippy Tap or handwashing stations always have water
Tippy Tap or handwashing stations near classes are in…
Students use tippy tap or handwashing stations correctly
Tippy Tap or handwashing stations near latrines are in…
Use of soap with Tippy Tap or handwashing station
WASH Club active
Teachers effectively sensitize students
Water available within classrooms is potable
Members of WASH Club receive good training
School has access to water
Water is available in the classrooms
Teachers effectively support WASH Clubs
Water transport equipment regularly washed
48
WASH Clubs 
WASH Clubs require particular attention as an effective initiative given their centrality to Keun Faaba’s 
strategy, as well as their positive mention in many qualitative interviews. Quantitative findings from the 
mid-term evaluation also support their effectiveness even though it is worth noting that the 
health/hygiene practices indicator has not improved. All but one of the directors at the 50 treatment 
schools indicated their schools have a WASH Club.48F
53 Among these 49 clubs, 13 were reported as 
moderately active by principals, while 34 were considered very active. Further analysis shows that 
principals reported a significantly higher proportion of rural schools (compared to urban) as “very 
active” (87% compared to 62%; see Annex 12 for more details). Results also show that small schools 
tended to be significantly more active than medium and large schools (91% compared to 50% and 73%, 
respectively; p=0.030). Overlap exists between school size and zone, as larger schools are more frequent 
in urban areas. In terms of membership, survey results demonstrate that the membership of WASH 
Clubs varied between 5 and 12 members, with an average membership of 8 members. On average, 
school principals reported that females make up nearly half of the club’s membership (49%, on average),
and this proportion varied between a minimum of 38 and 83 percent. 
The evaluation team held focus group discussions with WASH Clubs at three schools that included both 
students and their teacher advisors. Discussions revealed three very different approaches to the WASH 
Club, including concerning gender participation. One of the clubs was recently formed and its advisor 
had not yet not participated in a related training. The club members were all girls, chosen by the teacher 
based on her belief that girls are cleaner than boys. The club members appear to do all the cleaning 
themselves. The second and third clubs were more established, with teachers apparently implementing 
the clubs more closely in line with Keun Faaba’s vision. Members of the second club succeeded in 
meeting even when the advisor was not able to attend the sessions. At this school, both girls and boys 
participate in cleaning activities, though girls are responsible for cleaning latrines while boys fetch 
water. The students outwardly seemed fine with strictly gendered task distribution. The third club 
visited is highly functional, and members play more of an organizing role among their peers. While 
WASH Club members participate in the cleaning, they supervise the work of the other rotating groups. 
Student members spoke of how students use urinals rather than relieving themselves openly on the 
school grounds and of how they remind other students to wash their hands with soap or using cinders. 
This third club functions despite serious water-access issues within the village.
When asked on a survey if members of the WASH Clubs experience problems, more than half of the 
principals (28 or 57%) responded affirmatively. As Figure 10 demonstrates, WASH team members most 
commonly face bullying (as indicated by half of responding principals) and, to a lesser extent, verbal 
threats, students not following instructions, fear of older/stronger students and being laughed at. 
53 The remaining teacher indicated not knowing the answer to the question.
49
Figure 10: Difficulties WASH Clubs face according to principals (n=28)
In regard to whether female WASH Club members face particular challenges, both qualitative and 
quantitative data indicate minimal issues. For example, less than a fifth of principals (8 principals or 
16.3%) indicated that female WASH Club members experience difficulties. Among the difficulties girls 
experience, a lack of respect for females was most common (5 responses), followed by intimidation and 
verbal threats (4 responses for both, respectively). Focus group data from two of the three groups 
confirmed that both groups do experience verbal intimidation but that they also felt they could handle it 
themselves and approach teachers if the situation required escalation. Although some stakeholders 
interviewed expressed that WASH Club members have difficulties mobilizing their peers to appreciate 
good hygiene and a clean school environment, when asked directly, student members stated 
overwhelmingly that they earned respect among their peers for their role within the WASH Club, 
perhaps because of the authority it afforded them. The three quotes below provide examples of how 
certain students and teaching staff from different clubs feel efficacious. 
50%
29%
25%
25%
21%
11%
7%
4%
4%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Bullying
Verbal threat
Students don't follow instructions
Fear of older or stronger students
Laughing
Boys don't like to receive orders from girls
Fear to report to the teacher
Difficulties in repartion of task related to gender
Physical threat
50
“There’s no problem. The other kids do what we ask.”( Wash Club #2, focus group)
" Almost all the other kids respect us, but if they don’t we tell the teacher" (Wash 
Club #3, focus group)
"The kids in the club are respected and they enforce order and respect the rules" 
(Teaching Staff, focus group)49F
54
WASH activities needing improvement
Interviews and document review also indicated areas in which improvement of WASH activities could 
lead to greater effectiveness. To begin, access to water remains an issue at some schools. Proper latrine 
maintenance also proves a challenge for some schools according to a CRS field agent. Similarly, some 
element of Keun Faaba infrastructure have suffered vandalism, particularly at schools in urban areas or 
at those without or with incomplete school enclosures. Interviews with the CRS MEAL team and 
department-level DDEMP officials also point to possible disjuncture between project/school and 
community attitudes toward the importance of WASH. For this reason, MEAL staff interviewed called for 
continued sensibilization. A colleague commented that 
"I think that remains the real challenge, the regular daily awareness and daily follow￾up, and especially parents’ awareness to become involved. Because we know that 
when children have this reflex at home and at school, it becomes a habit." (MEAL 
Officer, interview)
Also notably, CRS experienced implementation delays of WASH activities because of unanticipated 
challenges faced in developing the WASH strategy, and because of recruitment difficulties. The WASH 
strategy was officially launched in January 2020, in year 3 of the project. The April-September 2019 
semi-annual report indicates that the delay prevented the full implementation of WASH activities for 
several months. Nonetheless, while the strategy took a while to develop, interviews with key 
stakeholders, as well as project documents, show that the strategy’s development is seen as a major 
accomplishment and solidifies MGD’s Phase 2 additional emphasis on WASH. According to the CRS chief 
of party, 
54 Note that the teaching staff focus group discussion took place at a different school than the WASH Club focus 
group discussions.
51
“The strategy has allowed us to clearly channel things with a good coordination 
between WASH and infrastructure activities. We’ve put into place Certification 
Committees with the help of the Pedagogical Advisors.” (COP, interview)
Recruitment and staffing of the WASH Team also encountered delays and turnover. Delays in part
resulted from challenges recruiting a gender-balanced team. Locating the position in Kandi, far from 
Cotonou, was also seen as an impediment to a quick and comprehensive recruiting process.50F
55 They also, 
however, resulted from a restructuring process that wanted to better align personnel backgrounds and 
roles with the new WASH strategy. In addition, the WASH-Nutrition program manager resigned during 
the first portion of the 2020 fiscal year, and recruitment suffered further delays due to COVID-19 
complications.51F
56 The next evaluation question explores the impact of COVID-19 on WASH initiatives in 
detail.
3.2. How has COVID-19 impacted the WASH strategy?
The COVID-19 pandemic has had an impact on schools and communities worldwide. In Benin, as 
indicated earlier, the Government of Benin mandated school closures from March 30 to May 10, 2020
for Grade 6 students, to August 10 for Grade 1-5 students and to September 28 for preschool students. 
While the COVID-19 pandemic and response continue and the full impact of the pandemic remains
unknown, the midterm evaluation provided an opportunity to better understand how COVID-19 has 
specifically impacted Keun Faaba’s WASH strategy and initiatives to date. Document review and 
qualitative data inform this question. Findings demonstrate that the COVID-19 pandemic affected the 
project in a complex way, as it both halted and reinforced key WASH activities.
COVID-19 halted or delayed WASH programming
As indicated by project documents,52F
57 school closures imposed by the Government of Benin to address 
COVID-19 put a halt to almost every WASH activity. At first, CRS took advantage of this time to develop 
and establish COVID-19 safety protocols. In the meantime, with schools closed, WASH Clubs ceased to 
meet and the review of club action plans and progress toward the certification of WASH-friendly schools 
was put on hold. Similarly, infrastructure construction activities could not take place, and challenges in 
the search for qualified tenders further delayed building efforts. The coaching of girls and boys by 
female community health workers was also suspended. When most activities resumed with school 
reopenings, gatherings remained limited to a maximum of 50 people per COVID safety protocols. 
Interviews with the CRS WASH-Nutrition specialist and CRS leadership confirmed these changes. Finally, 
the timing of the closures proved particularly constraining for WASH activities. As indicated above, and 
further emphasized in an interview with CRS leadership, the WASH strategy had just been officially 
launched in January 2020 and CRS had planned to use the year to accelerate efforts and make up for lost 
55 Source: Semi-annual report April-September 2019. 
56 Semi-annual report October 2019-March 2020.
57 This section draws from the Amendment to the Cooperative Agreement, the April 2019-September 2020 Semi￾annual Report and the FY2021 work plan.
52
time. CLTS activities were slightly less affected. Even though large gatherings could not take place, 
certification of Open-Defecation Free designation still took place. According to Caritas management and 
staff, the timing of the pandemic will also likely have an impact on CLTS achievements, as the initial 
lockdown occurred during the months when home visits were most likely,53F
58 and subsequently, large 
gatherings were not viable. CLTS activities thus also became difficult. The FY2021 work plan suggests 
that only WASH-friendly schools certification could occur before the end of the fiscal year.54F
59
COVID-19 reinforces good sanitation and handwashing messages
At the same time, the nature of COVID-19 prevention strategies aligned with Keun Faaba and WASH 
initiatives in general, namely, by further extending messaging to promote handwashing. Eight of 14 
interviews with implementing partners, students and teaching staff identified more regular 
handwashing as a positive outcome of the COVID-19 situation. Of these, all three student WASH Clubs 
indicated that they were already washing their hands prior to COVID-19 protocols. According to the 
Amendment document, COVID measures also included “printing educational posters to be hung in each 
classroom, the purchase and distribution of training toolkits to train communities and thermometers, 
and the purchase of masks, soap, and hand sanitizer for project staff.”5F
60 Discussions with CRS leadership 
explained how the organization provided masks to teachers, cooks and storekeepers out of concern that 
they had not been masking when schools resumed. Unfortunately, a school feeding field agent shared 
during an interview that it may prove difficult for cooks to wear a mask, especially since kitchens often 
involved smoke. The MEAL Team and the WASH-Nutrition specialist further shared that some schools 
received unanticipated funding from other NGOs to reinforce handwashing within the context of COVID￾19 and may have also received additional handwashing stations. The following quote further 
contextualizes this last point:
“The Covid-19 crisis is very serious and has had a positive impact thanks to the 
mobilization of all sides, whether it be the government or NGOs, to be able to 
produce messages, to promote good hygiene practices, so that in all the schools you 
have seen that there is a diversity of handwashing facilities.” (CRS WASH-Nutrition 
Specialist, interview)
3.3 Do literacy promotion activities help improve the reading and writing skills of students? 
Recall from section 1.2 above that Keun Faaba includes several literacy-promotion efforts that take 
place after school, including a bi-monthly story hour, a weekly radio hour featuring storytelling based on 
project booklets and books, the promotion of listening groups and community libraries to support 
children and their families’ reading practices. WEI leads educational activities in concert with two local 
NGOs. Some of these activities also seek to build the capacity of AMEs/APEs, who in turn initiate 
58 June through December corresponds to intensive farming activities.
59 FY2021 work plan, page 12.
60 Amendment to the Cooperative Agreement, p. 8.
53
activities within the community, for instance, study groups. COVID-19 prevention measures led to 
changes in literacy promotion activities, one of them being the implementation of two- and three-week 
adaptations of its radio programming to provide more direct instruction to students during school 
closures through a variation of its radio programming. 
Discussions with WEI and subcontractors, ALAFIA and 
DERANA, further clarified that story hour also 
modified its structure to reduce the number of 
students participating in each session. Rather than 
meeting twice a month with a large group of 
students, groups were limited to between 15 and 20 
students and met on alternate weeks. Story hour 
volunteers provide weekly programming to 
alternating groups. These volunteers receive training 
from WEI and partners but do not receive direct 
compensation. Story hour is intended for Grade 2 
students only. WEI also initiated study groups led by 
AME/APE members within the communities that 
occurred on Wednesday and Saturdays and made use 
of library materials. Like the story hour, the study 
groups are designed to focus on student work, but 
they also provide students with opportunities to 
interact with letter cards made from local materials. 
At the time of data collection, study groups and some 
libraries were still being established. As a further 
update, discussions also reiterated how WEI works 
closely with communities to generate support for 
literacy-promotion activities. In the case of libraries, 
WEI provides the materials, but the community AME/APE members are responsible for providing a place 
to house the library, complete with the necessary furniture. An individual also needs to be identified to 
manage the library. If this person is not able to read or speak French, a second person is selected to 
assist them with providing services to children. At the time of report review, all 97 communities in which 
WEI intervenes had libraries in place. 
This section examines the effectiveness of these activities, first drawing on questionnaire findings and 
using qualitative data to provide additional nuance. Teachers, parents and students all responded to 
related survey questions and a selection of these individuals participated in interview activities. When 
asked which extracurricular activities teachers felt were most effective for promoting improved reading 
and writing, more than half of the teachers (51%) listed the storytelling hour with the APE/AME, 
followed by listening sessions on the importance of reading (30%), book distribution (25%), study groups 
(23%), and the APE/AME-managed library (22%). Only 16 percent of teachers found the weekly radio 
program an effective promotion of reading. 
Analysis of interview data shows that stakeholders spoke most about the story hour when asked about 
literacy-promotion activities. Two of three teacher focus groups accentuated how story hour helped
students gain confidence to participate more readily in class. The below quotes provide further insights.
Figure 11: Community Library
54
"A child who doesn’t talk at school, after having participated in storytelling two or 
three times, they’ll become alert and start to speak at school, too." (Parent, focus 
group)
"In the beginning, when I would ask them to imagine something, they had a hard 
time doing it. I insisted on vocabulary enrichment with the kids. Tales are full of 
vocabulary, and there’s also the community library. As children’s vocabulary gets 
bigger, reading becomes easier." (Teacher, focus group)
"Story time works well and it takes place regularly. This has had a positive impact on 
kids’ reading abilities. Reading is a key to all other learning. It helps so much. They 
use illustrations to help communicate and express ideas orally." (Teacher, focus 
group)
Other stakeholders lauded story hour for its enjoyable approach and its ability to improve students’ 
vocabulary, as well as oral and listening comprehension. One parent group also shared how the focus on 
tales with a moral at the end was culturally relevant, making parents eager for their children to 
participate. 
At the same time, other stakeholders indicated that the story hour was not working well. While a 
department-level DDEMP official commented that he did not oversee the activity, he also mentioned 
that the COVID pandemic had disrupted programming, which had not yet recovered. Others echoed this 
sentiment, including a parent volunteer. Moreover, teaching staff (at a different school from the groups 
mentioned above) explained that a lack of volunteers meant that story hour was not happening for 
students within their community. Similarly, another teacher focus group indicated that teachers needed
to make great efforts to remind students to attend. Teachers participating in this particular group 
expressed mixed feelings about story hour. While some felt it was no longer worth their effort, another 
teacher suggested expanding the opportunity to Grade 1 students. Finally, the evaluation team’s review 
of audio stories indicates that some may not be appropriately leveled and that the recording quality may 
be poor, further complicating the utility of stories featured by WEI programming. These findings suggest 
mixed effectiveness for these activities.
Analysis of survey data provides a broader understanding of programming frequency and participation. 
When asked which activities took place most regularly at their schools during the first trimester before
the evaluation, many more teachers by far indicate that the AME/APE story hour occurred most 
regularly over other activities (70% compared to 27% for radio programming, the next highest rated 
activity). Teachers also indicated that students participated most regularly in story hour. In general, 
findings designate story hour as the most visible of all literacy-promotion activities. Like teachers, more 
parents reported their children taking part in the APE/AME story hour (32%) than in any other activity 
(see Annex 12 below). Most significantly, however, more than two-thirds (67%) of parents indicated 
having no knowledge of Keun Faaba extracurricular activities. A deeper analysis found that the 
proportion of parents unaware of extracurricular activities was significantly higher for parents who did
55
not speak or read French, and for parents who had not gone to school.56F
61 This result indicates a serious 
lack of awareness among the most vulnerable parents and may suggest the need for more effective 
communication about the availability of after-school activities for students to promote literacy among 
this group. 
Findings also provide some insights into reasons for non-participation. For one, discussions with some 
parents and teachers suggest that activities generally occur on Wednesday afternoons and Saturdays,
and that this timing may not work for certain segments of the target population. Children may find 
themselves helping their parents with cultivation in the fields at that time, for instance. The location 
may also not work for certain individuals within the community. In addition, parents may not be able to 
spare resources required for the full implementation of the community libraries. In terms of radio 
programming, questionnaire data confirms low listenership rates as reported in section 1.3 above,57F
62 as 
survey results show that more than half of students surveyed (55.9%) reported not tuning in. A lack of 
radio was clearly the greatest impediment to listening for students, as half of students (49.6%) indicated 
not having a radio and a quarter (24.6%) indicated that their parents did not provide them with one. The 
nonexistence of a library proved a barrier for 47.3 percent of students responding to the EGRA 
questionnaire to participate in extra-curricular activities and seems to be a major bottleneck for 
students. While teachers indicated that children may not be able to attend activities because of time 
conflicts, only a small proportion of students not attending radio shows (5.9%) and library activities 
(12.3%) indicated chores as an obstacle. 
3.4 Does the teaching of life skills help improve the reading and writing skills of students?
Keun Faaba’s life-skills curriculum focuses on hygiene and nutrition. Six study units are indicated within 
the teachers’ guide: 1) lack of hygiene and illnesses, 2) water hygiene, 3) keeping courtyards clean, 4) 
handwashing, 5) nutrition and food hygiene, and 6) personal hygiene and clothing.58F
63 Keun Faaba has 
also developed a Guide d’infusion, a document that shows teachers how the various life skills lessons 
can be integrated into the national curriculum’s scope and sequence. This particular evaluation question 
explores the extent to which the teaching of life skills, that is, an emphasis on good hygiene and 
nutrition, may translate into improving students’ reading and writing skills. 
First of all, interviews focused on better understanding the life skills that teachers emphasize with 
students. Of five interview activities with teaching staff, three of them spoke easily about the Guide 
d’infusion (WASH-Nutrition Integration Guide) while two others, from different communes, had no
awareness of the guide. These teachers seemingly do not yet include life skills as defined by Keun Faaba, 
in their classroom delivery. Notably, all four department chiefs of pedagogical regions also shared their 
experiences with the Integration Guide and related trainings. They made very positive comments and 
61 Results are statistically significant at the following p-values: parents who do not speak French (p=0.014), parents 
who do not read French (p=) and parents who did not go to school (p=0.009). 
62 Recall that the April-September 2020 semi-annual report noted that more than half (57%) of students did not 
tune into the radio programming.
63 Guide enseignement de l’hygiene et de la nutrition a l’ecole primaire base sur les competences de vie. Translation 
by evaluation team. As indicated within, the COVID-19 related school closures interrupted dissemination of the 
guide. Its use and impact should be explored within the final evaluation.
56
even expressed ownership over the process and the guide. One chief of pedagogical region further 
explained how the guides were distributed within teachers’ communities of practice. At the same time, 
the advisors clarified that school closures due to COVID-19 disrupted the guide’s dissemination,
explaining why some teachers had not yet received training. Notably, these departmental education 
officials indicated that the Integration Guide was intended for both Keun Faaba and non–Keun Faaba 
teachers. This point will be further explored later within the sustainability section. 
With regard to literacy, teachers most commonly addressed the link between life skills and students 
improving their reading and writing skills. 
"If you are sick because your environment is not healthy, you can't come to school 
and it affects your school performance, children’s attendance and ability to come to 
class. What is good health here? It's eating healthy, it's living in a healthy 
environment, and these life skills are taught through the module that CRS has put in 
place." (Teacher, Teaching Staff focus group)
"And when children are in good physical, mental health they are already willing to 
follow the teacher. When children follow the teacher, they understand. As a result, 
teaching is well organized and children are present. They will read. That’s that." 
(Teacher, Teaching Staff focus group)
In addition, another teacher made the connection between children learning life skills and reading and 
writing. Thus literacy becomes the vehicle through which to learn about proper health and hygiene. 
3.5 To what extent are teachers implementing literacy techniques acquired through the project?
Keun Faaba project activities include trainings for kindergarten, Grade 1 and Grade 2 teachers, principals 
and administrators (chiefs of pedagogical region and pedagogical advisors). These trainings were 
designed to reinforce teachers’ capacity to give instruction in reading and writing, and pre-reading and 
pre-writing for kindergarten teachers. According to project documents59F
64 and discussions with project 
management, WEI leads these trainings, with critical support from INFRE, the Primary Education 
Directorate, the Department of Primary Education and the National School of Teachers. COVID-19 
related closures greatly interrupted the time available for teachers to implement strategies learned. For 
example, the teacher training on using decodable books for reading instruction took place in January 
2020 but schools closed only two months later leaving teachers with only one month for practicing what 
they had learned. Teacher survey data revealed that 85 percent of Keun Faaba teachers have attended 
project trainings, while 15 percent of teachers have received no training at all. No additional information 
was available as to why these teachers did not participate in trainings. Similarly, 48 of 50 school 
64 The section draws on semi-annual reports, including indicator tracking tables, and WEI’s list of activities and 
training reports.
57
principals surveyed indicated that all of their Grade 1 and Grade 2 teachers participated in Keun Faaba 
trainings.60F
65
In terms of the extent to which teachers implement literacy techniques, survey data reveal that the top 
three types of techniques teachers most regularly practice are 1) the five components of reading (67%), 
2) using games to teach reading (45%) and 3) teaching reading and writing in a multilingual context 
(36%) (see Figure 12 for more details.) Principals surveyed confirmed these findings, identifying the five 
components of reading and using instructional games as the top two practices teachers effectively use. 
Figure 12: Literacy techniques teachers report implementing most effectively (n=87)
At the same time, project semi-annual reporting from September 2020 refers to a follow-up classroom 
observation study involving kindergarten, Grade 1 and Grade 2 teachers. Analysis indicated how findings 
show that the project is meeting 53% of annual and LOP targets61F
66 for teachers who are able to 
demonstrate new techniques or tools learned as a result of USDA assistance. Findings specified that 
kindergarten teachers needed reinforcement in organizing and preparing the classroom and pre-reading 
techniques, while Grade 1 and 2 teachers needed support in teaching strategies related to the five
components of reading. Finally, the semi-annual report notes that the largest percentage of teachers 
(65%) failed to promote a student-centered learning environment. The report points to communities of 
practice as an avenue for strengthening teacher practice and the FY2021 workplan indicates this as a 
project strategy. Further discussions with the COP further clarified that communities of practice meet bi￾monthly as needs-based, group coaching sessions in which teachers 1) share about teaching challenges 
and engage in discussions with peers and their coaches (who facilitate the Communities of Practice) to 
identify solutions; 2) engage in hands-on exercises and practical demonstrations of instructional 
65 It may also be noteworthy that 2 of the 50 surveyed directors from Keun Faaba schools responded that none of 
their Grade 2 teachers had participated in trainings. In addition, the two most popular trainings attended took 
place in November 2019 (Phase 1 training) and in January 2020 (Decodables training). 
66 Semi-annual Report April-September 2020, Excel spreadsheet: Result Indicators Report, row 71.
8%
13%
14%
14%
17%
20%
21%
22%
25%
26%
28%
30%
36%
45%
67%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Manage multigrade classrooms
Have conversations with students
Allow students enough time for practice
Teach respect and conflict resolution
Encourage students' creativity
Listen to students
Use booklets for Grade 1
Apply psychology to teaching/learning
Manage small groups
Use decodable booklets for Grade 2
Measure/evaluate acquired knowledge/skills
Enrich students' vocabulary
Teach reading and writing in a multlingual context
Use games to teach reading
Apply 5 components of reading
58
strategies (to overcome teaching challenges identified); and 3) develop teaching and learning materials 
that can support their teaching practice and serve as manipulatives to make learning more accessible to 
students. Pedagogical counselors and chiefs of pedagogical regions serve as coaches.
Qualitative data offer insights into supportive and hindering factors related to teachers incorporating 
new Keun Faaba strategies. Teaching staff in all four focus groups and three of four chiefs of pedagogical
region accentuated the positive aspects of Keun Faaba–promoted literacy strategies. They felt that 
communities of practice provide additional scaffolding and CRS offering teachers a comprehensive set of 
materials and trainings stood as factors supporting teachers in their adoption efforts. One teacher 
explained how their community of practice has helped overcome difficulties with application:
“For me, the difficulties I encountered are somewhat improved. Thanks to the 
community of practice. We ask the trainers about the difficulties we encounter in 
class and the trainers help us." (Teacher, focus group)
Moreover, teachers commented that they see the techniques as effective in helping students learn, 
notably the “I do, we do, you do” collective repetition technique that eases children into a new exercise. 
Three of four teacher focus groups explained how new methods helped children decode words and read 
more quickly than previous non-phonics-based methods. The quotes below provide illustration of their 
excitement for these techniques and of what teachers see as positive effects on students’ learning to 
read.
“It’s the repetition that I liked. It’s the method, ‘I do, we do, you do,’ that motivates 
kids, and they find it interesting. All the kids get involved. I really like this method. It’s 
not just that some kids learn, it’s that all the kids learn." (Teacher, focus group)
"Yes, the methods are very useful for the teachers, because it allows me to unfold our 
sequences as easily. Before, we had to look for images, not draw everything on the 
board. We don't do that anymore because we show the children pictures and the 
children repeat them, so they can understand things better." (Teacher, focus group)
At the same time, findings revealed difficulties that teachers encountered in implementing Keun Faaba–
promoted literacy techniques, though notably, nearly one-third (29.8%) of teachers indicated no 
difficulties. Among difficulties cited, the top three were that student assessments took too much time 
(20.2 %), teaching and learning materials were not available (20.2%) and that methods were not 
compatible with the Benin national curriculum (16 %). While qualitative data do not reinforce the first 
two results, the topic of a misalignment between the CRS curriculum and the Government of Benin’s 
national curriculum also emerged as a point of discussion during interviews with WEI staff and with a 
colleague at the World Bank. The latter confirmed that the World Bank was developing a phonics-based 
curriculum to be brought to scale in the short term. In addition, interview participants pointed to 
significant systemic and contextual challenges that hindered the implementation of literacy techniques. 
The most significant was the issue of teacher mobility: teachers leaving a school may take new 
59
competencies with them and leave a vacuum. A chief of pedagogical region stated the problem as 
follows:
“There’s the issue of teacher mobility. There’s concern for those who were there and 
now, like imagine that I participated in all the trainings, but then they tell me that 
there is another that is coming to replace me and that person didn’t participate in the 
trainings.” (Chief of Pedagogical Region, interview)
Keun Faaba promotes policy advocacy to revise teacher-placement policy. We turn next to efforts at the 
classroom level to improve teacher and student attendance.
3.5 Which strategies have been (or should be) put in place to effectively monitor teachers’ 
attendance? Has project implementation been effectively monitored? How well has the M&E 
mechanism helped project implementation, and what improvements could be made, if any? Have 
challenges of FFE I been addressed, namely: tracking teacher attendance, tracking student 
attendance?
As indicated in the response to evaluation question 1.2 above, Keun Faaba addresses teacher 
attendance through advocacy efforts to revise the teacher-placement policy, through radio messages 
and through the establishment of merit certificates. The project also encourages student participation in 
Grade 3, 4 and 5 for students who reach a 95 percent attendance rate by providing them with dry take￾home rations in the form of jugs of cooking oil. This section explores the extent to which teacher and 
student absenteeism constitutes a problem, as well as the viability of solutions.
Teacher attendance
In general, findings show that school-level stakeholders identified little concern for teacher absences 
from school. Principals across both control and treatment samples indicated few problems with teacher 
absence from school. For example, 93 of 100 school principals indicated that their teachers have been 
regular in their attendance since the beginning of the first trimester. Results also demonstrate that 
parents show more concern for teacher absences than the educators surveyed. One-fifth of all parents 
(20%) felt that absenteeism is “more or less” (10%) or “really” a problem (10 %). As Figure 13 illustrates, 
project parents expressed slightly more concern than control parents, particularly as 6 percent more 
parents felt that, “yes, really,” absenteeism constituted a recurring issue at their school. This result is 
statistically significant (see Annex 12 for full results). It is possible that parents at project schools are 
more likely to pay attention to teacher absence and see it as a problem than parents at control schools. 
In addition, the distinction between educators’ and parents’ views on teacher absenteeism is worth 
noting and signals a need for better communication about teacher absences and mitigation efforts.
60
Figure 13: Comparison of project and control parents’ views on whether teacher absenteeism is a 
recurring problem at their school62F
67
When surveyed, teachers across both control and project schools indicated that the most common 
reasons for their absences were: being sick themselves (44.7%), having a sick family member (18.1 %), 
administrative reasons (28.7%), work meetings (8.5%) and trainings (5.3%). There were no notable 
differences between control and project teachers. More notably, as Figure 14 illustrates, nearly twice as 
many control-school teachers report being absent than those in project schools during the first 
trimester, 59 compared to 32 percent. This result is statistically significant and suggests that something 
at Keun Faaba schools encourages teachers’ regular attendance, or at least, their reporting of regular 
attendance. 
Figure 14: Comparison of teacher-reported absences at project and control schools
One of Keun Faaba’s key strategies for promoting improved teacher attendance is issuing merit 
certificates to teachers. The project aims to issue 36 merit certificates (24 to male teachers and 12 to 
female teachers) over the life of the project, recognizing teachers who have improved their practice. 
Survey results show that 93 percent of teachers, 82 percent of principals and 91 percent of parents 
support providing teacher merit certificates. Among teachers, 82 percent were strongly in favor, having 
responded, “yes, really.” Unfortunately, COVID-related school closures delayed this activity. The FY2021 
work plan indicates that WEI will begin the process of developing criteria for selecting teachers for 
award in February 2021. Similarly, advocacy activities about the teacher-transfer policy have been 
67 Results are stasticially significant and have a p-value of <0.000.
50.5%
42.4%
29.6%
35.5%
12.9%
8.3%
7.0%
13.8%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Control (n=487)
Project (n=493)
No, not at all No, not really Yes, more or less Yes, really
41.0%
68.0%
59.1%
27.0%
0.0%
4.0% 1.0%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Control (n=105)
Project (n=100)
None Less than 6 Between 6 and 15 More than 15
61
postponed. Accordingly, focus group discussions generally revealed that teaching staff and department￾level education officials were not aware of any strategies to support teacher attendance.
Findings regarding Keun Faaba’s third strategy of using radio messaging for AMEs/APEs to provide 
feedback on teacher attendance prove contradictory. The FY2021 work plan developed in August 2020 
still includes this activity, but an interview with WEI staff in February 2021 indicated its cancellation. 
Survey results confirm that the approach may be controversial. For example, only 28 percent of 
principals surveyed at Keun Faaba schools agreed with this proposal, while nearly a quarter (12 
principals) indicated that they did not think it a good idea, “not at all.” Teachers, however, indicated 
differently, as 80 percent of teachers responded favorably, while only 11 percent of teachers indicated 
“no, not at all.” Among parents surveyed, 87 percent also supported the idea, and demonstrated 
interest in helping implement such monitoring. Results seem to show that parents are willing to play a 
role in fostering teacher accountability but that the suggested mechanism may not be appropriate. (For 
more information about stakeholders’ suggestions for improving teacher attendance, see Annex 12.) 
Student attendance
In terms of student attendance, results show that school principals at project schools within the sample 
perceive less of a recurring problem with absenteeism than school principals in the control sample by 
eight percentage points (62 to 54%, respectively). This difference is not significant, however, and cannot 
be generalized to all Keun Faaba Schools. In actuality, however, midterm evaluation data collected at 
the time of school visits indicates that attendance is lower in project schools than in control schools 
(92.8% compared to 89.7%, on average). While statistically significant, this difference is not very 
meaningful in practical terms. Project monitoring data63F
68 provide lower results than the midterm 
evaluation (79.8%, with very little difference between boys and girls). These measurements took place in 
August 2020 during a period of high cultivation activity and also reflect the consequences of the 
extended COVID-19 school closures.
In terms of monitoring, all principals surveyed asserted that teachers closely follow student absences 
regularly. Three teaching staff focus groups and one interview with a school principal addressed the 
issue of student attendance. All described the use of attendance registers multiple times during the day, 
including conducting a close count to allow for the accurate preparation of food. The way teachers 
collect this information appears problematic, however, as teachers ask students to identify those who 
are absent rather than going through the roll. This is a way to save time, particularly with very large class 
sizes, but it may lead to inaccuracies in school attendance. Similarly, the evaluation team observed at 
least one attendance register with the school principal that was not complete. Moreover, at times 
interview participants held diverse viewpoints about attendance. One teacher focus group insisted that 
few absences occur, while the chief of pedagogical region for that same department explained that 
absences were high due to children helping their families in the field. Nonetheless, stakeholders 
generally indicated that incentives for good attendance in the form of take-home rations of cooking oil 
motivates parents and students. Teachers asserted that attendance was higher for Grade 4, 5 and 6 
students, where these incentives are implemented. According to a teacher in a focus group:
68 Semi-annual Report April-September 2020, Excel spreadsheet: Result Indicators Report, rows 122-124.
62
“There’s not much absenteeism. The attendance log allows us to follow students’ 
individual attendance. Children know that they will have difficulties if they are 
absent. In Grade 6 there are few absences. Starting in Grade 4, they know that if they 
are present 95% of the time, they will get a jug of il. That motivates parents.” 
(Teacher, focus group)
Conclusion: Effectiveness
Findings overwhelmingly show that Phase II of the MGD17/Keun Faaba project has a heightened focus 
on WASH activities at both the school and community levels. Most notably, findings demonstrate an 
increased emphasis on handwashing stations at school, creative approaches to helping younger children 
learn to use school latrines, and WASH Clubs’ essential role in Keun Faaba’s approach. Dedicated 
teaching staff who can act as champions, particularly in terms of leading the WASH Club, likely also 
improve project effectiveness. Similarly, supportive and motivating field agents seem to increase 
effectiveness, though with some cost to long-term sustainability. Evidence further suggests that 
Community Led Total Sanitation (CLTS) efforts may also promote healthier environments for children, 
particularly in the 19 localities certified as Open-Defecation Free. The latter activities are often less 
visible, however. 
On the other hand, access to water continues as an issue for some schools, alongside proper latrine 
maintenance, both of which constrain Keun Faaba’s effectiveness. Although back on track at the time of 
midterm data collection, the project also suffered because of delays in the development of the WASH 
strategy and the recruitment of the WASH Team. Even more significantly, the COVID-19 pandemic 
response required the suspension and delay of WASH programming. At the same time, COVID￾prevention measures reinforced Keun Faaba messaging by promoting effective handwashing and good 
sanitation. While the pandemic also stalled the rollout of the WASH-Nutrition Integration Guide, 
department-level education officials demonstrate promising support and ownership for the initiative. 
Nonetheless, the linkage between improved WASH practices and improved literacy remains largely 
theoretical, an issue addressed within USDA’s current learning agenda. 
WASH Clubs have great potential for galvanizing support to develop healthy practices, though the 
quality of school-level application may vary greatly and depend largely on individual advisors. Although 
members of WASH Clubs expressed challenges, membership is active, and well-supported WASH Clubs 
also afford students respect and authority, creating a very positive experience for involved students. 
WASH Clubs have the potential to both challenge and reinforce gender norms. Midterm evaluation 
findings show current project implementation as largely gender-accommodating rather than gender￾transformative. Keun Faaba implementing partners may benefit from more clearly articulating their 
approach to existing social norms, particularly if the confrontation of gender-linked barriers constitutes 
a project goal. The certification of WASH-friendly schools set to ramp up in FY2021 also has the potential 
to further motivate school-level actors and to energize programming.
In terms of teachers’ skills to promote children’s literacy, Keun Faaba training has fostered the 
development of enhanced skills, though 15 percent of teachers surveyed did not benefit from any 
training. Self-reporting from teachers and school principals indicates that more than two-thirds (67%) of 
teachers regularly practice the integration of the five components of reading in their classrooms, while 
less than half (45%) use instructional games and more than one-third (36 %) use strategies for teaching 
63
reading and writing in a multilingual context. Serious reinforcement is nonetheless warranted, as project 
assessments show that kindergarten and Grade 1 and 2 teachers need additional support, particularly in 
promoting a student-centered learning environment and supporting pre-reading and reading strategies. 
Factors that support teachers’ continued growth include the visible improvements they witness in their 
students’ skills and confidence through collective reading strategies, as well as the technical and 
collegial support they receive through communities of practice. At the same time, it must be noted the 
time teachers have had for implementing newly acquired strategies has been limited, due in large part 
to COVID-19 school closures.
Although in the short term disconnects between the CRS reading approach and the national curriculum 
have caused frustrations for many educators, mastering the CRS curriculum proactively positions 
teachers and schools to be ready for the implementation of the government’s revised reading 
curriculum. Keun Faaba’s teaching and learning techniques also promote evidence-based reading 
practices that have the potential to benefit students’ literacy development. Unfortunately, as holds true 
for many early-grade reading projects, unpredictable teacher mobility – the very common practice for 
teachers in Benin to be transferred regularly and frequently, particularly in areas that are considered 
less desirable to live, such as the north – remains a major hindering factor. While Keun Faaba plans 
major advocacy efforts to revise this practice and ensure that teachers trained by CRS/WEI remain in 
their position until the end of the project, COVID-19 complications have delayed the launching of these 
efforts, leaving little time to address an incredibly complex issue before the end of the project. 
COVID-related delays have also greatly hampered the effectiveness of Keun Faaba’s strategies to 
improve teacher and student attendance. Nonetheless, findings demonstrate that project teachers are 
nearly half as likely to report being absent as teachers at control schools (32% compared to 59%), 
indicating that conditions in Keun Faaba schools foster better teacher attendance. At the same time, 
findings demonstrate that educators and parents view the problem of teacher absenteeism differently,
suggesting the need for better communication and sensitization efforts in both groups of stakeholders.
With regard to student attendance, while great enthusiasm exists for incentives provided to students, 
findings are contradictory, and attendance checks at the time of data collection confirm no meaningful 
improvement in student attendance at project schools.
In addition to delaying advocacy efforts for a revised teacher-mobility policy, school closures prevented 
Keun Faaba from providing motivation to teachers through merit certificates. Recognition of positive 
teacher practice stands as a recognized and effective strategy in many other contexts, including similar 
Francophone countries such as Mali69. Findings demonstrate great support for this initiative planned to 
get underway during the first quarter of 2021, and the evaluation team encourages CRS in this strategy.
Finally, WEI and its subcontractors have adapted project activities to promote literacy in response to 
COVID-19 prevention measures, unfortunately limiting the number of students who can participate in 
sessions and requiring additional efforts from volunteers. Findings about the effectiveness of these 
activities are mixed, particularly for story hour which received high reviews from some but reports of 
weak implementation within other communities. Of greatest concern, more than two-thirds of parents 
69 SIRA, the USAID-funded early grade reading project in Mali implemented by EDC, featured teacher merit awards.
64
(67%) indicated having no knowledge of Keun Faaba activities and most notably amongst parents with 
the least amount of education. An improved communication strategy is warranted. 
4. Efficiency 
The midterm evaluation also sought to assess the efficiency of the MGD17/Keun Faaba project, that is, 
“the extent to which the intervention delivers, or is likely to deliver, results in an economic and timely 
way.” Five evaluation questions address efficiency; they focus on the project’s fidelity to the original 
implementation timeline and budget, how food management and other community stakeholders 
function to support nutrition programming, as well as how the project maneuvers and responds to 
factors and challenges it encounters. 
4.1. Is the project being implemented as planned (timeline and budget)? If not, why not? Has the 
project been implemented in the most efficient way possible? 
Qualitative field work and document review provide insights into CRS and partners’ efficiency related to 
timeline and budget. In addition to obvious delays related to COVID-19, Keun Faaba has struggled to 
maintain its timeline in several ways. This section explores delays while later sections for evaluation 
questions 4.4 and 4.5 address internal and external hindering factors as well as challenges for 
implementation. 
Timeline
In addition to interview transcripts, the evaluation team closely reviewed semi-annual reports, project 
work plans and contractual documents to inform analysis of the project’s efficiency in terms of both 
time and financial resources. In terms of timing, findings show that the project has encountered 
significant delays due to internal and external factors (see EQ 4.4 below). The contract start date for the 
2017 McGovern-Dole Keun Faaba award was September 28, 2017. Table 12 indicates delays of major 
project milestones. The project launch and the execution of the baseline amendment were both delayed 
for 21 months. Technically, the baseline amendment was executed at the end of project year 3. In 
addition, the FY2021 work plan categorizes FY2020 activities as start-up. An interview with USDA 
personnel clarified that a fully executed baseline amendment normally issues 6 to 10 months after a 
new award, marking Keun Faaba’s delays as exceptional. Multiple reasons were provided for the delay in 
start-up, including a teacher strike in 2018, incomplete infrastructure activities during Phase 1, delayed 
baseline data collection, contracting delays and obstacles to recruitment. COVID-19 has further 
exacerbated these complications. A later section will explore these and other internal and external 
factors in greater detail. 
Table 12: Comparison of original and actual project milestone dates 
Project milestone Original date Actual date Delay
Project launch March 2018 December 2019 21 months
Baseline data collection February 2018 November 2018 9 months
Baseline report April 2018 February 2019 10 months
65
Fully executed baseline 
amendment
July 2018 June 2020 21 months
At the same time, discussions with Keun Faaba’s COP emphasized the nuanced nature of the impact of 
these delays. Previous activities that were continuations of the MGD2014 project, for example, started 
in January 2019 while only new activities requiring baseline data were delayed for longer. These 
activities including the community farms, CLTS and community libraries.
Financial analysis
Review of project financial reports shows a general burn rate 43.29% as of September 2020, which is 
acceptable at the time of report writing. In addition, interviews with key management staff, including 
the CRS finance manager, chief of party and head of programming, indicate that the project has stayed 
on budget and is on track in terms of burn-rate. Accordingly, the project seems to be on track for 
maintaining the original end date of 2022. According to the finance manager, “there will be enough 
money to finish the project.” He accentuated that warehouse stock was also on track and that the CRS 
team was conducting a supply-chain analysis to make adjustments as needed. At the same time, 
however, a closer analysis shows that the burn rate for infrastructure is only 2.42%, which is very low. 
Findings also speak to budget realignments for CRS and its partners. According to the Chief of Party 
(COP) and Finance Manager, budget realignment was necessary to address infrastructure challenges, 
revise the administrative staffing budget and adjust certain activity line items. The CRS Head of 
Programming also underlined that while no activities were cancelled, adjustments had to be made to 
them, as well as changes to the timeline. The chief of party predicts another budget readjustment 
related to infrastructure, as the project has realized it will need to install manually operated water 
pumps, rather than budgeted solar operated pumps, due to budget constraints. Similarly, Keun Faaba 
subcontractors also have undergone budget realignment. Caritas leadership, for example, spoke of how 
the budget has stayed on track but has undergone adjustments regarding CLTS activities. WEI leadership 
likewise noted activity readjustments. For example, the budget was revised to ensure that students 
receive a more comprehensive package of decodable readers, to support AME exchanges that had not 
previously existed in the budget and, significantly, to cover COVID-19 prevention and adaptation costs. 
Despite significant timeline delays, the financial management of the project seems satisfactory. 
Response sections for EQ 4.4 and 4.5 below will also attest to the challenging working conditions in 
project areas in Benin. To illustrate, USDA expressed general satisfaction with Keun Faaba’s project 
management in spite of the delayed timeline for implementation. One of the USDA technical staff 
interviewed said, 
Activities are logical and tracked really well. Whatever percentage of the activities 
completed—it’s tracked really well. Shows efficiency. CRS has been good at circling 
back to stakeholders when they receive feedback—about changes they want to 
make. Sometimes it takes years to make changes. . . . We can speak to the higher￾level programmatic level and we rely on specific projects to be efficient and adaptive 
and we feel like they’ve been efficient. (USDA Official, interview)
66
4.2. Is there another way to make food-management committees more efficient considering the 
literacy levels of committee members and parents?
One of the challenges facing Keun Faaba is the high likelihood of many community members that serve 
as cooks, and especially storekeepers, having low levels of literacy. As part of the midterm evaluation, 
more than one-third of participating storekeepers (15 of 38, 39.5%) self-reported having difficulties 
when needing to do calculations to manage the inventory. A lesser proportion mentioned difficulties 
reading documents (7 of 38, 18.4%). Of 37 principals within the project sample who indicated 
participating in the Canteen Management Committee, nearly all (34, or 92 percent) responded that they 
had not experienced difficulties managing the school feeding program at their school. To triangulate, 
nearly four-fifths (30 of 38, 79%) of storekeepers also indicated that they did not have major problems. 
On the other hand, five storekeepers responded affirmatively that “yes, really,” they had experienced 
problems, while two others responded “yes, more or less.” 
Direct discussions with parents reveal that at least in the four schools visited, all Canteen Management 
Committees and volunteers feel that they function efficiently. One exception is a case where a
competent storekeeper fell ill and was replaced by a person less literate, requiring some assistance from 
teachers to perform correct calculations. Findings also indicate that meetings do not always occur with 
great regularity, and taking meeting minutes or reporting decisions taken are not common practices. 
These groups rather raise concerns about challenges obtaining contributions from children in the form 
of money and parents in the form of condiments. CRS staff interviews also acknowledged this difficulty. 
One parent focus group spoke about difficulties raising money to replace CRS-provided utensils that are 
now worn, while another would prefer that parents send children with covered plates. One parent, in a 
group where they had no issues at all to raise, said,
“We have no problems with each other. The storekeeper knows how to do the 
calculations, the outputs and also the monthly report. Still no discrepancies in the 
calculations. No problems with theft.” (Parent Volunteer, focus group)
On the other hand, survey data reveal more of a nuanced experience. With regard to the literacy of 
volunteer cooks and storekeepers, over three-quarters of principals (29 principals, or 78%) commented 
that it was not a problem. Six principals (16%), however, indicated “more or less” of an issue, while one 
principal responded emphatically, “yes, really.” Not all respondents provided more details about 
problems observed, but those who did identified that volunteers may ask teachers or the principal to 
help them read instructions or perform calculations (five principals), while three principals replied that 
volunteers were unable to read instructions and one principal indicated that volunteers had difficulties 
writing the monthly report. 
Findings from interviews with key CRS staff, namely—the COP, MEAL officer, a canteen field agent and a 
WASH-Nutrition specialist—indicate that while the project strives for even greater efficiency, the model 
of the Canteen Management Committee allows for a collaborative effort that acknowledges the possible 
need for assistance from volunteers. They explained that the committee always included someone able 
to read and perform mathematical operations and that field agents asked teachers on the committee or 
the school principal to step in when issues required attention, such as managing inventory. In addition, 
the MEAL officer insisted that where problems existed, these may emerge from larger leadership issues
67
on how to construct and support the School Canteen Management Committee, rather than from the 
competencies of individual volunteers. At the same time, a WASH-Nutrition specialist acknowledged 
that it could prove challenging when a storekeeper needed constant assistance from teachers. 
4.3. How has the project responded to date in terms of key community stakeholders’ requests for 
material incentives? Is there a better approach to do this?
The Keun Faaba school feeding model at the school level relies on the contributions of community 
members who fulfill key roles, including as cooks and storekeepers, garden and farm volunteers, and 
library and storytelling-hour facilitators. Survey results provide insights into recruitment efforts as well 
as the motivations that drive volunteers to assist with the school feeding activity. It is worth noting that 
more than half of the school principals surveyed (52%) indicated having difficulties finding volunteers. 
Recall from above that the project provides volunteers with the provision of a bottle of oil per month as 
well as an equivalent of three student rations of the prepared daily meal per day. Among volunteers, of 
the 106 cooks and 34 storekeepers surveyed, nearly nine out of ten (88 percent) indicated that being 
able to provide a meal to students served as their motivation. The next most popular reason was “being 
close to my children” (11 volunteers, or 8%), followed by “in order to receive compensation” (7 
volunteers, or 4.9%). This last response may be underreported given social pressures to say otherwise. 
Relatedly, 128 of 144 volunteers (89%) indicated they had received some form of compensation for their 
contributions to the school canteen program. Most commonly, volunteers receive a bottle of oil per 
month (125, or 98 %), a meal on the days they work (20 volunteers, or 16%) or, for a very few (6, or 5%), 
financial compensation. 
When asked if they were satisfied with the current form of compensation, almost all individuals 
surveyed (93 percent) indicated satisfaction, with more than two-thirds of volunteers (68%) signaling 
“really” satisfied (see Figure 15. Almost all the nine volunteers who indicated not being totally satisfied 
suggested they would prefer monetary remuneration. Moreover, all 128 volunteers reporting some 
form of compensation indicated that they would continue supporting the Keun Faaba project even 
without anything in return. Similarly, nearly three-quarters of school principals agreed that they 
believed volunteers would continue even if compensation were not available (see sustainability 
question 6.2 below for more details).
Figure 15: Volunteers’ satisfaction with compensation (%)
64.9%
76.5%
26.6%
20.6%
8.5%
2.9%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Cooks (n=94)
Storekeepers (n=34)
Yes, really Yes, more or less No, not really
68
Qualitative data provide additional insights to quantitative findings. Of three parent groups, discussions 
within two groups indicate that volunteers feel satisfied with the compensation provided. One of these 
groups emphasized their satisfaction with receiving a jug of oil and their pleasure at being able to help 
their children receive better nourishment. Low turnover may also indicate general satisfaction with the 
current arrangement. At the same time, a third group emphasized that the compensation was 
insufficient given time spent. The excerpt below relates the conversation held within this particular
focus group:
Parent 1: “Women don’t receive anything from parents. They only get what was 
planned by the project.”
Parent 2: “Volunteers aren’t happy. Cooks are having a hard time. If the cooks are 
there until 2 p.m. every day and they only get a jug of oil, they don’t have time to 
tend their fields and they don’t have money to send to their middle-school children.”
Parent 3: “Also provide them with ingredients, rice, flour, in order to improve the 
situation. Dues are always a problem for parents and also for volunteers. It’s the 
same issue.” (Parents, focus group)
These comments align with concerns raised in response to EQ 4.2 above that other school parents do 
not provide financial contributions.64F
70 Interviews with CRS key personnel, including the COP, MEAL officer 
and a WASH-Nutrition specialist, conveyed that they would prefer to provide more comprehensive
compensation to volunteers. One staff member provided examples of certain communities where 
parents self-organize to provide volunteers with livestock or cloth wrap skirts as a symbolic gesture. 
Other examples include providing volunteers with produce from school farms where they exist, or 
monetary compensation of 5,000 F CFA (about US$10) at the end of the term. Interviews also raised the 
concern of fraud, and one staff member indicated that the disappearance of dry rations has been a
minor issue for the project, which they have effectively addressed. At the same time, the evaluation 
team’s analysis of the government’s School Canteen Strategy and WFP documents and interviews with 
relevant officials indicate no parallel compensation available to volunteers at government-run school 
canteens, though some communities are able to provide incentives independently.
4.4 Have there been internal and/or external factors that have hindered the efficient implementation 
of project activities?
As indicated in the response to EQ4.1 above, an examination of project efficiencies and challenges 
identifies both internal and external factors. 
70 A fourth group was not able to fully comment as the cooks and storekeeper were not present themselves within 
the focus group.
69
Internal factors
The identification of the following internal factors draws from qualitative interviews as well as an 
analysis of project documents. In addition, school directors were asked to cite internal factors that 
hindered project implementation. It is worth noting more than half of school principals (54 percent) 
indicated no internal hindering factors, while just under a third (26 percent) referred to delays in the 
delivery of school materials. 
Contracting challenges
Entirely an internal matter, findings from interview analysis and document review show that the CRS 
contracting process can be lengthy, causing delays in activity start-up. Two examples of CRS contracts 
with subcontractors provide illustration. The CRS contract with WEI, its most substantial partner, took 
more than five months to sign, as the effective date was October 1, 2018, but it was signed on March 28, 
2019. The contract with Caritas similarly took more than four months65F
71. Both the CRS MEAL officer and 
the infrastructure officer lamented the length of time that internal processes took for engaging local 
contractors for building projects. According to one of them, a contract might take five to six months to 
sign6F
72
. 
“Initially what we do, when there is infrastructure to be put in place, it is a long 
process. We have to draw up the documents, send them to Cotonou for people to 
review. After that, we have to wait for the approval. After the approval, we have to 
launch the process. After launching the process, we have to come back and rework 
the timeline. We have to postpone it because the team did not do its work in time. 
We have to rework the activity schedule. An initial three-month schedule lasts over a 
year, and sometimes, we have to carry out the building during the rainy season. Even 
with the procedures, we have to find the right balance and move things forward very 
quickly.” (Infrastructure Officer, interview)
Similarly worrisome, the interview with the MEAL team indicated that payments could be delayed, 
resulting in stalled activities. 
Recruitment challenges
Difficulties recruiting competent people to fill key positions have also posed a challenge for CRS. Most 
notably, the WASH Team was finally constituted in June 2020, in year 3 of the project. Project 
71 The evaluation team finds that two to three months is the ideal time period for contracting but that four months 
could be acceptable in more complicated circumstances.
72 It should be noted that CRS also provided a pre-award letter to partners to allow time for preparatory activities 
such as recruiting staff, training/orientation, and equipment purchase. Nonetheless, this seems to have not 
provided ample assurance to its partners. WEI, for instance, did not feel comfortable signing contracts with its own 
sub-partners until the contract was fully executed.
70
documents detail that recruitment was complicated by prioritizing a gender balance and by the position 
location in Kandi, far from Cotonou. At least one qualified female candidate declined an offer because of 
the location, considering it a very challenging environment for her.67F
73 In addition, according to the 
finance manager, the overlap between phase 1 and phase 2 made it impossible to automatically transfer 
staff from the first project to the second. Even with the assistance of a staffing agency, recruitment 
proved challenging. The following quote from the finance manager underlines the challenges the project 
faced with recruitment, especially being located in Kandi:
"Yes, generally one of the difficult things is that because certain strong candidates 
don’t want to move to Kandi. For instance, for WASH, the first person was not 
competent, and so we had to launch a search and we lost a lot of time." (Finance 
Manager, interview)
Problems with new finance and procurement system
CRS implemented a new financial system, Insight, across all its programming in April 2020. The system 
has led to difficulties transmitting reports to USDA in Washington, DC as well as to month-long delays 
issuing payments to vendors. Both the CRS finance manager and the COP spoke to the challenges 
encountered, though the COP was more emphatic, underlining that the current system requires a month 
for payment and requires additional coordination because it is issued in Cotonou. He further highlighted 
that the transition should have taken two months, though the interview was occurring in month 11. 
USDA agreed that they had “felt the effects” of this change. While stakeholders hope these delays will 
be temporary, these complications negatively affect efficiency.
Delayed development and launching of the WASH Strategy
As discussed in response to EQ3.2, the development and launch of the WASH Strategy marked a major 
milestone for the Keun Faaba project. Nonetheless, its delay had repercussions for the rest of the 
project timeline, including the finalization of the post-baseline amendment and the rollout of WASH 
activities. 
Infrastructure-specific considerations
In addition to contracting concerns, the infrastructure component of the Keun Faaba project has 
suffered additional inefficiencies, which may begin to provide some explanation for the very low 
infrastructure-specific burn-rate identified above (2.42%). To start, MGD2017 infrastructure projects 
could not begin before the completion of MGD2014 infrastructure projects, an issue that delayed phase 
II baseline procedures.68F
74 Once underway, the semi-annual October 2019-March 2020 report details how 
infrastructure construction activities came to a halt due to COVID-19, but also because the call for 
tenders had proven unsuccessful. The search involved the identification of prequalified companies for 
the construction of latrine cabins. Discussions with USDA personnel revealed their awareness also of 
73 Source: Semi-annual report April–Sept 2019, p. 7. 
74 Source: Semi-annual report October 2019-March 2020, p. 7; Interview with project COP.
71
contractual challenges specific to infrastructure activities. USDA recognized that the issue was a lesson 
learned for CRS. In addition, as the CRS infrastructure officer explained, Keun Faaba’s approach is also to 
work with local communities to involve them in the bidding and construction process to help develop 
their capacities and to privilege local resources. This strategy, while theoretically more sustainable in the 
long term and promoting community buy-in, also demands a significant amount of coordination and 
oversight. 
Inefficient distribution of field agents
In the field, Keun Faaba relies on various thematic agents responsible for organizing and facilitating 
activities within intervention communities. Varying subcontractors have different field agents with 
different organizational structures. There are six types of agents that intervene at the school level: 1) 
CRS WASH-Nutrition field agents, 2) CRS School Feeding field agents, 3) CRS Infrastructure field agents, 
4) Caritas CLTS field agents, 5) ALAFIA or DERANA Community field agents, and 6) URP Farm field 
agents.69F
75 The COP indicated concerns that coordination may be lacking among so many different types 
of agents and that this constitutes an area of improvement that the project has already actively 
engaged, namely by finding synergies between WASH and infrastructure field agents. The COP further
suggested that agents develop a coordination and communication mechanism to better organize their 
work collaboratively. In addition, a WASH-Nutrition specialist expressed concerns that so many different 
types field agents, each needing to cover a large area of schools, made for an inefficient system. He took 
the COP’s notion a step further and advocated for agents focusing on a geographical area but addressing 
multiple themes. The WASH-Nutrition specialist argued as follows, 
"And we only have four field agents, of which the four field agents can't cover all the 
schools in a month. It takes them at least two to three months before they can cover 
all the schools in their area. It takes a quarter. They have a strategy in place that 
allows them to go to two to three schools a day. But there's a problem there. . . . 
There are synergies between the teams or the other teams; the number is 
overwhelming. The other teams could help the WASH team in its activities and vice 
versa. The team could help the other teams to carry out the activities. But this was 
not done at the beginning. Each one takes care exclusively of its activities. . . . This 
strategy, we think that it will be able to bear fruit and allow all the teams to achieve 
the assigned objectives.”(WASH-Nutrition Specialist, interview)
External factors
In addition to the internal factors discussed above, several external factors hinder or threaten to hinder 
project implementation. A quote from the head of programming sums up the external threats as 
follows:
75 Note that #4 and #6 only intervene in select communities/schools.
72
“Everyone is working at his full capacity as efficiently as possible, but operating 
context is difficult—Kandi is far from the capital, flooding, security concerns on top of 
COVID. People are working in a difficult context and given that, they are working as
efficiently as possible." (Head of Programming, interview)
The section below examines these factors as well as others that surfaced during interviews and 
document analysis.
CLTS not appropriate for urban areas
Both document review and 
stakeholder interviews surfaced the 
issue of CLTS programming being fully 
appropriate in rural areas but not 
easily adapting to some of the peri￾urban and urban areas in which 
project interventions take place. The 
semi-annual October 2019-March 
2020 report identifies that 
households are less likely to 
cooperate in areas of high population 
density and also when people are 
renting from landlords. Caritas 
personnel noted in an interview that 
within the three districts in which 
they intervene, only one community 
is somewhat rural, making the classic 
CLTS methodology a good fit. 
Rains and flooding affect programming
Many stakeholders interviewed, both in Cotonou and in the field, identified rains and flooding as an 
external factor that complicated project efficiency. Difficulties might accrue from attempting to build 
latrines during the rainy season or from more urgent crisis like flooding in Malenville between August 
and September 2020, flooding the school and even leading to some drowning-related incidents. These 
floods also led to further delays in infrastructure activities. Project documents also attest to varying 
climatic conditions between departments, indicating that guidance for Alibori has focused on helping 
community farms deal with flooding, notably, waiting to transplant seedlings until rains have ceased and 
water has drained.70F
76
76 Source: Semi-annual report March–September 2020, p. 6.
Figure 16: Latrines Built with CLTS
73
Security concerns
Project staff also identify security as a factor hindering the efficient implementation of activities. In the 
town of Kandi, various security issues include reports of Boko Haram incidents and movement. The head 
of programming indicated that the project operated in a zone to which U.S. Embassy personnel and 
other NGOs do not travel. 
Teacher strikes threaten continuity of activities
As indicated in response to EQ4.1, a national teacher strike occurred from January to April 2018,
affecting interventions in schools and leading to school closures in March and April 2018. These strikes 
pushed back the final evaluation of the MGD 2014 project, which in turn delayed the MGD 2017 Keun 
Faaba project.71F
77 According to the WEI education specialist, the situation greatly delayed the 
implementation of WEI activities, and it was not until around June or July 2019 that activities began with 
intensity. The CRS finance manager noted that the Government of Benin has since enacted a law limiting
the severity of teacher strikes, hopefully indicating that they may prove less of a hindrance in the future.
Teacher mobility hampers efficient training of educators
As indicated above, Keun Faaba recognizes the challenge that current teacher-mobility strategies pose 
for a project like MGD 2017 with its limited intervention zone and the project activities’ dependence on 
teachers trained in the method. For this reason, teacher mobility constitutes an external factor that 
hinders project efficiency, especially when Keun Faaba–trained teachers leave for non-project schools. 
Moreover, in November 2019, the government altered its strategy on community teaching and now 
directly hires “aspiring teachers,” individuals who are not formally trained but who have been educated 
and wish to become teachers. While the Keun Faaba project included aspiring teachers in its approach, 
these teachers will likely be relocated to other non-project schools, necessitating additional time and 
resources for teacher training.72F
78
COVID-19 as chief disruptor
When CRS and partner staff interviewed were asked which external factors hindered program 
implementation, COVID-19 emerged as by far the most common answer. Similarly, 68 percent of school 
principals surveyed agreed. Recall that field activities were initially suspended in March 2020. According 
to the most recent semi-annual report,
“A lot of time was spent on establishing COVID-19 safety protocols that prevent 
contamination, before progressively resuming field activities. . . . The project team 
must now catch up on many activities during the first quarter of this fiscal year. These 
activities will take place while respecting the established COVID-19 safety protocols, 
77 MGD 2017 FY2019 work plan.
78 Semi-annual report October 2019–March 2020, p. 8.
74
which do not permit gathering of more than 50 people in the same area.” (Semi￾annual report April-September 2020, p. 6)
The FY2021 work plan further details how COVID-19 has affected the project timeline and activity 
implementation, noting the following effects: 
• building and rehabilitation of latrines, including recruitment of companies and contracting of 
service providers, significantly slowed
• capacity building at local, regional and national levels, including EGRA assessment and advocacy 
activities related to the teacher transport policy, postponed
• certification of WASH-friendly schools and exchange visits, coaching of girls and boys by 
community health workers and the evaluation of WASH-friendly school action plans postponed
• literacy-promotion activities dampened with the restriction of gatherings
• school-garden activities delayed, including exchange visits for school gardens
• promotion of teacher-attendance activities delayed
• school meal provision cancelled during school closure period
• teacher and administrator training on multigrade techniques postponed73F
79
4.5 What are the obstacles/challenges/risks to implementation and how can they be overcome in the 
remaining duration of the project? 
The response to the previous question already indicates a number of obstacles, risks and challenges to 
Keun Faaba implementation, most notably, security, flooding, teacher mobility and the continued 
management of COVID-19 effects on schooling in project areas. Findings from this section draw from 
document review, qualitative interviews and, to some extent, survey data. In general, School Canteen 
field agents and CRS leadership expressed concerns that additional programming challenges would arise 
if the COVID-19 pandemic worsens in Benin, most notably, if new variants cause intensified disruption. 
Additional school closures could prove devastating for the project and its beneficiaries. In addition, 
security concerns also remain front of mind for CRS personnel, particularly in relation to the teams 
continuing to have access to project zones and upcoming presidential elections. 
School-based challenges
In addition to teacher mobility, and the looming possibility of additional school closures related to 
COVID-19 already discussed, project documents also cite large class sizes as an obstacle for teachers 
implementing new reading-instruction techniques and improving students’ literacy. In addition, surveys 
asked principals to indicate any difficulties they had observed in project implementation. The majority of 
principals (27 principals, 54%) indicated that they knew of no difficulties. The only difficulty that 
garnered more than four responses concerned delays in the delivery of school materials (13 principals, 
24%). At the same time, results show that principals felt enthusiastically about their ability to overcome 
the following obstacles before the end of the project: delays in the delivery of school materials (15 
principals, 30%), lack of teachers (7 principals, 14%), animals attacking school gardens (7 principals, 14%) 
and village inhabitants damaging equipment (6 principals, 12%). All other responses garnered less than 
79 Semi-annual report October 2019–March 2020, p. 8.
75
five respondents. It is worth noting that these concerns did not arise in qualitative discussions and also 
that response numbers were quite low. Nonetheless, principals provide helpful advice for continued 
implementation. When asked about how best to overcome these obstacles, the two most popular 
responses were that CRS redouble its programming efforts (38% of principals) and that parents be 
further engaged in activities (34%). 
WASH-related challenges
As indicated in the findings above, serious problems of access to potable water remain for some 
communities and will likely reduce the project’s efficiency and effectiveness should they persist. As one 
WASH field agent pointed out, it is not realistic and appropriate to speak about hygiene with school and 
community stakeholders if there is no reliable water source. Another challenge for the WASH team is 
making up lost time with certification of WASH-friendly schools. This activity, as well as the development 
of WASH-friendly school action plans, figures prominently in the FY2021 work plan. Finally, as indicated 
above, CLTS activities are not suitable for peri-urban and urban areas. Findings indicate that the project 
will likely continue to encounter challenges and even failure if it pursues its original approach. 
Infrastructure-related challenges
Most significantly, generally catching up and being able to follow through on infrastructure activities
may pose the project’s greatest challenge in the time remaining on the award though there is also some 
indication of progress. The April-September 2020 semi-annual report indicates that the project fell 
behind in building and rehabilitating 77 latrine cabins. In addition, the FY2021 work plan identifies that 
borehole/water points are needed for 50 schools, while 9 schools must be connected to existing water 
systems. At the same time, according to a field agent, the team constructed 54 latrine cabins between 
November 2020 and February 2021, which are now ready for use. The FY2021 workplan identifies 54 
latrine cabins to be constructed by March 2021, making this initiative accomplished ahead of schedule.
Above findings also indicated that the project will need to change from solar-powered water pumps to 
manually powered ones. All of these activities will require the identification and contracting of local 
companies. In addition, CRS key personnel underlined that proper maintenance and upkeep is needed to 
assure the longevity of installations. An infrastructure field agent argued that such attention is necessary
for both the water sources of Phase 2 and the teacher housing units built as part of Phase 1. This staff 
member made the following comment:
“The boreholes that we build will one day break down, but the communities are not 
yet really organized to be able to face these outages. If we don’t repair the broken￾down borehole, that can cause even more problems. We think that the mayors’ 
offices should help the communities to do this. “ (Infrastructure Field Agent, 
interview)
Activity 2, as detailed in the FY2021 work plan and the amended agreement, includes working with 
“communes and communities to select and train Borehole Managers and to include maintenance of the 
76
boreholes in their sustainability plan.”74F
80 At the same time, neither data collected nor a review of project 
documents indicate current activities within MGD2017 that support the viability of MGD2014 
infrastructure.
Conclusion: Efficiency
The midterm evaluation examination of project efficiency in terms of time and financial resources finds 
the project to be extraordinarily delayed though on track financially. In terms of time, analysis shows 
that the project has suffered delays of up to 21 months for new activities and some project milestones, 
shortening the project’s time for implementation and target attainment. At the same time, the CRS 
finance manager provided assurance that the project still has sufficient funds remaining until the end of 
the project. Budget realignments attest to ongoing adaptive management as well as the volatile 
operating environment. Internal factors hindering efficiency include contracting challenges that have 
delayed contract signature as well as payments, recruiting challenges related to location of key positions 
in remote Kandi and, although beyond the control of country-level actors, the rollout of a new finance 
and procurement system that has further aggravated initial delays. In addition, the project’s staffing 
structure of specifically focused thematic field agents for large areas of project communities is 
inefficient and requires revisiting. The project’s infrastructure activities have also suffered multiple 
setbacks dating back to the previous MGD2014 award. The project also operates in the midst of 
challenging external factors limiting efficiency, including rains and flooding, security concerns, teacher 
strikes and mobility and, of course, the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. 
In terms of volunteer management, findings reveal that most School Canteen Management Committees 
and their volunteers report satisfactory efficiency even though the rigor may not be as high as the 
project intended. Similarly, 16 percent of school principals describe the literacy levels of volunteers as
challenging, a sentiment that CRS staff also echo. Findings suggest that volunteers and project 
management may have different expectations for the efficiency and functioning of volunteers. At the 
same time, responses indicate tolerance and solidarity among school community members, unsurprising 
in communities with more prevalent lower levels of literacy. Nonetheless, further scaffolding of 
volunteers with lower literacy levels and creative accommodations may contribute to enhanced 
efficiency. A possibility may include pairing storekeepers with low literacy levels with a second volunteer 
who will focus on the bookkeeping. Findings are similar in terms of material incentives provided to 
volunteers, namely, cooks and storekeepers. Overall, nearly all volunteers (93%) expressed satisfaction 
with the current approach, which also has the potential to be more sustainable in the long term. 
Nonetheless, a small portion of volunteers (less than 10%) are not fully satisfied. Again, creative 
solutions reflecting community inputs and increased community ownership over school canteens are 
warranted.
In terms of remaining project time, the evaluation identifies several challenges that have the potential 
to further reduce project efficiency. In general, additional closures related to COVID-19 would prove 
highly problematic, but security concerns also loom large for CRS project leadership and field staff. At
the school level, large class sizes remain a challenge for programming. The evaluation team suggests 
that WEI revisit its training and coaching regiment to ensure that teaching strategies for large class sizes 
are sufficiently covered. In terms of WASH, challenges include assuring access to water sources and 
80 Source: FY2021 work plan, p. 9.
77
ramping up WASH-friendly school certification along an accelerated timeline. Perhaps most urgently, 
findings indicate that CLTS activities will likely fail in urban and peri-urban areas without a major change 
in approach. The evaluation team urges the project to consider advocacy efforts to foment political will 
for waste-management campaigns in more populous areas. Lastly, infrastructure constitutes the 
greatest challenge facing Keun Faaba programming in the months ahead. Progress is being made 
towards latrine construction. Most notably, activities need to ensure that school leadership and 
communities are on board, trained and capable of providing adequate upkeep and repair for new 
installations. Efforts at the school and community level need to ensure the existence of borehole 
managers as well as sanitation champions at schools. Promoting a culture of proactive maintenance will 
be critical to project success.
5. Impact
The next DAC criteria this midterm evaluation addresses is impact, defined by the OECD as “the extent 
to which the intervention has generated or is expected to generate significant positive or negative, 
intended or unintended, higher-level effects.” Twelve evaluation questions inform the findings, as do
the results of the performance measurement indicator review above.
5.1 To date, which strategies have demonstrated success, and which have not been successful in 
achieving the project objectives and results? What best practices have been identified so far? 
Which issues should the project team focus its efforts on to achieve greatest impact?
To address successful and less successful strategies, the evaluation team relied largely on interview data, 
document review and additional synthesis of findings presented above. 
Successes
Despite many obstacles and challenges, findings point to several successes relevant to the WASH, school 
feeding, and infrastructure sectors, as well as the cross-cutting theme of community and collaboration 
between local and national authorities. It is worth noting that teaching/learning initiatives did not figure 
among successes mentioned by staff; those interviewed specifically for this question were CRS staff and 
not directly involved in those initiatives. Previous questions focusing on effectiveness above, however, 
provide some insights (EQs 3.3-3.6, in particular). Possible gains in teacher attendance may be most 
notable, as well as the popularity of literacy-promotion efforts like story hour. In addition, as the CRS 
head of programming pointed out, learning outcomes will best speak to the impact of specific education 
initiatives. The following evaluation question and EQ5.11 address learning outcomes in greater detail.
WASH — successful strategies
While the WASH strategy was delayed, project staff and project documents point to the development of 
the WASH strategy as a success for the Keun Faaba project and as value added when compared to MGD
2014. As indicated above, the strategy developed through a consultative process. Both the MEAL officer 
and the COP further highlighted that process and its benefits in the quotes below.
“The WASH strategy worked well. All the education actors and even local officials in 
charge of hygiene and sanitation—the strategy was validated and launched with all 
78
these actors. We worked together to define the strategy and to involve them in its 
development. The stakeholders really appreciated that.” (MEAL Officer, interview)
“The WASH strategy was inspired by the national strategy and was well developed. 
The various local authorities and even communities were highly engaged. I think that 
we’ll achieve change.” (COP, interview)
In addition, CRS staff underscored the success of WASH Clubs. Recall from earlier sections that WASH 
Clubs have played a role in helping some students improve the cleanliness of their school environments, 
all the while improving their own capacities. In terms of hygiene specifically, project documents cited 
how female teachers demonstrated great enthusiasm for being able to purchase reusable sanitary pads 
from a local producer who was affordable and within reach, and to assist girls in “learning how to 
manage their menstruation and continue to keep up their school attendance and performance.”75F
81
Finally, when CLTS is promoted in well-suited communities, the effort has the potential for success in 
raising awareness for positive hygiene and health practices and for promoting behavioral change (see 
EQ3.1 above). 
School feeding — successful strategies
Many aspects of Keun Faaba’s school 
feeding program may also be considered 
highly successful. As the head of 
programming pointed out, school 
canteens opened when schools resumed 
in September 2020, and Keun Faaba was 
able to provide some continuity to 
students’ families in the provision of 
take-home rations. Discussions with staff 
also reiterate the idea that class sizes are 
increasing in project schools and that 
parents are pleased to send children to 
school. School gardens also form an 
important part of this effort, and 
interview data and document review 
indicate progress in this area. The head of 
programming refers to this progress as 
“steady,” while a WASH field agent agreed, indicating the existence of 20 functioning gardens in 
Malanville already, while others were still in the making. Keun Faaba also promoted its garden work 
through one of its success stories shared in April 2019. In it, a school in an area with poor soil “served as 
a lead example of school gardens in the municipality.76F
82” 
81 MGD 2017 Sanitary Pad Success Story, p. 1.
82 Source: School Garden Success Story, p. 1.
Figure 17: School Garden in Malanville
79
Infrastructure — successful strategies
Although findings above indicate that infrastructure may constitute the project’s greatest challenge, it is 
also an area that has met some success. Two CRS staff lauded Phase 1 efforts to build teacher housing as 
meeting a critical need in school communities. This point appears contested among staff, however. A 
member of the CRS leadership indicated that infrastructure efforts within the first project not only led to 
a legal battle (which CRS eventually won) but also resulted in a realization that construction in Benin 
proved more complicated than initially understood. At the same time, discussions with staff also cited 
the good quality and longevity of the infrastructure efforts. For instance, an infrastructure field agent 
spoke of the large amount of cement used in constructions, which contributed to increased durability. 
The agent also commented that Keun Faaba worked with the community to ensure the maintenance of 
structures. Similarly, the finance manager spoke to the appropriateness of kitchen designs, which
provided better ventilation for cooks. While much time has been lost on infrastructure projects, there is 
also some indication that the infrastructure team may be gaining ground, particularly regarding latrine 
construction, as indicated in an earlier section. 
Community involvement and implication of local authorities — successful strategies
Findings also indicate that CRS integrates the involvement and implication of local authorities as part of 
its approach, and indeed, its institutional strategy (see EQ2.1). Discussions with CRS personnel point to 
perceptions among some field staff that communities are invested in changes. In addition, the 
contractual changes put into place to avoid problems with larger contracting outfits for infrastructure 
projects require more community involvement. Previously discussed findings also indicate how 
pedagogical advisors and local DDEMP officials express ownership over certain project initiatives such as 
trainings and the development of materials. The WASH-Nutrition Integration Guide’s incorporation into 
the national curriculum might serve as another example here, as well as how related trainings operate 
within communities of practice and address teachers even outside the project coverage area (see 
EQ3.4). The project’s COP also emphasized Keun Faaba’s close cooperation with communities to support 
school canteens. The most recent semi-annual report (April – September 2020) calculates community 
contributions to school canteens at $35,407 (19,474,320 F CFA) to include water, firewood, fish or meat, 
condiments, soap and cash. A project success story document details Keun Faaba’s strategy to hold joint 
budget and planning sessions, and how “77% of the school communities managed to increase their 
contribution from 25% to 50% compared to the same time last year.”7F
83
Weaker successes
While the above sections provide details about the 
various challenges that Keun Faaba has encountered 
and continues to face, this section provides additional 
feedback from CRS staff, in particular about initiatives 
that have proven less successful. Unsurprisingly, 
stakeholders focused on infrastructure challenges 
from Phase I that continue to haunt the project in 
Phase II. COVID-19 closures and delays further 
83 USDA MGD 2017. (March 2020). Success Story: Community engagement through planning and budgeting, p. 1.
Figure 18: Unfinished Headteacher House
80
compounded these complications. At the same time, findings indicate that this experience also elicited 
lessons learned that may strengthen the project in the long term, particularly in how infrastructure 
agents will now work even more closely with communities. Interviews also pointed to challenges 
surrounding the installation of water points. For instance, a school canteen field agent shared that of 10 
schools she worked with, five did not have access to a reliable water source. Several of the above 
sections also emphasize the need to focus on access to clean water. In addition, the evaluation team 
here reminds readers of the inappropriateness of the current CLTS approach for peri-urban and urban 
communities, as well as the low levels of radio participation experienced by Keun Faaba distance 
learning programming. These latter two also make for less successful strategies that require attention. 
Moving forward
Findings indicate that Keun Faaba staff are implementing forward-thinking strategies that incorporate 
sustainability, recognize the incredible catch-up work ahead of them and realize that they need to work 
as a team and with local partners. Project documents, namely, the April-September 2020 semi-annual 
report and the FY2021 work plan, clearly state that the project has encountered significant delays both 
before the COVID-19 pandemic and as a result of it. Interviews with the CRS head of programming and
the COP further indicate that leadership realizes they are working under significant pressure and that 
activities need to be doubled up to meet contractual obligations. Among management strategies key to 
success, leadership points to the need for continued team motivation and focus, as well as to that of 
proactively flagging obstacles to best address them. None of the discussions with CRS staff mentioned
changing emphasis on activities; rather, the team continues to view the various project components as a 
cohesive package. Two members of project leadership emphasized how project staff need to work 
together regardless of intervention sector. As the COP relayed, 
“We need to look at the coherence between different project components. We need 
to avoid silos. The teams need to understand how their activities impact the results of 
the other project components. We must ensure that all field agents are able to 
communicate effectively, report malfunctions or even intervene.” (COP, interview)
In addition, discussions also focused on the need for the continued promotion of community ownership 
for activities. The project’s WASH-Nutrition specialist eloquently stated this imperative in saying that
“We need to make more efforts to collaborate with state partners, be sure that key 
actors are engaged. Their participation is crucial for sustainability. If we don’t get to 
this level of engagement, it’s complicated. It’s for this reason that in the coming 
weeks we are going to start advocacy efforts, so that at the community level 
decisions are made to be able to engage everyone as needed, from the district level 
to the various schools and villages. It’s the big challenge that we have.” (WASH￾Nutrition Specialist, interview)
81
The report will further address this need in reference to sustainability questions below.
5.2 How likely is the project to achieve strategic objectives and contribute significantly to intended 
purpose ?
Keun Faaba has as its strategic objectives to improve the literacy of school-age children and to foster the 
increased use of good health and dietary practices. Analysis of interview data shows that relevant CRS 
project management (COP, head of programs and the MEAL officer) generally predict that some project 
targets will be attained while others will remain more elusive. In general, key project staff (including the 
WASH and infrastructure officers) identified attendance, school feeding, parental engagement, WASH￾friendly schools and menstrual hygiene management as indicators within easier reach. Moreover, they 
generally express skepticism about meeting CLTS targets because of complications in semi-urban areas. 
The COP, head of programs and MEAL officer all also expressed doubts that the project will meet the 
EGRA target, that is, the projected reading comprehension scores. One staff member argued that 
project students obtaining a better rate than control students might still demonstrate positive project 
impact. 
As the indicator review section above indicates, only two of eight project indicators examined at 
midterm show gains. They include the percentage of students identified as attentive (indicator 3, a 
change of nearly 5 percentage points). Indicator 4 also saw a tremendous jump of nearly 40 percentage 
points between baseline and midterm values, being assessed at 94.1 percent at midterm. The evaluation 
team believes the jump may be related to increased emphasis on handwashing as a result of the COVID￾19 pandemic. This value far exceeds the life-of-project target of 68 percent. Table 13 compares indicator 
values at baseline and midterm as well as the most recently collected project data. Analysis shows that 
project monitoring results are generally more conservative, with two exceptions. The project-monitoring 
value for indicator 5, the percentage of students achieving a passing score on a test of good health and 
hygiene practices, exceeds the midterm value by nearly five percentage points. The semi-annual report 
also noted that data for indicator 7, average student attendance, was collected in August 2020 and was 
low due to farming activities as well as COVID-19 closures. Attendance may have stabilized by February 
2021, when midterm attendance was assessed. In general, analysis of these indicator results raises 
concerns for the achievement of both strategic objectives. 
Table 13: Comparison table of baseline, project monitoring and midterm indicators with life-of-project 
(LOP) targets
Result Indicator Baseline 
Value
Midline 
Value84
Monitoring 
value
Target
1 Literacy MGD INDICATOR 1: Percentage of students 
who, by the end of two grades of primary 
schooling, demonstrate that they can read and 
understand the meaning of grade level text 
Benchmark: 60% (3/5 correct answers)
1% 0.8% 1% 10%
84 Green coloring indicates that results are improving. Bright green (#4) indicates that the midline value has 
surpassed the endline target. Yellow indicates maintenance of baseline results. Red indicates a decrease.
82
Result Indicator Baseline 
Value
Midline 
Value84
Monitoring 
value
Target
2 Literacy Percentage of parents who report spending 
time on literacy activities with their students in 
the preceding three days
31.1% 31.0% 31.1%* 45%
3 Literacy Percentage of students in target schools who 
are identified as attentive during 
class/instruction
67.6% 73.8% 68%* 75%
4 Health 
& 
Dietary 
Practice
Percentage of schools with soap and water at a 
handwashing station commonly used by 
students
54.4% 94.1% 54.0%* 68%
5 Health 
& 
Dietary 
Practice
Percentage of students in target schools who 
achieve a passing score on a test of good 
health and hygiene practices
Passing Score: 70%
34% 29.5% 35.2%78F
85 40%
6 Literacy Literacy Achievement Index 35 33 N/A 45
7 Literacy MGD INDICATOR 2: Average student 
attendance rate in USDA-supported 
classrooms/schools
88.2% 90% 79.8%79F
86 95%
8 Literacy Percentage of children receiving a minimum 
acceptable diet
68.9% 51.6% 78.24% 75%
*Project maintained baseline values. Data for these indicators were not collected by the project 
between evaluations.
5.3 What is the contribution of the radio broadcasts and the listening groups on the awareness raising 
on the importance of education?
Survey data shows that less than a third of parents surveyed (28.4%) at Keun Faaba schools reported 
having participated in listening sessions organized by WEI subgrantees ALAFIA and DERANA. As a 
reminder, listening sessions are live school meetings. At the same time, more than four-fifths (81.4%) of 
Keun Faaba parents report having heard radio announcements on the importance of education. Parents 
in urban areas were nearly ten percentage points more likely to report hearing announcements than 
rural parents (84.2 compared to 74.8%, respectively.) This result was statistically significant.80F
87
Qualitative data provide additional nuance for understanding the possible contributions that these 
initiatives and other community-based activities have had on parents’ perceptions of the importance of 
85 Data collected in August 2020 (per April-September 2020 semi-annual report.)
86 The April-September 2020 semi-annual report explains low attendance by the “start of fieldwork in farms and 
the consequence of schoolchildren’s extended absence related to school closures due to the COVID-19 pandemic.”
87 Result statistically significant at p<0.000.
83
education. For example, three of four teacher groups indicated perceiving changes in parents’ support 
of their children’s education. Yet two of these groups indicated that changes are delicate and could 
easily revert. The one group clearly arguing that no modification had occurred in parents’ attitudes 
toward education noted that the school was located in a rural area where farming dominated all other 
activities. A teacher in one of the groups indicating positive change provided the following example of 
parents’ increased, if reluctant, participation in school meetings. 
“Parents participate, but not 100 percent. They haven’t all understood. It’s the 
beginning. The proof is that when we organize general assembles now there isn’t any 
extra room for people to sit. They come in numbers, while before only four people 
used to come.” (Teacher, focus group)
Perhaps even more important, all four parent focus groups indicated having become more aware of the 
importance of education through the Keun Faaba project. One group cited meal provision and
cleanliness as reasons for parents’ greater confidence in school attendance. A second group provided a 
list of examples of how they have changed their approach after learning to better support their children 
through information sessions. This group indicated that they now understand that they should visit their 
children at school, speak with the teacher to check in on children’s progress and also ask children 
directly about their experiences at school. A third group identified study groups as helping children 
learn. The final parent focus group underlined the collective nature of helping children with schooling. A 
parent in this group said,
“We think that thanks to the radio programs and listening sessions that certain 
parents have changed their minds. That they have gained awareness. ‘One finger 
alone can’t lap up the hot sauce.’" (Parent, focus group) 
Both the COP and a DERANA field agent also underlined the delicate nature of these changes. They 
indicated that more time was necessary for sustained change. 
Despite these testimonials, quantitative analysis reveals no change in parents’ attitudes towards 
education. As Figure 19 indicates, the proportions of parents noting that education is important for girls 
and boys is relatively equal. There is no statistically significant difference between Keun Faaba and 
control group parents’ perceptions on the importance of education. Findings suggest that it may be too 
early to tell if CRS outreach efforts have had an impact on parental attitudes.
84
Figure 19: Comparison of project and control group parents' perceptions of the importance of education 
for boys and for girls
5.4 What is the contribution of the Community Led Total Sanitation (CLTS) approach to changes in 
children’s hygiene behavior in school?
Recall that Community Led Total Sanitation (CLTS) aims to eradicate open-air defecation by promoting 
awareness of the health risks associated with the practice.81F
88 Survey data inform the response to this 
evaluation question that seeks to understand if CLTS has contributed to changes in children’s behaviors 
at school. When asked, nine of ten school principals (90%) whose schools benefit from CLTS activities 
indicated satisfaction with Keun Faaba’s activities to improve hygiene outside of school, while one 
individual had no response. Moreover, principals felt that CLTS programming would have the greatest 
impact in reducing illness and improving students’ hygiene.
Survey data from students and parents indicate that children are more likely to wash their hands after 
defecating at CLTS schools than at non-CLTS schools (by 9 and 11 percentage points, respectively).82F
89 In 
addition, the proportion of children washing hands after defecation saw large gains between baseline 
and midline as reported by children (an increase of 25 percentage points), though parents reported 
slighter gains (6 percentage points). The evaluation team also investigated defecation practices. Results 
are less conclusive, showing, as indicated in Figure 20, that although parents are slightly more likely to 
report children at CLTS using latrines, children report the opposite. According to children, about 8 
percent more students at non-CLTS schools used latrines the last time they relieved themselves than 
students in communities benefiting from CLTS.83F
90 A comparison of midterm and baseline data for this 
88 Source: USAID (2014), Boîte à outils: Assainissement total piloté par la communauté (ATPC).
89The child-reported result is statistically significant (p=0.039), while it is not for parent-reported data (p=0.056). 
90 The student-reported result is statistically significant with p≤0.000. Statistical significance cannot be computed 
for parental data, as this is a composite result and the question allowed multiple answers.
1%
2%
3%
5%
21%
22%
23%
23%
78%
76%
74%
72%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Boys - Control
Boys - Project
Girls - Control
Girls - Project
Not important Not very important Important Very important
85
metric shows no improvements.84F
91 In sum, while principals express satisfaction with Keun Faaba CLTS 
activities outside of school, parent and child self-reporting proves conflicting. It may be too early, 
particularly given project delays, to issue a definitive conclusion.
Figure 20: Comparison of children’s handwashing and latrine use for CLTS and non-CLTS project schools
5.5 What is the contribution of the training of teachers/administrators to the quality of teaching and 
the outcome of school children’s literacy levels?
Findings from interviews as well as diverse quantitative methods inform the response to this question, 
which focuses on the impact of teacher training on teaching quality and learning outcomes. To begin, 
qualitative findings generally argue that trainings already have a positive effect on children’s literacy 
levels. During interviews, teachers and pedagogical advisors reported that the training was essential,
since the methodology differs from the traditional methodology used in Benin. All four discussions with 
chiefs of pedagogical region indicate that all agree in seeing a huge improvement since the new 
method’s implementation. These officials also talked about the difference between CRS schools and 
other schools as striking. Because the national curriculum is about to change in favor of a phonics-based 
curriculum, some of these chiefs of pedagogical region also indicated that CRS schools might actually 
find themselves better prepared than the other schools because they already follow a similar approach. 
One pedagogical advisor spoke to both of these points in saying,
Yes, yes, there is a difference. Because the method has changed. This method 
addresses the challenges, so today's first-grade learners in these WEI schools are not 
91 Note that data was only available for parents at midterm.
57%
55%
75%
56%
61%
66%
67%
65%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Using latrines
Handwashing after defecation
Using latrines
Handwashing after defecation
Parents' reporting Chlldren's reporting
CLTS Schools Non-CTLS Schools
86
at the same level as first-grade learners in schools that are not partners in the project 
in terms of reading and writing." (Chief of Pedagogical Region, focus group)
These same stakeholders also identified limits to the impact that training may have on literacy results. 
According to the educators interviewed, factors such as teacher mobility, limited parental engagement 
and large class sizes may dampen the positive effects of training.
Self-reporting from quantitative surveys also demonstrates positive perceptions of Keun Faaba trainings’ 
impact. Nearly all teachers (85 of 87, 98%) and all school principals surveyed indicated that they 
believed that Keun Faaba trainings contributed to improving the quality of teaching practice. The 
responses were emphatic, with more than four-fifths of both teachers and principals (74, or 85% and 41 
principals, or 82%) responding, “yes, really.” As Figure 21 indicates, teachers and principals agree on the 
top three ways that teaching has improved thanks to Keun Faaba trainings: 1) children’s reading 
abilities have improved, 2) children learn faster as a result and 3) now all children are learning, whereas 
only a few children were actually learning before. Results demonstrate that the teachers are more 
measured in their enthusiasm, perhaps because they are the direct beneficiaries of these trainings and 
are also the closest to student performance.
Figure 21: Ways teaching has improved due to Keun Faaba trainings according to principals and teachers 
Unfortunately, analysis of EGRA results suggests that Keun Faaba teacher training is not yet translating 
into better student learning outcomes. As Table 14 demonstrates, project schools have higher average 
results for only two subtasks. Analysis of zero scores for each subtask also demonstrates that students in 
project schools achieved around the same proportion of zero scores as control students. In fact, control 
schools, on average, had more zero scores for five of eight of the subtasks, though none of the results 
are statistically significant. Finally, Et4d developed a literacy index for EGRA scores, knowing that it will 
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0%
Activities and assessments take into account the learning
sequence (learning letters)
Children are more autonomous to decode new words
Lessons are better organized
Basic concepts are acquired
Teachers prepare better for lessons
Children are more attentive due to new methods
All children are learning, before only a few were learning
Children learn faster
Children's reading abilities have improved
Teachers (n=85) Principals (n=50)
87
prove very challenging for Keun Faaba, and for other projects with very low literacy levels at baseline to 
demonstrate progress. (See Annex 13 for description of literacy achievement index.) As displayed in 
Table 15, results on the literacy index show that while project schools were ahead of control schools at 
baseline, they have since lost the headway they had made. (See Annex 14 for full EGRA results). 
Table 14: Comparison of EGRA subtask results by school type
Control 
Mean
Project 
Mean
Difference
Vocabulary (%) 54.8 53.7 -1.1
Listening 
comprehension (%)
18.8 18.6 -0.2
Letter name (clpm) 9 10.2 1.2
Letter sound (cspm) 14 15.3 1.3
Familiar word (cwpm) 5.1 4.9 -0.2
Non-word (cwpm) 3.7 3.4 -0.3
Reading passage 
(cwpm)
7 5.9 -1.1
Reading comprehension 
(%)
3.2 2.3 -0.9
Table 15: Literacy index per school type
Baseline 
Control Mean
Baseline 
Project Mean
Difference Midterm 
Control Mean
Midterm 
Project Mean
Difference
Literacy 
Index
30.3 35.0 4.7* 34.2 32.7 -1.5
*p<0.05
At the same time, recall that trainings took place between November 2019 and January 2020 and that 
EGRA data were collected in February 2021. Students only had one month with decodables before 
classes ended. COVID-related school closures also lasted from March through September 2020. It is
quite probable that simply not enough teaching and learning time has elapsed to allow for visible 
results.
5.6 How successful has the project been in improving the quality of literacy instruction?
According to stakeholders interviewed, the project should prove successful in improving the quality of 
literacy instruction. A set of two focus groups with chiefs of pedagogical region and another set of two 
teacher focus groups specifically responded to a question about the project having improved quality. 
The first teacher group felt emphatically that quality had improved and expressed how colleagues in 
surrounding schools desired the methods to be generalized. The second group lauded the effectiveness 
of WEI’s WhatsApp training platform. Both groups of chiefs of pedagogical region felt strongly that Keun 
Faaba methods had positive results, specifically the “I do, we do, you do” approach. At the same time, 
these advisors commented that many teachers’ own educational backgrounds may limit the extent to 
which quality improves. This is especially the case in the north of Benin. In addition, INFRE, in 
88
collaboration with the World Bank, is in the process of updating the national curriculum to implement 
an approach very similar to Keun Faaba’s model. The approach includes phonemic awareness, phonics 
and decodables as well as the pedagogical approach “I do, we do, you do.”
As Figure 22 indicates, survey results confirm these qualitative findings. Teachers and school principals 
from project schools reported their strong association of Keun Faaba’s package of activities with an 
improved quality of instruction. All 50 principals and all but one teacher (out of 100) responded “yes,” 
with more than four-fifths of both stakeholder groups responding “yes, really.”
Figure 22: Teacher and principal perceptions of Keun Kaaba's impact on quality instruction
More specifically, a significantly larger though modest percentage of students surveyed in project 
schools report that their teachers call on them every day as compared to non-project schools (18% 
compared to 11%, respectively).85F
92 The project seems to have made similar gains promoting exposure to 
texts and reading in the home. Two-fifths of (41%) of project-group students report having a manual or 
reading book in French at home, compared to one-third of control-group students.86F
93 Keun Faaba 
students demonstrate an even greater significant difference over control peers in their frequency of 
reading or studying in French at home. Nearly half (47%) of Keun Faaba students report doing so,
compared to one-third (35%) of control students.87F
94
5.7 To what extent did COVID-19 affect project implementation and performance?
In complement to other sections above also addressing the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on 
programming (see evaluation questions 1.3, 3.2, 4.5), this section provides a reminder of ways in which 
COVID-19 has affected implementation but, more important, the views of key stakeholders as to how 
the pandemic may ultimately impact project performance. 
Summary of changes to project implementation
The lockdown related to COVID-19 and its accompanying school closures between March and 
September 2020 marked a major disruption to Keun Faaba activities. As indicated above, interviews with 
92 This result is statistically significant with p≤0.000.
93 This result is statistically significant with p=0.015.
94 This result is statistically significant with p≤0.000.
92.0%
87.0%
8.0%
12.0%
0.0%
1.0%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Principals (n=50)
Teachers (n=100)
Yes, really Yes, more or less No, not really
89
project leadership as well as document review identify how activities were delayed as the project 
needed to stall programming to develop appropriate preventative measures. Key activities affected 
included infrastructure efforts, inaccessible school gardens, advocacy efforts, WASH-friendly school 
certification, the development of the teacher-merit certification process and school meal provision. 
Project field staff and managers also noted that the speed of implementation slowed immensely. In 
some cases, such as with story hour and CLTS, field agents and sub-recipient managers claimed that 
momentum for activities was lost and hard to gain back. CLTS 
presents a unique situation, as indicated above, as project 
activities were set to ramp up as the lockdown came into place. 
Other activities underwent adaptations: training and literacy￾promotion activities had to adjust both scheduling and 
implementation for smaller gatherings and other preventative 
measures. For example, as a school feeding field agent shared 
(and as detailed in the COVID-19 protocol), children are now 
served differently at school given heightened safety measures,
and cooks and storekeepers space themselves out while 
working. Still other activities developed remote models of 
implementation; teacher communities of practice began using 
WhatsApp and radio programming transitioned to a brief 
distance-learning model. 
The community farm component may be the least affected of all 
Keun Faaba activities, according to the URP director, a URP field 
agent and farmers participating in a parents’ group. While 
preventative measures were taken and much more energy and effort were needed to enact the same
activities, these stakeholders repeated that they did not see COVID adaptations negatively affecting 
implementation or project results. A parent explained that they had to keep working or would lose the 
harvest, a major incentive for farmers and project alike. 
Impact of COVID-19 on project performance
Although a small number of stakeholders indicated that project performance remains on track despite 
the impact of COVID-19, more of them voiced uncertainty in the area, in alignment with the findings 
from EQ5.1 above. The finance manager pointed out that the operating context remained in flux and 
was largely dependent on government measures taken and the evolution of the pandemic in Benin. 
Three components seem the most concerning for project staff: 1) literacy outcomes, 2) infrastructure 
improvements and 3) WASH results, CLTS specifically. In addition to programmatic delays, learning loss 
during school closures and automatic student advancement to the next grade level may greatly reduce 
learning gains. As multiple findings above point out, the project currently finds itself in a race against the 
clock. Two quotes below prove particularly illustrative of staff’s realization of challenges ahead, as well 
as the complex nature of behavioral change. 
“Yes, yes. Me, I think that this will hamper results. Last year, if there hadn’t been the 
pandemic, today we would be far ahead in our activities. To bring about behavioral 
change in terms of hygiene and sanitation, that isn’t something that can come about
Figure 23: Covid Procedure for Food 
Distribution
90
in six or eight months. Rather it takes more than three years. You see, this is going to 
hinder quite a bit.” (Caritas CLTS Field Agent, interview)
“It will certainly have an impact on achieved results. For instance, with the pandemic 
schools were closed for almost three months . . . . Prior to COVID, we were still on 
target for creating changes in mentality at the community level and with students 
about the importance of WASH habits. After two or three months of disruption, we 
had to restart some things. Surely that will have an impact on our results.” (MEAL 
Officer, focus group)
At the same time, the pandemic may have a positive effect on some WASH-related measures, since it
placed additional emphasis on sanitation, and handwashing in particular. As discussed in the response to 
EQ3.2 and EQ5.2, this dovetailing may prove beneficial to project performance. To illustrate, a main 
project indicator, the percentage of schools with soap and water at a handwashing station commonly 
used by students, measured 94.1 percent at midterm, far exceeding the 68 percent LOP target. 
5.8 Has the project affected girls and boys differently? If so, how? 
An analysis of both qualitative and quantitative data reveals modest, if any, differences in the ways that 
the project may have affected girls and boys. While some stakeholders, including a school director and a 
chief of pedagogical region, indicated during interviews that they perceived no gender-related 
difference in the project, in general, qualitative analysis demonstrates that more stakeholders feel that 
the project supports girls’ education and gender equity. At the same time, there are a few ways in which 
they have been affected differently. For instance, parents highlighted how tasks were shared and that 
education was equally important for girls and boys. Parents in one group provided a bit more detail,
sharing that the project had helped to shift tasks at home, so that girls are more able to focus on 
schooling:
“The project has shown us that girls and boys should do the same activities. Now, 
boys can do housework just like girls. Before the project, boys would go to school and 
girls would work at home rather than doing their schoolwork. Now, girls go to school 
and do their schoolwork and they do better because they love school.” (Parents, focus 
group)
One teachers’ group further outlined how their AME worked closely with girls and their families to 
address issues of enrollment or poor attendance, while another noted how parents’ attention to gender 
equity and the importance of girls’ education had increased due to project activities. Respondents also 
pointed to Keun Faaba’s emphasis on menstruation education as important and distinct depending on 
gender. Three conversations with chiefs of pedagogical region, for example, identified efforts to inform 
girls about menstruation management and advocacy to parents as positive. The WASH Clubs provide 
another illustration of how Keun Faaba activities may affect girls and boys differently. As the response to 
EQ3.1 indicates, sometimes girls are more involved in the clubs due to their gender or because of how 
tasks are assigned along gender lines and in accordance with cultural norms. 
91
Analysis of quantitative data show similar results, with no major distinctions between results for boys 
and girls. We first begin by examining survey data. An analysis of student-reported habits, both in the 
classroom and outside, reveal no major differences between girls and boys, with the exception of the 
chores they do after school. These results are unsurprising and culturally influenced. As Figure 24
depicts, nearly two-thirds of teachers and principals surveyed indicated that they did not see the project 
affecting boys and girls differently. The remaining third for each group felt that boys and girls had been 
treated differently, with teachers being slightly more likely to say “yes, really.” 
Figure 24: Teachers’ and principals’ perceptions on if project activities affected girls and boys differently
Lastly, we examined EGRA findings to see if differences between girls and boys were visible. Again, 
analysis shows little distinction. Table 16 below displays scores of the literacy index for girls and boys. 
Results show that boys scored slightly higher in Keun Faaba schools, while the opposite occurred in 
control schools. Analysis of individual EGRA subtasks, as illustrated by Table 17, provides further details
of how boys in project schools performed better than girls on all tasks, though again, by small amounts. 
Curiously, girls in control schools outperformed boys on some tasks, though these results are not 
statistically significant and may not apply outside of the midterm evaluation sample of schools. These 
EGRA results, particularly in project schools, invite scrutiny as the project continues and especially 
during the endline evaluation.
Table 16: Literacy index per school type and gender
Control
Girls Boys
Project
Girls Boys
p-value
Literacy Index 34.9 33.5 32.0 33.4 0.324
Table 17: Mean scores by school type and gender
Control
Girls Boys
Project
Girls Boys
p-value
Vocabulary (%) 53.9 55.8 51.4 55.8 0.289
Listening comprehension (%) 19.0 18.5 17.4 19.7 0.229
50%
48%
14%
17%
20%
5%
16%
29%
0%
1%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Principals (n=50)
Teachers (n=100)
No, not at all No, not really Yes, more or less Yes, really I don't know/No response
92
Control
Girls Boys
Project
Girls Boys
p-value
Letter name (clpm) 8.8 9.2 10.0 10.5 0.889
Letter sound (cspm) 14.1 13.9 14.6 16.0 0.315
Familiar word (cwpm) 5.5 4.7 4.4 5.4 0.068
Non-word (cwpm) 3.6 3.7 3.0 3.8 0.350
Reading passage (cwpm) 7.4 6.5 5.3 6.6 0.056
Reading comprehension (%) 3.2 3.2 1.9 2.6 0.483
A mixed-methods analysis concludes that while some stakeholders feel that the project may be 
promoting the importance of girls’ education and providing important services like access to information 
about menstrual health and hygiene, overall, no apparent meaningful distinction manifests in how the 
projects affects girls and boys at midterm.
5.9 Has the project had any unintended negative effects? (Question asked to ensure the project is 
doing no harm and to update our theory of change understanding the full effect of the program) 
The evaluation team asked a purposeful selection of stakeholders if the project had unintended 
consequences. Of 32 interviews, actors in 19 interviews or focus groups indicated that they were not 
aware of any unintended consequences. These stakeholders included key CRS and partner staff, national 
and departmental officials, parents and teachers. At the same time, other actors identified ways in 
which the project may lead to undesired outcomes. A frequent refrain, for example, was that parents 
sent children to school even when they were ill so that they may continue to qualify for the good￾attendance incentive of a jug of oil. Notably, two out of four teaching staff focus groups indicated how 
parents were sending underage children to project schools rather than Quranic schools8F
95. The provision 
of school meals functions as a major attractor to these parents. Teachers expressed concerns that these 
children were not yet intellectually ready but that teachers felt obligated to accept them. In addition, a 
departmental official lamented an increase in class sizes, particularly in Grades 1 through 3. At the same 
time, a national-level DEMP official said that the schools selected were the most marginalized and that 
schools had not seen the transfer of students from schools without canteens to Keun Faaba schools that 
they were otherwise expecting. Different chiefs of pedagogical region also spoke to how the school 
canteen can prove disruptive. They shared how when field agents visited the schools, they sometimes 
took teachers aside to speak with them, disrupting the class. Another advisor commented how time 
needed to collect money for condiments and count attendance precisely could take away from time on 
teaching task. The quote below illustrates such concerns: 
95 These younger children will join the Grade 1 classroom and remain there until of age to move up. 
93
“Negative effects . . . I can tell you how the field agents are always in the schools to 
take the numbers, to do run errands. And so, as a result, that blocks teachers’ work a 
little when they have to take the time to pass on certain messages. That's all we can 
read about the negative effects. It makes it so that the planning of the day's activities 
is not carried out 100 percent.” (Chief of Pedagogical Region, interview)
Two other cited unintended effects relate to complications resulting from the COVID-19 school closures. 
A parents’ group pointed how insects ravaged project commodities when schools were closed and food 
stores were not regularly cleaned. This same group also shared how some children suffered from hunger 
because parents had come to count on them eating at school, leaving them unprepared to feed them 
midday. 
Lastly, stakeholders intervening in infrastructure and CLTS also shared examples of unintended 
consequences, such as other communities expressing frustration at not being selected for infrastructure 
development. Another illustration: in a community benefitting from CLTS, community tensions arose 
between a family who cleaned up their environment and another who dumped their trash on the 
recently cleaned space. 
5.10 What are the project’s major limitations, and how is the project team addressing those 
challenges? 
Earlier sections have addressed the project’s limitations in detail (see EQ4.5 and EQ5.1). In brief, 
limitations include the impact of COVID-19 on implementation, ramifications of school closures, 
recruitment difficulties for personnel based in Kandi, challenges identifying and managing contractors 
for infrastructure projects, security concerns and rains/floods. This section examines how the project 
team is innovating to best address these issues.
Discussions with the project team as well as document review identify several ways that CRS approaches 
these various challenges. Internally, the team holds weekly meetings to allow discussion across sector 
leads. The team is also exploring internally how it might incentivize individuals during the recruitment 
process to relocate to Kandi. One suggestion has been the provision of transportation allowances that 
would make possible regular returns to Cotonou. Concerning security challenges, CRS management 
spoke of a tracking system and a checklist to help monitor teams when they go out on visits and to avoid 
high-risk areas. Three additional strategies stand out:
• Overcoming resistance to outdoor urination through school-based efforts: As indicated above, 
CRS is implementing several strategies to address the issue of outdoor urination on 
schoolgrounds. In addition to constructing urinals, one of the innovative strategies is that WASH 
Clubs work with older children to initiate younger children into more sanitary urination 
practices.
• Community oversight of infrastructure projects: Findings show that the process CRS has used in 
the past to select providers for infrastructure is inadequate. Inspired by experiences of CRS in 
Mali, the infrastructure team is innovating to work closely with communities to provide 
supervision of contractors. According to the head of programming, 
94
“It is proving effective so far. Rather than just contract out the infrastructure and 
CRS oversees, now communities are receiving materials and they contract the work 
locally and supervise the work. We found that when communities are involved,
they are harder than we are on construction companies, making sure they do not 
use one cup more cement than needed, ensuring they respect timelines, 
maximizing resources. . . . They are able to visit and flag out problems sooner.” 
(Head of Programming, interview)
• Advocacy and capacity-building: The FY2021 work plan indicates that advocacy efforts are 
scheduled for the current year. The CRS team indicates that their work on teacher-transfer 
policy advocacy will be a focus for the duration of the project. In addition, Caritas leadership 
indicates that they are trying to work with mayors to advocate for the implementation of some 
form of waste-management system. Similarly, in urban areas, they are working with local 
authorities for introductions to property owners who could help them install latrines.
5.11 To what extent have students (boys and girls) increased their reading comprehension compared 
to baseline?
Recall that according to the project’s Performance Monitoring Plan (PMP), students have met the SO1 
Improved Literacy of School-Age Children impact indicator if they can read and understand the meaning 
of grade-level text. This indicator is measured by the percentage of second-grade children89F
96 who obtain 
three correct answers on five reading comprehension questions. As displayed in Table 18, 0.8 percent of 
students in project schools and 1.6 percent of students in control schools met this indicator at midterm. 
These results are not statistically significant. These proportions have not changed much between 
baseline and midterm. Much as at baseline, these results indicate that 99 percent of students in both 
school types cannot read and understand a simple Grade 2 reading passage in French. 
Table 18: Comparison of baseline and midterm proportions of students meeting benchmark for 
comprehension 
Baseline 
Control
%
Baseline
Project
%
Mid-term 
Control %
Mid-term 
Project %
% of students meeting indicator 0.9% 1.0% 1.6% 0.8%
As Table 19 demonstrates, further gender analysis indicates that not much meaningful difference
obtains between the average proportion of comprehension questions that girls and boys answered 
correctly at either time point. Comparing across time shows very slight differences, but these are not 
noteworthy. Results also show that while girls in project schools, on average, performed better than 
96 Recall from the methodology that the midterm evaluation assessed Grade 3 children, as it was determined that 
Grade 2 students would not be appropriate given time lost due to COVID-19 schooling disruptions.
95
boys at baseline, girls in project schools performed worse than boys at midterm. Again, these 
differences are very small and do not withstand scrutiny. Similar to the results from EQ5.8, neither boys 
nor girls have meaningfully increased their reading comprehension compared to baseline.
Table 19: Mean scores on comprehension subtask (%) by school type, gender and evaluation timepoint
Control Project
Girls Boys Girls Boys
Baseline results 2 2 2.9 2.3
Mid-term 
results 3.2 3.2 1.9 2.6
Change over 
time 1.2 1.2 -1 0.3
5.12 To what extent have students improved their nutrition, health and hygiene-related practices?
Recall from EQ5.2 that three of the eight indicators measured by this midterm evaluation relate to 
nutrition, health and hygiene practices. Table 20 presents a summary of these indicators. Indicator 
number 4, reporting the percentage of schools with soap and water at a handwashing station, far 
surpasses the baseline value. Moreover, results also exceed the target value, demonstrating high-level 
improvement. Results from the other two indicators, however, show declines since baseline. Close 
analysis of indicator 5, related to passing scores on a test of health and hygiene practices, demonstrates 
no significant difference between time points if the 95 percent confidence interval is taken into account. 
Were this to be the case, the margin of error for the midterm computation means that the true answer 
falls between 25.2 and 34.1 percent, which includes the baseline value for this indicator. Therefore, no 
meaningful change has between timepoints.
Table 20: Summary of nutrition, health and hygiene-related indicators
Indicator Baseline Value Midline Value Monitoring 
value
Target
4 Percentage of schools with soap 
and water at a handwashing 
station commonly used by 
students
54.4% 94.1% 54.0% 68%
5 Percentage of students in target 
schools who achieve a passing 
score on a test of good health 
and hygiene practices
Passing Score: 70%
34% 29.5% 35.2%90F
97 40%
8 Percentage of children receiving a 
minimum acceptable diet
68.9% 51.6% 78.24% 75%
97 Data collected in August 2020 (per April-September 2020 semi-annual report).
96
Similarly, comparisons of reported defecation practices from survey data also do not prove conclusive. 
Parent-reported survey data reveal no meaningful difference between project and control school 
practices. At the same time, student reports of latrine use reveal a statistically significant positive 
difference of 6 percent91F
98 in favor of Keun Faaba schools. Nonetheless, this difference is small and any 
stronger interpretation may be premature. 
At the same time, teachers’ impressions of both students’ awareness and practice of good hygiene 
habits paint a more convincing picture of improvements. Survey data demonstrate significantly higher 
results for teachers at project schools when compared to control schools. Figure 26 presents the 
proportion of teachers surveyed who indicate that the majority of their students are aware of important 
hygiene rules, as well as the majority whose students appropriately apply good hygiene practice. The 
positive difference for project schools at midterm ranges between 17 and 34 percent, with the largest 
gap being for students’ application of good hygiene practices. Midterm figures are consistently higher 
than baseline for both groups and both questions.
Figure 25: Teachers' impressions of proportions of students aware of and applying good hygiene 
practices92F
99
In terms of nutrition, as in response to EQ1.4, stakeholders overwhelmingly found school meals to be 
beneficial to students, believing that they have the potential to increase student attentiveness and so
improve student learning. Results measuring the project indicator relevant that the proportion of 
children receiving a minimum acceptable diet, however, have decreased at midterm. Caution is 
necessary when interpreting this indicator, however, as the manner of computing it has changed. In 
addition, it should be noted that baseline data was collected in November while midterm data was 
collected in January. For this reason, seasonable differences may affect results. In addition, at midterm, 
98 Result is statistically significant at p=0.003.
99 Results are statistically significant with a baseline p-value of 0.037 and 0.014 for midterm for awareness. For 
application, the midterm results are statistically significant at p≤0.000, but the p-value exceeds the threshold for 
baseline (p=0.055) and is not significant. 
61%
49%
64%
52%
27%
33%
47%
39%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Midterm
Baseline
Midterm
Baseline
Applying good
hygiene
practices
Aware of good
hygiene
practices
Control Project
97
the computation for this indicator included an additional question (whether children eat three meals a 
day) not present at baseline93F
100. As a result, we should not compare these two time periods. Rather, the 
evaluation team will look to the comparison between final and midterm evaluations to provide more 
meaningful insights. 
Conclusion – Impact
The midterm evaluation sought to investigate the impact of Keun Faaba project interventions on project 
schools and stakeholders compared to control-group peers and, when possible, against baseline 
measures. Some successful strategies stand out as contributing to the achievement of project results. In 
terms of WASH, successful strategies include the consultative and inclusive process informing the 
development of Keun Faaba’s WASH strategy, WASH Clubs’ seeming contribution to students’ 
confidence and cleaner school environments and the promotion of CLTS in well-suited communities. 
While the overall school-feeding activity is considered a success, school gardens and community farms
also merit mention for demonstrating progress. Community involvement, in general, and close 
interactions with local authorities undergird the CRS approach, and findings suggest early indications 
that the approach is generating ownership for certain initiatives, notably trainings and educational 
materials such as the WASH-Nutrition Integration Guide. 
Nonetheless, Keun Faaba faces major complications that have been aggravated by closures and delays 
related to COVID-19. The CRS team and partners have had to reschedule and adapt activities to comply 
with gathering limits and COVID-prevention measures. As only two of eight select indicators 
demonstrate gains since baseline, there is concern that the project remains far from reaching its 
strategic objectives. In addition, project staff express concerns about three particular results: 1) literacy 
outcomes, 2) infrastructure improvements and 3) for WASH, CLTS outcomes.
The project will need to double-down on its efforts to implement forward-thinking strategies that 
incorporate sustainability and draw on the implementation teams’ strengths, including those of local 
partners. The continued promotion of community ownership will prove critical and the innovative 
strategy of fostering community oversight of infrastructure projects has great potential to build capacity 
and enhance sustainability. Deferring to community oversight also entails a considerable amount of risk. 
As a result, project monitoring will need to be accurate and responsive to avoid problems. 
In terms of measured impacts, findings show no to modest progress across project components. While 
testimonials of parents’ heightened awareness of the importance of education exist, the contributions
of radio broadcasts and listening groups are not clearly visible, and the midterm evaluation finds no
statistically significant difference between Keun Faaba and control-group parents’ perceptions of the 
importance of education. Findings show a similar trend for the project’s impact on children’s literacy 
levels. Some promising findings regard educators asserting an improvement in the quality of their 
teaching as well as higher proportions of students in project groups saying that they are being called on 
daily by teachers. Similarly, the project also seems to be making gains in terms of children having 
accessible books at home and reading or studying French after school. EGRA results do not yet follow,
however, and literacy index scores show that project schools have lost the advantage they had at 
baseline over control schools and that comprehension scores have not improved. It is probable that 
100 This question was not asked at baseline but as it is a CRS requirement, the evaluation team included it at 
midterm.
98
time has simply not been sufficient to allow for visible change at midterm. In addition to project 
implementation delays and school closures due to COVID-19, powerful factors such as teacher mobility, 
low teacher capacity, limited parental engagement and large class sizes may have dampened project 
impact.
In addition, analysis concludes that while some stakeholders feel that the project promotes the 
importance of girls’ education and provides important services like access to information about 
menstrual health and hygiene, overall, survey data and EGRA results in particular demonstrate no 
meaningful distinction in how the project’s various components affect girls and boys at midterm. While 
it is not entirely clear from mid-term results, the coherence between girls’ and boys’ results may also 
signal that girls’ education efforts may have helped to level the playing field for female students.
Lastly, while the evaluation explored unintended negative effects, those generated are typical to school 
feeding programs and seem unsurprising, including parents sending children to school when ill. The 
project staff is already aware of these challenges. The exception may be some parents sending underage 
children to school, a behavior that could cause disruption and may require specific attention.
In sum, the midterm impact of the Keun Faaba project lags behind expectations across all project 
components, but the project has also experienced exceptional obstacles, some admittedly internal. 
Much effort and impeccable implementation are required for the project to catch up and demonstrate 
impact at endline.
6. Sustainability
The final DAC criteria addressed by this midterm evaluation is sustainability, defined by the OECD as 
“the extent to which the net benefits of the intervention continue or are likely to continue.” Five 
evaluation questions guide findings and cover the project’s vision, early indications of sustainability at 
the community level and strategies that specifically favor the sustainability of school canteens, 
education activities and inclusive or gender-sensitive practices. 
6.1 How has this project defined sustainability? Do all stakeholders share a common vision and 
understanding of the vision, as well as the pathway to get there?
Document review and discussions with stakeholders revealed that no single document exists that
defines Keun Faaba’s approach to sustainability. Moreover, the Keun Faaba COP asserts that more 
remains to be done in bringing project partners on board with a shared comprehensive vision for 
sustainability. The original cooperative agreement uses the term sustainability in relation to school 
gardens and the WASH-Nutrition Integration Guide, as well as school meals. The June 2020 amendment 
adds an additional reference to borehole maintenance. All three references cite collaboration at the 
local level, and in the case of the integration guide, the departmental level. 
Likewise, interviews with stakeholders identified component-specific strategies for promoting 
sustainability that rely on the engagement of communities and local and national authorities. 
Concerning WASH, in addition to the community maintenance of boreholes, the CRS head of 
programming pointed to the organization’s approach to implementing menstrual-hygiene campaigns 
and WASH certification. In the case of menstrual hygiene, CRS works with governmental community 
health workers already present and active in the zones. These individuals come to schools to support 
programming. Similarly, WASH certification relies on departmental-level chiefs of pedagogical region. 
99
CRS hopes to have these roles integrated into these actors’ job descriptions before the end of project. In 
addition, according to the Caritas director, Caritas associates the sustainability of CLTS efforts with the 
construction of latrines built of durable materials. 
With regard to school meals, communities taking increased ownership and responsibility for managing 
and supplying school canteens lies at the heart of the CRS vision for sustainability. Two initiatives are 
integral to the effort, as indicated by the project MEAL Team and document review: community farms, 
school gardens. The original cooperative agreement envisions the WASH-Nutrition Integration Guide as 
instrumental to developing capacity at the school level. It states,
“Starting in Year 3 the guide will be used by Pedagogical Advisors to train school 
directors on school gardens and to regularly monitor school gardens and integration 
of Agriculture and nutrition in teaching methods.” (Original Cooperative Agreement, 
September 27, 2017, p. 6; Amendment, p. 4)
In addition, the agreement clarifies that CRS will taper its contribution of commodities over time,
allowing for parents to contribute food for meals instead.94F
101 CRS also sees participation in the national 
coordination platform on school feeding and the organization of field visits with national MEMP 
representatives and Ministry of Planning and Development officials as key to information sharing and 
capacity building.95F
102 Finally, while they are few, with technical support from PfD, URP has established 
farm-management committees in communities with Keun Faaba farms and views capacity building as a 
way to ensure sustainability at the community level and to positively influence other communities. 
During an interview, the director also indicated the ongoing development of a sustainability plan for 
community farms at the time of data collection.
Lastly, for education, sustainability rests largely on capacity building and collaboration with leaders at 
the community, departmental and national levels. The WEI Education Team and partners also indicated 
during interviews the importance of parents’ groups (AME and APE, specifically) filling a more prominent 
role in promoting literacy efforts. For that reason, WEI attempts to engage AME and APE members in 
project activities such as community libraries. Similarly, the FY2021 work plan underlines the importance 
of working with opinion leaders to raise awareness of the importance of education within targeted 
communities and beyond. Teacher training in evidence-based reading-instruction strategies, as well as 
new Grade 1 and 2 materials that support the transitioning national curriculum, prove central to the 
project’s vision. As WEI Education Team members indicate,
“We can also mention the multiple teacher trainings that we have held. And if these 
teachers are maintained within these schools, it is obvious that they will build upon 
101 This had not yet started at the time of the evaluation. Source: MDG 2017 Cooperative Agreement, 
September 2017, p. 7; Amendment to Cooperative Agreement, June 2020, p. 5.
102Source: MDG 2017 FY2021 Work Plan, p. 10.
100
their experience and share it with other colleagues continuing to promote the 
sustainability of the project.” (WEI Education Team Member, interview)
Efforts to build capacity within INFRE to develop and administer EGRA at the local level and manage to 
analyze and use data to inform teacher-training modules makes for another important aspect of the CRS 
vision for sustainability. As indicated above, specific advocacy efforts focused on EGRA capacity building 
and buy-in are the focus of FY2021 activities. The project hopes its pilot efforts will eventually lead to 
the government adopting EGRA into its work plan and bringing it to scale. Nonetheless, INFRE officials 
also raised some concerns about the cost of performing EGRA, a component that CRS may be able to 
help the government address to ensure sustainability. Also significant, INFRE is adopting a new 
curriculum very similar to that of CRS (see EQ6.5 for more details).
In addition to Keun Faaba project leadership, government leaders also indicated understanding and 
support for Keun Faaba’s emphasis on community engagement. National DEMP officials underlined their 
satisfaction with the project and with partners’ close collaboration in developing strategic plans and 
sharing the same vision. A key official indicated that 
“The government is aware of the importance of sustaining these actions and CRS is 
active and is putting into place measures to support sustainability through 
community engagement. And it’s for this reason that the government’s plan is 
entitled National Integrated School Feeding Program (PNASI). Integrated means the 
implication of all of the ministry sectors and community-level structures. . . . The 
government envisions a school feeding model similar to the Brazilian model, a model 
where communities participate in supporting school canteens, so I think that CRS has 
this down and is a master at infrastructure development. CRS, through its 
supervision, mobilizes communities to provide labor, in terms of materials, to build 
infrastructure locally. I think that this approach is really taken into account by CRS.” 
(National DEMP Official, interview)
This alignment, also the topic of coherence question EQ2.2 above, offers a meaningful gauge of 
commonality between the general project vision for sustainability and the understanding of government 
partners, even if Keun Faaba’s sustainability strategy has not been officially articulated.
6.2. What are the early indications of sustainability at this point in the project? Is there evidence of 
more community capacity for sustainability communities ready to take over? Is there willingness 
of community members to participate without financial expectations? Are there any spontaneous 
actions of the PTAs and AMEs for the maintenance of school infrastructures or other critical 
school-improvement activities? Are the PTAs and AMEs now demonstrating application of the 
organizational competencies the project has passed on to them since FFE I?
This question examines the evidence of early indications of sustainability at the community level. All 100 
schools visited for the midterm evaluation indicated having APEs, but while all 50 Keun Faaba schools in 
101
the sample had established AMEs, this held true for only 54 percent of control schools at midterm.96F
103 In 
terms of APE activity level, curiously, slightly more control schools reported being active than project 
schools (96 to 90%), though this result is not statistically significant. This trend also obtained at baseline. 
The surveys asked schools indicating little or no activity to provide more details, to which the top two 
responses were that parents either did not have the time or the interest to participate.
APE/AME competent and confident
In terms of how much these community-based organizations have learned through the Keun Faaba 
project, findings show that APE and AME members demonstrate that organizational competencies are 
for the most part acquired, even if need for some level of support remains. Mixed-methods analysis 
provides evidence of this claim.
Four-fifths of principals surveyed identified that AME and APE members actively put into practice 
organization skills acquired since the beginning of the project. In addition, all four parent focus groups, 
including APE/AME members, agreed that they routinely put into practice what they had learned 
through trainings. One group indicated that some of the volunteers had also participated in Phase 1 of 
the Keun Faaba project, exemplifying even more longevity and dedication to the school feeding 
program. In commenting on their capabilities, two groups commented as follows, also affirming their 
commitments to sustainability:
“We are well organized to help load the food. We could also manage, looking at the 
number of children present, to know how much food to take out.” (Parents, focus 
group)
“Activities will continue because now we are habituated to these activities, both us 
and the children.” (Parents, focus group) 
It is worth noting that none of the school-level stakeholders made specific mention of food provisions. A 
departmental-level DEMP official did raise this concern, however. While he said that, “yes,” the canteen 
program would continue under government supervision at CRS schools on project closure, he added 
that the government could not supply as many commodities to schools as did CRS.
CRS staff noted strains to volunteers’ capacities. A school feeding field agent mentioned that some 
volunteers have great difficulties spending extended time at schools during fieldwork season, as they 
need to tend to their own land. A WASH-Nutrition specialist commented that volunteers could be more 
rigorous in their own hygiene and indicated that cooks did not always have water available to wash their 
own hands frequently. Lastly, the MEAL Team indicated a continuing problem with APEs and AMEs 
taking unsatisfactory notes at their meetings and not keeping track of problems, leading to inefficient 
problem solving. The team did note improvements since Phase 1, however. 
103 This proportion increased 13 percent since baseline.
102
Volunteer commitments strong but mixed
Findings are mixed with regard to whether volunteer commitment could withstand the withdrawal of 
compensation. Generally, cooks’ and storekeepers’ self-reporting is very positive, but other data sources 
show more measured responses. As analysis for efficiency question 4.3 above indicates, all cooks and 
storekeepers unanimously indicated that they would continue to volunteer even without compensation. 
All four parents’ focus groups also agreed. As the quotes below indicate, however, certain parents noted 
that it would be difficult and that some volunteers might therefore discontinue their service, providing 
more nuance to the quantitative results:
“If there wasn’t any compensation, they would still come, but it would be temporary. 
If there was no compensation, well, other parents would have to take over the 
charge. They would be bothered to make other parents work. (Parent, focus group)
“Some would leave but others would stay. They know that it’s their duty to nourish 
the children and they will stay.” (Parent, focus group)
Principals and project management showed similar reserve in their claims. Among the 37 principals who 
self-identified as being part of the School Feeding Program Management Committee, one quarter of 
them (8 or 27%) suggested that volunteers would not accept to work without compensation. CRS staff 
indicated they felt similarly, including a WASH field agent and members of the MEAL Team.
Voluntary community contributions
Moreover, the evaluation team found evidence of spontaneous and voluntary parental contributions at 
the school level that indicate substantial practical commitments already in place at some schools. 
Broadly speaking, survey data from the 50 Keun Faaba school principals sampled indicate that parents 
most often helped voluntarily during the past three years by building kitchens and food-storage areas. 
At the same time, 18 principals (28%) responded that parents had done nothing to help at their school, 
supporting the Keun Faaba COP’s description of voluntary parent contributions as “episodic but . . .
multiplying.” Figure 26 shows the kinds of activities parents have voluntarily assisted with.
103
Figure 26: Activities in which parents participated voluntarily within past three years, according to 
principals (n=50)
Interview data strongly substantiate examples of community contributions. All key project staff and 
partners, including diverse sector field agents, could testify to at least one case of a community 
performing some sort of improvement for the school. In addition, three out of four parents’ groups 
identified ways in which they had already contributed to their schools’ improved infrastructure. The 
fourth group indicated that “no,” the community had not been involved in this way. Examples of 
community efforts noted include: 
• Soliciting the mayor’s office for funding and receiving approval
• Building sheds, storage rooms and classrooms
• Providing gravel and sand for the construction of Keun Faaba infrastructure projects
• Community participation in latrine construction (CLTS) 
• Cleaning latrines and purchasing locks to prevent vandalism
• Cleanup day at the beginning of the year (raking around the school, sweeping, repairing Tippy 
Tap, cleaning and maintaining the kitchen)
• AMEs pooling money to buy bottles to make Tippy Taps or to buy soap
• Kitchen renovations
• Building shelves for serving food so that it does not have to sit on the ground
In addition, stakeholders shared examples of communities that set aside revenue from their harvest for 
purchasing condiments for school lunches, as well as of those that provided an additional meal to 
students in the morning. As a WASH-Nutrition specialist recounted,
”We should also speak about their contributions in terms of foodstuffs. Some APEs 
decide, for instance, to contribute foodstuffs themselves in order to provide an 
additional meal. For instance, porridge in the morning, so that children may learn. 
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
16%
18%
18%
28%
32%
42%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%
Well drilling
Classroom construction
Classroom repair
CLTS
School latrine repair
Food storage repair
Kitchen repair
School latrine construction
Buying or providing condiments
Nothing
Food storage construction
Kitchen construction
104
This example shows how some PTAs are really aware of what's going on and they are 
taking initiative.” (WASH-Nutrition Specialist, interview)
One example also included a community building a classroom financed by their cotton harvest. CRS 
further featured a success story of a community in Garou that raised $824 to construct a classroom 
made of metal sheeting, complete with student benches, a table and a blackboard. Most notably, the 
community became galvanized to make this contribution after Keun Faaba activities presented families 
with EGRA results. The attending community members came to the realization that overcrowding was 
partly to blame for poor results. so they mobilized to increase the school’s classroom capacity. Their 
funds also paid for a community teacher whom they helped recruit.97F
104 In addition, according to the WEI 
Education Team, some AMEs run school-enrollment campaigns that try to identify out-of-school children 
and those with high rates of absenteeism and work with families to bring them back to school. Members 
of the MEAL Team recounted another compelling example of community mobilization, explaining how 
cooks at a particular school visited another school that had a dilapidated kitchen, which the school’s 
own cooks did not know how to repair. The first group of cooks helped their peers repair workspace. 
While findings indicate that such actions are not yet mainstreamed, they provide assurances of the 
capabilities of even marginalized communities to mobilize and support convincing efforts. At the same 
time, a CRS WASH-Nutrition specialist cautioned that Phase 1 (MGD 2014) had worked with AMEs/APEs 
to build school enclosures but that the initiative had lost momentum over time. 
Special mention of community farms
Within discussions of sustainability, findings indicate that CRS community farms, though there are only 
12 of them, present a particularly strong case for future sustainability, even at midterm. PfD, one of the 
sub-recipients charged with implementing community farms for Keun Faaba, state that these farms have 
been doing well and have the capacity to produce essential food commodities for schools, as well as 
providing a source of revenue for the feeding program itself. One farmer in a parent focus group 
provided an illustration of how the community farm allowed them to support the school:
“Twelve bags of corn and three bags of sorghum harvested. We use it to buy 
condiments and also to pay the community teacher. The president of the AME stores 
the harvest, which is sold in function of the needs of the AME/PTA. We are going to 
continue. We are pleased with the community farm.” (Farmer, Parent focus group)
Moreover, PfD indicates its advocacy for having community farms register as agricultural 
businesses/cooperatives. Future years will prove challenging if they continue to provide all their 
products to the schools, leaving them without seeds. The UfP director argues that the initiative should 
be expanded, so that community farms develop the tools necessary to succeed as businesses, ensuring 
sustainability. Another farmer in a parent focus group supported this argument. Other actors, including 
104 MGD 2017 (2020), EGRA Success Story in Garou.
105
a departmental DEMP official, provided a reality check in arguing that the availability of water continues 
to be an issue in certain communities, keeping community farming out of reach.
6.3 What policies favor the sustainability of school canteen projects?
The existence of Benin’s PNASI school feeding project (see responses to EQ1.5 and EQ2.2 above), which 
operates within 54 percent of schools in the country, provides an environment that already values
school canteens. The Government of Benin has as its stated goal to reach 100 percent of all primary 
schools in rural areas. Interviews with project leadership, namely the Keun Faaba COP and the directors
of PfD and URP, as well as with the two departmental-level DEMP heads of School Food Service inform 
the response to this question. Analysis shows that these actors feel generally positive about the current 
policy environment. As the project COP stated,
“The government’s vision and government policies are put into place through the 
School Feeding Department. We have director-level support at the department level 
and from other governmental structures that intervene within the sector. All this 
promotes sustainability.” (COP, interview)
At the same time, actors indicate the need for additional policy work to increase sustainability, 
particularly at the local level. Both department-level DEMP officials interviewed described reliance on 
school fields and gardens a strong process, though one that required additional support. These actors 
signaled support for CRS programming. One of the officials was especially clear in his declaration:
“The government will adopt these schools. These schools will not be abandoned. The 
government will integrate nursery schools as well for school feeding when the nursery 
school is part of the primary school.” (DEMP Official, interview)
Going beyond school gardens and community farms, both the PfD and URP directors accentuated the 
need for policies supporting community ownership, particularly for the provision of food commodities. 
They argued that local government needed to manage the process. The URP management team 
expressed concern that the current market organization did not provide sufficient opportunity for local 
producers, rather favoring sales to Nigeria or Togo. URP also signaled awareness of government 
initiatives to move in the domestic direction, including signing contracts with local cooperatives to 
supply school canteens. In addition, the positive results of the Bèsèn Diannou Local and Regional Food 
Aid Procurement project (LRP) offer compelling evidence of how local commodities and procurement 
processes can effectively provide required school canteen commodities while bolstering food 
production at the local level. LRP was a USDA-funded project that ran from 2017-2019 in the Borgou 
region of Benin and was implemented by CRS with URP as a sub-recipient. The final evaluation of the 
project found the approach “a viable method for feeding students quality meals while contributing to 
106
the local economy.”98F
105 Importantly, the evaluation concluded that while the commodity cost was higher 
per metric ton for LRP, the average commodity cost per meal per student was lower and the total time 
from contracting to delivery to beneficiary schools proved shorter when compared to both WFP and 
MGD systems. The project also made meaningful gains in helping local producers improve their capacity. 
6.4 Are the policies and actions implemented at the educational level in line with the objectives at 
national level?
Findings demonstrate that educational actors at the school, departmental and national levels all agree 
that Keun Faaba’s policies and actions are in line with educational objectives at the national level. As 
Figure 28 indicates, four-fifths of principals indicate that Keun Faaba methods align with the national 
education curriculum, while one-fifth felt there was incompatibility. When asked why they felt the 
methods were incompatible, 9 out of 10 principles replied suggested incongruence with the official 
curriculum, while one principal felt that reading took too much time compared to the other subject 
areas. 
Figure 27: Principals' perceptions of the compatibility of Keun Faaba methods with national education 
objectives, in particular the reading curriculum (n=50)
National and departmental-level findings explain that educators at the school level have not yet been 
introduced to the new curriculum. 
INFRE officials also confirm that Keun Faaba has positively influenced and supported national-level 
strategies. As an INFRE official shared,
105 J. C. Fotso, M. A. Sanni, P. K. Jimmy & A. Ambrose (2019), Evaluation of Bèsèn Diannou Local and Regional Food 
Aid Procurement (LRP) Project, EVIHDAF, p. ix. 
No, not at all, 
2.0%
No, not really, 
18.0%
Yes, more or 
less, 14.0%
Yes, really, 
66.0%
107
"INFRE is in charge of training all the teachers in Benin, so our role is to capitalize on 
all the innovations that the project has made for all of Benin. The presence of INFRE 
as teacher trainers increases INFRE capacity to transmit these lessons beyond the 
project. The reforms at the program level have caught on." (INFRE Official, interview)
The new curriculum came about in part because of poor EGRA results that demonstrated a need for 
curricular reform.
Analysis indicates two clear and prominent examples of how Keun Faaba’s educational approach aligns 
with the government’s education objectives: 1) the development of the WASH-Nutrition Integration 
Guide and 2) the new phonics-based reading curriculum set to go to scale. All four chiefs of pedagogical 
region interviewed also confirmed alignment. Specifically speaking about the integration guide, one of 
them said, 
“Everywhere I see that the project confirms the government’s attitudes towards 
education. I believe that the project even prepared us before the [COVID-19] virus 
arrived. So, everywhere the project conforms with the Benin education curriculum.” 
(Chief of Pedagogical Region, interview)
Another chief of pedagogical region emphatically stated, 
“It’s a tie-in to the official curriculum” (Chief of Pedagogical Region, interview)
A World Bank education specialist confirmed ongoing collaborations with the Government of B and that 
the new curriculum would go to scale next year. The new curriculum used a phonics approach and 
involves decodables. The consultant central to curriculum development for Keun Faaba is the same 
consultant working on the new government curriculum with the World Bank, further confirming 
alignment between the approaches.
6.5 Have inclusive or gender sensitive strategies been implemented in view of sustainability among 
identified specific groups if there is any? E.g.: case of Fulani/Peulh communities?
Data from school principals and project staff provide an indication of how Keun Faaba may approach the 
implementation of inclusive or gender-sensitive strategies in view of sustainability. In general, actors 
showed greater awareness of strategies supportive of gender equity, though less of ones focusing on 
specific groups. Accordingly, only 14 of 50 principals (28%) knew of specific Keun Faaba strategies aiming 
to support marginalized individuals and communities. These respondents cited the provision of school 
supplies (9 principals), girls’ mentoring strategies (6 principals), free tuition for schooling (including 
donations of school supplies) (5 principals) and how all children are treated the same way (3 principals) 
as examples. All 14 principals described these strategies as effective, with 12 of 14 emphasizing they 
were “very effective.” On the other hand, when asked about strategies to promote girls’ education, 
108
nearly two-thirds of principals (31 principals, or 62%) indicated awareness of these strategies. The three 
most frequently cited strategies (see Figure 29) were girls’ mentoring, the provision of school supplies 
and offering lessons on puberty and good hygiene for both girls and boys. As with the previous question, 
nearly all principals (87%) familiar with these strategies found them to be effective.
Figure 28: Principals' awareness of strategies promoting girls' education (n=31)
The evaluation team also turned specifically to WEI subcontractors DERANA and ALAFIA, who work most 
closely with communities, to better understand how Keun Faaba may be implementing inclusive or 
gender-specific strategies in a sustainable manner. Their responses stressed that Keun Faaba 
implemented trainings focused on gender inclusion and equity, particularly discussions with AME/APE 
members about the roles of boys and girls and the not necessarily strict gender division of tasks. During 
these trainings, facilitators led by example with a mixed-gender pair of facilitators. DERANA and ALAFIA 
staff also described how they used radio programming and listening sessions to spread the message. 
Nonetheless, they also shared that views toward gender roles were culturally anchored, making
behavioral change a slow process.
More specifically, the existence of women’s associations (AME) at the school level may prove most 
sustainable, as these associations will hopefully stay in place after project end. Recall from EQ6.2 that all 
50 Keun Faaba schools sampled at midterm had established AMEs, compared to only 54 percent of 
control schools. Both institutions’ management stated that AMEs, as an institution, offered women from 
all subgroups within a community the opportunity to participate. The DERANA director described AMEs 
as providing women a safe space to express themselves,
“Significantly, the fact that students’ Mothers’ Associations (AME) have been set up 
allows women to express themselves. During meetings in general, women always 
stay away, and among Fulani women, it is even more obvious. But today, because 
they are part of an association, their shyness is being overcome. They express 
themselves and speak out even in the presence of men.” (DERANA Director, 
interview)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
I don't know/No response
Equal treatment of students
Free tuition for schooling
Puberty and good hygiene education
Provision of school supplies
Girls' mentoring
109
A vivid example is also how AME school-enrollment campaigns are designed to conduct outreach even in 
the most remote (often Peulh) communities. 
Conclusion – Sustainability
Even with project delays and substantial obstacles to project implementation, findings from the 
midterm evaluation demonstrate important early indications of sustainability at local, departmental and 
national levels. Nonetheless, no project-wide sustainability framework or plan exists, leaving each 
project component with its own conception of sustainability without a coherently articulated vision. At 
the same time, key partners seem to implicitly understand that the long-term continuation of project 
benefits relies on community and government counterpart engagement. 
Early indications of sustainability include how AME/APEs are largely active, having, at close to have the 
schools sampled, incorporated key project messages and trainings related to good hygiene, operating 
school canteens and showing strong evidence of spontaneous and voluntary parental contributions. 
School farms, in particular, seem to have generated great enthusiasm and a possibly viable and 
attractive way for community members to sustain school canteens. Other compelling examples of 
community support for schools include the construction of kitchen and food-storage areas, the provision 
of materials for Tippy Taps and, to a lesser extent, the provision of condiments. Findings are mixed as to 
whether cooks and storekeepers integral to school canteens would continue without project-provided 
incentives. The evaluation team notes that PNASI canteens do operate without these incentives, though 
with varied effectiveness. Creative solutions and increased community engagement may help certain 
communities identify a working solution.
Findings also demonstrate strong synergy between governmental policies for school feeding and 
government education objectives with Keun Faaba activities. Government officials have embraced the 
project’s WASH-Nutrition Integration Guide, and INFRE is revising its national curriculum to closely 
resemble Keun Faaba’s phonic-based approach to reading, currently being scaled up through the World 
Bank’s technical and financial support. At the same time, the Government of Benin should consider 
further strengthening its policies and efforts to support local food provision and procurement. CRS has 
great expertise in this area, and the project should consider further enhancing its related advocacy and 
capacity-building efforts during remaining project time.
4.Recommendations 
The recommendations below draw on the findings and conclusions of the midterm evaluation report to 
provide direction for midcourse corrections and future projects. The table indicates the stakeholder 
most likely able to address the recommendation, as well as the appropriate timeframe for 
implementation. The evaluation team also reiterates that CRS and partners should continue to 
emphasize strategies that have so far proven to be effective as well as those with the potential that, due 
to various circumstances, cited above, have not yet had sufficient time to demonstrate any effect.
# RECOMMENDATION ACTOR TIMEFRAME
1 In project time remaining, continue to focus education efforts on strong 
teacher training and efforts at the school-level to support changes in 
teacher practice. In-person and remote-communities of practice should 
WEI, CRS Immediate
110
# RECOMMENDATION ACTOR TIMEFRAME
be further leveraged, building on the positive experiences teachers 
reported during the school-closure period. Attention to teachers in 
remote locations with less access to communities of practice is necessary 
to ensure that all teachers feel supported to make changes to their 
teaching strategies.
2 The project needs to further strengthen community engagement 
initiatives to support reading. Efforts need to be made to regain 
momentum for these activities that waned after school closures. Most 
notably, an improved communication strategy is necessary for ensuring 
that the most marginalized parents and students are aware of the 
activities.
WEI and 
partners 
ALAFIA and 
DERANA
Immediate
3 In order to better ascertain student reading progress and needs, work 
with chiefs of pedagogical regions to develop a rapid diagnostic tool that 
teachers can use regularly as a formative assessment tool as well as for 
officials to use during monitoring and school visits. The tool should take 
no more than 5 minutes to administer and need only be used with five 
students per school. These students should be randomly selected. Many 
other countries have implemented a similar strategy. Look to the USAID 
Soma Umenye project in Rwanda as one example.
Put into place a strategy to identify students with the greatest need and 
provide appropriate remedial support. Teacher training should emphasize 
formative assessment and mediation strategies.
WEI
WEI
Immediate
Future 
projects
4 Keep working on improving the collaboration between various sector field 
agents to increase overall programming efficiency at local level.
For future projects, the implementing partner should restrict the number 
of field agent types and instead employ a matrix management system 
where individual field agents cover multiple domains and report to strong 
technical leads. This will reduce each agent’s number of schools and 
strengthen the relationship between the agent and each school. To 
ensure transparency, the field agents who focus on school meals and the 
management of foodstuffs would still need to be distinct from other field 
agents. The two groups would report to different supervisors and both 
monitor the use and storage of food.
CRS
CRS/USDA
Immediate
Future 
projects
5 Increase support for WASH Clubs to capitalize on positive experiences, 
particularly student-to-student learning (e.g. fostering urination in 
latrines) as well as normalizing WASH club activities at schools to reduce 
negative behaviors toward WASH members. Also find ways to recognize & 
motivate teachers advising WASH Clubs. Suggestions include developing a 
guide for teacher advisors to the WASH clubs and ensuring that new 
CRS, WEI Immediate
111
# RECOMMENDATION ACTOR TIMEFRAME
teacher advisors receive a short training to be able to appropriately 
support students and club activities.
6 Investigate & rectify CRS approval process to avoid cancellations or 
postponements due to unmet payments. Assure flexibility within process 
to ensure that invoices can be paid in a timely manner.
CRS Immediate
7 Increase efforts & resources for advocacy efforts to address 1) teacher￾mobility policy, 2) waste management, 3) policies supporting local 
commodity provision and procurement. 
In terms of teacher mobility, consider strategies that have worked in 
other settings for early grade reading projects like USAID-funded SIRA in 
Mali and NECS in Niger: work closely with the government to assure that 
project teachers are not transferred to other schools. The project will 
need to be mindful that an unintended outcome of this strategy may 
likely be that some teachers, especially those in more remote areas, may 
resent their participation in the project as a result.
CRS, WEI, 
Caritas, 
URP, PfD
Immediate
8 For the last point, CRS can leverage its LRP experiences so that LRP 
strategies become adopted or integrated into the government ‘s school
Feeding Policy. Such efforts may help leverage project gains, while the 
status quo likely will extinguish progress shortly after project end.
CRS Immediate
9 Work with Direction of School Feeding and the WFP to revive and 
strengthen collaborations with the various actors intervening in school 
feeding programs. In addition to regular meetings, foster exchanges to 
visit and better understand each other’s programming.
CRS Immediate
10 Revise current theory of change for greater accessibility &
comprehensiveness to include diagram, clarified linkages with 
intermediate outcomes & expanded list of critical assumptions (esp. re: 
health crises & unanticipated school closures).
For future projects, revise the theory of change so that assumptions are 
even clearer and recognize the complex environment within which the 
project operates.
CRS
CRS
Immediate
Future 
projects
11 Articulate sustainability plan to guide project implementation until close. 
The plan should include clear exit strategies, e.g., how communities will 
transition to government canteen support. The project should anticipate 
a process for accompanying communities to identify creative solutions for 
volunteer in-kind remuneration (e.g., community members rotating to 
help volunteers in their fields after end of schoolwork).
CRS with all 
partners
Immediate
112
# RECOMMENDATION ACTOR TIMEFRAME
12 Expand visibility of school gardens at departmental & national levels to 
maximize leveraging their success in supporting school canteens. 
In future projects, consider further expanding this component and 
working with farms from the start to create agricultural collectives.
CRS, URP, 
PfD
CRS/USDA
Immediate
Future 
projects
13 For the current project, focus on local government efforts to establish 
and/or strengthen waste-management services where CLTS is 
inappropriate (i.e.. urban areas). 
If CLTS continues as key strategy for future projects, ensure the CLTS￾appropriateness prior to implementation & lack of overlap with other 
NGOs. CLTS should target only rural areas.
CRS/USDA Immediate
Future 
projects
14 Articulate a clear gender-equity strategy for entire project. 
Future projects should focus on a gender-transformative rather than a 
gender-accommodating stance. The CRS gender-responsive education 
toolkit can provide guidance.
CRS Future 
projects
15 Transition Keun Faaba schools to PNASI at end of MGD 2017. CRS (or 
other implementing partner) should work with new school cohort that 
lacks successful school canteens. A new project in Benin should provide 
an enhanced implementation model taking into account lessons learned 
in LRP and MGD 2014 and 2017 & informed by global evidence base on 
school feeding programs.
USDA, GOB End of 
project
16 CRS should consider including questions in the final project evaluation 
that 1) investigate the characteristics of successful WASH clubs as well as 
obstacles; 2) examine teacher absenteeism using hard data; 3) spillover of 
project activities on control schools.
CRS End of 
project
17 Conduct needs assessments & feasibility studies for infrastructure 
component prior to project design for increased appropriateness. 
Infrastructure must be in place in first half of project to fully capitalize on 
its contributions.
Water resources and constraints at target schools, in particular, require 
analysis in greater depth. The project would also benefit from a donor 
mapping to understand and help link schools to available and potential 
support. CRS should consider partnering with other donors to improve 
access to water for schools. School selection for future projects should 
take into account a school’s water situation and limit the number of 
schools without a reliable water source in accordance with project 
resources in order to maintain manageable expectations.
CRS/USDA Future 
projects
113
# RECOMMENDATION ACTOR TIMEFRAME
18 Incorporate contingency plans for school closures into project designs 
(due to increased likelihood of future interruptions). These plans should 
include distance-learning programming & projects could partially rely on 
extant content from development partners, such as interactive audio 
instruction. Conduct a mapping exercise to identify possibilities.
CRS/USDA Future 
projects
 
114
Annex 1: Keun Faaba Theory of Change 
Building on M&E data, stakeholder consultations and analyses of progress, successes, and lessons 
learned from FFE I, FFE II will continue to focus on improved literacy of school-age children and 
improved health and nutrition practices, while expanding its reach to the communities as a force for 
sustainable change. The project’s theory of change is as follow:
• If teachers are rationally assigned to the project’s underserved departments in northern Benin; 
and if they are trained using effective adult education principles and practices (learning needs 
assessments, relevance, immediacy), and if they have access to improved literacy materials, and 
if they are given post-training supportive supervision,
• if canteen management committees and cooking teams are trained in school canteen 
management and food preparation and safety and demonstrate application of knowledge and 
skills, and if cooking teams access protein-rich, diverse, and micronutrient-rich food from 
imports, local purchases and school gardens and farms,
• if potable water systems are installed, and if school committees are trained to maintain these, 
and if more students have access to improved latrine facilities, and if training of students and 
teachers in hygiene behaviors using an evidence-based curriculum takes place, and if WASH 
structures are available at all schools (tippy-taps, etc.) and if Community Led Total Sanitation 
and Participatory Health and Sanitation Transformation activities are held in communities,
• if evidence-based social and behavior change activities targeting influential individuals and 
groups, using multiple communication channels (mass media, census campaigns, interpersonal 
communication, small group dialogue, peer learning) are carried out that address key 
determinants affecting household decision-making on school enrollment and retention and 
parent engagement in school activities, and if teachers and administrators are trained in child 
protection measures and if students are trained in age-appropriate life skills, and if AMEs/APEs 
are further trained to advocate, and if parents are trained in improved communication and 
positive parenting skills and if communication is improved between parents and students and 
among communities, teachers and school administrators,
• if national and local governments prioritize increased spending for training teachers, 
constructing classrooms, and school mandated, and if national and local governments integrate 
WASH and menstrual hygiene management activities in their transition plans, and if school 
district officials are equipped with the skills necessary to provide quality teacher training and 
supportive supervision in literacy instruction, and if parents and community producer groups 
are provided with the agriculture skills and accompaniment necessary for increased economic 
incentive to support school feeding,
• THEN there will be sustained delivery of quality literacy education in a healthy and enabling 
school, home, and community environment for children in Benin’s poorest school districts.
The evidence base for these theories of change (the “because” for the above statements) comes from 
research, industry best practices, conceptual frameworks (including CRS’ Integral Human Development 
Framework, CRS’ Effective Learning Framework, and UNICEF’s Maternal and Child Undernutrition 
Framework) and CRS and its partners’ experience with regards to nutrition and cognitive development, 
causal frameworks for improved quality of literacy instruction, adult education principles, and 
evaluations and best practices from the current and past CRS-led FFE projects in Benin, including the 
115
effects of improved WASH facilities and behaviors, and good nutrition on increased Beninese children’s 
learning, the ability of community farms to sustain school feeding years after project support ends, and 
government education policy improvements influenced by advocacy.
In response to needs, challenges, risks, constraints and opportunities listed in Attachment C: Strategic 
Analysis, Keun Faaba has prioritized teacher training, providing nutritious school meals, school 
construction, social and behavior change communication for education and nutrition, and capacity 
strengthening at community, regional and national levels for handover and sustainability. Keun Faaba 
activities will include the following outputs:
• increasing the relevance and quality of teacher training and post-training supervision, 
• advocating for government policies to rationally assign teachers to underserved areas, construct 
classrooms, construct latrines in schools, and promote WASH and menstrual hygiene 
management activities,
• extending evidence-based behavior change approaches for community WASH infrastructure and 
practices,
• promoting nutrition (awareness of importance, increased dietary diversity through school 
gardens and climate-smart crops in community farms),
• accelerating changes in cultural and social norms that inhibit household decision-makers from 
enrolling children (in particular girls) in school and retaining boys and girls in school, 
• integrating child protection measures, in particular those pertaining to girls, and,
• strengthening community-based structures for project sustainability (to manage canteens and 
maintain WASH infrastructure, to extend school gardens and establish community farms, to 
improve capacities to achieve self-identified school improvement goals and resolve education￾related issues and problems, and increase parent associations’, in particular women’s, voice and 
influence with education stakeholders).
Critical assumptions are external conditions necessary for the success of the project, with a high 
probability of occurring, over which implementers have little or no comparison, and thus will be 
carefully monitored. The following two critical assumptions were identified for FFE II:
Climate conditions: Climatic variability (including recurring droughts and periodic flooding), worsened 
by climate change, occurs in the Niger River basin, specifically in the Malanville area (Okpara et al 2013); 
flooding recently occurred in northern Benin in September 2016. These severe climatic shocks can affect 
crop production, lowering revenue of families to pay for needed school supplies or making opportunity 
costs for children to attend school higher, and also destroy school infrastructure (in particular 
community-constructed classrooms using local materials) such as school buildings and latrines. Strong 
seasonal winds (Harmattan) are also common across the north of Benin and have sometimes resulted in 
damaged community infrastructure, including schools. Thus, the critical assumption is that climatic 
conditions, such as drought, flooding and severe winds, will not have extensive negative impacts on
household income and food security nor extensively damage school infrastructure. [Reference: 
http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/55186]
Teacher strikes and absences: Benin’s powerful unions are a legacy of the 1972-1989 period when 
Marxism-Leninism was adopted as the national ideology. Teacher’s strikes (related to pay, policies, 
repression and/or other issues) regularly occur in Benin and can last for months. At various times, these 
strikes provoked severe repression by the government. Strikes and related actions disrupt education 
116
activities and affect student outcomes. In addition, teachers are sometimes pulled out of the classroom 
to work on political campaigns by politicians or to fulfill civic duties by the government. Benin held a 
presidential election in 2016 won by Patrice Talon in March. The critical assumption is that the effect of 
teacher’s strikes on project outputs and outcomes will be mitigated by careful implementation 
planning and accelerated project implementation (e.g. teacher training) when necessary. [Reference: 
http://www.irinnews.org/report/76873/benin-school-year-risks-being-written-teacher-strikes]
The FFE II results frameworks do not include the following results:
• MGD 1.3.3: Improved School Infrastructure: School infrastructure falls within the realm of 
responsibility of each commune, and is financed through the Commune Development Support 
Fund (Fonds d'Appui au Développement des Communes or FADEC). In December 2017, the 
Government of Benin has announced its intention to construct 6,000 new classrooms over the 
next five years. CRS will leverage this emerging priority as an advocacy tool for communes to 
devote FADEC funds to necessary school infrastructure, such as classrooms, as described in Sub￾Activity 8 of MGD Foundational Result 1.4.3: Increased Government Support.
• MGD 1.4.1: Improved Capacity of Government Institutions: This Foundational Result feeds into 
the three sub-activities of MGD 1.1.3 Improved Literacy Instructional Materials.
• MGD 2.5: Increased Access to Preventative Health Interventions: In 2015, the Ministry of Health, 
through its National Program for the Comparison of Non-Communicable Diseases, began 
providing children in all public primary schools annual deworming medication. FFE II will support 
this initiative by integrating deworming in its nutrition curricula. However, the government has 
taken on increased access of this initiative.
• MGD 2.6: Increased Access to Requisite Food Prep and Storage Tools and Equipment: Requisite 
food preparation and storage tools and equipment were provided through FFE I’s 
Building/Rehabilitation: Kitchens and Building/Rehabilitation: Storerooms activities.
• MGD 2.7.1: Increased Capacity of Government Institutions: While FFE II will collaborate with 
government institutions such as DANA and the Departmental Direction of Water to achieve the 
results of MGD Results Framework #2, the project does not need to build the government 
capacity to achieve the project’s health, nutrition, and dietary objectives because the capacity of 
these government institutions is already sufficient to support these objectives.
MGD 2.7.2: Improved Policy and Regulatory Framework: FFE II does not need to improve policy and 
regulatory framework to achieve the project’s health, nutrition, and dietary objectives because 
adequate policies already exist to support these health, nutrition, and dietary objectives. 
 
117
Annex 2: Details of Quantitative Sample 
Table A1: Target quantitative sample size and minimum detectable effect size
Population Targeted Sample size Minimum detectable effect 
size 
Schools 50 Treatment
50 Control
Total: 100 schools
N/A
Students - EGRA 16 students per school in 
Grade 3 — (8 girls/8 boys)
Total: 1,600 students
At endline, an effect size of 0.25 
standard-deviation of any 
continuous outcome will be 
detected as statistically significant 
and a difference of 13% on a 
dichotomous outcome
Student Attentiveness 20 students per school from 2 
classes (Grade 4, 5 or 6) —
(10 girls/10 boys)
Total: 2,000 students
At endline, we will detect effect 
size of 0.24 for continuous 
outcome and difference of 13% 
for a dichotomous variable
Parents 10 parents per school 
Total: 1,000 parents
At endline we will detect an effect 
size of 0.15 standard-deviation of 
any continuous outcome and 
difference of 8% for dichotomous 
variables
Teachers 2 teachers per school
Total: 200 teachers
N/A
Principals 1 teacher per school
Total: 100 principals
N/A
Table A2: School enrollment characteristics
Control Projet
n Mean(S.D) n Mean(S.D.)
Number of enrolled 
students in kindergarten
0 - 4 61.0 (25.4)
Number of enrolled 
students in CI
47 66.0 (21.2) 49 77.7 (32.1)
Number of enrolled 
students in CP
50 72.2 (19.1) 49 80.5 (33.4)
118
Control Projet
Number of enrolled 
students in CE1
50 52.2 (16.9) 50 57.1 (26.8)
Number of enrolled 
students in CE2
50 55.5 (15.0) 47 67.6 (29.2)
Number of enrolled 
students in CM1
49 38.1 (12.5) 47 45.1 (21.8)
Number of enrolled 
students in CM2
49 37.1 (11.3) 47 42.4 (16.7)
Number of total enrolled 
students
50 315.6 (78.6) 50 362.8 (144.0)
Number of levels in the 
school
50 5.9 (0.5) 50 5.8 (0.7)
Girls ratio in the school 50 0.50 (0.05) 50 0.47 (0.05)
Table A3: School enrolment by grade
Control Projet p-value
CI 65.1 80.7 0.011
CP 71.0 83.7 0.032
CE1 51.5 58.7 0.085
CE2 54.4 69.4 <0.000
CP1 37.3 46.2 0.004
CP2 36.7 43.3 0.005
119
Table A4: Teacher summary statistics
Control Projet
n Mean(S.D) n Mean(S.D.)
Number of male teacher 50 3.6 (1.2) 50 4.3 (1.4)
Number of female
teacher
50 2.4 (1.2) 50 1.7 (1.4)
Number of teacher
communautaire
50 0.7 (0.8) 50 0.7 (0.7)
Teacher/pupil ratio 50 47.5 (13.2) 50 55.6 (21.7)
Table A5: Teacher age and years of experience
Control Projet
n Mean(S.D) n Mean(S.D.)
Average age 105 33.4 (6.8) 100 35.0 (7.1)
Average years of
experience
105 8.1 (5.4) 100 9.8 (5.3)
n % n %
Female 56 53.3% 33 33.0%
Male 48 46.7% 67 67.0%
Table A6: Principal summary statistics
Control Projet
n Mean(S.D) n Mean(S.D.)
Average age 50 46.9 (8.5) 50 47.3 (7.4)
Average years of
experience
50 19.3 (6.9) 50 19.6 (6.6)
n % n %
Female director 9 18.0% 5 10.0%
Education level
BEPC 36 72.0% 34 68.0%
120
Control Projet
BAC, DEAT 11 22.0% 12 24.0%
Licence, Maitrise,
Master/DEA
3 6.0% 4 8.0%
Table A7: Parent summary statistics
Control Projet
n Mean(S.D) n Mean(S.D.)
Average age 494 37.4 (9.7) 487 37.8 (10.0)
n % n %
Parents Gender
Female 179 34.2% 203 40.3%
Male 345 65.8% 301 59.7%
Language at home
Bariba 407 77.7% 182 36.1%
Boo 1 0.2% 30 5.9%
Dendi 43 8.2% 160 31.8%
French 7 1.3% 5 1.0%
Mokole 1 0.2% 36 7.1%
Peulh 22 4.2% 42 8.3%
Yorouba 2 0.4% 6 1.2%
Fon 19 3.6% 12 2.4%
Other 22 4.2% 31 6.2%
Spoke french everyday 104 19.9% 49 9.7%
Read French everyday 90 17.2% 58 11.5%
Level of education
None 277 52.9% 306 60.7%
Can read 36 6.9% 18 3.6%
Primary 69 13.2% 71 14.1%
Secondary Cycle 1 87 16.6% 71 14.1%
Secondary Cycle 2 37 7.1% 27 5.4%
Superior Cycle 1 14 2.7% 8 1.6%
121
Superior Cycle 2 4 0.8% 3 0.6%
Occupation principale
Sans emploi 3 0.6% 5 0.8%
Ménagère 51 9.7% 45 9.3%
Travail agricole 266 50.8% 261 51.8%
Journalier 9 1.7% 3 0.6%
Marchand/comer. 62 11.8% 86 17.1%
Travailleur 23 4.4% 11 2.2%
Artisan 81 15.5% 76 15.1%
Retraité 5 1.0% 0 0.0%
Autre 23 4.4% 17 3.4%
Table A8: Classroom observation and student summary statistics
Control Projet
n Mean(S.D) n Mean(S.D.)
Average age 942 11.3 (1.9) 947 11.3 (1.9)
n % n %
Student Gender
Female 504 50.2% 501 50.5%
Male 500 49.8% 491 49.5%
Language at home
Bariba 779 77.6% 384 38.7%
Boo 2 0.2% 60 6.1%
Dendi 64 6.4% 243 24.5%
French 10 1.0% 41 4.1%
Mokole 0 0.0% 70 7.1%
Peulh 49 4.9% 90 9.1%
Yorouba 17 1.7% 23 2.3%
Fon 23 2.3% 29 2.9%
Other 60 6.0% 52 5.2%
Student level
122
CE1 20 2.0% 30 3.0%
CE2 393 39.1% 330 33.3%
CM1 361 36.0% 349 35.2%
CM2 230 22.9% 282 28.4%
Table A9: EGRA sample summary statistics
Control Projet
n Mean(S.D) n Mean(S.D.)
Average age 508 8.6 (1.4) 495 9.1 (1.6)
n % n %
Student Gender
Female 378 49.7% 380 49.7%
Male 383 50.3% 385 50.3%
Language at home
Bariba 595 78.2% 259 33.9%
Boo 1 0.1% 38 5.0%
Dendi 37 4.9% 192 25.1%
French 5 0.7% 2 0.3%
Mokole 0 0.0% 75 9.8%
Peulh 29 3.8% 71 9.3%
Yorouba 12 1.6% 13 1.7%
Fon 29 3.8% 25 3.3%
Other 53 7.0% 90 11.8%
 
123
Annex 3: Details of Qualitative Sample 
Table A10: Detailed list of key informant interviews by category and gender
Category Stakeholder Number 
KII/FGD 
Female 
Total 
Male 
Total 
Participant 
Total 
Authority International World Bank 1 1 0 1
World Food Program 1 2 0 2
Authority National DANA 1 1 1 2
DEMP 1 0 2 2
INFRE 1 0 1 1
Authority Regional DDEMP-CRP 4 1 9 10
DDEMP-DAS 2 2 0 2
Parent Volunteer 1 0 1 1
Program Staff ALAFIA 1 1 2 3
Caritas 2 0 3 3
CRS 10 5 8 13
DERANA 2 1 2 3
PfD 1 1 0 1
UrP 2 1 5 6
World Eduction 1 1 2 3
Teaching Staff PNASI 1 0 2 2
Head Teacher 1 0 1 1
Donor USDA 1 2 0 2
Grand Total 
 
34 19 39 58 
Table A11: Detailed list of focus group discussions by category and gender
Category Stakeholder Number 
KII/FGD 
Female 
Total 
Male 
Total 
Participant 
Total 
Parent APE-AME 4 14 20 34
Farmer 1 0 2 2
Students Club-Wash 3 12 7 19
Teaching Staff Teachers + Head Teacher 4 4 19 23
124
Grand Total 
 
12 30 48 78 
 
125
Annex 4: List of document reviewed 
CODE DESCRIPTION TYPE
D01 Agreement USDA-CRS- FFE-680-2017-027-00-A Contract
D02 Agreement USDA-CRS- FFE-680-2017-027-00-A - Amendment Contract
D03 Baseline Evaluation - USDA Comments Report
D04 Performance Monitoring Plan Other
D05 Contingency Plan Contract
D06 March-Sept 2019 indicators Performance report
D07 March-Sept 2019 Performance report Performance report
D08 March-Sept 2019 Performance report - Narrative Performance report
D09 Success story: Sanitary pad Success story
D10 Success story: School garden Success story
D11 Oct 2019-Mar 1020 indicators Performance report
D12 March-Sept - 2019 Performance report - Narrative Performance report
D13 Success story: CLTS Success story
D14 Success story: Sustainability Success story
D15 March-Sept 2020 indicators Performance report
D16 March-Sept 2020 Performance report - Narrative Performance report
D17 Success story: EGRA Success story
D18 Workplan 2019 - Narrative Workplan
D19 Workplan 2019 - Gantt Workplan
D20 Workplan 2020 - Narrative Workplan
D21 Workplan 2020 - Gantt Workplan
D22 Workplan 2021 - Narrative Workplan
126
CODE DESCRIPTION TYPE
D23 Workplan 2021 - Gantt Workplan
D24 Strategy WASH-Nutrition Report
D25 Tableau Forces et Faiblesses WASH Report
D26 CRS COVID Prevention protocols Policy
D27 Quaterly Activity report of WEI Report
D30 List of community farms with school identification code List
D31 List of CLTS localities with school identification code and status 
(certified, pre-certified ODF..)
List
D32 List of treatment and control schools List
D33 List of teacher training List
D34 List of field Agent List
D40 Government issued COVID guidance Policy
D41 Report concerning the consultations with communities to 
understand how they define project success (Feb 2020)
Report
D42 Guide on how to integrate WASH-Nutrition into the Government 
curriculum as part of the WASH Friendly school approach.
Policy
D43 Report of project data quality assessment (DQA) Report
D44 Template for project data quality assessment (DQA) Report
D45 Theory of Change Report
D46 Evaluation conducted to measure the impact of "home care 
program"
Report
D47 Updated organizational chart Report
D48 Teacher competence diagnosis Report
D49 Teachers training reports Report
D50 Curriculum de formation sur la nutrition Curriculum
D51 Guide Enseignant Hygiene Nutrition Competence de vie Curriculum
127
CODE DESCRIPTION TYPE
D52 Manuel de gestion des cantines scolaires Curriculum
D53 CRS Strategy 2030 Report
D54 Reunion: Processus de certification Ecole Amies de l'hygiene Report
D55 CRS-Demande d'accord ministères Other
D56 Guide d'infusion des competences de vie Report
D57 Canteen Training Manual Curriculum
D58 Procurement Contractors Infrastructure Other
D59 Manuels de formation des enseignants Other
D60 USDA Indicator Handbook Policy
D61 Better Criteria for evaluation Policy
D62 MGD Learning Agenda Policy
D63 USAID Tool Kit CLTS Policy
D64 UNICEF guide ATPC au Mali Policy
D65 MGD Systematic Review of Nutrition Policy
D66 MGD Systematic Review of School Feeding Policy
D67 MGD Systematic Review of Health interventions Policy
D68 Government policy and action plan for canteen Policy
D69 Education Policy on Reading Policy
D70 Local and regional food aid procurement program evaluation report Policy
D71 LRP CRS Benin evaluation Report
D72 WFP - Cost Benefit Analysis of School feeding Program in Benin Report
D73 WFP- State of School Feeding Worldwide - 2020 Report
D74 WFP - Evaluation of PNASI Report
D80 Contract Caritas Contract
128
CODE DESCRIPTION TYPE
D81 Contract PfD Contract
D82 Contract URP Contract
D83 Contract WEI Contract
D84 Contract WEI- Alafia Contract
D85 Contract WEI- Derana Contract
D86 WEI List of Activity Other
D90 FFE I: Baseline Evaluation Report Report
D91 FFE I: Midterm Evaluation Report Report
D92 FFE I: Endline Evaluation Report Report
D93 FFE I: Endline Evaluation Report-Annexes Report
D94 KEUN FAABA: Baseline Evaluation Report Report
D95 CRS strategy poster sdg goal alignment Report
D96 Financial Report Report
 
129
Annex 5: Evaluation matrix 
INDEX EVALUATION SECTION & QUESTIONS DESK REVIEW QUALITATIVE QUANTITATIVE 
R01 Relevance: Are stakeholders (PTAs, mothers’ 
associations, teachers, and local authorities) satisfied 
with their participation in the project? Why or why not?
Performance reports and success 
stories [D06 to D17]
KII - MoE Local
FGD - Teachers
FGD - Parents (PTA-AME)
Headteacher survey
Teacher survey
Parent Survey 
Cook-Storekeeper
R02 Relevance: To what extent will the project activities and 
expected results have the potential to solve the 
problems that gave rise to the project?
FFE-680-2017-027-00 Agreement and 
amendment [D01-D02]
KII - MoE National
KII - MoE Local
KII - WEI partners
KII – USDA
FGD - Teachers
R03 Relevance: Are the changes made to activities (design 
and implementation) due to Covid-19 relevant?
Covid Prevention Protocols [D26]
Performance report [D16]
Workplans [D22]
Evaluation conducted to measure the 
impact of "home care program" [D46]
KII - MoE National
KII - MoE Local
KII – USDA 
FGD - teachers
FGD - Parents (PTA)
Headteacher survey
Teacher survey
Parent Survey 
R04 Relevance: To what extent do the project interventions 
help address student hunger and attentiveness 
challenges?
KII - MoE National
KII - MoE Local
KII – USDA
FGD - Teachers
FGD - Parents (PTA)
Teacher survey
Parent Survey 
R05 Relevance: To what extent is the MGD17/Keun Faaba 
project aligned with the Government's canteen action 
plan?
Government policy and action plan 
for canteen [D68]
KII-MoE National
KII-Partners
KII-WFP
R06 Relevance: Is our theory of change relevant? Theory of Change [D45] KII - Partners
130
INDEX EVALUATION SECTION & QUESTIONS DESK REVIEW QUALITATIVE QUANTITATIVE 
R07 Coherence: To what extent is this intervention coherent 
with other interventions which have similar objectives 
and with CRS vision 2030?
Government policy and action plan 
for canteen [D68]
KII-MoE National
KII – Partners
KII - USDA
KII-WFP
R08 Coherence: To what extent is the intervention coherent 
with the government policy on school feeding?
Government policy and action plan 
for canteen [D68]
KII-MoE National
KII - USDA
KII-WFP
R09 Effectiveness: Has WASH received a heightened focus as 
a need raised in MGD17/Keun Faaba; what is working 
well and what needs to be changed? To what extent are 
the WASH strategies likely to remove gender linked 
barriers?
Stratégie WASH-Nutrition [D24]
KEUN FAABA: Baseline Evaluation 
Report [D94]
Performance reports [D08-D12-D16]
Guide Enseignant Hygiene Nutrition 
Competence de vie [D51]
Workplans [D18 to D23]
KII - Partners
FGD - Teachers
Head teacher survey
Teacher survey
School observation
R10 Effectiveness: How has COVID-19 impacted the WASH 
strategy?
Stratégie WASH-Nutrition [D24]
Performance reports [D16]
Workplans [D22]
KII - Partners
FGD - Teachers
R11 Effectiveness: Do literacy promotion activities help 
improve the reading and writing skills of students? 
WEI Monitoring data
Performance reports [D08-D12-D16]
Workplans [D18 to D23]
WEI List of Activity [D86]
FGD - Parents (PTA) Teacher survey
Parent Survey
Student survey -
Literacy
Student survey -
Attention
R12 Effectiveness: Does the teaching of life skills help 
improve the reading and writing skills of students?
Guide Enseignant Hygiene Nutrition 
Competence de vie [D51]
KEUN FAABA: Baseline Evaluation 
Report [94]
KII - Partners
FGD - Teachers
Teacher survey
Parent Survey
Student survey -
Attention
131
INDEX EVALUATION SECTION & QUESTIONS DESK REVIEW QUALITATIVE QUANTITATIVE 
R13 Effectiveness: To what extent are teachers 
implementing literacy techniques acquired through the 
project?
WEI Monitoring data
Teacher competence diagnosis [D48]
Teachers training reports [D49]
WEI List of Activity [D86]
KII - Partners [WEI-INFRE]
KII - MoE Local [CP]
FGD - teachers
Head teacher survey
Teacher survey
Parent Survey
R14 Effectiveness: Which strategies have been (or should 
be) put in place to effectively monitor teachers’ 
attendance? Has project implementation been 
effectively monitored? How well has the M&E 
mechanism helped project implementation, and what 
improvements could be made, if any? Have challenges 
of FFE I been addressed, namely: tracking teacher 
attendance, tracking student attendance?
Performance reports [D07-D08-D11-
D12-D15-D16]
WEI List of Activity [D86]
KII - Partners
FGD - Teachers
KII - Head Teachers
FGD - Parents (PTA)
Head teacher survey
Teacher survey
Parent Survey
R15 Efficiency: Is the project being implemented as planned 
(timeline and budget)? If not, why not? Has the project 
been implemented in the most efficient way possible?
Performance reports [D07-D08-D11-
D12-D-15-D16]
Workplans [D18 to D23]
Financial report - burn rate
KII – Partners
KII - USDA
R16 Efficiency: Is there another way to make food 
management committees more efficient considering 
literacy levels of committee members and parents?
Local and regional food aid 
procurement program evaluation 
report [70]
LRP CRS Benin evaluation [71]
KII - CRS Field Agent
KII - Partners
KII - Head Teachers
FGD - Parents (PTA)
Head Teachers 
survey
Cook survey
R17 Efficiency: How has the project responded to date in 
terms of key community stakeholders’ requests for 
material incentives? Is there a better approach to do 
this?
KEUN FAABA: Baseline Evaluation 
Report [94]
KII - CRS Field Agent
KII - Partners
KII - Head Teachers
FGD - Parents (PTA)
Head Teachers 
survey
Cook survey
R18 Efficiency: Have there been internal and/or external 
factors that have hindered the efficient implementation 
of project activities?
Performance reports [D07-D08-D11-
D12-D-15-D16]
Workplans [D18 to D23]
KII – Partners
KII - USDA
KII - MoE Local
KII-Headteacher
FGD - Parents (PTA)
Head teacher survey
132
INDEX EVALUATION SECTION & QUESTIONS DESK REVIEW QUALITATIVE QUANTITATIVE 
R19 Efficiency: What are the obstacles/challenges/risks to 
implementation and how can they be overcome in the 
remaining duration of the project? 
Performance reports [D07-D08-D11-
D12-D-15-D16]
Workplans [D18 to D23]
KII - Partners 
KII - USDA
KII - MoE Local
KII - MoE National
KII-Headteacher
FGD - Parents (PTA)
Head teacher survey
R20 Impact: To date, which strategies have demonstrated 
success, and which have not been successful in 
achieving the project objectives and results? What best 
practices have been identified so far? Which issues 
should the project team focus its efforts on to achieve 
greatest impact?
Performance reports and success 
stories [D06 to D17]
Workplans [D18 to D23]
KII - Partners
KII - MoE Local
R21 Impact: How likely is the project to achieve strategic 
objectives and contribute significantly to intended 
purpose ?
Performance Monitoring Plan [D04] KII – Partners
KII - USDA
R22 Impact: What is the contribution of the radio 
broadcasts and the listening groups in the awareness 
raising on the importance of education?
Performance Monitoring Plan [D04]
Listenership data
contract WEI
KII - Partners [WEI-and Sub]
FGD - Parents (PTA)
Parent Survey
R23 Impact: What is the contribution of the Community Led 
Total Sanitation (CLTS) approach to changes in 
children's hygiene behavior in school?
USAID Tool Kit CLTS [63]
UNICEF guide CLTS au Mali [64]
KII - Partners
KII - Water Local
KII - CLTS Leader
FGD - Parents (PTA) with 
CLTS
Sample with CLTS
Student Survey -
Attention 
Parent Survey
Headteacher 
Teacher 
R24 Impact: What is the contribution of the training of 
teachers / administrators to the quality of teaching and 
the outcome of school children’s literacy levels?
Teacher competence diagnosis [D48]
Teachers training reports [49]
KII - MoE Local
KII - Partners [WEI-and Sub]
FGD - Teachers
KII - Headteacher
Head teacher survey
Teacher survey
EGRA
133
INDEX EVALUATION SECTION & QUESTIONS DESK REVIEW QUALITATIVE QUANTITATIVE 
R25 Impact: How successful has the project been in 
improving the quality of literacy instruction?
WEI component of the program
EGRA results
WEI monitoring data on objectives of 
literacy instruction
KII - MoE Local
KII - Partners [WEI-and Sub]
FGD - Teachers
KII - Headteacher
Head teacher survey
Teacher survey
R26 Impact: To what extent, did COVID-19 affect project 
implementation and performance?
Evaluation conducted to measure the 
impact of "home care program" [D46]
Performance report [D16]
Workplans [D22]
KII - CRS Field Agent
KII – Partners
KII - USDA
Head teacher survey
R27 Impact: Has the project affected girls and boys 
differently? If so, how? 
FGD - Teachers
KII - Headteacher
FGD - Parents (PTA)
FGD - Children
Head teacher survey
Teacher survey
Student survey -
Literacy
Student survey -
Attention
EGRA
R28 Impact: Has the project had any unintended negative 
effects (question asked to ensure the project is doing no 
harm and to update our theory of change 
understanding the full effect of the program) 
Performance report [D16] KII – Partners
KII - USDA
KII - MoE National
KII - MoE Local
FGD - Teachers
KII - Headteacher
FGD - Parents (PTA)
R29 Impact: What are the project’s major limitations, and 
how is the project team addressing those challenges? 
Performance reports and success 
stories [D06 to D17]
Workplans [D18 to D23]
KII - Partners
R30 Impact: To what extent have students (boys and girls) 
increased their reading comprehension compared to 
baseline
KEUN FAABA: Baseline Evaluation 
Report [94]
EGRA
134
INDEX EVALUATION SECTION & QUESTIONS DESK REVIEW QUALITATIVE QUANTITATIVE 
R31 Impact: To what extent have students improved their 
nutrition, health, and hygiene-related practices?
FGD - Parents (PTA) Student survey -
Attention
Parent survey
R32 Sustainability: How has this project defined 
sustainability? Do all stakeholders share a common 
vision and understanding of the vision, as well as the 
pathway to get there?
FFE-680-2017-027-00 Agreement and 
amendment [D01-D02]
KII – Partners
KII - USDA
KII - MoE National
R33 Sustainability: What are the early indications of 
sustainability at this point in the project? Is there 
evidence of more community capacity for sustainability 
communities ready to take over? Is there willingness of 
community members to participate without financial 
expectations? Are there any spontaneous actions of the 
PTAs and AMEs for the maintenance of school 
infrastructures or other critical school improvement 
activities? Are the PTAs and AMEs now demonstrating 
application of the organizational competencies the 
project has passed on to them since FFE I?
FFE I: Endline Evaluation Report [92] KII - Headteacher
KII - CRS Field Agent
KII – Partners
FGD - Parents (PTA)
Head teacher survey
Cook
R34 Sustainability: What policies favor the sustainability of 
school canteen projects?
MGD Systematic Review of School 
Feeding [66]
LRP CRS Benin evaluation [71]
KII-MoE National
KII – Partners
KII - USDA
KII-WFP
R35 Sustainability: Are the policies and actions implemented 
at the educational level in line with the objectives at 
national level?
Teacher competence diagnosis [D48]
Education Policy on Reading [D69]
KII - Partners (WEI)
KII - MoE National
KII - MoE Local
FGD - Teachers
KII - Headteacher
Head teacher survey
R36 Sustainability: Have inclusive or gender sensitive 
strategies been implemented in view of sustainability 
Performance reports [D08-D12-D16] KII - Partners 
FGD - Teachers
KII - Headteacher
Head teacher survey
135
INDEX EVALUATION SECTION & QUESTIONS DESK REVIEW QUALITATIVE QUANTITATIVE 
among identified specific groups if there is any? E.g.: 
case of Fulani/Peuhl communities?
136
Annex 6: Data Collection Tools 
This section presents the data collection tools used throughout the CRS Keun Faaba mid-term 
evaluation. 
They are:
• EGRA
• Student questionnaire - Reading
• Student questionnaire - Hygiene
• Head teacher questionnaire
• Teacher questionnaire
• Parent questionnaire
• Cook / Store keeper questionnaire
• Observation de l’école
137
The EGRA tool is identical to baseline, which was defined following the 2nd edition of the EGRA tool kit.
Vocabulaire – Partie 1 : Reconnaitre les images
habit
canard
pied  Correct
 Incorrect
 Pas de réponse
cochon  Correct
 Incorrect
 Pas de réponse
coq  Correct
poulet  Incorrect
 Pas de réponse
bras  Correct
 Incorrect
 Pas de réponse
arbre  Correct
 Incorrect
 Pas de réponse
Vocabulaire – Partie 2 : Mots spatiaux
Prends le crayon et dépose-le : 
• Sur la feuille 
• A côté de la feuille 
• Sous la feuille 
• Derrière toi 
• Par terre
138
Letter names:
T n U i s H Z q N x
I F X o v R V c W A
Q a t d L B w p S e
D u h J b L P K M Y
k j c I N Q a n p y
r m r u s T g f C e
k i b a n X O e j S
L E s E U I d v o D
R z t T o U A L w h
T n U i s H Z q N x
Letters / Grapheme sounds 
i an o è ou eu in r ê un
ch p L t em d am m v ai
y w et dr b on er s c ez
er k ein z f au x n j oi 
ou r q ein p eau f ez on ei
o in er au ez m br ei cr q
ch i é gn ê in v t i oin
au ç o eu on en ou ein ê fr
d on gr ai b am et s c tion
er oin d om g au x ei j è
139
Familiar Words
tu ton bras oui fête
ou tata vélo table ami
peau maison balai petit képi
école beau chat grand épi
maman enfant voilà la elle
lune seau matin non pied
matin bon craie pipe malade
route canari jolie café coton
tout moi robe élève papa 
pain chaud mardi jeu livre
Invented word
ga rite ler mu seti
saré nupi cendo nebou soman
topa vicu pide neau renu
tasé tai rê véda tobin
gnau tipa chépu tapau doron
fumi pèmu reu sula samo
davo hain fen routa pémi
lato téquo loli topé possi
kisé sever dola pi lomi
doba banso reuli roga favé
140
Histoire
Mako aime manger les mangues. || Dans la cour de la maison, il y a un grand manguier. || Un matin, 
elle sort dehors pour manger une mangue. || Toutes les mangues mures ont disparu. Mako court à la 
maison. Sur la table, toutes les mangues sont là. || Elle mange une belle mangue. Mako est contente.
1. Qu’est-ce que Mako aime manger ? [Des mangues] – 5
2. Qui a-t-il dans la cour de la maison ? [Un manguier] – 17 (+12)
3. Quand Mako sort elle dehors ? [Le matin] – 26 (+9)
4. Où Mako trouve-t-elle les mangues ? [Sur la table] – 45 (+19)
5. Pourquoi Mako est-elle contente ? [Elle peut manger une mangue] – 53 (+8)
Compréhension orale
Boni et son frère se réveillent tôt. Ils mangent vite un peu de riz. Ils pensent que c’est les vacances, et ils 
partent chercher des criquets dans la brousse. Quand ils arrivent dans la brousse, ils ne voient personne. 
Ils comprennent que c’est un jour d’école. Ils courent au village. Ils espèrent qu’ils n’arriveront pas en 
retard à l’école.
1. Que mangent Boni et son frère quand ils se réveillent ? [Du riz]
2. Où vont-ils ? [Dans la brousse]
3. Que vont-ils faire ? [Chercher des criquets]
4. Qui trouvent-ils dans la brousse [personne]
5. Pourquoi les enfants rentrent-ils au village ? [Pour aller à l’école]
141
QUESTIONNAIRE – ELEVE - Lecture
Cette section doit être remplie par l’intervieweur
Date : (JJ-MM-AAAA)
Nom de l’intervieweur : (Spécifier)
Numéro d’énumérateur : (Spécifier)
Département : (Spécifier)
Commune : (Spécifier)
Numéro d’identification unique de l’école : (Spécifier)
Nom de l’école : (Spécifier)
École de Contrôle ou de Traitement : (Spécifier)
Bonjour ! Je m’appelle _____et j’habite_____. Je fais partie d'une équipe de recherche qui évalue les 
compétences des élèves en lecture dans les écoles bénéficiaires du projet Keun Faaba. Je souhaite te 
parler un peu de moi. J’ai des enfants qui, comme toi, aiment la lecture, le sport, et la musique.
Et toi, comment t’appelles-tu ? Qu’est-ce que tu aimes ? [Attendez la réponse de l’élève. Si l’élève 
semble à l’aise, passez directement au consentement verbal. S’il hésite ou a l’air peu à l’aise, posez la 
deuxième question avant de passer au consentement verbal].
Qu’est-ce que tu aimes faire lorsque tu n’es pas à l’école ?
Laisse-moi t’expliquer pourquoi je suis là aujourd’hui. Le Ministère des Enseignements Maternel et 
Primaire nous a demandé d’étudier comment les élèves apprennent à lire. Tu as été sélectionné(e) pour 
participer à cette étude.
Ta participation est très importante, mais tu n’es pas obligé de participer si tel n’est pas ton souhait.
Nous allons faire des jeux à l’oral et en lecture.
J’utiliserai cette tablette pour savoir à quelle vitesse tu lis. Mais ce n’est pas un examen, et ce que tu fais 
avec moi ne changera pas tes notes à l’école. Je vais aussi te poser quelques questions sur ta famille et la 
langue que tu parles à la maison. Je n’écris pas ton nom sur cette fiche, alors personne ne saura que ces 
réponses sont les tiennes.
Encore une fois, tu n’es pas obligé de participer si tu ne le veux pas. Si tu arrives à une question à 
laquelle tu préfères ne pas répondre, ce n’est pas grave, on peut passer.
As-tu des questions ? [Laisser le temps pour poser des questions et répondre au besoin]
Est-ce que tu es d’accord pour participer ? Peut-on commencer ?
Nº Question Réponse
1. Information sur l’élève
142
Nº Question Réponse
101 Quel âge as-tu ? ______
102 Genre (regardezl’enfant et cochez) o Masculin
o Féminin
103 Quelle était ta classe l’année passée ? o CI o CP o CE1
o Pas à l’école (maison)
104 As-tu fréquenté une école maternelle ? o Oui o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
105 Quelle(s) langue(s) parles-tu à la maison le plus 
souvent ?
o Français
o Dendi
o Bariba
o Peulh
o Boo
o Mokole
o Autre
2. Absence et lecture à l’école
201 Est-ce que tu as été absent la semaine dernière o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
202 Quand tu es absent qu’est-ce que tu fais ?
[NB :Ne donnez pas les réponses]
• Je ne fais rien
• Je m’amuse
• Je dors
• Je me repose
• J’aide à la maison
• J’aide dans les champs
• Je m’occupé de mes frères et sœurs
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
203 Avec quelle fréquence le maître te désigne-t-il 
pour lire au tableau ou dans le livre à l’école ?
o Tous les jours
o Plusieurs fois par semaine
o Une fois par semaine
o Une fois par mois
o Jamais
204 Combien êtes-vous à partager un seul livre de 
lecture en classe ? 
o Pas de livre ou ne lit pas o Seul
o 2 o 3 o 4 o + de 4
3. Lecture et devoirs à la maison
301 As-tu un manuel ou livre de lecture de français à la 
maison ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
302 Est-ce qu’il y a d’autres livres ou des magazines en 
français chez toi ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
303 Y-a-t-il des personnes dans ta famille qui savent
lire ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
304 [Q303 = Oui]
Qui sait lire ?
[NB : Ne pas lister les modalités]
• Papa  Maman
• Frère ou sœur  Autre
143
Nº Question Réponse
305 Lis-tu ou étudies-tu en français à la maison ? o Très souvent (tous les jours)
o Souvent (plusieures fois par semaine)
o Régulièrement (1 fois par semaine)
o Rarement (moins d’une fois par semaine)
o Jamais
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
306 Est-ce que quelqu’un dans ta famille te lit ou te 
raconte des histoires ?
o Très souvent (tous les jours)
o Souvent (plusieures fois par semaine)
o Régulièrement (1 fois par semaine)
o Rarement (moins d’une fois par semaine)
o Jamais
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
307 Est-ce que quelqu’un t’aide avec le travail d’école à 
la maison ?
o Très souvent (tous les jours)
o Souvent (plusieures fois par semaine)
o Régulièrement (1 fois par semaine)
o Rarement (moins d’une fois par semaine)
o Jamais
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
308 [Q307 = exclure jamais-ne sais pas]
Qui t’aide avec le travail d’école ?
[NB : Ne pas lister les modalités]
• Papa  Maman
• Frère ou sœur  Autre
309 [Si pas jamais-ne sais pas]
Est-ce que quelqu’un t’a aidé pour les activités de 
lecture durant les 3 derniers jours ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse 
310 Est-ce que l’on te fait lire des lettres et des mots ? o Très souvent 
o Souvent
o Régulièrement
o Rarement
o Jamais
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
311 Quand tu rentres chez toi, est-ce quelqu’un te 
demande ce que tu as appris à l’école ?
o Très souvent 
o Souvent
o Régulièrement
o Rarement
o Jamais
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
312 Si tu as de bonnes notes à l’école, que font tes 
parents ?
[NB : Ne donnez pas les réponses]
• Ils me complimentent
• Ils me donnent une récompense
• Ils me disent qu'ils sont contents
• Ils ne font rien
• Je n'ai jamais de bonnes notes
• Ils ne connaissent pas mes notes
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
144
Nº Question Réponse
313 Si tu as de mauvaises notes à l’école, que font tes 
parents :
[NB : Ne donnez pas les réponses]
• Ils essaient de m'aider à travailler
• Ils me disent que je dois travailler plus
• Ils me grondent
• Ils me punissent 
• Ils me tapent
• Ils ne font rien
• Je n'ai jamais de mauvaises notes
• Ils ne connaissent pas mes notes
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
314 Que fais-tu après l’école
[NB : ne donnez pas les réponses]
• Je vais aux champs
• J’aide à la maison
• Je vais chercher de l’eau
• Je prépare à manger
• Je vends avec mes parents
• Je vais á l’école coranique
• Je fais mes devoirs
• Je joue avec mes ami(e)s
• Je me repose
• Je ne fais rien
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
315 [Keun Faaba] 
As-tu écouté les émissions radio hebdomadaires 
l'année dernière lorsque les écoles ont été 
fermées ?
• Oui
• Non
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
316 [Keun Faaba] [Q316 = Non]
Pourquoi tu n'as pas écouté les émissions radio ?
[NB : ne donnez pas les réponses]
• Mes parents ne mettent pas de radio à ma 
disposition
• Les émissions de radio n’ont pas lieu 
régulièrement
• Je n’ai pas de radio
• La radio est cassée
• On n’a pas d’électricité
• Je ne suis pas intéressé
• J’ai d’autres tâches à accomplir
• Les horaires ne me conviennent pas
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
317 As-tu participé aux activités de lecture de la 
bibliothèque ou de l’heure de conte l’année 
passée ?
• Oui
• Non
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
318 [Keun Faaba] [Q317 = Non]
Pourquoi ne participes-tu pas aux activités de 
lecture de la bibliothèque ou la lecture des 
histoires ?
• Mes parents ne me laissent pas aller à la 
bibliothèque ou l’heure du conte
• Il n’y a pas de bibliothèque
• Il n’y a pas assez de livres dans la bibliothèque
• Les livres ont été endommagés
• Je ne suis pas intéressé
• J’ai d’autres tâches à accomplir
145
Nº Question Réponse
[NB : ne donnez pas les réponses]
• Les horaires ne me conviennent pas
• Je ne suis invité à participer
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
4. Alimentation
401 As-tu mangé aujourd'hui avant de venir à l'école ? o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
402 As-tu mangé hier pendant la recréation ?
[NB ou le dernier jour que tu es venu à l’école]
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
403 As-tu mangé hier à la cantine ?
[NB ou le dernier jour que tu es venu à l’école]
o Oui  Non
o Il n’y a pas de cantine
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
404 Combien de fois as-tu mangé à la cantine la 
semaine passée ?
o 0 fois o 1 fois o 2 fois
o 3 fois o 4 fois o 5 fois
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
405 Reçois-tu parfois des repas à emmener à la 
maison ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
5. Socio-économique
501 Quel type de sol y-a-t-il dans ta maison ?
NB : Lister les options
o Terre
o Bois
o Ciment ou carrelage
o Ne sais pas / Pas de réponse
502 Avec quoi cuisine-t-on dans ta maison ?
NB : Lister les options
o Bois que vous ramassez
o Bois ou du charbon, que vous achetez
o Gaz
o Électricité
o Ne sais pas / Pas de réponse
503 Avez-vous une radio dans votre maison ? o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
504 Avez-vous une télévision dans votre maison ? o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
505 Est-ce qu’un membre de ta famille a un téléphone 
portable ? 
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
Merci beaucoup d’avoir pris le temps de remplir ce sondage. Fin du questionnaire
146
QUESTIONNAIRE – ELEVE – Hygiène, Santé, Nutrition
Cette section doit être remplie par l’intervieweur
Date : (JJ-MM-AAAA)
Nom de l’intervieweur : (Spécifier)
Numéro d’énumérateur : (Spécifier)
Département : (Spécifier)
Commune : (Spécifier)
Numéro d’identification unique de l’école : (Spécifier)
Nom de l’école : (Spécifier)
École de Contrôle ou de Traitement : (Spécifier)
Observation de l’élève : Attentif / Non Attentif
Bonjour, je m'appelle……………………………. et je fais partie d'une équipe de recherche qui évalue le 
pourcentage des élèves ayant acquis de bonnes pratiques d’hygiène, de santé et de nutrition dans les 
écoles bénéficiaires du projet Keun Faaba. L'étude consistera à te poser 10 questions, auxquelles tu dois 
répondre par Vrai ou Faux, ensuite je te poserai quelques questions sur tes habitudes. Tes réponses 
seront strictement confidentielles et ne seront pas partagées avec quiconque. 
Encore une fois, tu n’es pas obligé de participer si tu ne le veux pas. Si tu arrives à une question à 
laquelle tu préfères ne pas répondre, ce n’est pas grave, on peut passer. 
As-tu des questions ? [Laisser le temps pour poser des questions et répondre au besoin]
Est-ce que tu es d’accord pour participer ? Peut-on commencer ?
Nº Question Réponse
1. Information sur l’élève
100 Quelle langue parles-tu à la maison le plus 
souvent ?
o Français
o Dendi
o Bariba
o Peulh
o Boo
o Mokole
o Autre
101 Quel âge as-tu ? ______
102 Genre (regardezl’enfant et cochez) o Masculin
o Féminin
103 En quelle classe es tu ? o Ce2 o Cm1 o Cm2
104 As-tu mangé aujourd'hui avant de venir à l'école ? o Oui
o Non
147
Nº Question Réponse
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
105 As-tu mangé hier pendant la recréation ?
[NB ou le dernier jour que tu es venu à l’école]
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
106 As-tu mangé hier à la cantine ?
[NB ou le dernier jour que tu es venu à l’école]
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
107 Combien de fois as-tu mangé à la cantine la 
semaine passée ?
o Aucune o 1 fois o 2 fois
o 3 fois o 4 fois o 5 fois
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
108 Reçois-tu parfois des repas à emmener à la 
maison ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
2. Test de connaissance sur l’hygiène, la santé et la nutrition
201 Un corps sale peut causer des maladies o Vrai o Faux
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
202 Marcher pieds nus peut causer des maladies o Vrai o Faux
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
203 La diarrhée ne peut pas causer la mort. o Vrai o Faux
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
204 La nourriture nous protège des maladies. o Vrai o Faux
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
205 Une alimentation qui ne contient que du pain, du 
riz et du maïs est équilibrée
o Vrai o Faux
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
206 Il est suffisant de laver le bidon qui contient l’eau à 
boire une fois par an.
o Vrai o Faux
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
207 Le meilleur moyen d’éviter les maladies est de se 
laver les mains avec de l'eau et du savon avant de 
manger et après être allé aux toilettes.
o Vrai o Faux
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
208 Les élèves peuvent rendre l'école propre. o Vrai o Faux
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
209 On se brosse les dents uniquement pour que notre 
bouche sente bon.
o Vrai o Faux
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
210 Pour être fort, il suffit de manger beaucoup de 
maïs.
o Vrai o Faux
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
3. Pratiques d’hygiène et de santé
301 Combien de fois par jour te laves-tu les mains ? o 6 fois ou plus
o 3 à 5 fois
o 1 à 2 fois
o Jamais
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
148
Nº Question Réponse
302 A quels moments de la journée te laves-tu les 
mains ?
[Cochez toutes les réponses qui s’appliquent]
(NB : Ne pas lire les réponses)
• Après défécation
• Avant de manger
• Après avoir mangé
• Après le nettoyage des latrines
• Après le repas
• Après avoir travaillé dans les champs
• Après le balayage
• Jamais
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
303 Qu’est-ce que tu utilises pour te laver les mains ? 
(NB : Ne pas lire les réponses)
• Savon
• Liquide vaisselle
• Cendre 
• Feuilles de citronnier
• Ne se lave pas les mains
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
304 Que fait-on dans ta famille pour améliorer la 
qualité de l’eau destinée à la boisson ? 
(NB : Ne pas lire les réponses ; Assurez-vous de 
demander s’ils connaissent d’autres manières) 
• Bouillir l’eau 
• Ajouter de l’eau de Javel 
• Ajouter une solution chlorée (Dans l’eau) 
• Ajouter des comprimés de chlore (Aqua Tabs) 
• Ajouter de l’alun
• Filtrer l’eau à travers un tissu 
• Laisser reposer l’eau
• Utiliser un filtre en Céramique 
• Utiliser un filtre bio-Sable 
• Désinfection solaire 
• Garder l’eau dans un récipient couvert 
• Utilise l’eau du robinet
• Rien 
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
305 La dernière fois que tu as déféqué, où l’as-tu fait ? o Dans les latrines de ma maison
o Dans les latrines de l’école
o Dans les latrines partagées avec le voisin
o Dans les latrines communautaires
o Dans un pot
o Dans la cour de ma maison/Derrière les 
batiments de la maison
o Dans la brousse 
o Dans le jardin
o Autre (spécifier)
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
4. Alimentation
Maintenant, j’aimerais te poser des questions sur les liquides ou les aliments que tu as pris hier pendant la 
journée à l’école et à la maison ou à l’extérieur de la maison
400 Combien de fois a tu mangé hier ? o Je n’ai pas mangé
o J’ai pris 1 repas
o J’ai pris 2 repas
o J’ai pris 3 repas ou plus
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse 
149
Nº Question Réponse
401 Grains, racines et tubercules 
NB : Pain, Riz, Pâtes, maïs, Masa, Paté, autre 
nourriture à base de grains, Pomme de terre, tarot, 
patates blanches, ignames blanches, manioc, ou 
autres tubercules
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
402 Légumineuses et noix
NB: Des aliments à base de haricots, pois, lentilles, 
ou de noix (Y compris Alélé/Toubani)
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
403 Produits laitiers 
NB : lait, yogourt, fromage, beurre, foura
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
404 Aliments à chair (viande, poisson, volaille et foie / 
abats)
NB : Du foie, rognon, cœur, autres abats ou viandes 
provenant d’organes animaux ; viande, comme du 
bœuf, du porc, de l’agneau, de la chèvre, du poulet 
ou du canard ; Du poisson ou des crustacés frais ou 
séchés ; Des escargots, des insectes, ou autres 
petits aliments contenant des protéines
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
405 Des œufs o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
406 Aliments enrichis en vitamine A, y compris l’huile 
végétale, les fruits et légumes
NB : Carottes ou patates douces qui sont jaunes ou 
oranges à l’intérieur, mangues, papayes mûres, 
pastèques
Des légumes feuilles vert foncé (n’importe lesquels: 
La salade ou laitue, choux, haricot vert, épinards, 
crin crin, feuille de baobab, gombo, afonu. Des 
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
150
Nº Question Réponse
aliments préparés avec de l’huile de palme rouge, 
de noix de palme, ou de la pulpe de noix de palme.
407 Autres fruits et légumes 
NB : Autres fruits (Goyave, Banane, Citron, Orange, 
Ananas) y autres légumes ; Une sauce (tomate ou 
oignon)
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
5. Activité de lecture
Maintenant, j’aimerais te poser des questions sur les activités de lecture dans ton village
501 [Keun Faaba] 
As-tu déjà écouté les emissions de Keun Faaba à la 
radio ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
502 [Keun Faaba] [Q501 = Non]
Sinon, pourquoi n’écoutes-tu pas les émissions de 
radio ?
[NB : ne donner pas les réponses]
• Mes parents ne mettent pas de radio à ma 
disposition
• Les émissions de radio n’ont pas lieu 
régulièrement
• Je n’ai pas de radio
• La radio est cassée
• On n’a pas d’électricité
• Je ne suis pas intéressé
• J’ai d’autres tâches à accomplir
• Les horaires ne me conviennent pas
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
503 [Keun Faaba] 
Si tu en avais la possibilité, souhaiterais tu 
participer à une l’heure de conte
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
504 [Keun Faaba]
Sinon, pourquoi ne souhaiterais tu pas assiter à la 
lecture de contes ?
[NB : ne donnez pas les réponses]
• Mes parents ne me laisseraient pas aller à la 
bibliothèque ou l’heure du conte
• Je ne suis pas intéressé
• Je n’aime pas les contes
• J’ai d’autres tâches à accomplir
• Les horaires ne me conviennent pas
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
6. Socio-économique
601 Quel type de sol y-a-t-il dans votre maison ? o Terre
o Bois
151
Nº Question Réponse
[NB : Lister les options]
o Ciment ou carrelage
o Ne sais pas / Pas de réponse
602 Avec quoi cuisine-t-on dans votre maison ?
[NB : Lister les options]
o Bois que vous ramassez
o Bois ou du charbon, que vous achetez
o Gaz
o Électricité
o Ne sais pas / Pas de réponse
603 Avez-vous une radio dans votre maison ? o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
604 Avez-vous une télévision dans votre maison ? o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
605 Est-ce qu’un membre de ta famille a un téléphone 
portable ? 
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
Merci beaucoup d’avoir pris le temps de remplir ce sondage.
Fin du questionnaire
152
QUESTIONNAIRE – DIRECTEUR
Cette section doit être remplie par l’intervieweur
Date : (JJ-MM-AAAA)
Nom de l’intervieweur : (Spécifier)
Numéro d’énumérateur : (Spécifier)
Département : (Spécifier)
Commune : (Spécifier)
Numéro d’identification unique de l’école : (Spécifier)
Nom de l’école : (Spécifier)
École de Contrôle ou de Traitement : (Spécifier)
Bonjour. Je m’appelle __________________ et j’aide à mener l’évaluation à mi-parcours du programme 
Keun Faaba mis en œuvre par CRS. Je travaille avec Et4d une société mandatée par CRS. Nous faisons 
une étude et nous aimerions que vous y participiez. Je voudrais vous poser des questions sur votre école 
et le corps enseignant. Cette information nous aidera à évaluer les activités mises en œuvre par CRS 
pour améliorer les services d’éducation, fournir plus de nourriture et de médicaments, et améliorer la 
santé et l’hygiène. Le sondage prend normalement 40 minutes. Les informations que vous nous 
donnerez seront strictement confidentielles et ne seront pas montrées à d’autres personnes. Votre 
identité ne sera pas liée à vos réponses Votre participation est volontaire et vous pouvez choisir de ne 
pas répondre à certaines questions, ou même à toutes les questions. Votre participation à de futurs 
programmes CRS ne dépend pas de vos réponses à cette enquête. Cependant, nous espérons que vous 
participerez à cette enquête puisque votre opinion est importante.
NB : Proposer au répondant de lui fournir les contacts de CRS s’il le désire
Maintenant, avez-vous des questions à poser sur le sondage ? [Laisser le temps pour poser des 
questions et répondre au besoin]
Me donnez-vous la permission de poursuivre l’interview ? Oui / Non
Nº Question Réponse
1. Caractéristiques du directeur et capacités
100 Êtes-vous directeur de l'école ou son 
remplaçant(e)?
o Directeur en titre
o Remplaçant
101 Genre (regardezl’interlocuteur et cochez) o Masculin
o Féminin
102 Quel âge avez-vous ? 
[NB : mettre 99 si la personne ne veut pas 
répondre]
_______ ans
153
Nº Question Réponse
103 Depuis combien de temps êtes-vous dans 
l’enseignement ?
_______ ans
104 Depuis combien de temps êtes-vous affecté(e) à 
cette école ?
_______ ans
105 Depuis combien d’années travaillez-vous en tant 
que directeur ?
[NB : Dans cette école ou une autre école]
_______ ans
106 Quel est le diplôme académique le plus élevé que 
vous avez obtenu ?
• CEP
• BEPC
• CAP (lycée technique)
• BAC, DEAT
• DEUG, DUES
• Licence
• Maitrise
• Master/DEA
• Autre 
107 Quel est le diplôme professionnel le plus élevé que 
vous avez obtenu ?
• Aucun
• CEAP
• CAP
• Autre 
2. Information sur l’école
200 Combien y a-t’il de salles de classe utilisées dans 
votre école ?
_______
201 Quelles classes avez-vous au sein de votre école ? • Maternelle
• Cours d'initiation (CI)
• Cours préparatoire (CP)
• CE1
• CE2
• CM1
• CM2
202 Dans la classe de CI combien d’élèves se partagent 
un manuel de français ?
[NB : Se rendre dans la classe de l’enseignant si 
nécessaire]
o 1 enfant par manuel
o 2 enfants par manuel
o 3 enfants par manuel
o 4 enfants par manuel
o 5 et plus enfants par manuel
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
203 Dans la classe de CP, combien d’élèves se 
partagent un manuel de français?
[NB : Se rendre dans la classe de l’enseignant si 
nécessaire]
o 1 enfant par manuel
o 2 enfants par manuel
o 3 enfants par manuel
o 4 enfants par manuel
o 5 et plus enfants par manuel
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
154
Nº Question Réponse
204 Dans la classe de CI, quelle part des élèves ont les 
fournitures nécessaires ?
[NB : Se rendre dans la classe de l’enseignant si 
nécessaire]
o Presque tous (80 à 100%)
o La plupart (60 à 80 %)
o La moitié (40 à 60%)
o Une faible part (20 à 40%)
o Très peu (0 à 20%)
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
205 Dans la classe de CP, quelle part des élèves ont les 
fournitures nécessaires ?
[NB : Se rendre dans la classe de l’enseignant si 
nécessaire]
o Presque tous (80 à 100%)
o La plupart (60 à 80 %)
o La moitié (40 à 60%)
o Une faible part (20 à 40%)
o Très peu (0 à 20%)
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
206 Votre école a-t-elle une cantine fonctionnelle ?
NB : 1 repas distribué par jour
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
207 Votre cantine a-t-elle un comité de gestion actif ?
NB : Un comité actif se réuni 1 fois par semaine
o Très actif
o Modérément actif
o Pas du tout actif
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
208 [Keun Faaba]
Votre école a-t-elle un club ami de l’hygiène (Club 
WASH)? 
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
209 [Keun Faaba] [Q208 = Oui]
Le club ami de l’hygiène est-il actif ?
o Très actif
o Modérément actif
o Pas du tout actif
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
210 [Keun Faaba] [Q208 = Oui]
Combien de garçons font partie du club ami de 
l’hygiène ?
_____
211 [Keun Faaba] [Q208 = Oui]
Combien de filles font partie du club ami de 
l’hygiène ?
_____
212 [Keun Faaba] [Q208 = Oui] o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
155
Nº Question Réponse
Pensez-vous que les membres du club ami de 
l’hygiène rencontrent des difficultés pour faire 
respecter les règles du club ami de l’hygiène ?
213 [Keun Faaba] [Q208 = Oui & Q212 = Oui]
Quelle sorte de difficultés ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Intimidation
• Menaces verbales
• Menaces physiques
• Moquerie
• Non suivi des consignes par les élèves
• Non respect du genre féminin. (Les gens 
n’aiment pas respecter les femmes).
• Peur des élèves plus agés ou plus forts
• Peur de rapporter auprès de l'enseignant
• Difficulté pour la répartition des taches liées au 
genre
• Les garçons n’aiment pas obéir aux filles
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
214 [Keun Faaba] [Q208 = Oui] 
Pensez-vous que les filles membres du club Wash 
rencontrent des difficultés liées à leur genre pour 
faire respecter les règles du club ami de l’hygiène ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
215 [Keun Faaba] [Q208 = Oui & Q214 = Oui]
Quelle sorte de difficultés ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Intimidation
• Menaces verbales
• Menaces physiques
• Moquerie
• Non suivi des consignes par les élèves
• Non respect du genre féminin. (Les gens 
n’aiment pas respecter les femmes).
• Peur des élèves plus agés ou plus forts
• Peur de rapporter auprès de l'enseignant
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
216 [Keun Faaba]
Pensez-vous que le projet Keun Faaba consacre 
plus d'efforts à l'hygiène durant cette deuxième 
phase [Démarrage septembre 2018] ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
217 [Keun Faaba] 
Selon vous quelles activités liées à l'hygiène 
fonctionnent bien au sein de votre école ?
[NB : Proposer les activités une part une et cocher 
si « oui »]
• Club ami de l’hygiène actif
• Bonne formation des membres du club ami de 
l’hygiène
• Bonne restitution des enseignements aux autres 
élèves
• Bon suivi des clubs ami de l’hygiène par les 
enseignants 
• Tippy Tap ou DLM situés près des classes sont 
en bon état
156
Nº Question Réponse
DLM Covid : Dispositif de lavage de main
• Tippy Tap ou DLM situés près des latrines sont 
en bon état
• Tippy Tap ou DLM ont toujours de l’eau
• Tippy Tap ou DLM sont utilisés correctement 
par les élèves
• Les élèves utilisent du savon ou des cendres au 
Tippy Tap ou DLM
• La communauté est impliquée dans le maintien 
en bon état des Tippy Tap ou DLM
• L’école dispose d’un accès à l’eau
• Le matériel de transport de l’eau est lavé 
régulièrement avec du savon
• De l’eau est disponible dans la classe
• L’eau disponible dans la classe est potable
• L’eau est traitée avec des aquatabs
• L’eau est testée pour vérifier qu’elle est potable
• Les élèves ne partagent pas les gobelets
• Les autorités locales se soucient de la qualité de 
l’eau
• L’école est salles car les villageois y laissent leur 
ordures
• Aucune
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
3. Implication des parents d’élèves
301 Votre école a-t-elle une APE ? o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
302 [Q301 = Non]
Pourquoi ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Les parents n'ont pas les moyens (argent)
• Les parents n'ont pas le temps
• Les parents ne sont pas intéressés
• L'école ne souhaite pas avoir d'APE
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
303 Est-t-elle active c'est à dire l’APE organise des 
réunions et tient des procès-verbaux ? 
o Oui, très active
o Oui, modérément active
o Oui, mais très peu
o Non, pas du tout active
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
304 [Q303 = Si pas du tout active ou peu active]
Pourquoi ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Les parents n'ont pas les moyens (argent)
• Les parents n'ont pas le temps
• Les parents ne sont pas intéressés
• L’APE n’est pas très organisée
• Il n’a pas de lieu disponible pour se rencontrer
• Le président a été malade
• L’école a été fermée
157
Nº Question Réponse
• La non motivation des membres du bureau APE 
(Les reunions ne sont pas remunerés)
• Les membres du bureaux Les membres du 
bureaux et les parents ne maitrisent pas leur 
roles.
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
305 Votre école a-t-elle une AME ? o Oui 
o Non
o Ne sait pas
306 [Q305 = Non]
Pourquoi ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Les mères n'ont pas les moyens (argent)
• Les mères n'ont pas le temps
• Les mères ne sont pas intéressées
• L'école ne souhaite pas avoir d'AME
• Les mères sont déjà très actives dans l’APE
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
307 Est-t-elle fonctionnelle, c’est-à-dire l’AME organise 
des réunions et tient des procès-verbaux ?
o Oui, très active
o Oui, modérément active
o Oui, mais très peu
o Non, pas du tout active
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
308 [Q307= pas du tout active ou peu active]
Pourquoi ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Les mères n'ont pas les moyens (argent)
• Les mères n'ont pas le temps
• Les mères ne sont pas intéressées
• Mères sont déjà très actives dans APE
• L’AME n’est pas très organisée
• Il n’a pas de lieu disponible pour se rencontrer
• La présidente a été malade
• L’école a été fermée
• La non motivation des membres du bureau AME 
(Les reunions ne sont pas remunerés)
• Les membres du bureaux Les membres du 
bureaux et les parents ne maitrisent pas leur 
roles.
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
309 [Keun Faaba]
Les AME et APE mettent-elles en pratique les 
compétences d'organisation acquises depuis le 
début du projet (2014) ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
310 [Keun Faaba] [Q310 = Oui] • Construction des latrines de l’école
• Réparation des latrines de l’école
158
Nº Question Réponse
A quelles activités les parents d’élèves ont t’ils 
participés de manière bénévole dans votre 
communauté au cours des 3 dernières années ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Construction de la cuisine
• Réparation de la cuisine
• Construction du magasin
• Réparation du magasin
• Construction d’une salle de classe
• Réparation d’une salle de classe
• Construction d’une clôture
• Réparation d’une clôture
• Forage de puit
• ATPC
• Construction de logement pour enseignant
• Les parents achetent ou fournissent des 
condiments
• Aucune
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
311 [Keun Faaba] Avez-vous été témoin d’actions 
spontanées initiées par l’APE ou l’AME visant à 
améliorer les infrastructures de l’école ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas/ Pas de réponse
312 [Keun Faaba] [Q312 = Oui] 
Quel type d’action ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Construction des latrines
• Réparation des latrines
• Construction de la cuisine
• Réparation de la cuisine
• Construction du magasin
• Réparation du magasin
• Construction d’une salle de classe
• Réparation d’une salle de classe
• Construction d’une clôture
• Réparation d’une clôture
• Forage de puit
• Construction de logement pour enseignant
• Aucune
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
4. Formation
401 [Keun Faaba]
Les enseignants CI de l’année scolaire 2019-2020 
avaient-ils reçus une formation dans le cadre du 
projet ?
o Oui, tous
o Oui, certains
o Non, aucun
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse 
402 [Keun Faaba]
Les enseignants CP de l’année scolaire 2019-2020 
avaient-ils reçus une formation dans le cadre du 
projet ?
o Oui, tous
o Oui, certains
o Non, aucun
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
403 [Keun Faaba] • Appliquer les 5 composants fondamentaux de la 
lecture
• Conscience phonémique
159
Nº Question Réponse
A votre connaissance, quel était le contenu de ces 
formations ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Mesurer/Evaluer les acquis
• Utiliser les jeux pour l’apprentissage de la 
lecture
• Gérer la classe en petits groupes
• Enrichir leur vocabulaire
• Appliquer la psychologie à l’enseignement et à 
l’apprentissage de la lecture et de l’écriture 
• Enseigner la lecture et l’écriture dans un 
contexte multilingue
• Gérer les classes multigrades
• Utiliser les livrets pour le CI
• Utiliser les livres décodables pour les classes de 
CP
• Donner aux élèves suffisamment de temps pour 
pratiquer
• Écouter des élèves
• Encourager la créativité des élèves
• Enseigner le respect et la résolution des conflits
• Avoir des conversations avec les élèves
• Utiliser des objets locaux pour les 
apprentissages
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse 
404 [Keun Faaba]
A votre connaissance, quels 
enseignements/méthodes promus par Keun Faaba 
vos enseignants de CI/CP mettent régulièrement 
en pratique ?
[Lister chacunes des options, et cocher ce qui est 
valide.]
• Appliquer les 5 composants fondamentaux de la 
lecture
• Mesurer/Evaluer les acquis
• Utiliser les jeux pour l’apprentissage de la 
lecture
• Gérer la classe en petits groupes
• Enrichir leur vocabulaire
• Appliquer la psychologie à l’enseignement et à 
l’apprentissage de la lecture et de l’écriture 
• Enseigner la lecture et l’écriture dans un 
contexte multilingue
• Gérer les classes multigrades
• Utiliser les livrets pour le CI
• Utiliser les livres décodables pour les classes de 
CP
• Donner aux élèves suffisamment de temps pour 
pratiquer
• Écouter des élèves
• Encourager la créativité des élèves
• Enseigner le respect et la résolution des conflits
• Avoir des conversations avec les élèves
• Utiliser des objets locaux pour les 
apprentissages
• Auncun
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse 
405 [Keun Faaba] • Les méthodes ne sont pas compatibles avec le 
programme officiel du Bénin
• L’évaluation des élèves prend trop de temps
160
Nº Question Réponse
A votre connaissance, quelles difficultés 
rencontrent-ils dans la mise en œuvre des 
méthodes de Keun Faaba ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Les ressources éducatives ne sont pas 
disponibles (manuel livres)
• L’enseignant n’a reçu aucune formation
• L’enseignant n’a pas été suffisament formé
• L’enseignant préfère suivre la méthode qu’il 
connait
• L’enseignant n’est pas ouvert au changement
• La préparation des leçons prend trop de temps
• Les documents de formations sont accés sur le 
CP et pas spécifiques au CI
• Les UP intègrent des écoles hors projet ce qui 
rend difficile les discussion sur la pedagogie
• Inexitance de support pour les test/évaluation
• Aucune
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
406 [Keun Faaba] 
Pensez-vous que les formations reçues par les 
enseignants ont contribué à améliorer la qualité 
des apprentissages ? 
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
407 [Keun Faaba] [Q406 = Oui]
De quelle manière la qualité des apprentissages 
est-elle meilleure ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Les enfants apprennent plus rapidement
• Les enfants apprennent tous, avant très peu 
apprenaient
• Le niveau de lecture des enfants s’est amélioré
• Les enseignants se préparent mieux
• Les leçons sont mieux organisées
• Les notions de bases sont acquises 
(Connaissance du son des lettres)
• Les enfants sont plus attentifs grâce aux 
nouvelles méthode
• Les activités et tests tiennent compte de la 
progression des enfants (apprentissage 
des lettres)
• Les enfants ont plus d’autonomie pour 
dechiffrer des nouveaux mots
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
408 [Keun Faaba]
Pensez-vous que l’ensemble des activités menées 
ont contribué à améliorer la qualité des 
apprentissages ? 
[Ex : Formation, cantine, UP, suivi CP)
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
409 [Keun Faaba] o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
161
Nº Question Réponse
Pensez-vous que les méthodes mises en œuvre 
dans le cadre du programme Keun Faaba sont 
compatibles avec les objectifs éducatifs 
nationaux en particulier le curriculum 
d’apprentissage de la lecture? 
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
410 [Keun Faaba] [Q408 = Non]
Pour quelles raisons ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Les méthodes ne sont pas compatibles avec le 
programme officiel du Bénin
• L’enseignement de la lecture prend trop de 
temps sur les autres matières
• Le gouvernement n’a pas les moyens de mettre 
en œuvre cette méthode (Achat livret/fiches.)
• Le gouvernement n’a pas les moyens de former 
les enseignants
• La préparation des leçons prend trop de temps
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
411 [Keun Faaba]
Avez-vous connaissance de stratégies spécifiques 
du projet Keun Faaba mise en œuvre pour soutenir 
les communautés marginalisées (ex: Peulh, 
communautés de déplacés) ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
412 [Keun Faaba] [Q411 = Oui]
Si oui lesquelles ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Éducation des filles (et les garçons) sur la 
puberté et la gestion de l’hygiène menstruelle
• Mentoring des filles
• La gratuite totale pour leur scolarité.( Y compris 
dons de fournitures scolaires )
• Dons de fournitures scolaires
• Tous les enfants sont traités de la même 
manière, il n'y a pas de discrimination
• Les agents de terrain parlent le langues locales, 
y compris celles des communautés 
mariginalisées
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
413 [Keun Faaba] [Q411 = Oui]
Que pensez-vous de l’efficacité de ces 
interventions ?
o Très efficace
o Moyennement efficace
o Peu efficace
o Pas du tout efficace
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
414 [Keun Faaba]
Avez-vous connaissance de stratégie spécifiques 
mise en œuvre pour aider les filles ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
415 [Keun Faaba] [Q414 = Oui] • Éducation des filles sur la puberté et la gestion 
de l’hygiène menstruelle
162
Nº Question Réponse
Si oui lesquelles ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Mentoring des filles
• La gratuite totale pour leur scolarité.( Y compris 
dons de fournitures scolaires )
• Dons de fournitures scolaires
• Tous les enfants sont traités de la même 
manière, il n'y a pas de discrimination
• Les agents de terrain parlent le langues locales, 
y compris celles des communautés 
mariginalisées
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
416 [Keun Faaba] [Q414 = Oui]
Que pensez-vous de l’efficacité de ces 
interventions ?
o Très efficace
o Moyennement efficace
o Peu efficace
o Pas du tout efficace
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
5. Présence des enseignants à l’école
501 Nombre d’enseignants de sexe masculins dans 
votre école ?
______
502 Nombre d’enseignants de sexe féminin dans votre 
école ?
______
503
C
Combien d’enseignants sont communautaire dans 
votre école ?
______
503
A
Combien d’enseignants sont aspirants dans votre 
école ?
______
504 Vos enseignants titulaires (Permanent ou 
contractuel) ont-ils été assidus à l’école au cours 
du 1er trimestre. ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
505 Vos enseignants communautaires ou aspirants ont￾ils été assidus à l’école au cours du 1er trimestre. ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
506 Combien de demi-journées l’école a-t-elle été 
ouverte au cours du 1er trimestre. ?
106 demi- journées (octobre 38-septembre 38-
decembre 30)
507 Combien de demi-journées ont été perdues par 
l’enseignant du CI au cours du 1er trimestre. ?
_____ demi- journées
508 Combien de demi-journées ont été perdues par 
l’enseignant du CP au cours du 1er trimestre. ?
_____ demi- journées
509 Combien de demi-journées ont été perdues par 
l’enseignant du CE1 au cours du 1er trimestre. ?
_____ demi- journées
163
Nº Question Réponse
510 Combien de demi-journées ont été perdues par 
l’enseignant du CE2 au cours du 1er trimestre. ?
_____ demi- journées
511 Combien de demi-journées ont été perdues par 
l’enseignant du CM1 au cours du 1er trimestre ?
_____ demi- journées
512 Combien de demi-journées ont été perdues par 
l’enseignant du CM2 au cours du 1er trimestre ?
_____ demi- journées
513
CI
Quel est le statut de l’enseignant de CI ? o APE (Agent permanent)
o ACE (Agent Contractuel)
o Aspirant
o Communautaire
o Conventionné par une structure extérieure
o Stagiaire
o Volontaire/Bénévole
o Autre
513
CP
Quel est le statut de l’enseignant de CP ? o APE (Agent permanent)
o ACE (Agent Contractuel)
o Aspirant
o Communautaire
o Conventionné par une structure extérieure
o Stagiaire
o Volontaire/Bénévole
o Autre
514
CI
Depuis combien de temps l'enseignant de CI est-il 
affecté à cette classe dans votre école ou groupe ?
o Moins d'un an
o Un an
o Deux ans
o Trois ans
o Quatre ans
o Cinq ans
o Plus de cinq ans
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
514
CP
Depuis combien de temps l'enseignant de CP est-il 
affecté à cette classe dans votre école ou 
groupement ?
o Moins d'un an
o Un an
o Deux ans
o Trois ans
o Quatre ans
o Cinq ans
o Plus de cinq ans
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
515 L'absentéisme des enseignants est-il un problème 
récurrent dans votre école ?
NB : Tous les enseignants
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
516 Quelles sont les principales raisons qui expliquent 
l’absentéisme des enseignants ?
• Grève
• Maladie (de soi)
• Maladie du membre de la famille
164
Nº Question Réponse
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Raison administrative (aller à la banque, 
chercher des papiers administratifs, etc.)
• Formation
• Réunion de travail
• Fête (prolongation)
• Cérémonie (funérailles, naissance, mariage)
• Problème de transport
• Manque de motivation
• Travail trop pénible
• Manque deconscience professionnelle 
• Manque d’amour pour le métier
• Mobilite géographique (Pendant une certaine 
saison la voie n’est pas accessible, crue d’eau )
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
517 [Keun Faaba]
Pensez-vous que remettre les certificats de mérite 
aux enseignants assidus puissent être une mesure 
efficace pour réduire les absences des 
enseignants ?
[NB : Le directeur peut donner son opinion dans le 
cadre général de l’éduction au Bénin]
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
518 [Keun Faaba]
Pensez-vous qu'impliquer l'APE ou de l'AME dans 
le contrôle de l’assiduïté des enseignants puisse 
permette de réduire leurs absences ?
[NB : Le directeur peut donner son opinion dans le 
cadre général de l’éduction au Bénin]
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
519 Quelles méthodes suggérez-vous pour réduire 
l'absentéisme des enseignants ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Augmenter les salaires
• Mettre en place un système de pénalité
• Diminuer les effectifs des classe
• Améliorer le système des affectations
• Revoir l’état des routes
• Prevoir des documents appropriés pour les 
fiches de préparations des cours. (temps de 
préparation à la maison trop long)
• Faciliter l’accès de dotation des moyens de 
transports aux enseignants
• Le directeur doit montrer l’exemple en étant 
assidu
165
Nº Question Réponse
• Sensibilisation et pris de conscience des 
enseignants
• Cesser de parainer des enseignants (enseignant 
politicien, les directeurs ne peuvent rien dire)
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
520 L'absentéisme des élèves est-il un problème 
récurrent dans votre école ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
521 Vos enseignants suivent-ils précisément les 
absences des élèves ? (Tous les jours chaque élève)
o Oui, pour chaque élève tous les jours
o Oui, pour chaque élève mais irrégulièrement
o Oui, au niveau de la classe tous les jours
o Oui, au niveau de la classe mais irrégulièrement
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
522 [Q521 = Non]
Pourquoi les enseignants ne suivent pas les 
absences de chaque élève tous les jours ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Il y a trop d’élèves
• Les élèves arrivent trop souvent en retard
• Les élèves inscrits changent trop souvent
• Cela prend trop de temps
• Nous n’avons pas de système facile pour 
enregistrer les présences
• Le système est trop compliqué
• Personne ne nous demande cette information
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
6. Santé et Hygiène
600 Votre école est-t-elle située dans un village 
bénéficiant d'un programme d'ATPC ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
601 Quand les vermifuges ont-ils été distribués aux 
élèves pour la dernière fois ?
o Année Scolaire 2020-2021
o Année Scolaire 2019-2020
o Année Scolaire 2018-2019
o Année Scolaire 2017-2018
o Jamais distribué
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
602 Votre école dispose-t-elle d’un accès à de l’eau ? o Oui, dans l’école
o Oui, à proximité de l’école
o Oui, mais loin de l’école
o Non 
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
603 [Q602 = Oui]
Quel est le type du point d’eau ?
o Puits ouvert
o Puits fermé 
o Forage 
o AEV
o Connexion SONEB
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
604 [Q602 = Oui] o Oui
o Non
166
Nº Question Réponse
L’eau de l’école est-elle généralement potable ? 
NB : A la sourcer ou traitée
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
605 [Q603 = Puit ouvert]
Utilisez-vous des puisettes pour prélever l’eau ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
606 [Q602 = Oui]
Dans votre école qui va chercher l’eau de boisson 
pour les classes ?
o Les élèves filles seulement et toujours
o Principalement les élèves filles
o Les élèves garçons seulement et toujours
o Principalement les élèves garçons
o Les élèves filles et les élèves garçons de façon 
alternée (ou ensemble)
o Les parents
o Parents et élèves filles et garçons
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
607 [Si Q602 = Oui]
Quel récipient est généralement utilisé pour le 
prélèvement / transport de l’eau et de boisson ?
o Sceau ou bassine en plastique
o Sceau ou bassine en tôle galvanisée
o Bidon avec couvercle
o Bidon sans couvercle
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
608 [Si Q602 = Oui]
Avec quelle fréquence le récipient de prélèvement 
/ transport de l’eau de boisson est –il lavé par 
semaine ?
o Tous les jours 
o 1 ou 2 par semaine
o 1 ou 2 fois par mois
o 1 fois par an
o Jamais
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
609 [Si Q602 = Oui]
Avec quoi le récipient de prélèvement / transport
de l’eau de boisson est–il lavé ?
o Seulement avec de l'eau
o Avec de l'eau et du savon
o Avec de l'eau et des cendres
o Avec de l'eau et du sable
o Avec de l'eau et du liquide vaisselle
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
610 [Q602 = Oui]
Quel récipient est généralement utilisé pour le 
stockage de l’eau de boisson ?
o Le contenant de prélèvement / transport sert 
pour le stockage
o Sceau ou bassine en plastique sans couvercle
o Sceau ou bassine en plastique avec couvercle
o Sceau ou bassine en tôle galvanisée sans 
couvercle
o Sceau ou bassine en tôle galvanisée avec 
couvercle
o Bidon sans bouchon
o Bidon avec bouchon
o Il n’y a pas de stockage
167
Nº Question Réponse
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
611 [Q602 = Oui]
Avec quelle fréquence le récipient de stockage de 
l’eau de boisson est –il lavé ?
o Tous les jours 
o 1 ou 2 par semaine
o 1 ou 2 fois par mois
o 1 fois par an
o Jamais
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
612 [Q602 = Oui]
Avec quoi le récipient de stockage de l’eau de 
boisson est –il lavé ?
o Seulement avec de l'eau
o Avec de l'eau et du savon
o Avec de l'eau et des cendres
o Avec de l'eau et du sable
o Avec de l'eau et du liquide vaisselle
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
613 Où les enfants trouvent-ils de l’eau à boire à 
l’école ?
• Dans le contenant d’eau de sa classe
• Dans une réserve de stockage
• Directement au puit
• Chez les vendeuses de la recréation
• Chez les cuisinières de la cantine
• Dans les tippy-taps
• Dans le DLM
• Nulle-part
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
614 Quels types de dispositifs avez-vous pour le lavage 
des mains ?
• Aucun
• Tippy-taps
• DLM
• Bassine
• Eau courante avec un robinet
• Autre
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
615 Chaque classe dispose-t-elle d'un dispositif de 
lavage des mains avec de l’eau ?
o Oui, tous
o Oui, mais seulement certains
o Non, aucune 
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
616 [Q615 = oui]
Les systèmes de lavage des mains incluent-ils du 
savon (ou cendres) ?
o Oui, tous
o Oui, mais seulement certains
o Non, aucune 
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
617 [Q615 = oui]
Quel est l’état de fonctionnement des systèmes de 
lavage des mains existants ? 
o Très bon état
o État plutôt bon
o État passable 
o Pas bien entretenu
o Très mal entretenu
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
618 Quelle proportion des élèves se lavent les mains 
avec du savon (ou cendres) avant le repas ?
o Presque tous (80 à 100%)
o La plupart (60 à 80 %)
o La moitié (40 à 60%)
o Une faible part (20 à 40%)
o Très peu (0 à 20%)
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
168
Nº Question Réponse
619 [Q618 = 0 à 40%]
Comment expliquez-vous ces mauvais résultats 
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Les élèves n’ont pas accès au savon/cendre
• Les élèves n’ont pas accès à l’eau
• La station de lavage n'est pas près du lieu des 
repas/latrines
• Les élèves ne savent pas que c’est important
• Ils pensent que cela ne sert à rien
• Les élèves oublient
• Les éleves sont pressés de manger 
• Les élèves n’ont pas le courage de le faire
• Les enseignants ne leur rappellent pas de le 
faire
• La culture du milieu
• La non pratique à la maison
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
• Autre, préciser_______
620 [Q618 = 40 à 100%]
Comment expliquez-vous ces bons résultats 
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• L’implication du club d’hygiène
• La sensibilisation
• Les enseignants leur rappellent de le faire
• Les enseignants leur demandent de le faire 
systématiquement
• Les enseignants ont sensibilisé les élèves
• Les élèves ont pris l'habitude
• Les élèves savent que c'est important
• Les élèves trouvent cela amusant
• La peur du Covid 19
• Pratique courante à la maison
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
621 Quelle proportion des élèves se lavent les mains 
avec du savon (ou cendres) après être allés aux 
toilettes ?
o Presque tous (80 à 100%)
o La plupart (60 à 80 %)
o La moitié (40 à 60%)
o Une faible part (20 à 40%)
o Très peu (0 à 20%)
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
622 [Q621 = 0 à 40%]
Comment expliquez-vous ces mauvais résultats 
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Les élèves n’ont pas accès au savon/cendre
• Les élèves n’ont pas accès à l’eau
• La station de lavage n'est pas près du lieu des 
repas/latrines
• Les élèves ne savent pas que c’est important
• Ils pensent que cela ne sert à rien
• Les élèves oublient
• Les éleves sont pressés de manger 
• Les élèves n’ont pas le courage de le faire
• Les enseignants ne leur rappellent pas de le 
faire
• La culture du milieu
• La non pratique à la maison
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
• Autre, préciser_______
623 [Q621 = 40 à 100%] • L’implication du club d’hygiène
• La sensibilisation
169
Nº Question Réponse
Comment expliquez-vous ces bons résultats ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Les enseignants leur rappellent de le faire
• Les enseignants leur demandent de le faire 
systématiquement
• Les enseignants ont sensibilisé les élèves
• Les élèves ont pris l'habitude
• Les élèves savent que c'est important
• Les élèves trouvent cela amusant
• La peur du Covid 19
• Pratique courante à la maison
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
624 Vos élèves ont-ils accès à des latrines à l’école ? o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
625 [Q624 = oui]
Le nombre de latrines est-il suffisant ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
626 [Q624 = oui]
Les latrines sont-elles fonctionnelles ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse 
627 [Q624 = oui]
Les latrines sont-elles relativement propres ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
628 [Q6204= oui]
Les latrines sont-elles utilisées par les villageois ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
629 [Q624 = oui]
Les filles ont-elles leurs propres latrines ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
630 [Q620 = oui & Q625 = oui]
Le nombre de latrines pour les filles est-il 
suffisant ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
631 [Q620 = oui] 
Existent-ils des systèmes de lavage de mains à côté 
des latrines
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
632 [Q620 = oui] o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
170
Nº Question Réponse
Existent-t-ils des latrines réservées uniquement 
pour les enseignants femmes ?
633 Qui sont ceux qui sont chargés de laver les 
latrines ?
• Les élèves avec programme par classe et par 
semaine
• Les élèves du Club ami de l’hygiène
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
634 Quel est le genre des élèves en charge de laver les 
latrines ?
o Les élèves filles seulement et toujours
o Principalement les élèves filles
o Les élèves garçons seulement et toujours
o Principalement les élèves garçons
o Les élèves filles et les élèves garçons de façon 
alternée
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
635 Quelle est la fréquence de nettoyage des latrines ? o Plusieurs fois par semaine
o Une fois par semaine
o Une fois par mois
o Une fois par trimestre
o Une fois par semestre
o Jamais
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
7. Implication des bénévoles dans Keun Faaba
701 [Keun Faaba]
Avez-vous parfois des difficultés pour trouver des 
bénévoles pour les activités du projet Keun Faaba ?
o La plupart du temps
o Parfois
o Jamais
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
702 [Keun Faaba] [Q701 = La plupart du temps ou 
Parfois]
Pour quelles activités du projet Keun Faaba avez 
des difficultés à trouver des bénévoles ?
[NB : Sélectionner se qui s’applique] 
• Cuisine-Cantine scolaire
• Magasin
• Culture du jardin 
• Ferme communautaire (Si elles existent)
• Comité Hygiène - Club ami de l'hygiène
• Construction / Réparation salles de classe
• Construction / Réparation latrines
• Évènement autour de la lecture
• ATPC
• Heure de conte
• Bibliothèque
• Soutien scolaire (aide aux devoir)
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
703 [Keun Faaba] [Q407 = 2 ou 3]
Que faudrait-il faire selon vous pour vous 
encourager les parents à participer plus aux 
activités du projet Keun Faaba ?
• Payer les bénévoles
• Donner des repas aux parents actifs
• Donner des denrées alimentaires aux parents 
actifs
• Présenter des résultats de Keun Faaba
• Apporter plus de formation aux parents
171
Nº Question Réponse
[NB : ne pas donner les réponses] • Améliorer la collaboration entre les enseignants 
et les parents
• Donner aux parents plus d'information sur les 
activités
• Demander aux parents d'être plus actifs
• Sensibiliser les parents sur l'importance du 
projet
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
704 [Keun Faaba] [Q108=1]
Pensez-vous que les bénévoles (Magasinier, 
cuisinières) accepteraient de s'impliquer en 
l'absence de compensation ?
o Oui, certainement
o Oui, peut-être
o Non, probablement pas
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
705 [Keun Faaba] [Q108=1]
Avez-vous rencontré des difficultés dans la gestion 
du magasin ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
706 [Keun Faaba] [Q705=oui]
Si oui, quelle était la nature de ces 
difficultés rencontrées par les magasiniers?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Fréquente absence des magasiniers
• Retard des magasiniers
• Vol ou disparition des marchandises
• Mauvais entretien des locaux
• Méconnaissance des règles de gestion
• Difficulté à remplir les documents
• Faiblesse en lecture
• Faiblesse en calcul
• Difficulté à faire le rapport mensuel
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
707 [Keun Faaba] [Q108=1]
Le faible niveau en lecture ou en calcul des 
volontaires du magasinier a t'il poser des 
problèmes ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
708 [Q707 = Oui]
Quel type de problème ?
• Ils n’arrivent pas à lire les instructions
• Ils ne respectent pas les procédures
• Ils perdent le matériel
• Ils ne comprennent pas bien ce qu’ils doivent 
faire
• Ils viennent demander de l’aide aux enseignants 
ou au directeur pour lire une instruction ou 
faire un calcul
172
Nº Question Réponse
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses] • Difficulté à faire le rapport mensuel
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
709 [Keun Faaba] [Q705=oui]
Selon vous, que faudrait-il faire pour améliorer la 
gestion du magasin ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Faire plus de formations
• Améliorer la documentation
• Simplifier les procédures
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
8. Participation au projet
801 [Keun Faaba]
Êtes-vous satisfait des activités menées par le 
programme Keun Faaba pour améliorer 
l'enseignement de la lecture à l'école ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
802 [Keun Faaba]
Quel est votre niveau d’implication dans le 
programme Keun Faaba pour améliorer 
l'enseignement de la lecture à l'école ?
o Très élevé
o Élevé
o Modéré
o Faible
o Inexistant
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
803 [Keun Faaba]
Concernant le programme Keun Faaba pour 
améliorer l'enseignement de la lecture à l'école, 
souhaiteriez-vous être :
o Plus impliqué
o Maintenir le même niveau d’implication
o Moins impliqué
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
804 [Keun Faaba]
Êtes-vous satisfait des activités menées par le 
programme Keun Faaba pour soutenir l’éducation 
dans la communauté ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
805 [Keun Faaba] o Très élevé
o Élevé
o Modéré
173
Nº Question Réponse
Quel est votre niveau d’implication dans le 
programme Keun Faaba pour soutenir l’éducation 
dans la communauté ?
o Faible
o Inexistant
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
806 [Keun Faaba]
Concernant le programme Keun Faaba de soutien 
l’éducation dans la communauté, souhaiteriez￾vous être :
o Plus impliqué
o Maintenir le même niveau d’implication
o Moins impliqué
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
807 [Keun Faaba]
Êtes-vous satisfait des activités menées par le 
programme Keun Faaba pour la cantine scolaire ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
808 [Keun Faaba]
Quel est votre niveau d’implication dans le 
programme Keun Faaba pour la cantine scolaire?
o Très élevé
o Élevé
o Modéré
o Faible
o Inexistant
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
809 [Keun Faaba]
Concernant le programme Keun Faaba Faaba pour 
la cantine scolaire, souhaiteriez-vous être :
o Plus impliqué
o Maintenir le même niveau d’implication
o Moins impliqué
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
810 [Keun Faaba]
Êtes-vous satisfait des activités menées par le 
programme Keun Faaba pour améliorer l'hygiène à 
l'école ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
811 [Keun Faaba]
Quel est votre niveau d’implication dans le 
programme Keun Faaba Faaba pour améliorer 
l'hygiène à l'école
o Très élevé
o Élevé
o Modéré
o Faible
o Inexistant
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
812 [Keun Faaba]
Concernant le programme Keun Faaba pour 
améliorer l'hygiène à l'école, souhaiteriez-vous 
être :
o Plus impliqué
o Maintenir le même niveau d’implication
o Moins impliqué
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
813 [Keun Faaba] [QD600 = Oui]
Êtes-vous satisfait des activités menées par le 
programme Keun Faaba pour améliorer l'hygiène 
en dehors de l'école ? [ATPC]
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
814 [Keun Faaba] • Amélioration de leur hygiène
• Diminution des maladies
174
Nº Question Réponse
Selon vous quel est l'impact de l'ATPC sur les 
enfants dans le cadre de l’école ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Diminution des absences
• Amélioration de l’attention à l’école
• Amélioration de la lecture
• Amélioration de l’écriture
• Amélioration des resultats des enfants
• Aucun
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
815 [Keun Faaba]
Quels facteurs externes ont rendu difficile la mise 
en œuvre des activités ?
[NB : Lister les réponses }
• Covid 19 - Fermeture des classes
• Intempéries : innondation…
• Grève des enseignants
• Manque d’enseignants
• Animaux attaquent le jardin
• Les habitants du village endommagent les 
équipements
• Fermeture de l’école du à des problèmes 
d’insécurité
• L’envaillissement de l’école par les abeilles
• Les enfants qui tombent en transe en série dans 
l’école
• Aucun
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
816 [Keun Faaba]
Quels facteurs internes (au sein du programme 
Keun Faaba) ont rendu difficile la mise en œuvre 
des activités ?
[NB : Lister les réponses }
• Retard livraison du matériel scolaire
• Retard livraison du matériel hygiène
• Retard construction des latrines
• Retard de livraison des vivres
• Retard dans la construction du puit
• Mauvais fonctionnement du puit
• Retard dans la formation des enseignants
• Manque de bénévoles
• Difficulté dans la mise en œuvre du jardin 
scolaire
• Difficulté dans la mise en œuvre de la ferme 
scolaire
• Aucun
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
817 [Keun Faaba]
Quels obstacles ou difficultés (internes ou externes 
pourront être surmontés d'ici la fin du projet ?
[NB : Lister les réponses }
• Retard livraison du matériel scolaire
• Retard livraison du matériel hygiène
• Retard construction des latrines
• Retard de livraison des vivres
• Retard dans la construction du puit
• Mauvais fonctionnement du puit
• Retard dans la formation des enseignants
• Manque de bénévoles
• Difficulté dans la mise en œuvre du jardin 
scolaire
• Difficulté dans la mise en œuvre de la ferme 
scolaire
175
Nº Question Réponse
• Manque d’enseignants
• Animaux attaquent le jardin
• Les habitants du village endommagent les 
équipements
• Fermeture de l’école du à des problèmes 
d’insécurité
• L’envaillissement de l’école par les abeilles
• Les enfants qui tombent en transe en série dans 
l’école
• Aucun
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
818 [Keun Faaba]
De quelle manière ces difficultés pourront-elles 
être surmontées ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Plus de moyens financiers
• Meilleure planification ou plus d’efforts de CRS
• Meilleure planification ou plus d’efforts de WEI
• Plus d’implication des parents
• Plus d'implication du gouvernement
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
819 [Keun Faaba]
Pensez-vous que les activités du projet ont affectés 
les garçons et les filles différemment ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
820 [Keun Faaba] [Q812 = Oui]
De quelle manière ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Augmentation du taux de scolarisation des filles 
ou maintien au sein de l’école 
• Les filles participent plus en classe
• Les garçons participent plus en classe
• Les filles prennent en charge plus de tâches 
dans le cadre de l’approvisionnement en eau
• Les garçons prennent en charge plus de tâches 
dans le cadre de l’approvisionnement en eau
• Les filles prennent en charge plus de tâches 
dans le cadre de l’hygiène 
• Les garçons prennent en charge plus de tâches 
dans le cadre de l’hygiène
• Les filles vont plus à la bibliothèque et aux 
activités de lecture
• Les garçons vont plus à la bibliothèque et aux 
activités de lecture
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
821 [Keun Faaba]
Que pensez-vous de l’utilité des émissions 
radiophoniques sur l’utilisation des livrets et 
décodables mises en place pour soutenir 
l’éducation pendant la crise de la Covid ?
o Oui, vraiment utile
o Oui, plus ou moins utile
o Non, pas vraiment utile
o Non, pas du tout utile
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
176
Nº Question Réponse
822 [Keun Faaba]
Pensez-vous que grâce à ces activités les élèves 
pourront rattraper le retard ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
823 [Keun Faaba]
Pensez-vous que le programme Keun Faaba vous a 
permis de rester impliqué avec votre école 
pendant la crise de la Covid
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
824 [Keun Faaba]
Que pensez-vous la distribution de rations mises 
en place pour soutenir l’alimentation soit utile ? 
o Oui, vraiment utile
o Oui, plus ou moins utile
o Non, pas vraiment utile
o Non, pas du tout utile
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
9. Commentaires
901 Faites-nous part de vos commentaires, si vous en avez éventuellement ?
902 En tant que l’intervieweur, veuillez fournir des commentaires supplémentaires (par exemple, problèmes, 
clarifications, commentaires).
Merci beaucoup d’avoir pris le temps de remplir ce sondage.
Fin du questionnaire
177
QUESTIONNAIRE – ENSEIGNANT
Cette section doit être remplie par l’intervieweur
Date : (JJ-MM-AAAA)
Nom de l’intervieweur : (Spécifier)
Numéro d’énumérateur : (Spécifier)
Département : (Spécifier)
Commune : (Spécifier)
Numéro d’identification unique de l’école : (Spécifier)
Nom de l’école : (Spécifier)
École de Contrôle ou de Traitement : (Spécifier)
Bonjour. Je m’appelle __________________ et j’aide à mener l’évaluation à mi-parcours du programme 
Keun Faaba mis en œuvre par CRS. Je travaille avec Et4d une société mandatée par CRS. Nous faisons 
une étude et nous aimerions que vous y participiez. Je voudrais vous poser des questions sur votre école 
et le Corps enseignant. Cette information nous aidera à évaluer les activités mises en œuvre par CRS 
pour améliorer les services d’éducation, fournir plus de nourriture et de médicaments, et améliorer la 
santé et l’hygiène. Le sondage prend normalement 20 à 30 minutes. Les informations que vous nous 
donnerez seront strictement confidentielles et ne seront pas montrées à d’autres personnes. Votre 
identité ne sera pas liée à vos réponses Votre participation est volontaire et vous pouvez choisir de ne 
pas répondre à certaines questions, ou même à toutes les questions. Votre participation à de futurs 
programmes CRS ne dépend pas de vos réponses à cette enquête. Cependant, nous espérons que vous 
participerez à cette enquête puisque votre opinion est importante.
NB : Proposer au répondant de lui fournir les contacts de CRS s’il le désire
Maintenant, avez-vous des questions à poser sur le sondage ? [Laisser le temps pour poser des 
questions et répondre au besoin]
Me donnez-vous la permission de poursuivre l’interview ? Oui / Non
178
Nº Question Réponse
1. Caractéristiques de l’enseignant
101 Genre (regardezl’enseignant et cochez) o Masculin
o Féminin
102 Quel âge avez-vous ? 
[NB : mettre 99 si la personne ne veut pas 
répondre]
_______ ans
103 Depuis combien d’années enseignez-vous ? _______ ans
104 Depuis combien d’années enseignez-vous dans 
cette école ?
_______ ans
105 Quelle est la classe la plus élevée que vous avez 
fréquentée ?
o 6
e
o 5é
o 4é
o 3é
o 2
nde
o 1ére
o Terminale
o Université
o Autre
106 Quel est le diplôme académique le plus élevé que 
vous avez obtenu ?
o CEP
o BEPC
o CAP (lycée technique)
o BAC, DEAT
o DEUG, DUES
o Licence
o Maitrise
o Master/DEA
o Autre
107 Quel est le diplôme professionnel le plus élevé que 
vous avez obtenu ?
o Aucun
o CEAP
o CAP
o Autre 
108 Quel est votre statut ? o APE (Agent permanent)
o ACE (Agent Contractuel)
o Aspirant
o Communautaire
o Conventionné par une structure extérieure
o Stagiaire
o Volontaire/Bénévole
o Autre 
2. Informations sur la classe de l’enseignant formation et absentéisme
201 Quelle(s) classe(s) enseignez-vous ? • Maternelle
• Cours d’Initiation (CI)
• Cours Préparatoire (CP)
• Cours élémentaire 1
• CE2
179
Nº Question Réponse
• CM1
• CM2
202 Votre classe compte combien de garçons/fille
[NB : Si plus d’une classe, indiquer le total]
____ Garçon
____ Filles
203 Avez-vous enseigné en CI ou en CP au cours des 5 
dernières années dans une école Keun Faaba ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
204 [Keun Faaba] [Q203 = Oui]
A quelles formations sur la lecture avez-vous 
participé dans le cadre du projet Keun Faaba ?
• 1er au 3 nov 2019 - EP 1 - Phase I
• 9 et 10 nov 2019 - EP 2 - Phase I
• 23 et 24 nov 2019 - EP 1 - Phase II
• 30 nov et 1er dec 2019 - EP 2 - Phase II
• 3 et 4 janvier 2020 - EP - Rattrapage
• 18 et 19 janvier 2020 - Décodable
• 19, 20 et 22 sept 2020 - Recyclage CI 1
• 19, 20 et 22 sept 2020 - Recyclage CP 1
• 24, 25 et 26 sept 2020 - Recyclage EM
• 6, 7 et 8 nov 2020 - Rattrapage CI
• 6, 7 et 8 nov 2020 - Rattrapage CP
• 18 et 19 janvier 2020 - Décodable
• 24 et 25 novembre 2020 - Recyclage
• 27 et 28 novembre 2020 - Recyclage CI 1
• 27 et 28 novembre 2020 - Recyclage CP 1
• 1 formation (ne se souvient plus laquelle)
• 2 formations (ne se souvient plus lesquelles)
• 3 formations (ne se souvient plus lesquelles)
• 4 formations (ne se souvient plus lesquelles)
• Aucune
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
205 [Keun Faaba] [Q203 = Oui] & [204 = Option 
checked] 
Quels sont les principaux enseignements que vous 
avez reçu durant cette formation ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Appliquer les 5 composants fondamentaux de la 
lecture
• Mesurer/Evaluer les acquis
• Utiliser les jeux pour l’apprentissage de la 
lecture
• Gérer la classe en petits groupes
• Enrichir leur vocabulaire
• Appliquer la psychologie à l’enseignement et à 
l’apprentissage de la lecture et de l’écriture 
• Enseigner la lecture et l’écriture dans un 
contexte multilingue
• Gérer les classes multigrades
• Utiliser les livrets pour le CI
• Utiliser les livres décodables pour les classes de 
CP
• Donner aux élèves suffisamment de temps pour 
pratiquer
• Écouter des élèves
• Encourager la créativité des élèves
• Enseigner le respect et la résolution des conflits
• Avoir des conversations avec les élèves
180
Nº Question Réponse
• Utiliser des objets locaux pour les 
apprentissages
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
206 [Keun Faaba] [Q203 = Oui] & [204 = Option 
checked] 
Quels enseignement/méthodes promus par Keun 
Faaba mettez-vous régulièrement en pratique ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Appliquer les 5 composants fondamentaux de la 
lecture
• Mesurer/Evaluer les acquis
• Utiliser les jeux pour l’apprentissage de la 
lecture
• Gérer la classe en petits groupes
• Enrichir leur vocabulaire
• Appliquer la psychologie à l’enseignement et à 
l’apprentissage de la lecture et de l’écriture 
• Enseigner la lecture et l’écriture dans un 
contexte multilingue
• Gérer les classes multigrades
• Utiliser les livrets pour le CI
• Utiliser les livres décodables pour les classes de 
CP
• Donner aux élèves suffisamment de temps pour 
pratiquer
• Écouter des élèves
• Encourager la créativité des élèves
• Enseigner le respect et la résolution des conflits
• Avoir des conversations avec les élèves
• Utiliser des objets locaux pour les 
apprentissages
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
207 [Keun Faaba] [Q203 = Oui] & [204 = Option 
checked] 
Quelles difficultés rencontrez-vous pour la mise en 
œuvre des méthodes de Keun Faaba ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Les méthodes ne sont pas compatibles avec le 
programme officiel du Bénin
• L’évaluation des élèves prend trop de temps
• Les ressources éducatives ne sont pas 
disponibles (manuel livres)
• L’enseignant n’a reçu aucune formation
• L’enseignant n’a pas été suffisament formé
• L’enseignant préfère suivre la méthode qu’il 
connait
• L’enseigannt n’est pas ouvert au changement
• La préparation des leçons prend trop de temps
• Autre, préciser ___________
208 [Keun Faaba] [Q203 = Oui] & [204 = Option 
checked] 
Pensez-vous que les formations reçues par les 
enseignants ont contribué à améliorer la qualité 
des apprentissages ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
209 [Keun Faaba] [Q208 = Oui] • Les enfants apprennent plus rapidement
• Les enfants apprennent tous, avant très peu 
apprenaient
181
Nº Question Réponse
De quelle manière la qualité de l'enseignement et 
des apprentissages s’est amélioré suite aux 
formations?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Les enseignants se préparent mieux
• Les leçons sont mieux organisées
• Les notions de bases sont acquises 
(Connaissance du son des lettres.)
• Les enfants sont plus attentifs grâce aux 
nouvelles méthodes
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
210 [Keun Faaba] 
Pensez-vous que l’ensemble des activités menées 
ont contribué à améliorer la qualité des 
apprentissages ? 
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
211 [Keun Faaba] 
Combien de jours avez-vous été absent au cours 
du 1er trimestre ?
o Moins de 6
o Entre 6 et 15
o Plus de 15
o Ne sais pas /pas réponse
212 [Keun Faaba]
Pour quelles raisons avez-vous été absent ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Grève
• Maladie (de soi)
• Maladie du membre de la famille
• Raison administrative (aller à la banque, 
chercher des papiers administratifs, etc.)
• Formation
• Réunion de travail
• Fête (prolongation)
• Cérémonie (funérailles, naissance, mariage)
• Problème de transport
• Manque de motivation
• Travail trop pénible
• Manque deconscience professionnelle 
• Manque d’amour pour le métier
• Mobilite géographique (Pendant une certaine 
saison la voie n’est pas accessible, crue d’eau )
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
213 [Keun Faaba] 
Pensez-vous que les certificats de mérite remis aux 
enseigants assidus puisse être une mesure efficace 
pour réduire les absences des enseignants ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
214 [Keun Faaba] 
Pensez-vous que l'implication de l'APE ou de l'AME 
dans le contrôle de l’assiduïté des enseigants 
puisse permette réduire leur absences ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
182
Nº Question Réponse
215 [Keun Faaba]
Que faudrait-il mettre en place pour réduire vos 
absences ou celles de vos collègues ?
• Augmenter les salaires
• Mettre en place un système de pénalité
• Diminuer les effectifs des classe
• Améliorer le système des affectations
• Revoir l’état des routes
• Prevoir des documents appropriés pour les 
fiches de préparations des cours. (temps de 
préparation à la maison trop long)
• Faciliter l’accès de dotation des moyens de 
transports aux enseignants
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
3. Programme Feedback
301 [Keun Faaba]
Parmi les activités menées par Keun Faaba dans le 
cadre extra-scolaire, lesquelles selon vous ont lieu 
régulièrement dans votre village au cours du 1er 
trimestre ?
• Distribution de livres aux APE/AME
• Programme de radio hebdomadaire
• L’heure de l’histoire par APE/AME
• Bibliothèque gérée par APE/AME
• Scéance d’écoute sur l’importance de la lecture
• Aucune/N’a pas connaissance d’activités extra￾scolaires
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
302 [Keun Faaba]
Parmi les activités menées par Keun Faaba dans le 
cadre extra-scolaire (communauté) lesquelles 
selon vous sont suivies par plus de 50% de vos 
élèves de CP ?
• Programme de radio hebdomadaire
• L’heure de l’histoire par APE/AME
• Bibliothèque gérée par APE/AME
• Aucune/N’a pas connaissance d’activités extra￾scolaires
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
303 [Keun Faaba]
Parmi les activités menées par Keun Faaba dans le 
cadre extra-scolaire lesquelles selon vous sont 
efficaces pour promouvoir l’importance de la 
lecture et de l’écriture ?
• Distribution de livres aux APE/AME
• Programme de radio hebdomadaire
• L’heure de conte par APE/AME
• Bibliothèque gérée par APE/AME
• Scéance d’écoute sur l’importance de la lecture
• Groupe d’étude
• Aucune/N’a pas connaissance d’activités extra￾scolaires
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
304 [Keun Faaba]
Selon vous quels problèmes limitent la 
participation des élèves à ces activités ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• L’AME/APE n’a pas créé la bibliothèque
• Il n’y a pas assez de livres dans la bibliothèque
• Les livres ont été endommagés
• Les parents n’ont pas connaissance des 
émissions de radio
• Les émissions de radio n’ont pas lieu 
régulièrement
• Les enfants ne sont pas intéressés
• Les enfants ont d’autres tâches à accomplir
• Les horaires ne conviennent pas
• Aucun problème
• Autre, préciser ___________
183
Nº Question Réponse
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
4. Nutrition
401 [Keun Faaba]
Pensez-vous que la cantine scolaire permet de 
réduire la faim
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
402 [Keun Faaba]
Pensez-vous que grâce la cantine scolaire les 
enfants sont plus attentifs ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
403 [Keun Faaba] [Q402 = Non]
Si non, Pourquoi ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Ils ne peuvent pas se concentrer
• Ils sont fatigués
• Ils ont mal au ventre
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
404 [Keun Faaba] [Q402 = Oui]
Si oui, Pourquoi
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Ils sont plus éveillés
• Ils sont rassasiés
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
• Autre, préciser : _________
5. Santé, hygiène
501 Dans quelles proportions pensez-vous que vos 
élèves connaissent les règles d’hygiène 
importantes ?
[NB : Se laver les mains, utiliser du savon, laver ce 
que l’on mange, utiliser les latrines] 
o Presque tous (80 à 100%)
o La plupart (60 à 80 %)
o La moitié (40 à 60%)
o Une faible part (20 à 40%)
o Très peu (0 à 20%)
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
502 Dans quelles proportions pensez-vous que vos 
élèves mettent ces règles en pratique ?
o Presque tous (80 à 100%)
o La plupart (60 à 80 %)
o La moitié (40 à 60%)
o Une faible part (20 à 40%)
o Très peu (0 à 20%)
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
503 [Q502 <50%] • Ils ne connaissent pas les règles d’hygiène
• Cela ne les intéresse pas
• Ils pensent que cela ne sert à rien
184
Nº Question Réponse
Pour quelles raisons vos élèves ne mettent pas les 
règles d’hygiène en pratique ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Ils n’ont pas accès à l’eau
• Ils n’ont pas accès au savon/cendre
• Ils n’ont pas conscience des risques
• Ils sont trop jeunes
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
507 [Keun Faaba] 
Pensez-vous que Keun Faaba consacre plus 
d'efforts à l'hygiène durant cette deuxième phase 
du projet (Démarrage réel sept 2019) ?
• Oui, vraiment
• Oui, plus ou moins
• Non, pas vraiment
• Non, pas du tout
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
508 [Keun Faaba] 
Selon vous quelles activités 
Hygiène/Assainissement fonctionnent bien au sein 
de votre école ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Club ami de l’hygiène actif
• Bonne formation des membres du Club ami de 
l’hygiène
• Bonne restitution des enseignements aux autres 
élèves
• Bon suivi des clubs ami de l’hygiène par les 
enseignants 
• Tippy Tap situés près des classes en bon état
• Tippy Tap situés près des latrines en bon état
• Tippy Tap ont toujours de l’eau
• Tippy Tap utilisés correctement par les élèves
• Utilisation du savon au Tippy Tap
• Les Tippy Tap 
• La communauté est impliquée dans le maintien 
en état des Tippy Tap
• L’école dispose d’un accès à l’eau
• Le matériel de transport de l’eau est lavé 
régulièrement avec du savon
• De l’eau disponible dans la classe
• L’eau disponible dans la classe est potable
• L’eau est traitée avec des aquatabs
• L’eau est testée pour vérifier qu’elle est potable
• Les élèves ne partagent pas les gobelets
• Les autorités locales se soucient de la qualité de 
l’eau
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
6. Participation au projet
600 [Keun Faaba] 
Votre école est-t-elle située dans un village 
bénéficiant d'un programme d'ATPC ?
o Oui
o Non
601 [Keun Faaba] o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
185
Nº Question Réponse
Êtes-vous satisfait des activités menées par le 
programme Keun Faaba pour améliorer 
l'enseignement de la lecture à l'école ?
602 [Keun Faaba] 
Quel est votre niveau d’implication dans le 
programme Keun Faaba pour améliorer 
l'enseignement de la lecture à l'école ?
o Très élevé
o Élevé
o Modéré
o Faible
o Inexistant
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
603 [Keun Faaba]
Concernant le programme Keun Faaba pour 
améliorer l'enseignement de la lecture à l'école, 
souhaiteriez-vous être :
o Plus impliqué
o Maintenir le même niveau d’implication
o Moins impliqué
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
604 [Keun Faaba]
Êtes-vous satisfait des activités menées par le 
programme Keun Faaba pour améliorer le soutien 
scolaire dans la communauté ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
605 [Keun Faaba]
Quel est votre niveau d’implication dans le 
programme Keun Faaba pour soutenir l’éducation 
dans la communauté ?
o Très élevé
o Élevé
o Modéré
o Faible
o Inexistant
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
606 [Keun Faaba]
Concernant le programme Keun Faaba de soutien 
l’éducation dans la communauté, souhaiteriez￾vous être :
o Plus impliqué
o Maintenir le même niveau d’implication
o Moins impliqué
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
607 [Keun Faaba] 
tes-vous satisfait des activités menées par le 
programme Keun Faaba pour améliorer l'hygiène à 
l'école ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
608 [Keun Faaba]
Quel est votre niveau d’implication dans le 
programme Keun Faaba pour améliorer l'hygiène à 
l'école?
o Très élevé
o Élevé
o Modéré
o Faible
o Inexistant
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
609 [Keun Faaba] o Plus impliqué
o Maintenir le même niveau d’implication
o Moins impliqué
186
Nº Question Réponse
Concernant le programme Keun Faaba Faaba pour 
améliorer l'hygiène à l'école, souhaiteriez-vous 
être :
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
610 [Keun Faaba] [Q600 = Oui]
Êtes-vous satisfait des activités menées par le 
programme Keun Faaba pour améliorer l'hygiène 
en dehors de l'école ? [ATPC]
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
611 [Keun Faaba]
Que pensez-vous de l’utilité des émissions 
radiophoniques sur l’utilisation des livrets et 
décodables mises en place pour soutenir 
l’éducation pendant la crise de la Covid ?
o Oui, vraiment utile
o Oui, plus ou moins utile
o Non, pas vraiment utile
o Non, pas du tout utile
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
612 [Keun Faaba]
Pensez-vous que grâce à ces activités les élèves 
pourront rattraper le retard ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
613 [Keun Faaba]
Pensez-vous que le programme Keun Faaba vous a 
permis de rester impliqué avec votre école 
pendant la crise de la Covid
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
614 [Keun Faaba]
Que pensez-vous de l’utilité de la distribution de 
rations mises en place pour soutenir l’alimentation 
pendant la crise de la Covid ?
o Oui, vraiment utile
o Oui, plus ou moins utile
o Non, pas vraiment utile
o Non, pas du tout utile
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
615 [Keun Faaba]
Pensez-vous que les activités du projet ont affectés 
les élèves garçons et les élèves filles 
différemment ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
616 [Keun Faaba] [Q615 = Oui]
De quelle manière ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Les filles participent plus en classe
• Les garçons participent plus en classe
• Les filles prennent en charge plus de tâches 
dans le cadre de l’approvisionnement en eau
• Les garçons prennent en charge plus de tâches 
dans le cadre de l’approvisionnement en eau
• Les filles prennent en charge plus de tâches 
dans le cadre de l’hygiène
• Les garçons prennent en charge plus de tâches 
dans le cadre de l’hygiène
187
Nº Question Réponse
• Les filles assistent plus volontier à l'heure de 
conte
• Les garcons assistent plus volontier à l'heure de 
conte
• Autre, préciser ___________
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
7. Commentaires
701 Faites-nous part de vos commentaires, si vous en avez éventuellement ?
702 En tant que l’intervieweur, veuillez fournir des commentaires supplémentaires (par exemple, problèmes, 
clarifications, commentaires).
Merci beaucoup d’avoir pris le temps de répondre ce sondage.
Fin du questionnaire
188
QUESTIONNAIRE – PARENTS
Cette section doit être remplie par l’intervieweur
Date : (JJ-MM-AAAA)
Nom de l’intervieweur : (Spécifier)
Numéro d’énumérateur : (Spécifier)
Département : (Spécifier)
Commune : (Spécifier)
Numéro d’identification unique de l’école : (Spécifier)
Nom de l’école : (Spécifier)
École de Contrôle ou de Traitement : (Spécifier)
Bonjour. Je m’appelle __________________ et j’aide à mener l’évaluation à mi-parcours du programme 
Keun Faaba mis en œuvre par CRS. Je travaille avec Et4d une société mandatée par CRS. Nous faisons 
une étude et nous aimerions que vous y participiez. Je voudrais vous poser des questions sur vos 
enfants. Cette information nous aidera à évaluer les activités mises en œuvre par CRS pour améliorer les 
services d’éducation, fournir plus de nourriture et de médicaments, et améliorer la santé et l’hygiène. Le 
sondage prend normalement 20 minutes. Les informations que vous nous donnerez seront strictement 
confidentielles et ne sera pas montrées à d’autres personnes. Votre identité ne sera pas liée à vos 
réponses. Votre participation est volontaire et vous pouvez choisir de ne pas répondre à certaines 
questions, ou même à toutes les questions. Votre participation à de futurs programmes CRS ne dépend 
pas de vos réponses à cette enquête. Cependant, nous espérons que vous participerez à cette enquête 
puisque votre opinion est importante.
NB : Proposer au répondant de lui fournir les contacts de CRS s’il le désire
Maintenant, avez-vous des questions à poser sur le sondage ? [Laisser le temps pour poser des 
questions et répondre au besoin]
Me donnez-vous la permission de poursuivre l’interview ? Oui / Non
189
Nº Question Réponse
1. Caractéristiques du parent
100 Quelle langue parlez-vous principalement à la 
maison ?
o Français
o Dendi
o Bariba
o Peulh
o Boo
o Mokole
o Autre
101 Genre (regardezle parent et cochez) o Masculin
o Féminin
102 Quel âge avez-vous ? 
[NB : mettre 99 si la personne ne veut pas 
répondre]
_______ ans
103 Combien de personnes vivent avec vous, y compris 
vous-même ?
(NB : mettre 99 si la personne ne veut pas 
répondre)
______ personnes
104 Quel est votre niveau en français ? o Je parle couramment
o Je comprends et je parle assez bien 
o Je comprends et je parle un peu
o Je comprends un peu mais je ne parle pas
o Je ne parle pas le français
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
105 Quel est votre niveau en lecture en français ? o Je sais lire parfaitement
o Je sais lire assez bien
o Je sais lire un peu
o Je ne sais pas lire
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
106 Si non, y-a-t-il une autre personne dans votre 
famille (vivant avec vous) qui lit couramment le 
Français ?
o Oui 
o Non
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
107 Quel est votre niveau d’éducation ? o Aucun
o Primaire
o Cycle 1 secondaire
o Cycle 2 secondaire
o Cycle 1 supérieur.
o Cycle 2 supérieur
o Alphabétisé
o Autre 
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse 
108 Quelle est votre occupation principale ? o Sans emploi
o Ménagère
o Travail agricole
o Propriétaire foncier 
o Journalier(ière)
o Marchand(e) / Commerçant
190
Nº Question Réponse
o Travailleur(euse) de bureau
o Artisan(e) : Tisserant, forgeron, coiffeur…
o Retraité(e)
o Autre
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse 
109 Êtes-vous membre d'une association de parents 
d’élèves et ou de l’associations des mères 
d’élèves ?
• APE
• AME
• Aucune
2. Caractéristiques des enfants
201 Combien avez-vous de filles ?
(NB : mettre 99 si la personne ne veut pas 
répondre)
______ filles
202 [Q201 > 0]
Combien avez-vous de filles inscrites dans cette 
l’école primaire (ou groupe)?
______ filles
203 [Q201 > 0]
En quelle classe sont-elles ?
• Maternelle
• Cours d’Initiation (CI)
• Cours Préparatoire (CP)
• Cours élémentaire 1
• CE2
• CM1
• CM2
204 [Q201 > 0]
Comment qualifiez-vous les résultats scolaires de 
vos filles ?
o Très bons
o Bons
o Moyens
o Mauvais
o Très mauvais
205 Combien avez-vous de garçons ?
(NB : mettre 99 si la personne ne veut pas 
répondre)
______ garçons
206 [Q205 > 0]
Combien avez-vous de garçons inscrits dans cette 
l’école primaire (ou groupe) ?
______ garçons
207 [Q205 > 0]
En quelle classe sont-ils ?
• Maternelle
• Cours d’Initiation (CI)
• Cours Préparatoire (CP)
• Cours élémentaire 1
• CE2
• CM1
• CM2
208 [Q205 > 0] o Très bons
o Bons
191
Nº Question Réponse
Comment qualifiez-vous les résultats scolaires de 
vos garçons ?
o Moyens
o Mauvais
o Très mauvais
3. Pratiques Hygiène - Santé
301 Combien de fois par jour votre enfant scolarisé le 
plus jeune se lave-t’il les mains ?
o 6 fois ou plus
o 3 à 5 fois
o 1 à 2 fois
o Jamais
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
302 A quelle occasion votre enfant scolarisé le plus 
jeune se lave-t’il les mains ? (Cochez toutes les 
réponses qui s’appliquent)
(NB : Ne donner pas les réponses - Assurez-vous de 
demander s’ils connaissent d’autres réponses.)
• Après défécation 
• Avant de manger
• Après avoir mangé 
• Après le nettoyage des latrines 
• Après avoir travaillé dans les champs
• Jamais
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
• Autre, préciser : _________
303 Qu’utilise-t-il pour se laver les mains ? 
(NB : Ne donner pas les réponses - Assurez-vous de 
demander s’ils connaissent d’autres réponses.)
• Savon
• Liquide vaisselle
• Cendre 
• Feuilles de citronnier
• Ne se lave pas les mains
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
• Autre, préciser : _________
304 Votre enfant scolarisé le plus jeune sait-il si quand 
l’eau est potable ou non potable ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
305 Quand ils ne sont pas à l’école, où vos enfants 
vont-ils déféquer ?
[NB : Si plusieurs enfants, demander la réponse 
pour l'enfant scolarisé le plus jeune]
• Dans les latrines de ma maison
• Dans les latrines de l’école
• Dans les latrines partagées avec le voisin
• Dans les latrines communautaires
• Dans un pot
• Dans la cour de ma maison
• Dans la brousse
• Dans le jardin
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
• Autre, préciser : _________
4. Programme Feedback
401 [Keun Faaba] 
Pensez-vous que la cantine scolaire permet de 
réduire la faim ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
402 [Keun Faaba] 
Que pensez-vous de l’utilité des émissions 
radiophoniques sur l’utilisation des livrets et 
o Oui, vraiment utile
o Oui, plus ou moins utile
o Non, pas vraiment utile
o Non, pas du tout utile
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
192
Nº Question Réponse
décodables mises en place pour soutenir 
l’éducation pendant la crise de la Covid ?
403 [Keun Faaba]
Que pensez-vous de l’utilité de la distribution de 
rations mises en place pour soutenir l’alimentation 
pendant la crise de la Covid ?
o Oui, vraiment utile
o Oui, plus ou moins utile
o Non, pas vraiment utile
o Non, pas du tout utile
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
404 L'absentéisme des enseignants est-il un problème 
récurrent dans l’école de vos enfants ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
405 [Q404 = Oui]
Quelles sont les principales raisons qui expliquent 
l’absentéisme des enseignants ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• Grève
• Maladie (de soi)
• Maladie du membre de la famille
• Raison administrative (aller à la banque, 
chercher des papiers administratifs, etc.)
• Formation
• Réunion de travail
• Fête (prolongation)
• Cérémonie (funérailles, naissance, mariage)
• Problème de transport
• Manque de motivation
• Travail trop pénible
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
• Autre, préciser : _________
406 [Keun Faaba] 
Pensez-vous que les certificats de mérite remis aux 
enseigants assidus soit une mesure efficace pour 
réduire les absences des enseignants ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
407 [Keun Faaba] 
Pensez-vous que l'implication de l'APE et de l'AME 
soit une méthode efficace pour réduire 
l’absentéisme ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
408 Quelles méthodes suggérez-vous pour réduire 
l'absentéisme des enseignants?
• Augmenter les salaires
• Mettre en place un système de pénalité
• Diminuer les effectifs
• Améliorer le système des affectations
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
• Autre, préciser: _________
5. Importance de l’éducation
501 Quelle importance accordez-vous à l’éducation 
scolaire de vos garçons ?
o Très important
o Important
o Peu important
o Pas du tout important
193
Nº Question Réponse
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
502 Quelle importance accordez-vous à l’éducation 
scolaire de vos filles ?
o Très important
o Important
o Peu important
o Pas du tout important
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
503 [Keun Faaba] 
Avez-vous participé à des groupes 
d’écoute organisé par Alafia ou Derana?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
504 [Keun Faaba] [Q503 = Oui]
Que pensez-vous de l’utilité des groupes 
d’écoute ?
o Très utile
o Assez utile
o Peu utile
o Pas du tout utile
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
505 Avez-vous entendu les annonces radiophoniques, 
qui parle de l’importance de l’éducation ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
506 Que pensez-vous de l’utilité des annonces radio 
sur l’importances de l’éducation ?
o Très utile
o Assez utile
o Peu utile
o Pas du tout utile
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
6. Implication dans la vie scolaire
601 Vous-même (ou autres membres de la famille 
racontez-vous des histoires à vos enfants ?
[NB : Quelque-soit la langue]
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
602 [Q601 = Oui]
Avec quelle fréquence ?
o Tous les jours
o 2 à 3 fois par semaine
o 1 fois par semaine
o Quelque fois par mois
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
603 Vous-même (ou autres membres de la famille) 
aidez-vous vos enfants pour leurs devoirs ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
604 Si oui, pour quels types d’activité ? • Lire des lettres 
• Lire des mots
• Lire un texte
• Mathématiques
• Faire réciter les leçons
• Aide aux devoirs
• Autre, préciser : _________
605 [Q604 = Non]
Pourquoi ?
• Les parents ne s’intéressent pas à l’école
• Les parents pensent que ce n’est pas leur rôle
• Les parents n’ont pas le temps
• Les parents pensent que cela ne sert à rien
• Les parents ne savent pas comment les aider ?
• Les parents ne parlent pas assez bien le Français
194
Nº Question Réponse
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses] • Les parents ne savent pas lire
• Autre, préciser : _________
606 Est-ce que vous avez personnellement fait des 
activités de lecture avec vos enfants dans les 3 
derniers jours ??
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
607 Est-ce que quelqu’un d’autre dans votre foyer a 
fait des activités de lecture avec vos enfants dans 
les 3 derniers jours ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
608 Vos enfants ont-ils déjà reçu l’aide de quelqu’un ? 
Si oui de qui ?
• Oui, un membre de la famille
• Oui, un groupe de soutien organisé par les 
parents 
• Oui, un tuteur/ répétiteur personnel (payant)
• Oui, un groupe d’étude (payant)
• Oui, Autres spécifier
• Non
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
7. Implication dans le projet Keun Faaba
700 [Keun Faaba] 
Votre école est-t-elle située dans un village 
bénéficiant d'un programme d'ATPC ?
ATPC: Assainissment Total Piloté par la 
Communauté (Uniquement Gogounou)
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sais/Pas de réponse
701 [Keun Faaba]
Êtes-vous satisfait des activités menées par le 
programme Keun Faaba pour améliorer 
l'enseignement de la lecture à l'école ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
702 [Keun Faaba]
Êtes-vous satisfait des activités menées par le 
programme Keun Faaba pour soutenir l’éducation 
dans la communauté ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
703 [Keun Faaba] 
Quel est votre niveau d’implication dans le 
programme Keun Faaba pour soutenir l’éducation 
dans la communauté ?
o Très élevé
o Élevé
o Modéré
o Faible
o Inexistant
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
704 [Keun Faaba] o Plus impliqué
o Maintenir le même niveau d’implication
195
Nº Question Réponse
Concernant le programme Keun Faaba de soutien à 
l’éducation dans la communauté, souhaiteriez￾vous être :
o Moins impliqué
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
705 [Keun Faaba] 
Parmi les activités menées par Keun Faaba dans la 
communauté, lesquelles ont lieu régulièrement 
dans votre village au cours du 1er trimestre ?
• Programme de radio hebdomadaire
• L’heure de conte par APE/AME
• Bibliothèque gérée par APE/AME
• Groupe d’étude
• Aucune/N’a pas connaissance d’activités extra￾scolaires
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
706
S
[Keun Faaba] 
A quelles activités participent vos enfants ?
• Programme de radio hebdomadaire
• L’heure de conte par APE/AME
• Bibliothèque gérée par APE/AME
• Groupe d’étude
• Aucune/N’a pas connaissance d’activités extra￾scolaires
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
706
P
[Keun Faaba] 
A quelles activités avez pris part personnellement?
• Distribution de livres aux APE/AME
• Programme de radio hebdomadaire
• L’heure de conte par APE/AME
• Bibliothèque gérée par APE/AME
• Scéance d’écoute sur l’importance de la lecture
• Groupe d’étude
• Aucune/N’a pas connaissance d’activités extra￾scolaires
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
707 [Keun Faaba] 
Selon vous quels problèmes limitent la 
participation de vos enfants à ces activités ?
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses]
• L’AME/APE n’a pas créé la bibliothèque
• Il n’y a pas assez de livres dans la bibliothèque
• Les livres ont été endommagés
• Les parents n’ont pas connaissance des 
émissions de radio
• Les émissions de radio n’ont pas lieu 
régulièrement
• Les enfants ne sont pas intéressés
• Les enfants ont d’autres tâches à accomplir
• Les horaires ne nous conviennent pas ?
• Aucun
• Autre, préciser : _________
708 [Keun Faaba] 
Êtes-vous satisfait des activités menées par le 
programme Keun Faaba pour améliorer l'hygiène à 
l'école ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
709 [Keun Faaba] [QT600 = Oui]
Êtes-vous satisfait des activités menées par le 
programme Keun Faaba pour améliorer l'hygiène 
en dehors de l'école ? [ATPC]
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
196
Nº Question Réponse
710 [Keun Faaba] 
Êtes-vous satisfait des activités menées par le 
programme Keun Faaba pour la cantine scolaire ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
711 [Keun Faaba] 
Dans quelles activités êtes-vous personnellement 
impliquées ?
• Cuisine-Cantine scolaire
• Magasin
• Culture du jardin 
• Ferme communautaire
• Comité Hygiène - Club ami de l'hygiène
• Construction / Réparation salles de classe
• Construction / Réparation latrines
• Évènement autour de la lecture
• ATPC
• Bibliothèque
• Soutien scolaire (aide aux devoir)
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
• Autre, préciser
712 [Keun Faaba]
Êtes-vous satisfait de votre engagement dans le 
programme Keun Faaba ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
713 [Keun Faaba] 
Souhaiteriez-vous participer plus activement au 
programme Keun Faaba ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sais / Pas de réponse
714 [Keun Faaba] 
Que faudrait-il faire pour vous encourager à 
participer plus ?
[NB : ne pas donner les réponses]
• Donner des repas aux parents actifs
• Donner des denrées alimentaires aux parents 
actifs
• Présenter des résultats de Keun Faaba
• Apporter plus de formation aux parents
• Améliorer la collaboration entre les enseignants 
et les parents
• Donner aux parents plus d'information sur les 
activités
• Demander aux parents d'être plus actifs
• Sensibiliser les parents sur l'importance du 
projet
• Payer les bénévoles
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
• Autre, préciser ___________
8. Socio-économique
801 Quel type de sol y-a-t-il dans votre maison ?
[NB : Lister les options]
o Terre
o Bois
o Ciment ou carrelage
o Ne sais pas / Pas de réponse
197
Nº Question Réponse
802 Avec quoi cuisine-t-on dans votre maison ?
[NB : Lister les options]
o Bois que vous ramassez
o Bois ou du charbon, que vous achetez
o Gaz
o Électricité
o Ne sais pas / Pas de réponse
803 Avez-vous une radio dans votre maison ? o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
804 Avez-vous une télévision dans votre maison ? o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
805 Est-ce qu’un membre de ta famille a un téléphone 
portable ? 
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
9. Commentaires
901 Faites-nous part de vos commentaires, si vous en avez éventuellement ?
902 En tant que l’intervieweur, veuillez fournir des commentaires supplémentaires (par exemple, problèmes, 
clarifications, commentaires).
Merci beaucoup d’avoir pris le temps de répondre ce sondage.
Fin du questionnaire
198
QUESTIONNAIRE – CUISINIER / MAGASINIER
Cette section doit être remplie par l’intervieweur
Date : (JJ-MM-AAAA)
Nom de l’intervieweur : (Spécifier)
Numéro d’énumérateur : (Spécifier)
Département : (Spécifier)
Commune : (Spécifier)
Numéro d’identification unique de l’école : (Spécifier)
Nom de l’école : (Spécifier)
École de Contrôle ou de Traitement : (Spécifier)
Bonjour. Je m’appelle __________________ et j’aide à mener l’évaluation à mi-parcours du programme 
Keun Faaba mis en œuvre par CRS. Je travaille avec Et4d une société mandatée par CRS. Nous menons 
un sondage et nous aimerions que vous y participiez. Je voudrais vous poser des questions sur la cuisine 
et le magasin. Cette information nous aidera à évaluer les activités mises en œuvre par CRS pour 
améliorer les services d’éducation, fournir plus de nourriture et de médicaments, et améliorer la santé 
et l’hygiène. Le sondage prend normalement 15 minutes. L’information que vous nous donnerez sera 
strictement confidentielle et ne sera pas montrée à d’autres personnes. Votre identité ne sera pas liée à 
vos réponses. Votre participation est volontaire et vous pouvez choisir de ne pas répondre à certaines 
questions, ou même à toutes les questions. Votre participation à de futurs programmes CRS ne dépend 
pas de vos réponses à cette enquête. Cependant, nous espérons que vous participerez à cette enquête 
puisque votre opinion est importante
NB : Proposer au répondant de lui fournir les contacts de CRS s’il le désire
Maintenant, avez-vous des questions à poser sur le sondage ? [Laisser le temps pour poser des 
questions et répondre au besoin]
Me donnez-vous la permission de poursuivre l’interview ? Oui / Non
199
Nº Question Réponse
1. Caractéristiques du parent
101 Genre (regardezle parent et cochez) o Masculin
o Féminin
102 Quel âge avez-vous ? 
[NB : mettre 99 si la personne ne veut pas 
répondre]
_______ ans
103 Combien d’enfants avez-vous dans l’école primaire 
(ou le groupe ? 
______ enfants
104 Quel est votre rôle au sein du programme Keun 
Faaba ?
• Cuisinier
• Magasinier
105 Quel est votre niveau en Français ? o Je parle couramment
o Je comprends et je parle assez bien 
o Je comprends et je parle un peu
o Je comprends un peu mais je ne parle pas
o Je ne parle pas le français
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
106 Quel est votre niveau en lecture en Français? o Je sais lire parfaitement
o Je sais lire assez bien
o Je sais lire un peu
o Je ne sais pas lire
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
107 Quel est votre niveau en calcul ? o Je sais très bien faire des calculs
o Je sais assez bien fairedes calculs
o Je sais un peu faire des calculs
o Je ne sais pas faire des calculs
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
2. Information sur la cuisine
201 Depuis combien de temps participez-vous à la 
préparation des repas ?
o Moins d’1 an 
o 1 an
o 2 ans
o 3 ans
o 4 ans et plus
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
202 Avec quelle fréquence intervenez-vous pour 
préparer les repas ?
o Tous les jours (5 jours sur 5)
o Presque tous les jours (4 jours sur 5)
o 1 à 3 fois par semaine
o 1 à 3 fois par mois
o Moins d’une fois par mois
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
203 Pourquoi prenez-vous part à cette activité 
bénévole ? 
• Pour permettre aux enfants d’avoir un repas
• Parce que le directeur me l’a demandé
• Pour être avec d’autres parents
• Pour être proche de mes enfants
• Pour recevoir une compensation
• Je remplace un autre parent
200
Nº Question Réponse
[NB : Ne pas donner les réponses] • Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
• Autre, préciser : _________
204 Avez-vous reçu une forme de compensation pour 
votre travail ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
205 [Q204 = Oui]
Quelle est la nature de cette compensation ?
• Compensation financière
• Huile (1 fois par mois)
• Repas (Chaque jour travaillé)
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
• Autre, préciser_______
206 [Q204 = Oui]
Etes-vous satisfait de cette compensation ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
207 [Q204 = Oui]
Seriez-vous prêts à continuer sans cette 
compensation ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
208 [Q206 = Non]
Quelles modifications devraient être apportées au 
système de compensation ?
• Compensation financière
• De l’huile ou plus d’huile
• Des repas ou plus de repas
• Ration sèche
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
• Autre, préciser_______
209 Êtes-vous satisfait de votre engagement dans le 
programme Keun Faaba ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
210 [Q209 = Oui]
Pourquoi ?
[NB : Ne pas lire les réponses]
• Je suis content(e) d’aider
• J’aime être avec d’autres parents
• Pour l’huile que l’on nous donne
• Pour les repas que l’on nous donne
• Pour l’argent que l’on nous donne
• Parce que j’aime sortir de chez moi
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse 
• Autre, préciser : _________
211 [Q209 = Non], Si non. Pourquoi ?
[NB : Ne pas lire les réponses]
• Cela prend trop de temps
• Nous ne recevons pas de compensation
• Nous ne recevons pas assez de compensation
• Je dois toujours remplacer les absents
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse 
• Autre, préciser : _________
3. Information sur le magasin
301 Depuis combien de temps participez-vous à la 
gestion du magasin ?
o Moins d’1 an 
o 1 an
o 2 ans
o 3 ans
o 4 ans et plus
201
Nº Question Réponse
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
302 Avec quelle fréquence intervenez-vous pour la 
gestion des stocks ?
o Tous les jours (5 jours sur 5)
o Presque tous les jours (4 jours sur 5)
o 1 à 3 fois par semaine
o 1 à 3 fois par mois
o 1 à 3 fois par ans
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
303 Pourquoi prenez-vous part à cette activité 
bénévole ? 
[NB : Ne pas lire les réponses]
• Pour permettre aux enfants d’avoir un repas
• Parce que le directeur me l’a demandé
• Pour être avec d’autres parents
• Pour être proche de mes enfants
• Pour recevoir une compensation
• Je remplace un autre parent
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
• Autre, préciser : _________
304 Avez-vous reçu une forme de compensation pour 
votre travail ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
305 [Q304 = Oui]
Quelle est la nature de cette compensation ?
• Compensation financière
• Huile (1 fois par mois)
• Repas (Chaque jour travaillé)
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
• Autre, préciser_______
306 [Q304 = Oui]
Etes-vous satisfait par cette compensation ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
307 [Q304 = Oui]
Seriez-vous prêts à continuer sans cette 
compensation ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
308 [Si Non 306], quelles modifications devraient être 
apportées au système de compensation ?
• Compensation financière
• De l’huile ou plus d’huile
• Des repas ou plus de repas
• Ration sèche
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
• Autre, préciser_______
309 Rencontrez-vous des difficultés particulières pour 
faire les calculs liés à la gestion des stocks ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
310 Rencontrez-vous des difficultés particulières dans 
l'utilisation des documents de gestion de stock ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
202
Nº Question Réponse
311 Êtes-vous satisfait de votre engagement dans le 
programme Keun Faaba ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
312 [Q311 = Oui] 
Pourquoi ?
[NB : Ne pas lire les réponses]
• Je suis content(e) d’aider
• J’aime être avec d’autres parents
• Pour l’huile que l’on nous donne
• Pour les repas que l’on nous donne
• Pour l’argent que l’on nous donne
• Parce que j’aime sortir de chez moi
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse 
• Autre, préciser : _________
313 [Q311 = Non] 
Pourquoi ?
[NB : Ne pas lire les réponses]
• Cela prend trop de temps
• Nous ne recevons pas de compensation
• Nous ne recevons pas assez de compensation
• Je dois toujours remplacer les absents
• Autre, préciser : _________
4. Commentaires
401 Faites-nous part de vos commentaires, si vous en avez éventuellement ?
402 En tant que l’intervieweur, veuillez fournir des commentaires supplémentaires (par exemple, problèmes, 
clarifications, commentaires).
Merci beaucoup d’avoir pris le temps de répondre ce sondage.
Fin du questionnaire
203
OUTIL D’OBSERVATION DE L’ECOLE 1
1. Cantine - Magasin
100 Nombre d’écoles dans le goupement, qui partage les latrines ___
101 L’école a-telle une cantine ? o Oui
o Oui, mais à l'air libre
o Non
102 [#Q01=oui]
La cantine est-elle bien équipée ?
o Oui, très bien
o Oui, plutôt
o Assez bien
o Pas, vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
103 [Q101=oui]
La cantine est-elle propre ?
o Oui, très bien
o Oui, plutôt
o Assez bien
o Pas, vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
104 L’école dispose-t-elle d’un magasin ? o Oui
o Oui, mais non-accessible 
fermé)
o Non
105 [Q104=oui]
Le magasin est-il propre ?
o Oui, très bien
o Oui, plutôt
o Assez bien
o Pas, vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
106 [Q104=oui]
Le magasin est-il bien rangé ?
o Oui, très bien
o Oui, plutôt
o Assez bien
o Pas, vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
107 Nombre de latrines dont dispose l’école /______/
108 Nombre de latrines fonctionnelles /______/
109 Nombre de latrines femmes uniquement /______/
110 Les latrines sont-elles propres ? o Oui, très bien
o Oui, plutôt
o Assez bien
o Pas, vraiment
o Non, pas du tout
Commentaires:
204
OUTIL D’OBSERVATION DE L’ECOLE - 2
2. Hygiène
201 L’école a-t-elle accès à de l’eau ? o Oui, dans l’école
o Oui, à proximité de l’école
o Oui, mais loin de l’école
o Non
202 L’eau est-elle potable ? o Oui
o Non
203 Nombre de stations de lavage des mains dans l’école ? /______/
204 Les stations de lavage des mains ont-elles de l’eau ? o Presque tous (80 à 100%)
o La plupart (60 à 80 %)
o La moitié (40 à 60%)
o Une faible part (20 à 40%)
o Très peu (0 à 20%)
o Aucun
205 Les stations de lavage des mains ont-elles du savon (ou les cendres 
de remplacement localement acceptées) ?
o Presque tous (80 à 100%)
o La plupart (60 à 80 %)
o La moitié (40 à 60%)
o Une faible part (20 à 40%)
o Très peu (0 à 20%)
o Aucun
206 Pensez-vous que les stations de lavage des mains sont couramment 
utilisées ? 
o Oui, souvent
o Parfois
o Non, jamais
207 Personnellement, avez-vous vu des élèves qui utilisaient des stations 
de lavage des mains ?
o Oui, beaucoup
o Oui, quelques-uns
o Non
Commentaires:
205
Annex 7: Additional Health & Hygiene test results 
Table A12 provides the percentage of students correctly answering this question by commune. Please note that the sample was not drawn to 
provide actionable precision at the commune level. We urge prudence in interpreting these results and would urge CRS and partners not to 
make decisions based on this information. 
Table A12: Health and hygiene test results by question, according to commune
Question Commune
Gogounou Kalale Kandi Malanville
1) Un corps sale peut causer des maladies 90.0% 90.8% 88.0% 87.5%
2) Marcher pieds nus peut causer des maladies 82.1% 83.3% 86.7% 84.8%
3) La diarrhée ne peut pas causer la mort 45.8% 33.3% 38.4% 28.8%
4) La nourriture nous protège des maladies 70.8% 66.7% 68.8% 77.8%
5) Une alimentation qui ne contient que du pain, du riz et du 
maïs est équilibrée
35.4% 31.7% 24.3% 13.6%
6) Il est suffisant de laver le bidon qui contient l’eau à boire 
une fois par an
56.7% 48.3% 56.8% 52.9%
7) Le meilleur moyen d’éviter les maladies est de se laver les 
mains avec de l'eau et du savon avant de manger et après 
être allé aux toilettes
92.1% 96.7% 97.6% 98.1%
8) Les élèves peuvent rendre l'école propre 99.6% 100.0% 97.6% 98.4%
9) On se brosse les dents uniquement pour que notre bouche 
sente bon
15.4% 35.0% 4.0% 4.3%
10) Pour être fort, il suffit de manger beaucoup de maïs 17.5% 18.3% 14.9% 7.8%
206
Table A13: Health and hygiene test results by question, project vs. control schools
Item Control Project
1) Un corps sale peut causer des
maladies
89.6% 88.7%
2) Marcher pieds nus peut causer
des maladies
83.1% 84.7%
3) La diarrhée ne peut pas causer la
mort
43.7% 37.1%
4) La nourriture nous protège des
maladies
70.3% 71.4%
5) Une alimentation qui ne contient
que du pain, du riz et du maïs est
équilibrée
30.3% 25.1%
6) Il est suffisant de laver le bidon
qui contient l’eau à boire une fois
par an
51.1% 54.7%
7) Le meilleur moyen d’éviter les
maladies est de se laver les mains
avec de l'eau et du savon avant de
manger et après être allé aux
toilettes
96.8% 96.3%
8) Les élèves peuvent rendre l'école
propre
97.5% 98.6%
9) On se brosse les dents
uniquement pour que notre bouche
sente bon
19.3% 10.6%
10) Pour être fort, il suffit de
manger beaucoup de maïs
17.1% 14.1%
 
 
207
Annex 8: COVID Protocol for Data Collection 
Mesures de protection contre les COVID-19 à mettre en œuvre pendant la formation :
• En début de journée, la température sera prise à l'arrivée pour tous les participants à la 
formation. 
• Chaque participant et formateur devra, au début de la journée, compléter le screening pour le 
dépistage des symptômes de COVID-19 en répondant aux questions suivantes :
• Avez-vous Fièvre (37,7 °C ou plus si pris par voie axillaire/sous le bras) ou sensation de 
fièvre (frissons, transpiration) ?
• Toussez-vous (pour les personnes souffrant de toux chronique, changement de la toux 
par rapport à la normale pour elles) ?
• Avez-vous Troubles respiratoires ?
• Avez-vous Mal de gorge ?
• Avez-vous douleurs musculaires ou corporelles ?
• Avez-vous vomissements ou diarrhée ?
• Avez-vous une nouvelle perte de goût ou d’odeur ?
• Quiconque souffre même d'une toux légère ou d'une fièvre de faible intensité (37,5 ° C ou plus) 
devra appeler le numéro téléphonique 136 et rester à la maison pendant au moins deux 
semaines après la disparition des symptômes. 
• Si l'un des participants à la formation présente des symptômes de type grippal en début de 
journée, il ne doit pas se rendre à la formation. Il doit appeler M Appolinaire Appalo pour 
informer les formateurs de son absence
• Les participants à la formation recevront des masques faciaux et du désinfectant pour les mains 
à utiliser pendant la formation. Le port de masque est obligatoire pendant la formation. Pendant 
la première session de formation un module sera inclus sur la manière correcte de porter un 
masque facial.
• Les participants devront se les mains pendant 20 secondes à un poste de lavage des mains placé 
à l'extérieur de la salle de formation avant de rentrer dans la salle et périodiquement dans la 
journée.
• Dans la salle de formation, une distance de minimum 1 mètre sera maintenue en permanence 
entre les participants afin d'assurer une distanciation sociale
• Dans la mesure du possible, les séances d'entraînement auront lieu dans un espace extérieur 
• Les participants à la formation recevront du matériel de formation qui sera clairement étiqueté 
pour minimiser les échanges entre les participants. 
• Les stimuli pour enfants (pour les enquêteurs EGRA) seront étiquetés pour minimiser l'échange 
entre les participants et essuyés à l’aide d’une lingette imprégnée de désinfectant tout au long 
de la journée pendant les sessions de pratique.
• La liste de présence sera établie avant la pause-café. Chaque participant doit signer avec son 
propre stylo et juste après se lever pour aller se laver les mains. 
• Le mêmes mesures seront suivies par les formateurs et le staff administratif.
208
Mesures de protection contre les COVID-19 à mettre en œuvre pendant la collecte des 
données :
• Chaque équipe de collecte recevra un thermomètre pour mesurer la température des membres 
de l’équipes et des participants aux entretiens.
• Chaque membre de l'équipe recevra un spray désinfectant à utiliser pour désinfecter les espaces 
de travail et le matériel de travail.
• En début de journée, le chef d’équipe sera chargé de mesurer la température de tous les 
membres de l'équipe.
• Chaque évaluateur et superviseur devra, au début de la journée, compléter le screening pour le 
dépistage des symptômes de COVID-19 en répondant aux questions suivantes :
• Avez-vous Fièvre (37,7 °C ou plus si pris par voie axillaire/sous le bras) ou sensation de 
fièvre (frissons, transpiration) ?
• Toussez-vous (pour les personnes souffrant de toux chronique, changement de la toux 
par rapport à la normale pour elles) ?
• Avez-vous Troubles respiratoires ?
• Avez-vous Mal de gorge ?
• Avez-vous douleurs musculaires ou corporelles ?
• Avez-vous vomissements ou diarrhée ?
• Avez-vous une nouvelle perte de goût ou d’odeur ?
• Quiconque souffre même d'une toux légère ou d'une fièvre de faible intensité (37,5 ° C ou plus) 
doit appeler au numéro téléphonique 136 et des rester à la maison pendant au moins deux 
semaines après la disparition des symptômes. 
• Si l'un des membres de l’équipe présente des symptômes de type grippal en début de journée, il 
ne doit pas se rendre à l’école. Il doit appeler le chef d’équipe et M Appolinaire Appalo pour 
informer de son absence.
• Après avoir sélectionné les participants à l'entretien (directeur, enseignants, élèves de CE1, 
parents), le chef d'équipe mesurera leur température afin de s'assurer qu'ils peuvent participer 
à la collecte des données. Avant de démarrer l’entretien, l’évaluateur posera aussi les questions 
des dépistage COVID-19. La température des élèves sélectionnés pour participer à "l’observation 
de l'attention" sera prise à la fin de l'observation avant l'interview.
• Les évaluateurs EGRA, après avoir trouvé un bureau et 2 chaises à utiliser pour le test EGRA, 
nettoieront l'espace de travail à l'aide du spray désinfectant.
• Les évaluateurs EGRA nettoieront également les stimuli EGRA à la fin de chaque test, avant 
d'emmener le nouvel élève dans l'espace de travail.
• Il incombe à l’évaluateur de porter un nombre suffisant de masques faciaux pour la durée de la 
collecte des données. Si le l’évaluateur utilise un masque facial en tissu (non médical), il lui 
incombe de le laver quotidiennement. Le port de masque est obligatoire pendant la collecte des 
données.
• Pour les entretiens, une distance d'au moins un mètre sera respectée entre l’évaluateur et le 
l’interlocuteur.
209
Annex 9: Et4d Team members for mid-term 
evaluation 
Evaluation Director 
Isabelle McMahon, M.B.A.
Ms. Isabelle McMahon is an international development multilingual professional with over 25 years of 
experience. She is an evaluation expert with a vast experience in qualitative and mixed methods design 
and analysis, applied research, and promoting use of evidence-based findings for organizational learning 
and project improvement. Additionally, Ms. McMahon is very experienced with the planning, management 
and monitoring of data collection processes, integrating technology where effective, as well quality 
assurance procedures. Ms. McMahon led three USDA McGovern Dole impact evaluations. She also led 
six World Bank evaluations that were EGRA focused and recently led the evaluation of the USAID reading 
program in Mali (SIRA). She is a skilled strategic planner with great ability to conceptualize, innovate, plan 
and execute ideas and systems even under stressful conditions, while meeting deadlines. She is an excellent 
communicator. She expresses her ideas and concepts clearly and concisely in written, oral and visual form. 
Ms. McMahon has worked for USAID, the World Bank and other overseas foundations, international 
organizations, and donors. For CRS, she will act as project director and be the main point of contact. She 
will personally lead the enumerator training for the survey tools, the data collection in the Francophone 
region and the qualitative component. Ms. McMahon will ensure all key stakeholders contribute to the 
mid-term evaluation.
Senior Evaluation Expert and Education Lead
Karla Giuliano Sarr, Ph.D.
Dr. Karla Giuliano Sarr is fluent in French and has over 10 years of experience conducting research and 
evaluation, technical assistance and capacity building in international education. Dr. Sarr has worked on 
programs focusing on basic education, youth programming, multilingual education, education in crisis and 
conflict, community-school relationships, reading, girls' education, training and curriculum development. 
Dr. Sarr has lived and worked in West Africa in addition to conducting applied research and evaluation 
projects in the region as an international consultant. Dr. Sarr is currently serving as Team Leader for an 
independent evaluation of Nigeria’s progress towards Sustainable Development Goal 4 with UNICEF. She 
led studies for four USAID early grade reading programs in Ethiopia, Mali, Niger and Senegal. She also 
served as the principal investigator for the endline evaluation of a French-funded program to end school￾related gender-based violence in Cameroon, Senegal and Togo. In addition, Dr. Sarr has taught at both 
the middle school and graduate school levels, first as a Peace Corps Volunteer in Gabon and then also 
full-time at the School for International Training Graduate Institute where she continues to work as an 
adjunct professor. Dr. Sarr has a M.A. and Ed.D. in Educational Policy and Leadership from the University 
of Massachusetts-Amherst and a B.S. from Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service. 
For CRS, Dr. Karla Giuliano Sarr, as Senior Evaluation and Education Specialist, will advise the team in 
regard to instrument development and will lead the writing of the final evaluation report working closely 
with all team members. 
210
Data Analysis Lead
Michel Rousseau, Ph.D.
Professor Michel Rousseau, a native French speaker, has been a university professor since 2005. He 
teaches psychometrics, quantitative methods, and classroom assessment. Parallel to his work as a 
professor, he has also worked as a consultant for international development projects in many countries, 
mainly in Africa (Guinea, Senegal, Nigeria, Morocco, and Zambia). In those projects, he has worked on 
the development of assessment tests for impact evaluation as well as conducted test equating and other 
statistical analyses. With Et4d, he performed the data analysis for the PEARL project in the South Pacific 
for the early grade reading evaluations, Nascent Solutions’ endline and baseline evaluations in 
Cameroon and CRS Food for Education (Keun Faaba) baseline evaluation in Benin. Additionally, he is the 
founder of GAUSS, a consultant company in Quebec that offers services in the research and 
psychometrics fields. 
Professor Michel Rousseau will guide the Et4d team on all issues related to sampling and will conduct 
the quantitative analysis. 
Senior Nutrition and WASH Expert 
Noreen Mucha, M.P.A.
Ms. Noreen Mucha has over 17 years of experience working in international development, primarily 
focusing in the public health sector, but also within the agriculture and education sectors. Experience 
includes working with multiple donors, United Nations, host country governments, international non￾governmental organizations, think-tanks, U.S. military, research institutions and universities. Technical 
areas of expertise include nutrition (both specific and sensitive) to reduce stunting and acute 
malnutrition, infectious disease including HIV and AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis as well as orphans and 
vulnerable children programming. Ms. Mucha has experience with both qualitative and quantitative 
research and evaluations including performance evaluations, impact evaluations, household surveys. 
Ms. Mucha was the nutrition expert who was on a team to conduct a performance evaluation for the 
USG/USAID Feed the Future ‘Malawi Integrating Nutrition into Value Chains’ which included the 
development of data collection tools, key informant interviews and focus group discussions for women 
of reproductive age smallholder farmers. Noreen is currently working for a USAID-funded project in 
Zambia to assist the national government (the Zambia National Food and Nutrition Commission) to 
develop their national nutrition common results framework. Ms. Mucha has worked with et4D with 
several USDA-FFE evaluations and recently provided technical assistance to an NGO to develop the 
nutrition components for the MGD FFE program design for Mozambique. 
For CRS, as the Senior Nutrition and WASH expert, Ms. Noreen Mucha will advise the team in regard to 
the instrument development and write the evaluation report sections related to hygiene and nutrition.
EGRA Trainer, Quality Assurance and Survey Coordinator Lead
Alice Michelazzi
Ms. Alice Michelazzi is a fluent French speaker. She has led numerous data collection projects using 
technology in several African countries with leading firms such as Et4d, Chemonics, Edintersect, School 
to School International (STS) and Montrose. With STS, she led qualitative instrument design workshops 
and led the qualitative data collection using focus groups. In Tanzania she has been part of the baseline 
data collection for the first phase of the USDA FFE intervention in Mara Region implemented by PCI 
(2014). She also carried out the midline evaluation (2015). For Et4d, Ms. Michelazzi performed three 
EGRA enumerator training sessions for the PEARL project and coordinated the data collection in two 
211
countries. She was also the EGRA trainer for Nascent Solutions Inc. endline and baseline evaluation in 
Cameroon and CRS FFE baseline evaluation in Benin. 
Ms. Michelazzi will work with Ms. McMahon, Dr. Karla Giuliano Sarr and the CRS M&E team to develop 
or adapt the questionnaires and interview protocols. She will also render the questionnaires for digital 
devices. As the lead trainer, she will select and train the EGRA enumerators in Benin in collaboration 
with Ms. Isabelle McMahon. As the survey coordinator, she will also define the quality assurance 
protocols to be followed by the survey coordinator during data collection and supervise the data 
collection for EGRA, as well as the focus groups.
Survey Trainer and Field Coordinator
Appolinaire Appalo 
M. Appalo is Et4d’s local partner in Benin. M. Appalo graduated with a Master of Science in 
Mathematics, Economics and Statistics from the African School of Economics (ASE) in Benin. He has 
experience in various empirical work and in impact evaluation surveys. For the Gender Innovation Lab 
(GIL / World Bank) he has successfully managed the implementation of data collections both in Benin 
and in the Democratic Republic of Congo. He has conducted various studies in Benin as principal 
investigator including the setting up of internal mechanism for data collection, monitoring and 
evaluation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) assigned to the Ministry of Decentralization 
and Local Governance financed by German International organization (GIZ) and the External Monitoring 
of the Enumeration (EME) of the mosquito net free distribution project in Benin initiated by the National 
Malaria Control Program (PNLP-Benin) 2020 Edition. M. Appalo speaks five Beninese local languages and 
has skills on techniques required for management of enumerators for quality data collection and has 
working experience in the 12 regions of Benin. 
M. Appalo’s role will include the recruitment and management of the enumerators, performing FGD and 
KII with the Et4d team, quality control during data collection as well as performing administrative and 
organizational tasks. 
212
Annex 10: Statistical weighting & adjustment 
factors 
Sampling weights
In order to correct estimates for unequal probability of selection caused by clustering of the sample, we 
applied a two-step procedure for weighting the data. In the first step, base weights were computed for 
each dataset; and, in the second step, adjustment factors were applied to correct for non-participation 
of the selected subjects as well as selection within school.
The probability of inclusion of each student in strata s = {control urban, control rural, program urban, 
program rural} is:
π
𝑠 = [
𝑚𝑖
𝑠
∗ 𝑛
𝑠
𝑀𝑠
] ∗ [
𝑠
𝑠
𝑚𝑖
𝑠
] =
𝑠
𝑠
∗ 𝑛
𝑠
𝑀𝑠
Where
- gl
ab is the total enrollment of school i in strata s
- 𝑀𝑠
is the total enrollment of all schools in strata s
- 𝑛
𝑠
is the total number of schools sampled in strata s
- 𝑠
𝑠
is the number of students sampled per school in strata s
Thus, the school weight (inverse probability of selection) for strata s is: 
𝑊𝑠 = 1
𝜋
⁄ 𝑠 =
𝑀𝑠
𝑠
𝑠 ∗ 𝑛
𝑠
Adjustment factors
The probability of inclusion of participant type k = {teacher, parent, student (Grades 4-6)} in the teacher, 
parent, student attentiveness and WASH surveys, respectively is: 
𝜋
𝑘 =
𝑠
𝑘,𝑖
𝑀𝑘,𝑖
Where
- 𝑠
𝑘,𝑖
is the number of participant type k sampled in school i
- 𝑀𝑘,𝑖
is the total number of all participant type k in school i
Thus, the adjustment factor (inverse probability of selection) for participant type k is:
213
𝐴𝑘 = 1
𝜋
⁄ 𝑘 =
𝑀𝑘,𝑖
𝑠
𝑘,𝑖
Finally, for the EGRA reading assessment, the probability of selecting a non-repeating student of gender 
g = {male, female} from the 3rd grade of school i is:
𝜋
𝑔,𝑖 =
𝑠
𝑔,𝑖
𝑀𝑔,𝑖
Where
- 𝑠
𝑔,𝑖
is the number of non-repeating students of gender g sampled from the 3rd grade of 
school i
- 𝑀𝑔,𝑖
is the total number of non-repeating students of gender g in school i
Thus, the adjustment factor (inverse probability of selection) for EGRA reading scores are:
𝐴𝑔,𝑖 = 1
𝜋
⁄ 𝑔,𝑖 =
𝑀𝑔,𝑖
𝑠
𝑔,𝑖
Adjustment factors are multiplied by the respective school weight when weighting each observation.
 
214
Annex 11: Indicator analysis details 
Table A14: Data collection sources informing indicator results
Indicators Baseline Target Data collection tool
MGD INDICATOR 1: Percentage of students
who, by the end of two grades of primary
schooling, demonstrate that they can read
and understand the meaning of grade level
text
Benchmark: 60% (3/5 correct answers)
1% 10% EGRA, tool identical to baseline, which was
defined following the 2
nd edition of the
EGRA tool kit
Percentage of parents who report spending
time on literacy activities with their students
in the preceding three days
31.1% 45% Parent Questionnaire
Percentage of students in target schools who
are identified as attentive during
class/instruction
67.6% 75% Classroom observation tool
Percentage of schools with soap and water at
a hand washing station commonly used by
students
54.4% 68% School Observation
Percentage of students in target schools who
achieve a passing score on a test of good
health and hygiene practices
Passing Score: 70%
34% 40% Student questionnaire – Hygiene
Literacy Achievement Index 35 45 EGRA
MGD INDICATOR 2: Average student
attendance rate in USDA supported
classrooms/schools
88.2% 95% Student Attendance Sheets
215
Annex 12: Additional quantitative tables and 
graphs 
Table A15: WASH Clubs’ level of activity by zone (n=49)
Zone Yes, moderately active Yes, very active Total
Rural 3 20 23
13.04% 86.96% 100.00%
Urban 10 16 26
38.46% 61.54% 100.00%
Total 13 36 49
26.53% 73.47% 100.00%
p-value=0.044 – results are statistically significant
Figure A1: Student participation in Keun Faaba activities, according to parents (n=504)
43%
32%
22%
10%
2%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
None/No awareness of extra-curricular…
APE/AME Storyhour
Study group
Weekly radio program
Library run by AME/APE
216
Table A16: Comparison of control and project parents' responses to "Teacher absence is a recurring 
problem in your school"
L'absentéisme des
enseignants est-il un
problème récurrent
dans l'école de
Type_pl
Control Projet Total
Non, pas du tout 246 209 455
50.51% 42.39% 46.43%
Non, pas vraiment 144 175 319
29.57% 35.50% 32.55%
Oui, plus ou moins 63 41 104
12.94% 8.32% 10.61%
Oui, vraiment 34 68 102
6.98% 13.79% 10.41%
Total 487 493 980
100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
chi-square=21.973, df=3, p<0.000
217
Figure A2: Suggestions for improving teacher attendance from teachers, principals and parents
Figure A3: External factors hindering implementation at the school level according to principals (n=50)
78%
16%
22%
30%
6%
0%
12%
16%
4%
4%
48%
27%
25%
17%
14%
13%
8%
7%
6%
4%
38%
19%
38%
5%
5%
8%
7%
6%
2%
1%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Sensitization and awareness raising among teachers
Putting into place a penalty system
Raising salaries
Improving mobility system
Reduce class sizes
Review road conditions
Facilitate access to transportation resources for teachers
Principals must set the example with their own attendance
Provide appropriate materials for lesson plans
Stop sponsoring teachers
Principals (n=50) Teachers (n=100) Parents (n=1,028)
4.0%
4.0%
16.0%
18.0%
18.0%
22.0%
68.0%
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0%
Bad weather/flooding
Children falling in trance at school
Inhabitants of village damage the
equipment
Animals attacking the garden
None
Teacher absence
School closures
218
Table A17: Food groups consumed by children, control schools compared with project schools
Food Group Control Project p-value 
Seeds, roots and tubers 99.2% 99.1% 0.941
Pulses and nuts 47.6% 50.6% 0.416
Dairy products 22.8% 30.1% 0.019
Meat products 66.3% 70.2% 0.274
Eggs 6.2% 11.0% 0.004
Foods enriched in Vitamin A 91.8% 74.8% <0.00
Other fruits and vegetables 67.4% 55.1% 0.028
Table A18: Number of meals consumed by children, control schools compared to project schools
Number of meals Control Project 
0 0.1% 1.4%
1 0.5% 0.4%
2 19.8% 19.7%
3 79.6% 78.5%
p=0.593
219
Annex 13: Overview of literacy achievement 
index 
Apart from tracking reading performance using the McGovern-Dole FY17 strategic indicators and levels 
noted above, another way to measure progress is to develop a literacy achievement index, which is a 
point system that is used to measure how well a sample of students are performing. An index system 
measures achievement and changes in achievement along the performance distribution rather than the 
very narrow focus of a proficiency indicator. 
In the literacy achievement index below, each reading level is assigned points based on a scale ranging 
from 0 to 100, with 100 representing the fluent comprehending reader who meets the McGovern-Dole
FY17 benchmark (60% correct on Reading Comprehension) and 0 representing the non-reader. The 
point value for each reading level is illustrated below and increases in equal increments as students 
advance through the levels.
Table A19: Literacy achievement index point scale
Level Category Points
1 Non-Reader 0
2 Emerging Pre-Reader 25
3 Novice Reader 50
4 Intermediate Reader 75
5 Fluent Comprehending Reader 100
To determine the literacy achievement index of a given sample, we assigned points to each child for the 
highest level achieved and then computed a weighted average for the overall sample. For example, if 
none of the children could read any letters and were in the non-reader category, the literacy index 
would be zero. On the other hand, if all students met the reading comprehension benchmark of 60%, 
the literacy index value would be 100. For illustrative purposes, we provide the literacy indexes by 
school type, gender, commune and geographic location (urban/rural) in the subsequent sections.
 
220
Annex 14: Comprehensive EGRA Results 
IMPROVED LITERACY INDICATOR
Table A20: Proportion of Students Meeting the Improved Literacy Indicator
Control
%
Project
%
p-value
% of students meeting indicator 1.6% 0.8% 0.207
Table A21: Proportion of Students Meeting the Improved Literacy Indicator by commune
Commune % Range (%) (95% CI)
Gogounou 0.0 -
Kalale 1.1 0.2-6.9
Kandi 0.0 0.3-2.8
Malanville 1.2 0.3-4.5
Table A22 Distribution of Reading Comprehension Scores by School Type
Control Project Difference
RC Score 0% 90.4% 91.9% 1.5
RC Score 20% 5.3% 5.9% 0.6
RC Score 40% 2.6% 1.3% -1.3
RC Score 60% 1.2% 0.8% -1.2
RC Score 80% 0.3% 0.0% -0.3
RC Score 100% 0.1% 0.0% -0.1
221
SNAPSHOT OF MEAN SCORES BY SCHOOL TYPE
Table A23: Mean Scores by School Type
Control
Mean
Project
Mean
p-value
Vocabulary (%) 54.8 53.7 0.548
Listening comprehension (%) 18.8 18.6 0.920
Letter name (clpm) 9.0 10.2 0.058
Letter sound (cspm) 14.0 15.3 0.261
Familiar word (cwpm) 5.1 4.9 0.764
Non-word (cwpm) 3.7 3.4 0.637
Reading passage (cwpm) 7.0 5.9 0.233
Reading comprehension (%) 3.2 2.3 0.128
Mean Scores by School Type and Gender
Table A24: Mean Scores by School Type and Gender
Control
Girls Boys
Project
Girls Boys
p￾value
Vocabulary (%) 53.9 55.8 51.4 55.8 0.289
Listening comprehension (%) 19.0 18.5 17.4 19.7 0.229
Letter name (clpm) 8.8 9.2 10.0 10.5 0.889
Letter sound (cspm) 14.1 13.9 14.6 16.0 0.315
Familiar word (cwpm) 5.5 4.7 4.4 5.4 0.068
Non-word (cwpm) 3.6 3.7 3.0 3.8 0.350
Reading passage (cwpm) 7.4 6.5 5.3 6.6 0.056
Reading comprehension (%) 3.2 3.2 1.9 2.6 0.483
222
MEAN SCORES BY SCHOOL TYPE AND LOCATION
Table A25: Mean Scores by School Type and Urban/Rural Location
Control
Rural Urban
Project
Rural Urban
p￾value
Vocabulary (%) 52.7 58.9 51.0 56.1 0.047
Listening comprehension (%) 14.1 27.7 16.8 20.2 >0.000
Letter name (clpm) 8.4 10.0 11.2 9.4 0.087
Letter sound (cspm) 13.8 14.5 17.6 13.3 0.682
Familiar word (cwpm) 4.7 5.9 6.0 4.0 0.301
Non-word (cwpm) 3.5 4.0 4.0 3.0 0.594
Reading passage (cwpm) 6.5 7.8 7.0 5.1 0.381
Reading comprehension (%) 2.4 4.7 2.8 1.8 0.054
ZERO SCORES BY SCHOOL TYPE
Table A26: Zero Scores by School Type
Control
%
Project
%
p￾value
Vocabulary (%) 0.4 0.8 0.278
Listening comprehension (%) 50.9 45.8 0.242
Letter name (clpm) 17.3 18.3 0.750
Letter sound (cspm) 8.4 10.7 0.425
Familiar word (cwpm) 58.8 57.8 0.808
Non-word (cwpm) 62.5 61.8 0.855
Reading passage (cwpm) 57.4 60.6 0.443
Reading comprehension (%) 90.4 91.9 0.377
223
Zero Scores by School Type and Gender
Table A27: Zero Scores by School Type and Gender
Control
Girls Boys
Project
Girls Boys
p￾value
Vocabulary (%) 0.3 0.4 0.7 0.9 0.658
Listening comprehension (%) 50.3 51.6 49.2 42.8 0.710
Letter name (clpm) 19.0 15.4 17.7 18.8 0.135
Letter sound (cspm) 9.3 7.5 10.1 11.3 0.299
Familiar word (cwpm) 58.1 59.5 58.4 57.2 0.690
Non-word (cwpm) 61.8 63.2 63.6 60.0 0.722
Reading passage (cwpm) 54.1 60.9 61.4 59.9 0.070
Reading comprehension (%) 90.6 90.2 92.6 91.2 0.806
Zero Scores by School Type and Location
Table A28: Zero Scores by School Type and Urban/Rural Location
Control
Rural Urban
Project
Rural Urban
p￾value
Vocabulary (%) 0.5 0 1.0 0.6 0.695
Listening comprehension (%) 62.3 29.2 48.8 43.2 >0.000
Letter name (clpm) 18.2 15.4 16.2 20.1 0.508
Letter sound (cspm) 8.6 8.0 6.1 14.7 0.839
Familiar word (cwpm) 59.3 57.9 50.6 64.1 0.819
Non-word (cwpm) 64.2 59.3 56.3 66.6 0.418
Reading passage (cwpm) 58.2 56.1 55.1 65.5 0.731
Reading comprehension (%) 92.5 86.5 90.6 93.0 0.024
224
EGRA BY READING CATEGORIES
In order to get a better sense of the distribution of EGRA score along the progression scale from non￾reader to fluent readers, we have been built levels using the letter name, reading passage and reading
comprehension subtasks. The five level are
- Level 1: Non-Reader: the child does not read any letter
- Level 2: Emerging Pre-Reader: the child reads letters but no words
- Level 3: Novice Reader: the child reads less than 20 words per minute
- Level 4: Intermediate Reader: the child reads more than 20 words per minute <=60% RC
- Level 5: Fluent Comprehending Reader: the child reads more than >= 60%RC
Table A29: Percentage of student per reading category
Control
%
Project
%
Difference
Level 1: Non-Reader 16.4% 17.8% 1.4
Level 2: Emerging Pre-Reader 41.1% 42.9% 1.8
Level 3: Novice Reader 33.5% 30.9% -2.6
Level 4: Intermediate Reader 7.4% 7.6% 0.2
Level 5: Fluent Comprehending Reader 1.6% 0.8% -0.8
Figure A4: Distribution of student levels by school type
0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
Project
Control
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5
225
LITERACY INDEX
Unfortunately, we know that it will be very challenging for CRS to reach its target for the
improved literacy of school-age children indicator, therefore we feel that we need another
indicator, which will capture the progress made on the lower-level tasks such as reading letter
and words, instead of only focusing on reading comprehension. Such an indicator could be
referred to as a literacy index. In the literacy index, we attribute points to each child reaching
one of the following five levels, and then computed a weighted average. The values in points of
each reading level are the following:
• Level 1 - Non-Reader: 0 point
• Level 2 - Emerging Pre-Reader: 25 points
• Level 3 - Novice Reader: 50 points
• Level 4 - Intermediate Reader: 75 points
• Level 5 - Fluent Comprehending Reader: 100 points
If, for a given aggregate, all the students know zero letters the literacy index value will be 0
point. If all students reach the comprehension benchmark of 60% RC, the index value will be
100 points.
Literacy Index by school type
Table A30: Literacy Index Per School Type
Control
Mean
Project
Mean
p-value
Literacy Index 34.2 32.7 0.464
Literacy Index by gender
Table A31: Literacy Index Per School Type and Gender
Control
Girls Boys
Project
Girls Boys
p-value
Literacy Index 34.9 33.5 32.0 33.4 0.324
226
Literacy Index by commune
Table A32: Literacy Index by Commune for Control Schools
Mean
Banikoara 32.5
Bembereke 42.1
Nikki 33.3
Sinende 31.9
Table A33: Literacy Index by Commune for Program Schools
Mean
Gogounou 34.6
Kalale 33.9
Kandi 35.4
Malanville 28.6
Literacy Index by geographic location (Urban/Rural)
Table A34: Literacy Index by Commune for Program Schools by Location (Urban/Rural)
Control
Rural Urban
Project
Rural Urban
p-value
Literacy Index 33.4 35.6 35.2 30.5 0.467
227
FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH READING FLUENCY
Student Characteristics
Table A35: Regression Coefficient for Student Characteristics
Student Characteristics % Regression
coefficient
p-value
Have been to kindergarten 32.5% 1.42 0.044
Eat before going to school 67.1% -1.43 0.055
Eat during recess 86.2% 1.68 0.021
Eat at the canteen 82.5% 0.83 0.241
Absent from school last week 25.1% 0.69 0.361
Reading Frequency at School
Table A36: Regression Coefficient for Reading in Class
Reading in Class % Regression
coefficient
p-value
Never (base level) 6.1% - -
Once every month 9.2% 0.32 0.602
Once every week 28.8% 2.47 0.001
Several times per week 43.5% 5.47 <0.000
Every day 12.4% 14.65 <0.000
Reading Books at Home
The regression coefficients in Table A35 suggest that having French reading books or other French
reading materials at home had little effect on reading fluency scores. Students with French reading
materials at home read one more correct word per minute compared to students with no reading
materials in French. Thus, although 30% of students had French reading books at home, it was not
necessarily an advantage in this EGRA study. However, other factors could have influenced this result
such as the type and level of the book, parents ’literacy, and whether students read at home – all of
these factors are explored and discussed in the following sections.
228
Table A35: Regression Coefficient for French Reading Books at Home
Books at home % Regression
coefficient
p-value
French reading book at home 35.5% 3.31 <0.000
Other French reading materials at home 28.6% 3.75 <0.000
Family Literacy
Family literacy results in Table A37 indicate that parent literacy is low, but most students have
somebody at home who can read. Given that 74% of students have a sibling who can read, this is likely
the person who most often helps them with homework and reading. However, because their knowledge
of reading may also be low, there is practically no correlation with improved reading scores. On the
other hand, students who had a mother or father who can read actually read 1.3 more cwpm than
students without a literate parent. Therefore, parent literacy may be an important factor in improving
student reading fluency.
Table A37: Regression Coefficient for Family Literacy
Family literacy % Regression
coefficient
p-value
Somebody can read at home 87.3% 3.69 <0.000
Home study and Reading Habits 
Table A38: Regression Coefficient for Home Study and Reading Habits 
Reading habits % Regression
coefficient
p-value
Read or study in French at home 56.2% 5.92 <0.000
Students do homework after school 27.7% 4.85 <0.000
Someone at home read or tell stories 27.3% 2.17 <0.000
Someone at home help with homework 47.6% 4.01 <0.000
Father help with homework 9.0% 5.39 <0.000
Mother help with homework 5.6% 5.65 <0.000
Brother or sister help with homework 56.3% 1.75 0.006
229
Someone helped in the last three day 38.1% 6.01 <0.000
Someone asks student to read letters or
words
22.6% 1.91 0.024
Parental Support
Table A39: Regression Coefficient for Good Grades
What parents do when student has good
grades
% Regression
coefficient
p-value
Congratulate 37.0% 5.31 <0.000
Give a reward 15.8% 6.38 <0.000
Say that they are happy 31.1% 5.12 <0.000
Do nothing 38.9% -5.57 <0.000
They don’t know student grades 4.7% -4.41 <0.000
Table A40: Regression Coefficient for Bad Grades
What parents do when student has bad grades % Regression
coefficient
p-value
Try to help me 5.3% 5.87 0.001
Say that I must work harder 16.7% 3.27 0.002
Scold me 32.9% 2.51 <0.000
Punish me 6.4% 2.13 0.048
Hit me 15.6% 1.38 0.100
Do nothing 43.9% -4.39 <0.000
They don’t know student grades 4.1% -5.52 0.001
230
Annex 15: Terms of Reference 
 
McGovern-Dole International Food For Education (FFEII) and Child Nutrition Program
Keun Faaba Benin 
Terms of Reference for Baseline Study, Mid-Term and Final Evaluation 
August 2020
These draft Terms of Reference are subject to review and changes by USDA prior to contracting the 
consultant or consultant firm.
231
Table of Contents
List of Acronyms 231
I. Purpose 233
II. Project Background 233
III. Baseline Study 236
IV. Mid-term Evaluation 238
IV.1 Key evaluation question 239
IV.2 Deliverables 241
IV.3 Audience and Key Stakeholders for Mid-term evaluation 242
IV.4 Mid-term Evaluation Timeline 243
V. Final Evaluation 244
VI. Evaluation Approach and Methodology247
VI-1. Study design and Sampling considerations 248
VI-2. Data collection method and instruments 250
VI-3. Ethical considerations 251
VII. Evaluator Qualifications 251
VIII. Evaluation Management and Coordination 252
IX. Evaluation Resources 253
X. Structure of Proposal and Submission Guidelines 253
List of Acronyms
AME Association des Mères d'Elèves or Mothers of Students Association
232
APE Association des Parents d'Elèves or Parents of Students Association
CRP Chef de Région Pédagogiques
CI Cours d’Initiation or Initiation Course Level (grade 1)
CP Cours Préparatoire or Preparatory Course Level (grade 2)
CRS Catholic Relief Services
DANA Direction of Food and Applied Nutrition
DAS Direction of School Feeding
DEP Direction of Primary Education
DEMP Direction of Preschool and Primary Education
DIIP Direction of Pedagogical Inspection and Innovation
EGRA Early Grade Reading Assessment
FFE Food For Education
GoB Government of Benin
INFRE National Institute for Training and Research in Education
INGO International Non-Governmental Organization
MEAL Monitoring & Evaluation, Accountability and Learning
MEMP Ministry of Preschool and Primary Education
NGO Non Governmental Organization
PfD Partners for Development 
PMP Performance Monitoring Plan
PTA Parent – Teacher Association
SO Specific Objective
THR Take Home Ration
TOR Terms of Reference
UN United Nations
USAID United States Agency for International Development
USDA United States Department of Agriculture
URP-BA Union Régionale des Producteurs or Regional Producers Union -Borgou/Alibori
WEI World Education Inc.
233
I. Purpose
This purpose of the Terms of Reference (TOR) is to describe the objectives and minimum methodological 
requirements for the Baseline, Mid-term, and Final Evaluation for CRS Benin’s USDA-funded McGovern￾Dole International Food For Education (FFEII) and Child Nutrition Program. The TOR outline the 
conditions, tasks and responsibilities of an external consultant or firms to conduct these three 
evaluations. However, for each subsequent evaluation (Mid-term and Final Evaluation), a revised 
detailed TOR will be developed, submitted to USDA for approval, and shared with the contracted 
consultant. CRS reserved the right to terminate its relationship with the external consultant or firm if the 
baseline performance is not satisfactory. Given that CRS was satisfied with the performance of the 
external consultant firm that led the baseline, CRS will continue to collaborate with this firm. However, 
CRS always reserves the right to do a competitive bid process in the case that the external consultant 
sets new conditions that do not meet CRS’ expectations.
If this midterm evaluation, does not meet expectations, CRS will re-engage in a competitive recruitment 
process for the final evaluation. For consistency purposes, it is also expected that the consultancy team 
members will remain the same and if any changes would need to be approved by CRS.
II. Project Background
Through its program in Benin, Catholic Relief Services (CRS) will implement a five-year (2018 – 2022) 
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and 
Child Nutrition Program (MGD) award, Food for Education II (FFEII). The project’s local name is Keun 
Faaba (Supporting Education in Bariba, the most commonly spoken language the project’s 
implementation zone). In this project, CRS aims to improve the literacy and health and dietary practices 
of school age children in northern Benin. The MGD17/Keun-Faaba project will intervene in primary 
schools and preschools in the same area as Food for Education phase I (FFEI). The purpose of this TOR is 
to provide an overview of the scope, design, methods and approximate timeline for the MGD17/Keun￾Faaba project’s evaluation activities. Keun Faaba project is valued at $21,350,686.00 which includes 
6,610 MT of commodities (Soy-Fortified Cornmeal, Green Split Peas, Fortified Rice, Vegetable oil and 
Lentils).
Over the life of the project, CRS will reach approximately 46,118 individuals participating in USDA’s MGD 
program.. Participating individuals include : 
• 41,977 primary and preschool schoolchildren who will receive daily school meals (breakfast, snack, 
lunch) over the 4-year life of the project and benefit from improved education quality activities;
• 3,533 parents/caregivers (1,104 people including cooks, storekeepers, nutrition teachers, principals, 
PTA and AME canteen committee members, 23 female Community Health Workers (CHW), 266 
teachers and 144 administrators, 1,026 people including other APE and AME teachers, principals, 
450 existing Savings and Internal Lending Communities (SILC) group members, and 970 mothers 
and fathers participating in listening groups ) who will benefit from training or other support as 
result of the Keun Faaba project;
• 156 school administrators, 266teachers/educators teaching assistant receive training;
234
• 600 community farm producers (counted as laborers) who will receive training on community farm 
management; and
• 8 government officials who will receive and provide technical support.
• 97 Parent-Teacher Association PTA supported
The objectives of MGD17/Keun Faaba project are: 
- Improve the literacy of school-age children by improving the quality of literacy instruction, 
improving attentiveness, and improving student attendance;
- Improve student attentiveness by providing school meals;
- Improve student attendance through raising awareness of the importance of education, enrollment 
campaigns, and training parent-teacher associations;
- Increase the use of health and dietary practices by improving knowledge of health and hygiene 
practices, increasing knowledge of safe food preparation and storage practices, increasing 
knowledge of nutrition, increasing access to clean water and sanitation services, and increasing 
access to requisite food preparation and storage tools and equipment.
The purpose of the overall program evaluation (baseline, midterm, final) is to assess progress towards 
achieving the two strategic objectives of USDA’s MGD program: (1) Improved literacy of school-age 
children and (2) Increased use of health and dietary practices in targeted schools. 
The project’s Strategic Objectives and expected results are further detailed in the Project-level Results 
Framework as shown in Annex A.
The following activities will be implemented in order to achieve MGD17/Keun Faaba Objectives:
- Building/Rehabilitation: Latrines
- Building/Rehabilitation: Wells and water stations/systems
- Capacity Building: Local, Regional, and National level
- Create WASH-Friendly Schools
- Distribution: School supplies and materials
- Establish Activities to Promote Literacy
- Establish and Maintain School Gardens
- Establish Community Farms
- Promote Teacher Attendance
- Provide School Meals
- Provide Take Home Rations
- Raising Awareness of the Importance of Education
- Training: Food Preparation and Storage Practices
- Training: Good health and sanitation practices
- Training: Parent-Teacher Associations
- Training: Teachers and School Administrators
235
Learning activities focus on people and processes. CRS will guide the process of choosing the most 
appropriate means to facilitate learning before, during, and after activity implementation of critical 
project events and evaluations. Other fora to facilitate learning are face-to-face meetings; discussions; 
establishing a ‘community of practice’ around a particular topic; visits to project sites; teleconferences; 
project task collaboration; and on-line collaborative learning.
The project also includes annual opportunities for international travel and participation in conferences, 
training, and workshops related to literacy education, libraries, child nutrition, and school feeding. CRS 
will liaise with all partners to document such learning and support national, regional and cross agency 
activities in operations research and learning on projects which are employing similar interventions.
It is important to note that the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic led to the closure of preschools 
from March 30th through September 28, 2020, and primary schools from March 30th through August 
10th. However, the government reopened grade 6 of primary schools on May 10th to allow them to 
take exams to graduate into the next grade level and to advance into lower secondary school the 
following school year. The remaining grades recommenced on August 10th for one month to complete 
the school year and take exams to determine advancement into the next grade level. This school closure 
left many vulnerable students without food. CRS, with the approval of USDA, distributed the 
commodities corresponding to Q3 as take-home rations (THRs), which was determined to be the best 
method to get the much needed food to the program beneficiaries during this time. 
In an effort to prevent and manage the spread of this pandemic in Benin, the Government of Benin 
forbade any activities gathering large groups of people. These preventive measures, therefore, 
hampered and delayed the implementation of several activities of the project.
The results/findings of critical project events and evaluations should allow the various project 
stakeholders to test certain assumptions of the theory of change, to research the causes of certain 
critical gaps based on the evidence, and to see the possible adjustment scenarios. To better meet these 
needs, the external consultant/staff should focus on the various tools developed in the context of the 
project. In addition to the various questions and tools, additional questions can also help to reach this 
goal. These are:
• To date, which strategies have demonstrated success, and which have not been successful in 
achieving the project objectives and results?
• Is the project being implemented as planned (timeline and budget)? If not, why not?
• What are the obstacles/challenges/risks to implementation and how can they be overcome in 
the remaining duration of the project?
• What are the early indications of sustainability at this point in the project?
• Has the project affected girls and boys differently? If so, how?
• What best practices have been identified so far?
• Has the project had any unintended negative effects (question asked to ensure the project is 
doing no harm and to update our theory of change understanding the full effect of the program)
• What are the project’s major limitations, and how is the project team addressing those 
challenges?
• How do the limitations affect the results, interpretation, and conclusions of the study?
Through this learning opportunity, the project team and stakeholders can make a key decision to 
improve existing project business processes, including the development of research agendas, 
236
performance management plans, monitoring, evaluation, accountability and learning (MEAL) plans, and 
evaluation plans.
CRS Benin will work with sub-recipients World Education Inc. (WEI), Caritas Kandi, Regional Union of 
Producers (Union Régionale des Producteurs or URP) and Partners for Development (PFD). CRS will lead
also the project implementation in partnership with the Ministry of preschool and Primary Education 
(MEMP), the direction of School Feeding (DAS) and its regional services (SAS), the direction of Food and 
Applied Nutrition (DANA), the regional Primary Education bureau (DEMP), the National Institute for 
Training and Research in Education (INFRE), the Direction of Pedagogical Inspection and Innovation 
(DIIP), Direction of Kindergarten Education (DEM), the National Council, the Ministry of Secondary 
Education and Vocational Training, the Ministry of Health and Directorate of the Family and Social 
Affairs (DGFAS) of the Ministry of Work, Public Function and Social Affairs Ministry of Agriculture, 
Livestock, and Fisheries
The consultant will ensure these key stakeholders contribute to the Baseline, Mid-term, and Final 
Evaluations.
This second phase of MGD17/Keun Faaba fits within the objective of the Beninese State which wants to 
increase the coverage of canteens from 29% to 51% of the schools, improve access to primary education 
and improve the retention rate in school.
III. Baseline Study
The purpose of the Baseline Evaluation is a) to establish the baseline values of USDA’s SO1: Improved 
literacy of school-age children in the target school and SO2: Increased use of health and dietary 
practices and b) to establish baseline values of the main outcome/output indicators for both SOs. The 
Baseline assessment is planned to begin in February and we expect the final report in April 2018. 
The selected consultant shall carry out a mixed method (quantitative and qualitative) approach to the 
baseline survey. The baseline will be designed in such a way that it provides data that will be 
comparable to the Mid-term and Final evaluations. The survey will include measurement of both 
performance and impact indicators. For measuring impact, quasi-experimental design methods, such as 
regression discontinuity design, difference in difference, instrumental variables and statistically 
significant matching methods shall be included. The consultant should choose the appropriate method 
according to the result of baseline study. A method must be one of quasi experimental methods for 
impact evaluation.
During the baseline, the theory of change will be improved. The improvement will be done with baseline 
consultant support. It will consist of formulating a ToC for each strategic objective and for the purpose. 
A graphic representation of the ToC will be made to facilitate a better understanding. It will also prepare 
a matrix of evaluation questions based on the ToC. According in the Performance Monitoring Plan 
(PMP), specific performance indicators will be collected during the baseline:
• Percent of students who, by the end of two grades of primary schooling, demonstrate that they 
can read and understand the meaning of grade level text
• Number of students regularly (80%) attending USDA supported classrooms/schools
• Percent of parents who report spending time on literacy activities with their students the last 
three days
237
• Number of classrooms assessed using the Early Grade Reading Assessment
• Number of individuals who demonstrate use of new safe food preparation and storage practices 
as a result of USDA assistance
• Number of schools using an improved water source
• Percent of schools with soap and water at a hand washing station commonly used by students
• Number of schools with improved sanitary facilities 
• Number of teachers/educators/ teaching assistants in target schools who demonstrate use of 
new and quality teaching techniques or tools.
The PMP will be made available to the selected consultant for further review. 
The consultant will hire and train their own team for data collection in the field. 
Key Outputs:
- Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA) conducted 
- Baseline Survey designed, conducted, report written and results presented.
Milestones:
- Prepare baseline survey questionnaire and methodology to be approved by CRS Benin and 
CRS M&E and Education Technical Advisors. The design phase will include reference to the 
USDA approved Monitoring & Evaluation Plan and PMP to ensure that all data necessary to 
answer the evaluation questions is collected at baseline.
- Recruit and train a team of enumerators on how to administer the baseline survey 
questionnaire and qualitative tools.
- Field test questionnaires / survey tools, and revise as appropriate.
- Establish questions to test the theory of change. FFE II Theory of change is the Annex D
- Conduct baseline survey with daily data quality checks.
- Produce a draft baseline survey report which is shared with CRS and project stakeholders for 
comments, and then a final baseline survey report which incorporates those comments.
- Present survey results to key stakeholders
All deliverables should be completed in English. The final report will be a polished document ready for 
publication. This means the document contains no factual errors or inaccuracies and citations are 
properly used.
The Baseline, Mid-term and Final studies will occur in Borgou and Alibori departments (Intervention 
areas: Kalalé, Gogounou, Kandi and Malanville; Comparison areas: Banikoara and Bembereke) and will 
require the full availability of the external Consultant/firms. This will include approximately one month 
on site in the north of Benin. The Baseline evaluation will take place between February and March 2018.
Timetable for Baseline Study
The timeline of baseline study is described in the table below. This process, which should have begun in 
December 2017, and ended in April 2018, was delayed and extended to January 2019. The timeline 
238
changed because of delays in USDA’s approval of the award and the agreement signature and due to a 
lengthy teacher’s strike resulting in school closure.
Calendar Baseline Survey Activities
December 14th, 2017 Submit the Baseline TOR to USDA 
March 2018 Selection of consultant (based on draft TOR)
April 2018 Receive USDA’s approval of the Baseline TOR
September 2018
Start of contracting process with the consultant; Draft the Baseline survey 
design (assign roles and responsibilities, discuss data collection method and 
develop survey tools). Sign contract with consultant.
October 2018
Finalize the Baseline survey design; Validate the survey tools; Recruit data 
collectors
November 2018 Train data collectors and pretest the tools; Complete data collection
December 2018 Organize validation workshop
December 7th, 2018 Submit first draft report to CRS
December19th, 2018 Review of the report by CRS
January 4th, 2019 Integrate responses to comments
January 11th, 2019 Validate the final report
January 15th, 2019 Present the baseline survey results to USDA
IV. Mid-term Evaluation
Originally the Mid-term Evaluation was scheduled to be held between November and December 2020 
according to the revised timeline approved by USDA. However, due to the COVID19 pandemic which led 
to postponement of many activities and also to align the mid-term evaluation period with that of the 
baseline study the mid-term evaluation has been postponed to mid-January 2021, with the approval of 
USDA. It is expected that the Mid-term and Final Evaluations will be led by the same Consultant to 
ensure consistency of the approach and comparability of results, however this contract could be 
canceled in the case that CRS is unsatisfied with the quality of the mid-term evaluation process. The 
midterm evaluation will be both retrospective and prospective. The mid-term evaluation will focus on 
evaluating the processes, the intermediate results and some effects (outcomes) that should be 
perceptible at this stage of the project's implementation. The overall impact will mainly be the focus of 
the final evaluation. During this evaluation, the consultant will focus on relevance, efficiency, 
sustainability, efficiency and some intermediate effects of project activities. The purpose of the midterm 
is to:
239
➢ Assess the state of affairs related to effect and impact indicators; 
➢ Assess the relevance of all interventions; 
➢ Assess effectiveness of implementation strategies and activities; 
➢ Assess project efficiency
The evaluation will also document lessons learned and provide recommendations for mid-course 
corrective actions necessary to effectively and efficiently meet the project objectives and results. Both 
CRS and its sub-recipients will provide input to the external consultant for a complete survey design that 
includes sample and data collection methodology and quantitative and qualitative components 
appropriate for the expected results. CRS anticipates that key evaluation questions which inform this 
design may include: 
IV.1 Key evaluation question
Relevance:
• Are stakeholders (PTAs, mothers’ associations, teachers, and local authorities) satisfied with 
their participation in the project? Why or why not?
• To what extent will the project activities and expected results solve the problems that gave 
rise to the project?
• Are the changes made to activities (design and implementation) due to Covid-19 relevant?
• To what extent have students improved their nutrition, health, and hygiene-related 
practices?
• To what extent do the project interventions help address student hunger and attentiveness?
• To what extent have students (boys and girls) increased their reading comprehension 
compared to baseline? 
• To what extent are teachers implementing literacy techniques acquired through the 
project?
• Is our theory of change relevant?
Coherence:
• To what extent is this intervention coherent with other interventions which have similar 
objectives?
• To what extent is the intervention coherent with government policy on school feeding?
Effectiveness:
240
• Has WASH received a heightened focus as a need raised in MGD17/Keun Faaba; what is 
working well and what needs to be changed? To what extent are the WASH strategies likely 
to remove gender linked barriers?
• How has COVID-19 impacted the WASH strategy?
• Do literacy promotion activities help improve the reading and writing skills of students? 
• Does the teaching of life skills help improve the reading and writing skills of students?
• Which strategies have been (or should be) put in place to effectively monitor teachers’ 
attendance? Has project implementation been effectively monitored? How well has the 
M&E mechanism helped project implementation, and what improvements could be made, if 
any? Have challenges of FFE II been addressed, namely: tracking teacher attendance, 
tracking student attendance?
• Efficiency:
• Has the project been implemented in the most efficient way possible? 
• Is there another way to get food management committees more efficient considering 
literacy levels?
• How has the project responded to date in terms of key community stakeholders’ requests 
for material incentives? Is there a better approach to do this?
• Have there been internal and/or external factors that have hindered the efficient 
implementation of project activities?
Sustainability:
• Is there evidence of more community capacity for sustainability communities ready to take 
over? Is there willingness of community members to participate without financial 
expectations? Are there any spontaneous actions of the PTAs for the maintenance of school 
infrastructures or other critical school improvement activities?Are the PTAs now 
demonstrating application of the organizational competencies the project has passed on to 
them since FFE I?
• how has this project defined sustainability?
• Do all stakeholders share a common vision and understanding of the vision, as well as the 
pathway to get there?
• To what extent is the MGD17/Keun Faaba project aligned with the Government's canteen 
action plan?
• What policies favor the sustainability of school canteen projects?
• Are the policies and actions implemented at the educational level in line with the objectives 
at national level?
241
• Have inclusive or gender sensitive strategies been implemented in view of sustainability 
among identified specific groups if there is any? E.g.: case of Fulani/Peuhl communities?
Impact:
• Which issues should the project team focus its efforts on to achieve greatest impact?
• How likely is the project to achieve strategic objectives and contribute significantly to 
intended purpose?What is the contribution of the radio broadcasts and the listening groups 
in the awareness raising on the importance of education?
• What is the contribution of the Community Led Total Sanitation (CLTS) approach to changes 
in children's hygiene behavior in school?
• What is the contribution of the training of teachers / administrators to the quality of 
teaching and the outcome of schoolchildren’s literacy levels?
• How successful has the project been in improving the quality of literacy instruction?
• To what extent, did COVID-19 affect project implementation and performance?
To respond to the above objectives, both quantitative and qualitative methods will be used. Sampling 
methods will be the same used in the baseline survey to promote consistency. The evaluation will 
measure changes in indicator levels from baseline, and document evidence of program impact for each 
intermediate result as well as crosscutting activities.
IV.2 Deliverables
The consultant will produce the same key deliverables as the baseline. The deliverables are: 
• An Inception Report including the methodology, sampling methodology, method of attribution, data 
analysis plan, data collection tools (focus group, direct observation, interview guide, individual 
survey guide, quantitative data collection, etc.), quality assurance plan, and a detailed work plan for 
midterm evaluation; 
• The database (qualitative and quantitative) and the variables dictionary (including both raw and 
clean datasets, as well as KII transcripts and notes from FGDs); 
• Program (command) used to analyze the collected data;
• Draft report with a precise summary, introduction, background, methodology, results and findings, 
conclusions, recommendations and annexes;
• Final Report with the following sections: an executive summary, background, evaluation design 
including assumptions and limitations, methodology, evaluation questions, findings, a separate 
section for conclusions, lessons learned and effective practices (if any), and recommendations 
(should be clear, concise, relevant, specific and practical). Recommendations should be rooted in 
findings and conclusions established in the report. This report will keep the same format as baseline 
report with added elements specific to midterm evaluation. This report must not exceed 100 pages. 
The report should include an annex with detailed results of regression analysis if applicable. 
242
Depending on the type of analysis and model approach, the information that accompanies the 
results can vary. However, it is standard practice to report a few elements to statistical results. This 
includes:
▪ Sample size and number of observations
▪ Coefficients and standard errors for the dependent and independent variables
▪ R
2
- coefficient of determination
▪ Confidence interval
▪ Root Mean Squared Error
▪ Statistical significance of equation (F-test) and estimates (t-test) or corresponding p-values
▪ A description or interpretation of the results
• A standalone 2 to 3 pages summary of the midterm evaluation which includes the methodology, key 
findings, and key recommendations;
• Final report revised integrating comments from USDA; 
• Presentation of final report to stakeholders; 
• Webinar to present a summary of methodology, key findings, and recommendations (for CRS staff); 
and 
• Final midterm evaluation report will be made publicly available. Evaluators shall provide a copy of 
the evaluation reports that is free of personally identifiable information (PII) and proprietary 
information. Final versions of evaluation reports ready for publication will be made be accessible to 
persons with disabilities.IV.3 Audience and Key Stakeholders for Mid-term evaluation
Stakeholder Interest 
Government of Benin; Ministry of Preschool 
and Primary School Education 
Contribution of the project to the national strategy on 
education 
USDA
Major accomplishments and challenges; accountability to US 
government; guidance/consensus on any changes to be 
addressed per the mid-term results
CRS, WEI, CARITAS Kandi, URP, PfD 
Major accomplishments, challenges, and lessons learned; 
improve linkages with GoB; USDA reporting and accountability 
requirements
Other UN and NGO agencies Lessons learned, collaboration and synergy for implementation
Schools Seeing progress on enrollment/attendance/learning, and school 
development
243
Stakeholder Interest 
Communities Seeing progress in children’s education and school development 
as compared to others
IV.4 Mid-term Evaluation Timeline
The mid-term evaluation will occur in Borgou and Alibori departments (Intervention areas: Kalalé, 
Gogounou, Kandi and Malanville) and will require the full availability of the external consultant/firms. 
This will include approximately one month on site in the north of Benin. This process will begin in August 
2020 and will end in April 2021.
Calendar Mid-term Evaluation Activities
August 2020 Submit TOR to USDA 
September 2020 Incorporate comments from USDA & receive USDA approval
October 2020 Discussion with external consultant
November 2020 Discuss partners’ roles and responsibilities
December 2020 Optional: Consultant interview with USDA (as key informant)
January 2021 Conduct evaluation
February 2021 (within 15 days after 
the end of data collection)
Organize workshop to share provisional results with 
stakeholders (national and local government services, NGO, UN 
agencies, PTA representative, mayors) 
March 2021- Before the end of the 
evaluation process (within 15 days 
after the end of data collection)
Webinar with CRS
March 2021- after the Webinar with 
CRS 
Submit final mid-term evaluation report to USDA
April 2021 Discuss actions to address findings and recommendations, 
involving relevant stakeholders, including USDA. Submit 
management response to USDA
April 2021 (Quarterly review and 
subsequent progress report)
Report on implementation of follow-up actions
244
CRS will ensure key stakeholders, including the MoE, CRS, sub-recipients and partners, NGO agencies, 
schools, communities, and USDA, are involved in the evaluation process, and that they participate in 
discussions on corrective actions to address findings and recommendations. Upon receipt of the Mid￾term Evaluation report, CRS will organize a workshop inviting key stakeholders to discuss actions to 
address evaluation findings and recommendations. CRS, committed to “beneficiary feedback” 
approaches, will share project results and findings with beneficiaries. Leaflets presenting key results of 
the Mid-term Evaluation will be developed and shared with parents, principals and local authorities, and 
provide training to field officers for platelet communications. Exchange with communities on their 
proposed solutions to address the finding of evaluation will be monitored at each quarterly project 
coordination. CRS will also include status of the follow-up plan in progress reports to USDA.
V. Final Evaluation
The Final Evaluation is planned between November 2021 and March 2022. The purpose of this 
evaluation is to: 
➢ Measure the impact of program interventions and activities and to determine its level of 
achievement against the planned results; 
➢ Identify implementation strengths, challenges, lessons learned and recommendations for CRS, 
implementing partners, MoE, and USDA for future food assistance and education programs;
➢ understand impacts of the project on participants. 
V.1 Key Evaluation questions
Key evaluation questions will include the following:
Relevance :
• To what extent were the implementation strategies relevant enough to improve (1) children’s 
literacy, (2) student enrollment and attendance, particularly girls, and (3) community 
engagement?
• Are stakeholders (PTAs, mothers’ associations, teachers, and local authorities) satisfied with 
their participation in the project? Why or why not?
Effectiveness:
• To what extent have targeted schools witnessed improved quality of education/learning?
• To what extent have members of PTAs/mothers’ associations increased their knowledge and 
understanding of literacy, nutrition, health and hygiene, gender and child protection concepts?
• Have targeted beneficiaries demonstrated improved understanding of the importance of 
education?
• Have targeted beneficiaries demonstrated improved understanding of health and hygiene 
practices?
Efficiency:
245
• Were activities cost efficient? Were objectives achieved on time?
• Was the project implemented in the most efficient way compared to alternatives?
• Were there internal and/or external factors hindering efficient implementation of project 
activities?
Sustainability:
• What activities and/or outcomes (both expected and unexpected) of the project are likely to be 
sustained? What evidence is there to suggest this?
• What are the major factors that can influence achievement or non-achievement of 
sustainability?
Impact:
• To what extent are the activities and outputs of the project consistent with the overall goals and 
the attainment of the anticipated results?
• Have the target beneficiaries (in particular PTAs and local government officials) taken ownership 
of the project concept and approach?
• Are project impacts likely to be long-lasting?
• What are the key success factors of the project? What are the main limiting factors?
• What are the unintended effects of the project (positive or negative)?
• What are the key lessons that can be learned from the project?
Evaluators will use quantitative and qualitative methods including stakeholder interviews and/or self￾assessments, observation, description of cooperative action(s) taken, and focus groups. The sampling 
method will include all categories of stakeholders including staff, central and local authorities, teachers, 
students, parents, PTAs and mothers’ associations.
Audience and stakeholders are the same as those for the baseline and mid-term evaluation. They 
include the Ministry of Education, USDA, CRS and its partners, other UN agencies and NGOs, schools and 
communities. Their possible interests are described in the table below. 
The consultant will choose the appropriate method according to the result of baseline study. A method 
must be one of quasi experimental methods for the Final Evaluation.
V.2 Deliverables
The consultant will produce the same key deliverables as the baseline and MTE. The deliverables are: 
• An Inception Report including the methodology, sampling methodology, method of attribution, data 
analysis plan, data collection tools (focus group, direct observation, interview guide, individual 
survey guide, quantitative data collection, etc.), quality assurance plan, and a detailed work plan for 
final evaluation; 
246
• The database (qualitative and quantitative) and the variables dictionary (including both raw and 
clean datasets, as well as KII transcripts and notes from FGDs); 
• Program (command) used to analyze the collected data;
• Draft report with a precise summary, introduction, background, methodology, results and findings, 
conclusions, recommendations and annexes;
• Final Report with the following sections: an executive summary, background, evaluation design 
including assumptions and limitations, methodology, evaluation questions, findings, a separate 
section for conclusions, lessons learned and effective practices (if any), and recommendations 
(should be clear, concise, relevant, specific and practical). Recommendations should follow directly 
from findings and conclusions established in the report. This report will keep the same format as 
baseline and MTE report with added elements specific to the final evaluation. This report must not 
exceed 100 pages. The report should include an annex with detailed results of regression analysis if 
applicable. Depending on the type of analysis and model approach, the information that 
accompanies the results can vary. However, it is standard practice to report a few elements to 
statistical results. This includes:
▪ Sample size and number of observations
▪ Coefficients and standard errors for the dependent and independent variables
▪ R
2
- coefficient of determination
▪ Confidence interval
▪ Root Mean Squared Error
▪ Statistical significance of equation (F-test) and estimates (t-test) or corresponding p-values
▪ A description or interpretation of the results
• A standalone 2 to 3 pages summary of the final evaluation which includes the methodology, key 
findings, and key recommendations;
• Final report revised integrating comments from USDA; 
• Presentation of final report to stakeholders; 
• Webinar to present a summary of methodology, key findings, and recommendations (for CRS staff); 
and 
• Finalized final evaluation report will be made publicly available. Evaluators shall provide a copy of 
the evaluation reports that is free of personally identifiable information (PII) and proprietary 
information. Final versions of evaluation reports ready for publication will be accessible to persons 
with disabilities. 
V.3 Proposed Final Evaluation Timeline
247
Calendar Final Evaluation Activities
February 2022 Discuss possible review of TOR and partners’ roles and responsibilities
February 2022 Submit the TOR to USDA for review
March 2022 Receive USDA approval
April 2022 Discussion with external consultant
April 2022 Refine project evaluation and methodology, assign roles and 
responsibilities
May 2022 Conduct evaluation
May 2022 – around 15 days 
before the end of the 
evaluation process
Organize a workshop to share provisional results with stakeholders 
(national and local government services, NGO, UN agencies, PTA 
representative, mayors)
May 2022- Before the end of 
the evaluation process
Webinar with CRS 
June 2022- within 15 days of 
the end of evaluation process
Submit final evaluation report to USDA
Final progress report Report on implementation of follow-up actions
VI. Evaluation Approach and Methodology 
The design must consider how data collection will take place, and must ensure that the evaluation has 
the necessary rigor and scientific validity to measure progress and results. To this end, both quantitative 
and qualitative methods will be used and be designed to provide data comparison with the mid-term 
and final evaluations. The survey will include measurement of both performance and impact indicators. 
For measuring impact, a quasi-experimental design method, such as difference in difference or other 
method deemed scientifically valid will be used by the consultant. The final evaluation should measure 
the impact of the intervention on reading levels and attentiveness of children. In the previous studies 
(baseline and midterm), qualitative (focus group, interview) and quantitative data was collected to 
answer the different evaluation questions in order to assign an impact to the implementation of the 
project. Also, to attribute impact to project interventions, the “difference in difference” methodology 
will be used. If necessary, we will add propensity score matching to the difference-in-difference analysis 
at end line. Data will be weighted to represent the entire population of students, teachers, principals, or 
parents, within school clusters and strata of urban or rural schools. This same methodology can be used 
in this evaluation with the addition of qualitative data collection from students. 
For the data analysis, the consultant may use his or her preferred software, but the ‘’difference in 
difference’’ method should be applied to estimate the change attributable to the project. 
248
This evaluation should use as much as possible the same comparison group, but pay careful attention to 
indicators that need to be disaggregated by gender, making attempts to gather responses from equal 
portions of males and females at each level of data collection. Finally, respondents in the comparison 
area should be asked if there is any similar intervention that has been implemented during the program 
implementation. Any school which has experienced a similar intervention can no longer provide an 
adequate counterfactual.
The control schools were in communes neighboring the intervention areas (Banikoara, Bembereke, Nikki 
and Sinende). They were selected to serve as a control group for the baseline, midline and end line 
evaluations; however— if a canteen is being established in any of the control schools, they will be 
replaced. The external consultant/firms will provide a detailed description of the data collection 
methodology, collection tools and sampling techniques appropriate for baseline study, midterm and 
final evaluation. 
CRS will ensure that key stakeholders are involved in this assessment process. The midterm evaluation 
will measure changes in indicator levels from baseline, and document evidence of program impact for 
each intermediate result as well as crosscutting activities. First and foremost, this MTE will ensure the 
safety of respondents and consider remote data collection or secondary data it necessary to limit risks of 
COVID-19 contamination.
As stated in the, MGD17/Keun Faaba project Evaluation Plan, the Consultant will use quantitative and 
qualitative methods. The quantitative portion will have two main components. The first component has 
consisted of surveys questionnaire of principals, teachers, students and parents, as well as an 
infrastructure observation and the second component will consist of an Early Grade Reading Assessment 
(EGRA. The EGRA test, will be the same as the one used at baseline. The qualitative component will 
consist of interviews with key stakeholders such as the head of the school districts (Chef des Régions 
Pédagogiques, CRP) in each intervention commune, and parents’ and mothers’ associations which were 
identified by the quantitative component as being particularly active or particularly weak and another’s 
parents. 
VI-1. Study design and Sampling considerations
Sample Size and Power Calculations: MGD17/Keun Faaba includes 144 schools in 97 communities with 
an average of 288 students per school. 
The sample size for the intervention and comparison groups includes 192 teachers, 96 school directors, 
288 cooks, 48 parent-teacher associations, and two to three local authorities in 48 communities.
As was done during the baseline study, assessing students at the start of a new academic year as a proxy 
measure for student learning levels at the end of the prior academic year is a common practice among 
education evaluations and does not affect the quality of the study. Furthermore, given the lack of 
schooling for students in Benin since April 2020, students will not be at the typical “beginning of Grade 
3” level immediately at the start of the new school year, as students will not have been exposed to the 
full Grade 2 curriculum by the start of the new school year. Therefore, if the study aims to capture 
students’ learning levels at the end of Grade 2, the data collection should take place upon completion of 
the Grade 2 materials or immediately prior to/during the introduction of the Grade 3 materials. 
Therefore, although Benin schools are expected to re-open by September 28th, data collection will not 
occur until mid-January. 
249
Sample sizes for student who will pass the EGRA test were calculated using Equations (22) for clustered 
binary outcomes106, using the standard 80% power and 5% significance level. The relevant ICC is 0.066, 
from baseline study data. For this indicator the value is 1% and LOP target for this indicator was 10%. 
Considering the urban and rural area as well as the treatment and comparison schools, the number of 
clusters is 48 which allow the evaluator to reach a minimum detectable effect equal to 9%. The table 
below show this calculation. The sample size used for the baseline study completely covered the desired 
minimum detectable effect. 
Target Success Rate (p1): 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Baseline Success Rate (p0): 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Significance (zα): 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
Power (zβ): 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
ICC (ρ) 0.06608 0.06608 0.06608 0.06608 0.06608 0.06608
Numbers of individuals per 
cluster (m) 5 7 9 11 13 15
Number of Clusters (k) 24 19 16 15 13 12
Total Sample Size (m*k) 122 135 148 161 174 186
Sample sizes for parents in target communities who report spending time on literacy activities with their 
students the last three days were calculated using Equations (22) for clustered binary outcomes, using 
the standard 80% power and 5% significance level. The relevant ICC is 0.098, from baseline study data. 
For this indicator the value is 31% and LOP target for this indicator was 45% as per agreement. report 
spending time on literacy activities with their students the last three days. The table below show this 
calculation. The sample size used for the baseline study completely covered the desired minimum 
detectable effect. 
Target Success Rate (p1): 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45
Baseline Success Rate (p0): 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31
Significance (zα): 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
106 Going beyond simple sample size calculations: a practitioner's guide, McConnell and Vera-Hernandez. 2015. 
Page 18
250
Power (zβ): 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
ICC (ρ) 0.098 0.098 0.098 0.098 0.098
Numbers of individuals per cluster (m) 5 7 9 10 12
Number of Clusters (k) 50 41 36 34 31
Total Sample Size (m*k) 250 285 320 337 372
For each cluster, the sample size will be 5-10 parents, a questionnaire for 2-3 cooks and a questionnaire 
for 3-4 farmers in all treatment and comparison communities. 
At least two key informant interviews will be conducted with school district level authorities and local 
government authorities in the same clusters selected above as well as informant interviews with key 
government stakeholders at the regional and central level.
In each school sampled, grade 1 and 2 students will be sampled using the Randomized Number 
Generator (RNG) to bring their parent. Children in grades 1 and 2 are also excluded because they are 
deemed too young to be able to answer the nutrition and hygiene questions. Enumerators will sample 
five girls and five boys in each class using a random number generator, and attentiveness will be 
evaluated by observing each student for three minutes. 
Teachers will be randomly selected in each of the sampled schools, using a random number generator 
(RNG application). The population sample includes teachers from all six grades plus the kindergarten 
teacher without principals.
With a total of 48 schools for treatment and 48 for comparison, students, parents and other 
stakeholders involved in this data collection will be covered by this survey. 
Note: Due to the spread of the COVID-19 virus, the midterm evaluator will propose and implement a 
satisfactory plan to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 during the data collection phase of the midterm 
evaluation (if need be). This COVID-19 plan will include contingencies for study design, trainings, data 
collection, analysis and reporting, and budget implications. 
VI-2. Data collection method and instruments
The three main data collection tools are as follows.
• Early Grade Reading Assessment: Developed/Adapted by WEI and INFRE to assess grade-level 
reading. (Note that the EGRA test will be the same as the one used at baseline: the 2nd edition 
EGRA). 
• School infrastructure inventory: To determine the need to meet set standards or the minimum 
viable when there is a gap in terms of classrooms, latrines, and water systems.
251
• Questionnaires: See Annex C: Key Questions for information on the questionnaire content for 
teachers, principals, and parents. It will be finalized during data collector training. Some 
information will be gathered from several sources so that it can be cross-verified.
It is suggested that the design include:
• Design of data collection tools: The survey will apply evidence based collection methods and 
use electronic data collection methods (smart phones and cloud-based data collection).
• Review of Records and Documents: The survey will collect primary source information from 
school records and documents.
• Key Informant Interviews: The survey will carry out structured and unstructured interviews with 
key informants from schools, the MEMP, and communities. The Consultant will interview USDA 
as a key informant prior to data collection. 
• Focus Group Interviews: The survey will use focus group interviews to evaluate the leaderships 
of parents and teachers, to identify key informants, and to capture habits practiced in the 
learning process. This will be carried out in each of the three surveys (baseline, midterm and 
final) to compare and contrast different moments in the process and to justify the impact.
• Questionnaires: The midterm survey will use questionnaires to capture information such as 
student hunger or existing knowledge.
Also, FFE I secondary data can be accessed as needed by the consultant to refine these analyzes.
Mobile data collection will be adopted during this study. The evaluation team will use either tablets or 
smartphones depending on availability. These data collection techniques will also be used in the final 
evaluation.
Before the field survey, USDA expects to be interviewed first. Discussions/interviews with communities 
will be done in local language and in French for teachers and project staff. Translation can be made by a 
local consultant hired by the external consultant/firms.
VI-3. Ethical considerations
Per ethical standards, the consultant is responsible for ensuring Institutional Review Board approval in￾country before starting the field survey. All respondents will also be assured of a willing participation in 
the study or a willing withdrawal. Respondents must be informed that all answers are confidential. 
Moreover, the selected Consultant shall demonstrate how it will take into account other ethical 
consideration regarding the interviews with children. 
VII. Evaluator Qualifications
The Consultant must have significant experience in the design of evaluations for development projects 
in sub-Saharan Africa (data collection, analysis, reporting, etc.). A good knowledge of school feeding 
projects, education and other school-related interventions will also be essential, as will the ability to 
respect legal and cultural requirements. 
Team Leader Profile
252
• At least a Masters degree in statistics or related field (PhD preferred)
• At least 15 years experiences in the evidence-based evaluation of international development 
projects, preferably in Francophone West Africa. 
• Good knowledge of the requirements and working methods of USDA / USAID
• Fluency (written and oral) in English and French
• Availability during the evaluation period
• Past experience with an EGRA tool is an asset
• Prior experience implementing quasi-experimental methodologies
Other Team Members
• At least a Masters in statistics or a related field
• Fluent English and at proficiency in oral French
• Experience with data collection in West African countries 
• Past experience with an EGRA tool is an asset (A national pedagogical specialist with good 
experience with EGRA to contribute in the study and in recommendation design as the project 
does not have Education specialist)
Experience / knowledge of school feeding, education, health, nutrition and food security sector trends 
and best practices is an asset
VIII. Evaluation Management and Coordination
The external consultants will ensure the evaluation's independence. They will report technically and 
administratively to CRS. The consultant team lead will be responsible for ensuring on-time delivery and 
quality assurance of deliverables.
The inception report and the provisional report will be validated by technical focal points with the 
support of the MGD 2017 project team and Senior Technical Advisor in Education. 
* At the Regional and HQ level: The technical focal point for CRS will be the Regional Technical Advisor 
MEAL (RTA MEAL). However, according to CRS MEAL policies and procedures, the MEAL colleagues at 
HQ, and the Technical advisors for Education will also contribute to the MTE report review. 
* At Country Program level: The administrative focal points will be the Head of Programming (HOP) and 
the Chief of Party (COP) of FFEII MGD17/Keun Faaba Project. 
Benin's MEAL team (MEAL Coordinator and project MEAL) will work together to ensure the quality of 
data and assessment results. They will conduct field supervision visits to monitor the midterm 
evaluation study activities in target communities to ensure high-quality data collection and 
management. 
Moreover:
- CRS will approve the key personnel of the external consultant before each evaluation. Additionally, 
through a competitive bid, project MEAL staff will provide a database of enumerators based on 
253
selection criteria. The consultant will choose the bests of them to perform this data collection. This 
selection should respect gender balance at least 30% of women against 70% men.
- CRS Project team will provide the resources listed in section IX and will assist with introductions to 
high profile in-country stakeholders as necessary. 
- CRS will facilitate the meetings between the consultants and the various stakeholders by receiving 
authorization from the Ministry of Primary and Maternal Education.
IX. Evaluation Resources
The following reference resources are available for this study and should be utilized by the Consultant. 
• Baseline, Mid-term, and Final FFE I evaluations /reports
• MGD17/Keun Faaba baseline tools and report
• MGD17/Keun Faaba semi-annual reports (project level)
• The databases available on the MGD17/Keun Faaba project indicators
• FFE I result of EGRA developed by WEI
• Evaluation plan
• Stakeholder analysis 
• MEAL design documents (PMP, Data collection plan, Indicator Performance Tracking Table (IPTT), 
Logframe, etc..)
• All articles or reports on the education sector in Benin;
• MGD17/Keun Faaba Terms of Reference of Baseline Study
• MGD17/Keun Faaba Performance Monitoring Plan approved by the donor
• MGD17/Keun Faaba award agreement include all important documentUSDA Monitoring and 
Evaluation Policy (https://www.fas.usda.gov/sites/default/files/2014-03/evalpol.pdf)
X. Structure of Proposal and Submission Guidelines
Consultants or consultant firms wishing to apply to conduct these evaluations should send their CVs, 
along with a technical proposal that includes at least the following specifications: 
- A description of the firm’s expertise (maximum 5 pages) 
- The different tasks they are planning to undertake in order to fulfill the mission (including a 
detailed explanation of the methodology they will use) 
- A detailed budget according to the illustrated models 
- A sample of similar work undertaken as the lead consultant
NB: The ToRs are subjected to review and changes by USDA prior to contracting the consultant or 
consultant firm, for which negotiations with the selected consultant or firm will be required to finalize 
the terms of the contract. 
The proposal should be sent either in a sealed envelope to CRS at the following address: Catholic Relief 
Services-USCCB, Benin-Togo Program, Lot 11 Les Cocotiers, 01 BP 518 RP, Cotonou, Benin, or 
electronically in PDF, no later than January 10, 2018, at 5:00 PM (Benin local time) to 
benin@global.crs.org, with copy to the CRS Head of Programming (nickie.sene@crs.org). The subject 
254
line should read: "Consultant for the midterm evaluation of the CRS FFE II PROJECT”. Any additional 
information sent beyond what has been requested will not be considered. 
255
Annex 16: Conflict of Interest Form