December 2021
This evaluation report was produced at the request of the United States Agency for International Development. It 
was prepared independently by the IT Shows, Inc.’s Evaluation Team, Dr. Karla Giuliano Sarr, Ms. Isabelle McMahon, 
Dr. Michel Rousseau, Ms Alice Michelazzi, Ms Amina Chire, and M Ismail Ahmed
Improving Reading in Djibouti – Midterm Performance 
Evaluation of the Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity 
(DEGRA)
ii
Improving Reading in Djibouti – Midterm
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF THE DJIBOUTI EARLY GRADE 
READING ACTIVITY (DEGRA)
December 30, 2021
7200AA20D00015 / 72060321F00001
DISCLAIMER
This document was prepared by the Evaluation Team from IT Shows Inc. for review by the United 
States Agency for International Development. The views expressed in this document do not necessarily 
reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States 
Government.
iii
ABSTRACT
The Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity (DEGRA), funded by the United States Agency for 
International Development (USAID), is a five-year (2019-2024), $11,386,528 project to improve reading 
outcomes for more than 55,000 children in Grades 1–5. This report presents the results of a midterm 
performance evaluation aimed to determine DEGRA effectiveness, document lessons learned, and make 
recommendations for improvement. The evaluation followed a convergent mixed-methods approach 
and sought to address six evaluation questions. The questions focus on each of the three project 
components, as well as on factors contributing to or hampering success, the theory of change, and 
emerging signs of sustainability. Overall, DEGRA’s accomplishments at midterm are impressive. For 
component 1 (improving reading instruction), midterm EGRA results show meaningful improvement in 
students’ reading scores. The proportion of students attaining or exceeding established benchmarks has 
increased for all subtasks since November 2020. Possible contributing factors for positive results may 
include DEGRA’s progressive phonics-based syllabic strategy, teacher training, and emphasis on 
improved supervision. DEGRA has also met its midterm targets for the third component (systems￾strengthening). Educator training, TLM development, and the creation and implementation of the 
supervision dashboard all contribute to capacity building of the larger education sector. The evaluation 
team notes evidence of emerging sustainability of project results. At the same time, DEGRA’s second 
component (community engagement) has suffered multiple setbacks, constituting the weakest link in the 
project’s approach at midterm. PTA mobilization faces particular system-level challenges. A close 
analysis of the theory of change also indicates areas for improvement.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The midterm evaluation of the Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity (DEGRA) is the result of work 
conducted by the USAID team, supported by international experts Isabelle McMahon, Alice Michelazzi, 
Dr. Karla Giuliano Sarr, and Dr. Michel Rousseau, as well as national experts Dr. Amina Saïd Chiré and 
Ismail Ahmed.
The evaluation team expresses our gratitude to all those who contributed to the evaluation, at the 
national and regional levels, as well as at headquarters in the United States. The quality of their 
observations, responses, and suggestions made it possible to obtain the information necessary to 
perform an objective analysis of stakeholders’ experiences of project activities and the related results.
We thank the key officials and members of the Ministry of National Education and Vocational Training 
(MENFOP) for facilitating the evaluation team’s work, sharing their viewpoints on DEGRA, and, more 
globally, on reading instruction and learning in Djibouti. 
Many thanks as well to FHI360 implementing partner staff in particular, as well as partners from STS, 
OSC, UNFD, and Paix et Lait for their responsiveness and effective collaboration with the evaluation 
team throughout the evaluation process.
We also thank USAID colleagues Lloyd Jackson, Alpha Diallo, Hanad Robleh, and Saada Abdillahi, 
without whom the DEGRA evaluation would not have been possible. They consistently ensured that the 
evaluation team had the information necessary to develop an accurate and complete evaluation report.
Finally, we would be remiss if we did not thank the data collectors and all the local stakeholders who 
contributed in various ways to this evaluation. We express our gratitude to students, teachers, parents, 
pedagogical advisors, educational consultants, inspectors, and others who shared their thoughts with the 
team. We wish you the very best as you continue your journeys to improve the reading abilities of 
Djibouti’s future. 
- The Evaluation Team
v
CONTENTS
Abstract.......................................................................................................................................................................... iii
Acknowledgments........................................................................................................................................................ iv
Contents.......................................................................................................................................................................... v
Tables............................................................................................................................................................................. vii
Figures............................................................................................................................................................................ vii
Annex Tables................................................................................................................................................................ vii
Annex Figures.............................................................................................................................................................. vii
Acronyms..................................................................................................................................................................... viii
Executive Summary.......................................................................................................................................................x
Evaluation Purpose & Evaluation Questions...........................................................................................................1
Evaluation Purpose...................................................................................................................................................1
Evaluation Questions...............................................................................................................................................1
Project background.......................................................................................................................................................2
Evaluation methods & limitations..............................................................................................................................3
Evaluation Methodology..........................................................................................................................................3
Limitations..................................................................................................................................................................4
Findings............................................................................................................................................................................5
EQ1.a) Has DEGRA been achieving its intended outcomes for reading instruction?..............................5
EQ1.b) Are there comparisons/conclusions that can be discerned from students benefiting from 
DEGRA and those that did not?...........................................................................................................................7
EQ1.c) What is the impact of the new instructional methods of teaching reading introduced by 
DEGRA on children’s learning outcomes?.......................................................................................................10
EQ1.d-e) What is the impact of pedagogical supervision and support on children's learning 
outcomes? Has pedagogical supervision and support been sufficient in the country, particularly in 
the remote rural schools?....................................................................................................................................16
EQ2.a) Has DEGRA been achieving its intended outcomes for community participation? .................18
EQ2.b) Has DEGRA been effective in mobilizing communities and engaging the PTAs in reading 
activities?...................................................................................................................................................................20
EQ2.c) Has DEGRA been effective in reinforcing NGO capacities to carry out reading activities?..24
EQ3.a) Has DEGRA been achieving its intended outcomes for the IR-3?................................................24
EQ3.b) Has DEGRA been successful in creating and enabling a favorable policy environment to 
improve reading instruction?...............................................................................................................................26
EQ3.c) Has DEGRA been effective in collaborating with CRIPEN, CFEEF, the Ministry’s cabinet 
through the Office of the Secretary General, the Office of the Executive Secretary, the Office of 
the General Inspector, and the Evaluation Unit?............................................................................................28
EQ4) What have been some primary factors that have contributed to success or presented specific 
challenges in DEGRA’s implementation? What alternative approaches could lead to better results?
....................................................................................................................................................................................29
vi
EQ5) Do the original assumptions and the theory of change still hold? If not, what adaptations are 
needed to ensure that DEGRA remains on track to achieve its expected results?...............................32
EQ6) What has the implementer achieved so far to ensure sustainability?.............................................33
Conclusions..................................................................................................................................................................36
Recommendations.......................................................................................................................................................38
Annexes.........................................................................................................................................................................40
Annex I: Evaluation Statement of Work...........................................................................................................40
Annex II: Evaluation Methods and Limitations................................................................................................53
Annex III: Data Collection Instruments: Survey and Observation Tools.................................................63
Annex IV: Data Collection Instruments: KII and FGD Unique Questions............................................ 100
Annex V: Detailed EGRA Results.................................................................................................................... 108
Annex VI: Additional Quantitative Tables..................................................................................................... 111
Annex VII: List of Services and Organizations Consulted and Planning of School Visits................... 129
Annex VIII: List of Documents Reviewed...................................................................................................... 131
Annex IX: Evaluation Framework.................................................................................................................... 134
Annex X: Team Composition.......................................................................................................................... 138
vii
TABLES
Table 1: Respondents in quantitative sample, by tool...............................................................................................4
Table 2: IR–1 results at mid-term..................................................................................................................................6
Table 3: IR2 Results at mid-term.................................................................................................................................19
Table 4: IR-3 Results at midterm.................................................................................................................................25
FIGURES
Figure 1: Regional map of Djibouti................................................................................................................................2
Figure 2: Average fluency scores on timed subtasks, by timepoint.......................................................................7
Figure 3 : Average percent correct on untimed subtasks, by timepoint..............................................................8
Figure 4: Teachers’ practice of formative assessment techniques by location..................................................12
Figure 5: Proportion of teachers reporting supervision by location...................................................................16
Figure 6: Parents' reporting of key message content by location (n=168) ........................................................21
ANNEX TABLES
Annex Table 1: Evaluation Matrix................................................................................................................................55
Annex Table 2: Number of schools sampled per region.......................................................................................57
Annex Table 3: Respondents in quantitative sample, by tool ...............................................................................57
Annex Table 4: Quantitative sample power calculation.........................................................................................58
Annex Table 5: Number of schools for FGD per region.......................................................................................58
Annex Table 6: Participants in qualitative sample by stakeholder.......................................................................59
Annex Table 7: Data collection team composition by gender..............................................................................60
Annex Table 8: Bias, limitations and constraints......................................................................................................61
Annex Table 9: Benchmark by subtasks.................................................................................................................. 108
Annex Table 10: Summary statistics for students participating in EGRA sample (unweighted)................ 111
Annex Table 11: Summary statistics for parents participating in survey (unweighted) ............................... 112
Annex Table 12: Summary statistics for teachers participating in survey (unweighted) ............................. 113
Annex Table 13: Summary statistics for school type participating in survey (unweighted)........................ 114
Annex Table 14: Summary statistics for school enrollment participating in survey (unweighted) ........... 115
Annex Table 15: Student answers to key questions (weighted answers)....................................................... 116
Annex Table 16: Answers of parents of children in Grade 1 or 2 to key questions (weighted answers)
........................................................................................................................................................................................... 118
Annex Table 17: All Parents answers to key questions (weighted answers)................................................. 120
Annex Table 18: Parent member of the PTA answers to key questions (weighted answers)................... 121
Annex Table 19: Teachers of Grades 1 or 2 answers to key questions (weighted answers).................... 123
Annex Table 20: Directors’ answers to key questions (weighted answers).................................................. 127
ANNEX FIGURES
Annex Figure 1: Evaluation process.............................................................................................................................53
Annex Figure 2: Percentage of zero score ............................................................................................................. 108
Annex Figure 3: Percentage of students attaining or exceeding the benchmark by timepoint.................. 109
Annex Figure 4: Percentage of students attaining or exceeding the benchmark by zone........................... 109
Annex Figure 5 : Percentage of students attaining or exceeding the benchmark by gender..................... 110
viii
ACRONYMS
AAM Assessor Accuracy Measure
APC Apprentissage par les Compétences (Competency-based learning)
APE L’Association des Parents d’Élèves (Parent Teacher Association)
AMELP Activity Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan
CAL Center for Applied Linguistics
CBE Capacity Building/OD & M&E Expert
CFEEF Centre de Formation des Enseignants de l'Enseignement Fondamental (Center for Basic 
Education Teacher Training)
CGE Comité de Gestion d’École (School Management Committees)
CLA Collaboration, Learning and Adaptation
CLPM Correct letters per minute 
COP Chief of Party
CP Conseiller pédagogique (pedagogical advisor) 
CRIPEN Centre de Recherche, d'Information et de Production de l'Éducation Nationale
CSO Civil Society Association
CSOSP USAID Civil Society Organization Strengthening Program
CWPM Correct words per minute 
CWSN Children with special needs
DDCCS DirDobiro Conseils Consulting & Services 
DEC Development Experience Clearinghouse
DEP Direction de l’enseignement public (public schools director)
DGE Direction Générale de l'Éducation
DR Direction des régions (regions director)
DEGRA Activité de Renforcement de la Lecture dans l'Enseignement de Base (Djibouti Early 
Grade Reading Activity) 
EGIS Équité Genre et Inclusion Sociale (Gender Equity and Social Inclusion)
EGR Early Grade Reading 
EGRA Early Grade Reading Assessment 
ET Evaluation team
ENI Evaluations Nationales Indépendantes
FGD Focus Group Discussions
FOI Fidelity of Implementation
FY Fiscal Year
GESI Gender Equity and Social Inclusion
GLPE Groupement local des partenaires de l’éducation (Local Group of Education Partners)
GoDj Government of Djibouti
GTPL Groupe de Techique pour la Promotion de la Lecture (Working Group to Promote 
Reading)
GLPE Groupe Local des Partenaires de l’Éducation (Local Education Partners Group)
GPE Global Partnership for Education
IBTCI International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc.
IG Inspectrice générale (general inspector)
IGEG Inspection Générale de l’Enseignement Général
IRR Inter Rater Reliability
IP Implementing Partner
IR Intermediate Result
IRB Institutional Review Board (IRB)
ITS IT Shows
ix
KII Key Informant Interview
LOE Level of Effort
LOI Language of Instruction 
MEL Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning 
MENFOP Ministry of National Education and Vocational Training
NGO Non-Governmental Organization
OQEA Observatoire de la Qualité des Enseignements et des Apprentissage
ORF Oral Reading Fluency 
OSC Overseas Strategic Consulting, Ltd
PAD Project Appraisal Document
PAE Plan d'Action de l'Éducation (Education Action Plan)
PRECAD Programme de Renforcement des Capacités des Associations de Djibouti
PRODA Expanding Opportunities for Learning Project
PTA Parent Teacher Association
SBCC Social and Behavior Change Communication
SCAPE Strategy of Accelerated Growth and Promotion of Employment
SE Secrétaire exécutif (executive secretary)
SG Secrétaire général (general secretary)
SMC School Management Committee
STS School-to-School International
TC Technical Commission
TL Team Leader
TLM Teaching and Learning Materials
UNDP Union Nationale des Femmes Djiboutiennes
USAID United States Agency for International Development
x
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity (DEGRA), funded by the United States Agency for 
International Development (USAID), is a five-year (2019-2024), $11,386,528 project to improve reading 
outcomes for more than 55,000 children in Grades 1–5. The activity leverages Djiboutian leaders in the 
Ministère de l’Éducation Nationale et de la Formation Professionnelle (MENFOP) to lead data-informed 
initiatives to improve reading skills. FHI360 leads the effort alongside School-to-School International 
(STS), Overseas Strategic Consulting (OSC), and the Djiboutian non-governmental organizations 
(NGOs) Union National des Femmes de Djibouti (UNFD) and Paix et Lait.
EVALUATION PURPOSE AND EVALUATION QUESTIONS
The primary objectives of this midterm performance evaluation are to determine DEGRA effectiveness, 
document lessons learned, and make recommendations for improvement. The results of the evaluation 
will help USAID/Djibouti to 1) make any necessary adjustments to enhance the effectiveness of DEGRA 
during its remaining implementation period and, 2) inform the design of future activities in alignment 
with USG strategic objectives. Although the findings of this midterm evaluation are primarily directed at
USAID/Djibouti program and technical officers, the report will be shared with MENFOP and other key 
education partners, including the donor community, researchers, and other key stakeholders working in 
education. As the implementing partner, FHI360 may use lessons learned from the evaluation to identify 
areas for improvement or revision to ensure maximum impact.
PROJECT BACKGROUND
DEGRA implements a coordinated approach that engages teachers, PTAs, and MENFOP to catalyze 
change. It supports MENFOP to create inclusive, gender-equitable, and enriching environments for 
reading at the school, community, and policy levels. Through quality materials and multiple layers of 
individualized support, the project ensures teachers use evidence-based instructional practices for 
reading, tailored to student needs, based on regular assessment data. Parent-Teacher Associations 
(PTAs) and will extend learning beyond the classroom with simple activities that encourage reading in 
the community. Three components guide implementation at three levels: 1) instruction, 2) community 
participation, 3) policy. Through collaboration with MENFOP, DEGRA implements country-wide in all 
151 public primary schools using French. 
EVALUATION QUESTIONS, DESIGN, METHODS AND LIMITATIONS
This evaluation seeks to address six evaluation questions and sub-questions regarding the performance 
of the project at midterm. The questions focus on each of the three project components, as well as on 
factors contributing to or hampering success, the theory of change, and emerging signs of sustainability.
The evaluation methodology followed a convergent mixed-methods approach. Data collection occurred 
between October 25 and November 23, 2021. IT Shows, Inc. (ITS), led the evaluation in collaboration 
with DirDobiro Conseils Consulting & Services. Three phases comprised the evaluation process: 1) 
preparation; 2) data collection; and 3) data analysis and report writing. Quantitative sampling employed a 
three-stage stratified cluster approach. In total, 1,279 individuals took part in quantitative activities 
including EGRA, student questionnaires, director/teacher questionnaires, classroom observation, and 
parent questionnaires. Student participants came from Grade 3, as a proxy for end-of-year Grade 2. The 
qualitative sample used purposeful sampling and included seven schools. The evaluation team performed 
43 interviews and spoke with 108 individuals (57 females and 51 males). 
Limitations reflect challenges resulting from a compressed timeframe for data collection as well as 
design-related restrictions. Quantitative methods allow for an understanding of trends but, in absence of 
an experimental design, they cannot provide causal information. Qualitative findings are not 
generalizable, though they are transferable and may be applicable to other stakeholders.
xi
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 
Overall, DEGRA’s accomplishments at midterm are impressive, especially given a challenging operating 
environment. This section presents findings and conclusions organized by evaluation questions.
EQ1.a) Has DEGRA been achieving its intended outcomes for reading instruction? 
EQ1.b) Are there comparisons/conclusions that can be discerned from students 
benefiting from DEGRA and those that did not? EQ1.c) What is the impact of new 
instructional methods of teaching reading introduced by DEGRA on children’s learning 
outcomes? EQ1.d-e) What is the impact of pedagogical supervision and support on 
children's learning outcomes? Has pedagogical supervision and support been sufficient 
in the country, particularly in the remote rural schools? 
Student performance results, based on the 
DEGRA midterm performance evaluation EGRA,
show meaningful improvement in students’ 
reading scores. The proportion of students 
attaining or exceeding established benchmarks 
has increased for all subtasks since November 
2020 (see Annex Figure 3). At 43.1 percent, 
DEGRA has already reached its life-of-project 
target at the beginning of Year 4 for students 
meeting proficiency levels, surpassing the LOP 
target of 35 percent. These results are laudatory 
and distinguish themselves from many EGR 
projects in other countries that struggle to meet 
benchmarks. Results also indicate disparities 
between student learning by location, with results 
in Djibouti Suburbs being weakest. 
The midterm evaluation is limited in its ability to identify causes for the positive changes, but findings 
suggest that DEGRA’s pedagogical approach may be among contributing factors. Feedback from teacher 
focus groups was highly positive and elicited strong statements from educators that DEGRA is “a radical 
change” (School Director, Djibouti Inner City1), “1,000 times better” than the previous approach 
(Teachers FGD, Djibouti Inner City), and asserting that children now manage to read, whereas they had 
troubles doing so in early grades before (KII, School Director, Djibouti Suburbs). In contrast to the 
previous whole-language method, DEGRA employs a progressive phonics-based syllabic strategy that 
begins with the alphabet and guides students to decode. An innovation of DEGRA’s approach within the 
Djiboutian context is the introduction of oral comprehension as a competency for the first time. 
Teacher training has also likely contributed to improved results though teacher attendance remains low 
and symptomatic of a larger sector issue. Qualitative data from Grade 1 and 2 teachers who attended 
trainings were very positive. At the same time, 39.1 percent of teachers surveyed reported they had not 
participated in any formal DEGRA trainings; the percentage is even higher for teachers in the Djibouti 
Suburbs (60.9%). DEGRA’s pivot to developing a pool of trainers was an effective strategy to combat 
attendance issues though regional disparities persist. Similarly, many teachers positively experienced
DEGRA’s emphasis on the supervision and coaching of teachers by pedagogical advisors and school 
directors. But, yet again, application is inconsistent. Finally, DEGRA’s collaborative development of the 
supervision dashboard with MENFOP constitutes a definite project success, even given mixed feedback. 
1
For the purpose of the evaluation, the term “Djibouti Inner City” includes Ras Dika (The European city) and Boulaos (The African city)
“Djibouti suburbs” includes Balbala, which now represents a good portion of Djibouti City.
Annex Figure 3: Percentage of students attaining or 
exceeding the benchmark by timepoint
xii
DEGRA has undertaken curricular revision for Grades 1-3. TLMs are user-friendly, provide diverse 
texts, and elicit higher-order critical thinking skills. Nearly all children surveyed report possessing a 
textbook (95.7%) or student workbook (95.5%) though classroom observation results are lower (79%
and 75.4% respectively). A high percentage of parents surveyed also indicated that their children used 
their workbook (80.5%) textbook (74.6%) “often” or “very often” and qualitative data confirm these 
findings. Children taking their student materials home constructs an important bridge between school 
and the home environment. Children in Djibouti Suburbs seem to have less access to materials. 
EQ2.a) Has DEGRA been achieving its intended outcomes for community participation? 
EQ2.b) Has DEGRA been effective in mobilizing communities and engaging the PTAs in 
reading activities? EQ2.c) Has DEGRA been effective in reinforcing NGO capacities to 
carry out reading activities?
DEGRA’s community-strengthening component, IR-2, has suffered multiple setbacks and makes forthe 
weakest link in the project’s approach at midterm. An imposed slowdown as well as COVID-19 
lockdowns delayed implementation until well into Year 3. Findings indicate that nearly a third (29%) of 
parents are hearing SBCC messages, but more so in urban areas, as might have been expected. Parental 
and PTA mobilization constitute other key aspects of IR-2, and efforts focus on 50 schools within 
Djibouti City. PTA mobilization faces particular system-level challenges, as PTAs are a fairly recent 
phenomenon in Djibouti and fostering their operationalization to support reading initiatives and 
outreach will require a cultural and structural shift. Given the nascent nature of parental activities, 
exploration of their effects will be important for the endline evaluation. Along with changing parental 
attitudes, this work will take time and will likely to continue to lag as other project areas advance. 
DEGRA’s identification of reading corners and reading festivals as exciting events that can galvanize 
community enthusiasm for reading is accurate. Yet since CRIPEN has already been implementing these 
activities, DEGRA should seek to support and amplify CRIPEN’s initiatives. Lastly, setbacks with NGO 
training and coordination further exacerbate the challenges DEGRA has encountered in its community￾engagement efforts.
EQ3.a) Has DEGRA been achieving its intended outcomes for the IR-3? EQ3.b) Has 
DEGRA been successful in creating and enabling a favorable policy environment to 
improve reading instruction? EQ3.c) Has DEGRA been effective in collaborating with 
CRIPEN, CFEEF, the Ministry’s cabinet through the Office of the Secretary General, the 
Office of the Executive Secretary, the Office of the General Inspector, and the Evaluation 
Unit? 
DEGRA has met its midterm targets for systems-strengthening. Educator training, TLM development, 
and the creation and implementation of the supervision dashboard all contribute to capacity building of 
the larger education sector. The development of the EGRA tool and its embrace by MENFOP, as well as 
MENFOP’s Evaluation Unit’s improved capacity to fully oversee an EGRA process, also make for 
impressive achievements. FHI360 staff and its partners (STS and OSC) enjoy a collegial and productive 
relationship with MENFOP. Findings demonstrate that focal points and DEGRA technical staff work well 
together and have open and constructive conversations that promote progress. At the same time, the 
Steering Committee and the Reading Promotion Commission have not been functional. Because of the
high level of functionality that has occurred without these bodies, DEGRA should be mindful that efforts 
to reinstate them not come at the expense of already productive collaborative arrangements.
EQ4) What have been some primary factors that have contributed to success or 
presented specific challenges in DEGRA’s implementation? What alternative approaches 
could lead to better results?
The project has faced minor internal challenges related to staff turnover, while handling significant 
challenges related to climate issues, sociocultural and economic barriers, inactive PTAs, a complex 
xiii
ecosystem of Government of Djibouti institutions, and of course, COVID-19 complications. In many 
cases, COVID-19 challenges prompted creative and innovative solutions that have strengthened project 
operation, like shorter training sessions with more regular coaching opportunities. A number of internal 
factors also seem to support the project’s success, such as its effective collaboration among partners, 
regular meetings, active mitigation of COVID-19 obstacles, and emphasis on effective and close 
partnership with MENFOP and USAID. MENFOP’s competence and engagement have proven invaluable
throughout the process and bode well for long-term improvements. 
EQ5) Do the original assumptions and the theory of change still hold? If not, what 
adaptations are needed to ensure that DEGRA remains on track to achieve its expected 
results?
Close analysis of the theory of change points to areas that require further comprehensive development. 
For example, detail is lacking to articulate clear linkage between project activities and outcomes; key 
assumptions also remain missing. Working sessions with partners aimed to fully unpack the project’s 
hidden assumptions about the linkages between each component’s activity and project results may help 
further enhance already strong project results and perhaps provide solutions for IR-2.
EQ6) What has the implementer achieved so far to ensure sustainability?
The evaluation team notes evidence of the emerging sustainability of project results, including structural 
changes like the CFEEF’s pre-service reading-instruction module, revised TLMs, the supervision 
dashboard, and government-approved established benchmarks for reading competencies. Capacity
building may also foster long-term changes, notably educators who benefited from DEGRA trainings in 
new instructional methods and the establishment of a pool of trainers for cascade trainings.
KEY RECOMMENDATIONS
The abbreviated list of actionable recommendations below provides suggestions for FHI360 and partners
to further strengthen the activity during the remaining Years 4 and 5. Items in parentheses suggest the 
stakeholder responsible for enacting the recommendation. (See the end of the main report for a full list.)
ALL - Extend the project timeline at least until the end of the 2023-2024 academic year to allow 
for complete implementation in Grade 5. (USAID)
IR1 - Review TLM production process to improve quality control and the printing process to avoid 
minor errors and ensure timely delivery. (IR1 Team, CRIPEN)
- Ensure all children have access to the student manual and workbook. (IR1 Team, CRIPEN)
- Offer teachers and directors alternative training modalities to improve teacher attendance. 
(IR1 Team, CRIPEN)
- Track teacher participation in trainings through a centralized system to identify teachers who 
might need assistance. (USAID)
- Review supervision dashboard to streamline required data entry. Place emphasis on 
information necessary for MENFOP, ensuring coaching and pedagogical advisor 
responsiveness to teacher needs. (IR1 Team, IR3 Team, MENFOP)
IR2 - Review and revise DEGRA’s IR-2 strategy to adapt activities, targets, and work plan to the 
realities of PTA capacity and function. (IR2 Team, CRIPEN, GoDj Special Advisor for PTAs, 
USAID, UNFD)
IR3 - Continue to support the MENFOP Evaluation Unit with capacity-building activities. Strategize 
ways to increase the number of staff trained to mitigate turnover. (IR3 Team, M&E Team)
1
EVALUATION PURPOSE & EVALUATION QUESTIONS
Evaluation Purpose
USAID/Djibouti is committed to supporting the Government of Djibouti’s education goals and has 
invested heavily in the country’s education sector. In 2019, USAID/Djibouti launched the Djibouti’s Early 
Grade Reading Activity (DEGRA). DEGRA is a five-year activity (2019–2024) designed to improve 
reading achievement for Djiboutian children at the primary school level (Grades 1 to 5). The DEGRA 
activity seeks to improve the reading outcomes of more than 55,000 children. DEGRA leverages 
Djiboutian leaders in the National Ministry of Education and Vocational Training (MENFOP) and civil 
society to lead data-informed initiatives to improve reading skills through continuous cycles of 
collaboration, learning, and adaptation (CLA). With a budget of 11,368, 527 USD, FHI360 implements 
the activity alongside its partners School-to-School International (STS), Overseas Strategic Consulting 
(OSC), and Djiboutian non-governmental organizations (NGOs) Union National des Femmes de 
Djibouti (UNFD) and Paix et Lait. IT Shows, Inc. (ITS), in collaboration with the Djiboutian partner 
DirDobiro Conseils Consulting & Services carried out a multilevel and multiphased midterm 
performance evaluation between October and December 2021.
The midterm performance evaluation of DEGRA provides an opportunity for USAID/Djibouti to 
examine key learnings from the implementation of the DEGRA activity to date. Findings, conclusions, 
and recommendations will assist USAID/Djibouti in determining what, if any, adjustments to the DEGRA 
activity are necessary to more effectively achieve the expected outcomes of the activity and the broader 
US Government strategic objectives in Djibouti. The primary objectives of this midterm performance 
evaluation are to determine DEGRA activity effectiveness, document lessons learned, and to make 
recommendations for improvement. The evaluation will assess whether DEGRA activities to date have 
been on track to achieve the intended outcomes, and document lessons based on factors that have 
contributed to the success or presented specific challenges in DEGRA’s implementation. The results of 
the evaluation will help USAID/Djibouti to i) make any necessary adjustments to enhance the 
effectiveness of DEGRA during its remaining implementation period and, ii) inform the design of future 
activities. 
Although the findings of this midterm evaluation are primarily directed at USAID/Djibouti program and 
technical officers, the report will be shared with MENFOP and other key education partners, including 
the donor community, researchers, and other key stakeholders working in education. As the 
implementing partner, FHI360 will be able to review the lessons learned from the evaluation to identify 
areas that can be improved or revised to ensure maximum impact.
Evaluation Questions
This evaluation seeks to address the six following questions regarding the performance of the 
project, within the context of USAID/Djibouti’s objectives:
1a) Has DEGRA been achieving its intended outcomes for the reading instruction 
component?
1b) Are there comparisons/conclusions that can be discerned from students benefiting from 
DEGRA and those that did not?
1c) What is the impact of new instructional methods of teaching reading introduced by 
DEGRA on children’s learning outcomes?
1d) What is the impact of pedagogical supervision and support on children's learning 
outcomes? 
1e) Has pedagogical supervision and support been sufficient in the country, particularly in the 
remote rural schools? 
2
2a) Has DEGRA been achieving its intended outcomes for the community participation 
component?
2b) Has DEGRA been effective in mobilizing communities and engaging the PTAs in reading 
activities?
2c) Has DEGRA been effective in reinforcing NGO capacities to carry out reading activities?
3a) Has DEGRA been achieving its intended outcomes for the education policy component?
3b) Has DEGRA been successful in creating and enabling a favorable policy environment to 
improve reading instruction? 
3c) Has DEGRA been effective in collaborating with CRIPEN, CFEEF, the Ministry’s cabinet 
through the Office of the Secretary General, the Office of the Executive Secretary, the 
Office of the General Inspector, and the Evaluation Unit? 
4) What have been some primary factors that have contributed to success or presented 
specific challenges in DEGRA’s implementation?
What alternative approaches could lead to better results?
5) Do the original assumptions and the theory of change still hold?
If not, what adaptations are needed to ensure that DEGRA remains on track to achieve 
its expected results?
6) What has the implementer achieved so far to ensure sustainability?
PROJECT BACKGROUND
DEGRA began implementation at a critical time for the 
Government of Djibouti (GoDj) as MENFOP had just 
launched its new three-year Education Action Plan (2017–
2020), which concentrated on improving children’s 
learning outcomes with a focus on reading and 
mathematics in primary education. MENFOP’s long-term 
Master Plan (2020–2035) is also anticipated to prioritize 
literacy and numeracy in basic education.
With the passage of the Education Law of 2000, MENFOP 
began implementing reforms that led to concrete results 
in access to primary education, such that the Gross 
Enrolment Rate (GER) increased from 49.5 percent in 
2003 to 78.5 percent in 2015. To meet one of the 
Millennium Development Goals for 2015, the GoDj 
increased the education budget from 16 percent of the 
national budget in 2007 to 20 percent in 2016. Despite 
the increase in access to schools, many challenges remain. 
For example, efforts to increase the enrollment of girls 
and other underrepresented groups are lacking. An 
estimated 37 percent of school-aged children have 
dropped out of school or never attended. Preschool is not compulsory, and only 5 percent of children 
attend formal preschool, while about 68 percent of children attend Koranic community-based 
preschools. The repetition rate in early primary education stands at 5 percent until Grade 5, the final 
year of primary school, where the rate jumps to 9 percent. The education system also suffers from a 
range of problems, such as weak institutional structures, a low quality of teacher training and in-service 
continuing education, large class sizes, and low student achievement rates in major subjects. 
A performance evaluation of the previous 2009–2013 USAID education project, and the Workforce 
Development Assessment conducted in April 2014, highlight the need to reinforce basic literacy to 
Figure 1: Regional map of Djibouti
3
improve learning achievement. Only 40 percent of fifth graders achieved the minimum mastery for the 
primary education cycle in 2013. In June 2021, FHI360 conducted a policy-linking workshop on 
benchmarks, which showed that among the 620 children from Grade 2 who passed the EGRA test, 21.3
percent reached the minimum global proficiency on reading words or decoding, 20 percent on the 
identification of letters and sounds, 6.1 percent on reading comprehension, and 11.7 percent on oral 
comprehension.
It is within this context that FHI360, along with partners STS International and OSC, began the 
implementation of DEGRA, a five-year activity valued at 11,368,527 USD. The activity implements a 
coordinated approach that engages teachers, communities, and MENFOP to catalyze change. DEGRA 
supports MENFOP to create inclusive, gender-equitable, and enriching environments for reading at the 
school, community, and policy levels. Through quality materials and multiple layers of individualized 
support, DEGRA ensures that teachers use evidence-based instructional practices for reading, ones 
tailored to student needs and based on regular assessment data. Parent Teacher Associations (PTAs) 
and civil society organizations (CSOs) are extending learning beyond the classroom with simple activities 
that encourage reading in the community, such as festivals, tutoring, and reading at home. Three 
components guide implementation at three levels: 1) instruction, 2) community participation, 3) policy. 
Through collaboration with MENFOP, DEGRA implements country-wide in all 151 public primary 
schools. French is the language of instruction.
EVALUATION METHODS & LIMITATIONS
The midterm performance evaluation of the DEGRA activity took place between September and 
December 2021 and followed a mixed-methods design. The evaluation team included a team leader and 
a capacity building/organizational development and monitoring and evaluation expert, both of whom 
traveled to Djibouti to work in-country. Two local experts from Djibouti, a statistician and a researcher,
also contributed to the team (see Annex X for more details). DirDobiro Conseils Consulting & Services 
(DDCC&S), a local data-collection firm, hired data collectors and organized the logistics of data 
collection. Data collection occurred between October 25 and November 18, 2021. (See Annex II for a 
more detailed version of this section.)
Three phases comprised the evaluation process:
1) Preparation: Review of project documents and other relevant documents, identification of 
stakeholders, development of quantitative and qualitative data-collection instruments, 
training of enumerators.
2) Quantitative and qualitative data collection.
3) Data analysis and report writing.
Evaluation Methodology
The evaluation methodology is a convergent mixed-methods approach, in which quantitative and 
qualitative data collection take place simultaneously to provide for breadth and depth to yield answers 
to the evaluation questions. Qualitative data collection took place between October 25 and November 
23, 2021, while quantitative data collection took place between November 9 and November 18, 2021.
Document Review: Review of documents provided an understanding of activity objectives and 
implementation characteristics, contexts, and challenges, and helped to identify and describe achieved 
activity results. Further consultation of documents throughout the analysis and writing process allowed 
for triangulation with primary data (see list of documents in Annex VII).
Quantitative Methods: At the school-classroom level, in 50 schools, the evaluation employed the 
Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA), three questionnaires (students, teachers/director, and 
parents), and a classroom observation tool. (See Annexes III for survey and observation tools.)
4
Qualitative Methods: The evaluation team visited seven schools, where its members focused on 
gauging teachers’ views on the new curriculum and materials, as well as parents’ (PTA members) 
understanding, and awareness of issues related to parental engagement and PTA activities. At the 
systems-level, the evaluation team interviewed USAID/Djibouti education personnel to gain a deeper 
understanding of how policies are interpreted and implemented at all levels of the educational system. 
The team interviewed key national and regional MENFOP officials, government partners, and DEGRA 
staff from implementing organizations (FHI360 and its partners). 
Sampling
Quantitative sampling: It employed three-stage stratified cluster approach. At the first stage, schools 
were stratified by region, while at the second stage, one stream of classes for each target grade was 
selected. Finally, at the third stage, within each selected stream, the approach stratified students by 
gender. A total of 50 schools were randomly sampled in Djibouti City, Ali Sabieh, Arta, Dikhil, Obock, 
and Tadjourah regions. 
At each school, data collectors observed Grade 1 and Grade 2 teachers during a reading lesson in the 
selected stream. Teachers and the school director subsequently completed a questionnaire. Data 
collectors randomly selected 10 to 12 students in Grade 32 to take part in the EGRA assessment. These 
same students also sat for a student questionnaire. In total, 1,279 individuals took part in quantitative 
activities, as further detailed in Table 1.
Table 1: Respondents in quantitative sample, by tool
Instrument Quantity
EGRA – Student Questionnaires 556
Director – Teacher Questionnaires 144
Observation 95
Parent 484
Total 1,279
Qualitative sampling: Seven schools took part in the more extensive qualitative data collection using 
FGDs and KIIs. The selection criteria included the existence of a PTA and the type of community 
(remote/regional capital and inner city/suburban). The evaluation team performed 43 interviews and 
spoke with 108 individuals (57 females and 51 males). 
Data Analysis
The evaluation questions guided the analysis for both quantitative and qualitative strands. Quantitative 
data analysis was purely descriptive and assisted by the use of STATA. Analysis of qualitative data 
worked from interview transcripts and began in the field as interesting or significant points emerged. 
Once collection was complete, thematic coding drew on findings organized by evaluation question and 
approach. An Excel coding process also occurred simultaneously. In all cases, evaluators paid attention 
to trends and outliers, as well as to illustrative quotes.
Limitations
The evaluation team encountered challenges throughout the evaluation process due to the compressed 
time available for quantitative data collection. In addition to challenges in the field, limitations related to 
2 Due to the timing of the evaluation, Grade 3 was selected as a proxy for Grade 2 learning outcomes. FHI360 used the same approach for the 
November 2020 EGRA baseline, therefore the results are comparable.
5
the research methods cropped up. As with most qualitative research, because of a purposive sample, the 
results are not generalizable, though they are transferable, as elements of this study can connect to 
others’ experiences and thereby provide valuable insights that may be applicable to other stakeholders.
(See Annex II for a comprehensive list of limitations)
FINDINGS
EQ1.a) Has DEGRA been achieving its intended outcomes for reading instruction?
DEGRA’s first intermediary result (IR) focuses on improving reading instruction for Grades 1 through 5. 
It includes two sub-results: 1) Improved curriculum and reading materials used in primary schools, and 
2) Teacher practice in reading instruction improved. Table 2 provides insights into the health of DEGRA 
results at the midterm timepoint. The table includes one top-line indicator relevant to reading 
instruction, as well as five other indicators. Note that far exceeding a target may indicate substantial 
success or, conversely, signal inadequate target setting. 
Analysis shows that DEGRA has met one of six of the IR1 indicators for Year 1-3. The first top-line 
indicator reflects a benchmark of students meeting 68 points. The score identified here is the result of 
the midterm evaluation EGRA, not the midterm EGRA performed by the MENFOP in November 2021
as results were not available at the time the report was written. As the table indicates, topline results 
depended upon EGRA, which had been delayed until Year 3 for various reasons (see EQ4). The ES 1.1 
indicator has some limitations, because it does not take into account benchmarks at the subtask level. 
For instance, a child who does not speak French at all could still achieve the benchmark if they mastered 
another subtask, such as knowing the letters very well. 
6
Table 2: IR–1 results at mid-term
Indicator Type Year 1
Achieved
Year 1
Target
Year 2
Achieved
Year 2 
Target
Year 3 
Achieved
Year 3 
Target
% Achieved
against
Combined 
Year 1-3
Target
LOP 
Target
% 
Achieved
against
LOP
Target
Top-line indicators
Percentage of learners targeted for USG assistance 
who attain a minimum grade-level proficiency in 
reading at the end of Grade 2
ES. 1-1 N/A N/A Baseline 
value: 
20.5%
N/A 43% 30% 143% 35% 123%
IR–1: Reading Instruction Improved
Number of primary or secondary textbooks and 
other teaching and learning materials (TLMs) that 
are inclusively representative provided with USG 
assistance3
ES.1-49 
- PPR
2,900 24,031 81,700 124,686 45,138 34,077 71% 240,456 54%
Number of education administrators and officials 
who complete professional development activities 
with USG assistance
ES.1-12 
- PPR
98 231 182 231 238 231 75%4 1,155 48%
Number of learners in primary schools or 
equivalent non-school based settings reached with 
USG education assistance
ES.1-3 -
PPR
9,830 11,183 24,013 26,716 37,546 37,546 94%5 60,043 62%
Percentage of beneficiary primary school teachers 
who correctly use evidence-based instructional 
methods (including inclusive gender-sensitive and 
socially inclusive methods) as a result of training 
and coaching
Custom N/A N/A 35% 75% 36% 80% 45% N/A N/A
Percentage of teachers/educators who receive 
coaching or mentoring with USG support
Custom N/A N/A 56% 75% 59% 80% 74% N/A N/A
3
The estimated number of children that CRIPEN used for printing is different from what the project used at startup
4
The same people are being trained every year
5
The LOP target is difficult to calculate as cohorts move up grades each year, and there may be drop-outs and repeaters, therefore 100 percent means all the children in public school in Grade 3 have 
been reached.
7
EQ1.b) Are there comparisons/conclusions that can be discerned from students 
benefiting from DEGRA and those that did not?
The midterm evaluation draws on EGRA as well as survey and interview/focus group findings to answer 
this question. Recall that DEGRA serves all public schools in Djibouti. Therefore, comparisons are made 
across time, reaching back to the period before the introduction of DEGRA where possible. 
Learning outcomes improved
Analysis of EGRA results demonstrate meaningful improvements in students’ learning outcomes in 
reading between the baseline and midterm evaluation assessments. This progression mimics similar 
improvements noted by the internal DEGRA baseline study.
6 Recall that the evaluation team used the 
same tool as the baseline but did not have access to datasets for direct comparisons. Rather, we refer to 
findings from the baseline report. Figures 2 and 3 present results on timed and untimed tasks.
Figure 2: Average fluency scores on timed subtasks, by timepoint
6
FHI360 & School-to-School International. (April 2021). Djibouti Early Grade reading Activity Early Grade Reading Assessment Report. 
20.1
13.8
42.4
12.4
6.9
29.4
4.6
1.1
17.0
0
10
20
30
40
50
Letter Name or Sound Made-up word Oral Reading Fluency
Average number of correct items per minute
Nov 2021 April 2021 Nov 2020
8
Figure 3 : Average percent correct on untimed subtasks, by timepoint
Compared with previous timepoints, students show improvement on all their fluency scores. In 
November 2020, students were able to read in one minute an average of 17 letters, 1.1 nonwords, and 
4.6 words of the passage. One year later, students were able to read an average of 42.4 letters, 13.8 
nonwords, and 20.1 words of the passage. Analysis also shows satisfactory improvements on untimed 
subtasks. Students’ average performance increased from 43 percent for initial sounds, 31.1 percent for 
silly sentences, 1.8 percent for reading comprehension, and 8.9 percent for listening comprehension to 
65.8 percent for initial sounds, 68.7 percent for silly sentences, 27.3 percent for reading comprehension,
and 35.8 percent for listening comprehension. A reduction in the percentage of students with zero 
scores is also observed for all subtasks, although for some subtasks (initial sounds, letter sounds, and 
oral reading fluency) proportions are similar or even higher compared to what was observed in April 
2021.
Importantly, findings also demonstrate improvements in the proportion of students attaining or 
exceeding established benchmarks (see benchmarks in Annex V) for all subtasks since November 2020. 
For all benchmarks, the percentage of students are higher than what was observed last year. 
Disaggregation demonstrates very small differences between girls and boys at this timepoint (less than 2
percent for all subtasks), while students’ location presents greater variation in results. Students from 
Djibouti Suburbs present the lowest proportion of students meeting or exceeding the benchmarks. An
analysis of teachers’ status may shine additional light on these findings. The percentage of student 
teachers is very high in regional areas compared to Djibouti Inner City and may reflect the requirement 
that student teachers spend their first couple of years in more remote areas. Teachers’ seniority may 
35.8
27.3
68.7
65.8
17.5
12.6
48.5
67.1
8.9
1.8
31.1
43.0
0
20
40
60
80
Initial Sound Identification Silly Sentence Pairs Reading Comprehension Listening Comprehension
Percent of Correct Items
Nov 2021 April 2021 Nov 2020
9
correspond to their ability to produce better results for students, at least in Djibouti Inner City, 
whereas Djibouti Suburbs may experience additional challenges.
Stakeholder satisfaction with reading performance
Quantitative findings further indicate that parents and teachers are satisfied with students’ reading 
performance, even without awareness of concrete results like those provided by EGRA. Parents 
surveyed found their children’s literacy level to be average (47%) or above average (39.5%). Almost all 
parents agree that the new method will help their children better to learn to read.
Similarly, nearly all teachers (96.8%) surveyed report satisfaction with their students’ reading 
performance. Teachers most often (74.2%) point to teacher training to explain students’ good 
performance in reading, followed by the teachers’ pedagogical qualities (52.1%), the new DEGRA 
method of teaching reading (44.8%), parents’ assistance (25.7%), and small classroom sizes (19.8%). On 
the other hand, teachers give the following reasons to explain their students’ poor performance in 
reading: student absenteeism (55.4%), students’ lack of work at home (44.6%), students not speaking 
enough French (22.3%) and large class sizes (22.3%).
Stakeholders perceive approach as effective
Analysis shows that stakeholders perceive DEGRA’s approach as highly effective. Qualitative data from 
interviews with a variety of stakeholders, including DEGRA staff and a MENFOP representative, indicate 
their belief that DEGRA has contributed to improved learning. Both pointed to how students are 
learning to decode rather than memorize words, as had been the case with the previous approach. 
Feedback from teacher focus groups was very positive and elicited strong statements from educators 
that DEGRA constituted “a radical change” (School Director, Djibouti Inner City), worked “1,000 times 
better” than the previous approach (Teachers FGD, Djibouti City), and that children were able to read 
now, whereas they had had troubles reading in early grades before (KII, School Director, Djibouti
Suburbs). Other teaching staff interviewed pointed to the effectiveness of DEGRA’s progressive phonics￾syllabic–based strategy and to how it appropriately calibrated to students’ levels. Similarly, parents from 
focus groups in Djibouti Inner City, as well as a main regional town, underlined that their children were
more motivated for school and reading. A few parents interviewed also made illustrative comparisons 
between their children who had learned to read prior to DEGRA and those who were experiencing
DEGRA’s approach, noting that their younger children have stronger reading skills.
“The new method allows children to develop a taste for reading. The children love to
read and can even read sentences that appear on TV.” (Parent, FGD, Djibouti Inner 
City)
Quantitative data indicate that support for DEGRA’s approach among teachers may be widespread. All 
teachers surveyed reported that the new DEGRA program will help students learn to read more easily, 
with 71.4 percent of teachers responding “absolutely,” and the remaining 28.6 percent replying “more 
or less.” 
Increased student interest in learning 
Findings also indicate increases in children’s participation in the classroom, along with students’ 
improved capacity to express themselves in French. As illustration, an inspector and a school director 
underlined that DEGRA had introduced an engaging and playful approach to learning, using 
manipulatives, for instance. (See EQ1c for more detail on how instructional methods may contribute to 
these perceived changes.)
In addition, almost all teachers (98.3%) surveyed stated that their students felt motivated and 
participated actively in classroom activities, with nearly three-quarters (74.3%) of teachers indicating that 
10
students do so “a lot.” Studentsresponded similarly when asked how frequently they answered when 
their teacher asked them questions during lessons. Over three-quarters (75.7%) of students indicated 
they responded at least once a week, with 32 percent of students indicating “rarely” and only 1.3
percent indicating they “never” responded. 
While little difference exists between girls’ and boys’ answers, students in the regions were more likely 
to answer “rarely” or “never”; nearly half (45.5%) of students in the regions answered “rarely,” 
compared to only 5.3 percent within Djibouti Inner City and 14.4 percent from the Djibouti Suburbs. 
Overall, about a quarter of the teachers stated that boys and girls participated equally, yet a close 
analysis of survey results again reveals differences by location. Less than a tenth (8.7%) of teachers in 
Djibouti Suburbs indicate gender equity in students’ participation, while 14.5 percent responded this way 
in Djibouti Inner City, and more than a third (34.5%) of teachers did so in the regions. During 
observation, almost all teachers demonstrated a variety of desired behaviors to elicit participation from 
students. The only noticeable difference was for pair work, which was often less present in Djibouti
Inner City (75.8%) than in Djibouti Suburbs (95.5%) and the regions (98.4%). 
EQ1.c) What is the impact of the new instructional methods of teaching reading 
introduced by DEGRA on children’s learning outcomes?
The new instructional methods introduced by DEGRA followed a series of instructional approaches in 
Djibouti, each of which lasted about 20 years. In 2001, MENFOP introduced the apprentissage par les 
compétences (competency-based learning, APC). The APC focused instruction on fostering students’ 
ability to know how to act in a variety of school and real-life situations.
7 DEGRA’s approach builds on 
the APC and introduces a phonics-based syllabic approach to reading and writing that includes an 
established scope and sequence as well as student-centered activities. The new approach recognizes oral 
comprehension as a competency for the first time,
8 and it rests on the five essential components of 
reading instruction: phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary development, reading fluency, and reading 
comprehension. Reading activities include the use of nursery rhymes, text dialogues, and leveled readers 
alongside an emphasis on formative assessment. The inclusion of oral comprehension proves particularly 
important in a context like Djibouti where most students do not speak French, the language of 
instruction, at home. This evaluation question examines how these new methods may have impacted 
children’s learning outcomes. As this is a performance rather than an impact evaluation, findings point to 
possible contributions rather than causal claims. We first describe the general consensus among 
stakeholders for the approach and then explore the strengths and weaknesses of the new pedagogy and 
teaching and learning materials (TLMs). Two final subsections address teacher training and DEGRA’s 
gender, equity, and social inclusion (GESI) efforts, both significant components within the new 
instructional methods.
Enduring consensus among stakeholders for the new approach
Analysis of qualitative data from interviews with key government and project stakeholders indicate that 
DEGRA arrived at a moment when the education system was beginning to recognize the previous 
curriculum’sinadequacy. A number of studies had been conducted, including a seminal study by
International Business & Technical Consultants, Inc. (IBTCI), which indicated poor student results with 
the previous method. Although there was some resistance to the development of a new approach,
consultative discussions quickly resulted in consensus among actors, due in part to MENFOP’s buy-in 
and leadership. 
Three years into implementation, midterm survey data confirms that consensus around the DEGRA 
approach endures. Overall, teachers demonstrate strong support for the new approach. Nearly two￾7 MENFOP. (Janvier, 2019). De Mamadou et Bineta à Ali et Loula. Observatoire de la qualité des enseignements-apprentissages. No. 3.
8
FHI360 (October 31, 2019). Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity: Annual Report (Year 1).
11
thirds (60.6%) of teachers surveyed felt the curriculum scope and sequence were “very well adapted” to 
students’ abilities, while under two-fifths (39.4%) found it to be “more or less adapted.” Echoing above 
findings, nearly four-fifths of teachers (79.7%) surveyed responded that they “very much” agreed that 
phonemic awareness helped students learn to read. Finally, 72.8 percent of teachers indicated that the 
DEGRA approach proved useful, though with noticeable gender distinction. Male teachers were much 
more likely to answer “very useful” compared to their female counterparts (60.4% compared to 39.8%).
Strengths and weaknesses of the new pedagogy
Nearly all stakeholders participating in the midterm evaluation expressed satisfaction with DEGRA’s new 
instructional approach. This section explores strengths of the reading approach, as well as weaknesses. 
Strengths of new pedagogy
Instruction begins with the alphabet: Beginning with the alphabet and introducing students to letter 
sounds and letter names in Grade 1, ensures that children who did not benefit from preschool also have 
the opportunity to learn to read. A variety of stakeholder groups made this argument, including teaching 
staff in four focus groups across different geographical areas, two regional officials, and two national 
education officials. 
Emphasis on oral comprehension: DEGRA also begins with emphasis on oral comprehension as a 
standalone competency (as noted earlier). One regional official described beginning with oral 
comprehension as “the doorway” and “an initiation” for students. Multiple stakeholders interviewed 
indicated that they felt this approach helped students express themselves better in French, a language 
that most students do not speak at home. A parent from Ali Sabieh region’s main town expressed 
satisfaction at how her son explains the lessons learned at school to her, indicating he is able to 
understand them.
"With the Big Books, they [children] learn to speak in French in the first year. Now, 
they've just started the second grade, and already they want to tell you a story in 
French. I sat in the classroom and told them to tell me a story. They went to the 
blackboard and started to recount, ‘Once upon a time, there was a little Red Riding 
Hood,’ and what amazed me was their ability to master the story, which was not the 
case before.” (Director, KII, Ali Sabieh region, rural school)
Features a systematic syllabic approach: Overwhelmingly, all regional officials and the majority of focus 
groups with teaching staff noted DEGRA’s systematic syllabic approach to be strong. Children begin with 
letters, then decode words and phrases, and they are able to do so from Grade 1. More than half of 
focus groups with teaching staff noted that children quickly grasp the concept of syllabification, dividing 
words into syllables; they quickly learn to read and write. 
Greater attention to reading comprehension and critical thinking skills: Two regional education officials 
and two teacher FGDs noted how DEGRA’s approach utilizes implicit and inferential comprehension 
questions, whereas the previous method relied on more literal interpretations and did not activate 
students’ higher order thinking skills. 
Formative assessment occurs regularly and points teachers toward students in difficulty: A limited 
number of interviews and FGDs brought up DEGRA’s formative evaluation approach as a strength. The 
method accentuates the need for regular formative assessment, done at least every two weeks, followed 
with remediation as needed for students in difficulty. One teacher focus group expressed the desire for 
assessment activities to be more differentiated to also challenge more advanced students. Quantitative 
data shed light on how teachers report their use of formative assessment strategies. Figure 4
demonstrates that more than half of teachers report assessing their students every week and more than 
12
three-quarters do so at the end of each module. Results also indicate that teachers in Djibouti Suburbs
schools report their practices as less regular. 
Figure 4: Teachers’ practice of formative assessment techniques by location
Weaknesses of new pedagogy
Stakeholders expressed very few weaknesses of the new approach when asked during qualitative 
interviews. Only two appear noteworthy. The first concern arose during a parent focus group at a rural 
school in the Arta region. There, parents expressed confusion as to why their children in Grade 1 were
not yet able to write, though they had learned how to sing. This may indicate that some parents are not 
yet aware of the new strategy and the effectiveness of oral comprehension and phonological awareness 
as foundations for reading and writing. Second, a teacher focus group at the same rural school in Arta,
indicated challenges in applying the method to multigrade classrooms. This may constitute an area for 
further strengthening during coaching and training activities.
Strengths and weaknesses of TLMs 
Five products for each grade level (1-3) constitute the DEGRA teaching and learning materials (TLMs): 
teachers’ guides, student textbooks, student workbooks, Big Books, and posters. TLM development 
followed a collaborative process between DEGRA’s technical team and the MENFOP writers based at 
CRIPEN. Once drafted, FHI360 experts in Djibouti, as well as at the home office in Washington, D.C.,
reviewed the products, which were then revised and shared with the validation committee for approval 
and additional revisions as necessary.
9 The Grade 1 process encountered delays as discussions took time 
to bring the CRIPEN Curriculum Review Committee (CRC) onboard with a brand-new curriculum,
rather than revisions to the APC. As a result, Grade 1 revisions took place in a compressed timeframe 
of three months.
10 At the same time, the COVID-19–related shutdowns also challenged the 
development of Grade 2 materials. Distribution of Grade 3 student materials and the revised Grade 1 
and 2 instructional packages (taking into account piloting feedback)
11 occurred in October 2021.
12
CRIPEN distributes the student materials (manual and exercise book), which parents are expected to 
9
The evaluation team reviewed internal documents for the 1st and 2nd year TLM revision that detailed strengths and weaknesses of the 
teachers’ guide, student manual, student workbook and big books.
10 FHI360 (October 31, 2019). Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity: Annual Report (Year 1).
11 FHI360 (July 31, 2021). Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity: FY 2021 Quarterly Report (April 1-June 30, 2021).
12 At the time of data collection, the teachers’ guide was still in the layout process. Student books were prioritized as they were produced in 
India, whereas the teacher’s guide can be printed in Djibouti. In the interview, teachers were provided with a PDF version of the manual, 
according to national education officials.
13
buy. Materials are free to students living in more remote areas. The sections below explore the 
strengths and weakness of the DEGRA TLMs.
Strengths of TLMs
Joint development process: The development of the TLMs required close collaboration between 
DEGRA specialists and the CRC, the Technical Committee, teachers and inspectors, and of course, 
CRIPEN. Key national government officials also repeatedly underlined the competency and strengths of 
the FHI360 curriculum specialist.
Materials are easy to use: Overwhelmingly, stakeholders identified the TLMs as user-friendly and useful, 
especially for those who had not participated in a formal DEGRA training. Qualitative interviews with 
the majority of regional officials and teacher FGDs revealed that teachers appreciate semi scripted
lessons. Quantitative data also support this finding. Almost all teachers (92.1%) surveyed stated that they 
possess the new teacher’s guide, and 90.2 percent indicated the guide’s ease of use. High proportions of 
teachers also think the same of the student workbook (87.6%) and textbook (90.1%). While still more 
than three-quarters of teachers, a lesser percentage of them answered that the Big Books were very 
easy to use (79.1%) and very helpful (77.2%). They also thought the letter and syllable labels (82.4%) very 
helpful.
Texts are diverse: Materials feature poetry, dialogues, and stories, for example, and as noted above, 
associated comprehension questions elicit higher-order critical thinking skills.
TLMs promote student ownership and transfer to home: According to midterm evaluation survey data, 
almost all (95.7%) students report possessing a textbook or their student workbook (95.5%). At the 
same time, observation data from school visits reported lower proportions, with 79 percent of 
classrooms having student workbooks and 75.4 percent having student manuals. Student survey data 
likely reflects some overreporting due to social desirability bias; it may also be possible that some 
students left their materials at home. Of parents, 80.5 percent stated that their children used their 
workbook, and 74.6 percent the textbooks, “often” or “very often” at home. These rates are lower for 
parents in Djibouti Suburbs, however. Interview data support these findings, as nearly all parent FGDs 
(five of six), along with a teachers FGD and two directors, confirm that children are bringing books 
home. This change results in parents more able to follow their children’s schoolwork. In addition, 
teachers in Obock region and parents in Arta shared that UNICEF had provided students with 
schoolbags, which provided additional protection for DEGRA student materials.
Learning supports present in classrooms: Midterm evaluation results confirm that many TLMs have 
arrived in classrooms and are being utilized by teachers and staff, though some areas, namely Djibouti 
Inner City, may be lacking more than Djibouti Suburbs areas or areas beyond the capital. Data 
collectors observed the presence of Big Books in 91.5 percent of classrooms and posters in 93.4 
percent of classrooms. Those materials were less often observed in Djibouti Inner City, where 21.2
percent of classrooms had no Big Books at all, and 24.2 percent had no posters. Across the sample, 
observers also found that 77 percent of classrooms have letter and syllable labels, and 63.5 percent of 
the students in classrooms have manipulatives. Again, observers noted lower proportions of students 
with those materials in Djibouti Inner City than in other locations.
Weaknesses of TLMs
Additional images lacking: Two teacher focus groups in the regions, as well as a director from the 
Obock region in an interview, commented that additional images were necessary for teaching French 
vocabulary in rural areas, where students may not have had as much exposure as students in the capital.
Teachers’ guide may be too long for regular publication: CRIPEN representatives indicated concerns 
about the teachers’ guide’slength. At the same time, one official rationalized the length, noting the 
14
intention to provide teachers as much support in possible through an exhaustive guide. Notably, none of 
the teachers interviewed indicated the length of the teacher guide as a problem. 
Highly consultative process is heavy and slow: While the consultative process for TLM development 
fostered buy-in and ensured that materials reflect classroom and home realities, CRIPEN experienced 
constant revisions and reformatting challenges, making the process slow and unwieldy at times.
Proofing errors: Books contain errors and typos that should have been addressed through a close review 
process. Additional scrutiny is necessary in the future. The most prominent challenge for teachers may 
be how characters’ names change between Grade 1 and Grade 2 from Kada and Lili to Kadar and Loula. 
Teachers in a focus group in Djibouti Inner City expressed frustration about how this change confused
students and teachers alike, especially with books arriving late and having begun the year with the 
previous set of names. Their comments seemed to indicate that the final revision changes after piloting 
may not have been well communicated to teachers.
Delivery of Grade 3 materials delayed: Grade 3 student materials were delivered in October, and the 
majority of teaching staff focus groups pointed to delays as problematic. Regional officials also criticized 
the late arrival, and one official said that it led to the school year beginning poorly. Data collectors 
observed boxes of DEGRA Grade 3 materials in an inspection office during an interview in mid￾November, indicating that books still had not fully made it to schools at that time.
“There was a lack of books and we, as teachers, also have no guide, and we were 
thrown in a situation where we were not even given training at the beginning. We 
were told, ‘This is a new program being taught’ without giving us materials for 
teachers and students. We managed. We were given handouts and everything white, 
that is to say that the colors were missing. It's a new curriculum. It was necessary to 
give us trainings a year in advance, so that we could work already and have a year in 
advance and prepare the books.” (Teacher FGD, Ali Sabieh region, regional capital)
Teacher training
In addition to designing and distributing the new TLMs featuring the DEGRA approach, the project has 
worked closely with MENFOP, notably, the CFEEF and the Inspector General’s (IG) Office, to 
implement trainings to familiarize teachers with the new instructional methods for teaching reading. 
Both quantitative and qualitative findings point to high rates of teachers who have not participated in 
sessions and challenges in training delivery. Overall, 39.1 percent of teachers surveyed for the midterm 
evaluation stated that they did not participate in any formal DEGRA trainings. This percentage is highest 
for teachers in the Djibouti Suburbs at 60.9 percent. Almost one teacher out of four (23.5%) surveyed 
at midterm are in their first year of teaching in Grades 1 or 2, though this percentage is slightly lower in 
Djibouti Inner City (17.6%). Focus groups with teaching staff indicate that the issue may be even more 
pronounced among Grade 3 teachers.
Interviews with government officials indicate that low attendance in trainings makes for a widespread 
issue and that they have tried multiple solutions, including summertime pre-service trainings for teachers 
on the curriculum, which also includes reading. Four government officials and two teacher focus groups, 
however, indicated that these sessions’ timing makes them highly unpopular with teachers. Two 
interviews with regional education officials and two teaching staff focus groups cited valid reasons for 
non-attendance, including maternity leave, a teacher being assigned to a different grade, and remote 
schools far from training sites. A focus group with teachers from the Djibouti Suburbs noted that five of 
the six teachers had changed grades after having participated in trainings, feeling lost as a result. 
Prominent government officials as well as DEGRA staff noted that teacher attendance monitoring at 
trainings currently remains weak. A CFEEF representative indicated that teacher attendance may 
15
improve with the implementation of a new teacher-evaluation system as part of another development 
project (PRODA). In theory, the system will allow tracking of teacher training.
To help mediate the issue of training non-attendance, DEGRA developed a pool of trainers among 
pedagogical advisors and a CFEEF trainer. Each pedagogical advisor worked with a group of 25 teachers. 
This strategy is heralded by FHI360 leadership as a central feature of its approach and a strong example 
of system-level capacity building. The majority of the teachers (71.3%) declared that they had
participated in a training organized by a pedagogical advisor, though again, distinctions are evident by 
teacher location. While this group encompassed more than 80 percent of teachers in Djibouti Inner 
City, less than two-thirds (62.6%) of teachers from other areas reported attending such trainings. 
Project-monitoring data report even lower figures, with 59 percent of teachers having received coaching 
or mentoring in Year 2, and 45 percent of teachers doing so in Year 3. It is possible that teachers have 
participated in trainings since the collection of monitoring data, which may account for some of the 
disparity between project and evaluation data.
Of those who did attend trainings, nearly all (95.8%) teachers found the training useful. Of teachers who 
reported not attending trainings, almost all teachers (91.0%) stated that they used the teachers’ guide to 
familiarize themselves with the new curriculum, while one-fifth (20.5%) indicated asking for help from 
their colleagues and 5.4 percent reported doing nothing to become familiar with the new methods. As 
may have been expected, regional education officials expressed concern, as some of the reading
instruction concepts benefit from in-person demonstrations, notably phonological awareness. Survey 
data affirm this observation, as 40.1 percent of teachers surveyed noted phonemic awareness, a 
component of phonological awareness, as the most difficult component to teach.
13
Attention to gender, social inclusion, and ethnic diversity
DEGRA’s design aims to apply a gender and social inclusion (GESI) lens to all activities. A gender 
analysis, conducted during Year 1, provided recommendations for each component of DEGRA’s results 
framework.
14 The GESI-sensitive approach of IR-1 has largely focused on trainings for TLM designers, a 
GESI-sensitive review of TLMs, and an orientation to address stereotypes.
15 One government official 
provided examples of how TLMs have become more inclusive: ensuring that names within materials 
reflect diverse groups within society, rather than only Muslim names, and images representing the 
variety of peoples and groups within Djibouti. Other stakeholders interviewed, from government as well 
as the DEGRA team, expressed caution that Djibouti was not ready for a more gender-transformative 
approach. Interviews with government counterparts and DEGRA staff indicate their support for the 
GESI approach. They signal those trainings have proved useful, and perhaps most importantly, that 
DEGRA’s attention to GESI has led the CFEEF to introduce a new module within pre-service training 
that focuses on gender inclusion. While some of the TLMs now include images of children with 
disabilities (e.g., a child in a wheelchair), findings indicate less attention to disability than gender inclusion. 
Discussions with parents and teachers indicate that, while it may be possible to accommodate children 
with mobility impairments, it proves more challenging to serve children with intellectual disabilities. 
Parents of children with disabilities may also prefer to send their children to a specialized school.
13 Note that phonological awareness refers to the ability to recognize and manipulate the spoken parts of sentences and words whereas 
phonemic awareness is specific to sounds (phonemes). See Phonological and Phonemic Awareness: Introduction by Reading Rockets:
https://www.readingrockets.org/teaching/reading101-course/modules/phonological-and-phonemic-awareness-introduction.
14 FHI360. (November 2019). Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity: Rapport Final: Etude Diagnostique Basée sur l’Equité Genre et l’Inclusion 
Sociale (EGIS).
15 FHI360 (October 31, 2019). Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity: Annual Report (Year 1).
16
EQ1.d-e) What is the impact of pedagogical supervision and support on children's 
learning outcomes? Has pedagogical supervision and support been sufficient in the 
country, particularly in the remote rural schools? 
The response to this question explores the extent of supervision activities that teachers have 
experienced up to the midterm evaluation point. Due to various other factors at play, including years of 
teaching and class size, it is not possible to draw direct conclusions between supervision practices and
children’s learning outcomes. Rather, the results below indicate the frequency of supervision, types of 
supervision, as well as impressions of the effectiveness of supervision. Findings reveal disparities between 
practices within Djibouti Inner City, its periphery (Suburbs), and all other areas (regions).
Since the beginning of the year, 68.2 percent of teachers surveyed stated that they have received a visit 
from a pedagogical advisor, while a higher percentage, 85.2 percent, reported their director observing 
their teaching at least once. As Figure 5 indicates, the proportion varies depending on location, with 
teachers outside of the capital area reporting lowest rates of visits by pedagogical advisors and teachers 
in Djibouti Suburbs being less likely to report directors’ observation. More than three-quarters (83.2%) 
of teachers surveyed found supervision from the pedagogical advisor “very helpful,” though only half of 
the teachers think that they received enough visits from pedagogical advisors. Teachers from the regions
were 15 percentage points less likely to find the visit very helpful (77.4% in the regions, compared to 
92.6 percent in Djibouti Inner City). Teachers report that pedagogical advisors have mostly helped them 
to address classroom management and discipline (61.5%), reading instructional methods (49.8%), lesson 
planning (46.6%), and strategies for improving students’ participation (32.2%). 
Figure 5: Proportion of teachers reporting supervision by location
Interview data similarly indicates that supervision sessions with pedagogical advisors can prove positive. 
Notably, many teachers feel that the pedagogical advisors provide advice that allowsthem to improve 
their teaching practice. This holds particularly true for student teachers and new teachers, as indicated 
within three teacher focus groups and a KII with a school director. Teachers in two focus groups 
commented that the new digital classroom-observation tool used by pedagogical advisors provided a lot 
of detail, more than previous versions. All directors surveyed also commented on the new observation 
tool’s usefulness.
Regarding director-led supervision, about half (46.8%) of teachers surveyed indicated that the director 
observed them two to four times since the beginning of the year. A good proportion of teachers 
(83.7%) think that directors have been “very” helpful in assisting them with improving their teaching, and 
17
14.3 percent think that directors have been helpful. Directors interviewed explained that they now feel 
more able to help their teachers with reading instruction specifically, in addition to general support. 
These findings may hide important location-related distinctions, however. Although the quantitative 
sample size for directors is small, results show that directors in Djibouti Suburbs are less likely to find 
their support effective and for supervision to form a key part of their role when compared with 
directors in Djibouti Inner City and regional areas.
Commensurate with findings above on teacher training, nearly a third (30.1%) of directors report not 
having participated in a training on their role in supporting teachers’ reading instruction. Not being 
invited to the training was the most common reason cited for not attending, and nearly two-thirds 
(64.8%) of directors reported this scenario. Nearly all (97.9%) directors who participated found the 
training to be helpful.
Explanations for weaker levels of supervision
Multiple types of stakeholders noted that school directors may still have difficulties providing teachers 
with quality instructional coaching, including two members of the DEGRA leadership, three national 
education officials, a regional education official, two school directors, and a teachers’ focus group. Some 
directors are themselves not familiar enough with the new instructional approach and/or they are too 
busy with administrative tasks and cannot make time for coaching. National level officials and DEGRA 
staff underlined how in remote areas, school directors serve as the default coaches since pedagogical 
advisors can only visit once a month at best. In these schools, directors have an even more important 
role to play in providing instructional support. Many teachers in remote areas are new teachers, further 
heightening the need for coaching. A teacher focus group in a rural area in Obock region noted that 
pedagogical advisors can visit schools within the main town twice a month, but only once in remote 
schools. A regional education officer concurred, noting that it takes four to five hours to arrive in some 
of the schools in the region. Similar concerns were raised by teaching staff during a focus group in a 
rural school in the Tadjourah region. In addition, when school directors themselves are new, they may 
have even more difficulties supporting their teaching staff. 
Supervision dashboard
During Year 2, DEGRA worked with pedagogical advisors to develop a classroom observation tool to 
assess fidelity of implementation of lesson plans, as well as general pedagogical best practice. The tool 
included math elements and integrated items from a previous tool pedagogical advisors had used with 
the World Bank. A related training took place for pedagogical advisors and CFEEF staff in January 2020. 
DEGRA subsequently developed an interactive online dashboard using Microsoft Power BI to visualize
pedagogical advisor data. The dashboard serves to track the status of data collection and to visualize
data from classroom observations. MENFOP validated the dashboard, and trainings were to take place in 
Year 3. Capacity building for the dashboard and an effective transfer of the system to MENFOP 
constitute a key feature of the IR3 project component that have received approval from MENFOP.
16
Qualitative efforts reveal mixed sentiments about the supervision dashboard. The dashboard is fully 
functional, and findings support that the design process was participatory and that the dashboard 
enabled the harmonization of observation checklists as well as supervision processes across regions. 
Two national and two regional government officials interviewed underlined how the dashboard 
presented a cultural and procedural shift for pedagogical advisors, meeting resistance from pedagogical 
advisors during the early stages. According to these stakeholders, resistance has since waned, and 
FHI360 monitoring data reports that 70 percent of pedagogical advisors use tablets. While two focus 
groups and a regional education official celebrated the functionality of the dashboard and the ability to 
16 FHI360 (October 31, 2020). Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity: Annual Report (Year 2).
18
view feedback immediately, another teacher focus group voiced frustrations, noting that pedagogical 
advisors may focus too much on completing the form and less on coaching (i.e., critical discussions with 
the teacher) during the supervision process. Finally, the evaluation team described the amount of data 
entered the tablet as comprehensive but suggested it may prove overly demanding on pedagogical 
advisors if the data are not exploited. DEGRA may benefit from further streamlining the tool. 
EQ2.a) Has DEGRA been achieving its intended outcomes for community participation?
IR–2 focuses on enhancing community participation in early grade reading through work with families 
and communities and by leveraging Parent-Teacher Associations (PTAs), School Management 
Committees (SMCs), and Civil Society Organizations (CSOs). Two sub-IRs contribute to the 
achievement of IR–2: 1) raising public awareness of the importance of early grade reading and increasing 
family and community participation in early grade reading activities; and 2) strengthening the capacity of 
PTAs, SMCs, and CSOs to support early grade reading.17
Of nine IR–2 indicators, DEGRA has met midterm targets for five. Progress has been slow regarding 
PTA and parent activities that require their initiative, such as school-improvement projects and home￾based reading activities. Two of the indicators also do not have LOP targets, as FHI360 has indicated 
that USAID has not yet provided feedback on related revisions. In addition, two results have far 
surpassed targets set: the second indicator measuring the “number of educational programs 
disseminated” and the fourth indicator measuring the number of “reading enrichment sessions organized 
by CSOs.” The second indicator concerns SBCC messages. For the fourth indicator, sessions are 
counted individually, even if they form part of a series. Targets may require further revision to be more 
realistic and meaningful for the project. Thoughtful review is recommended as IR–2 gains momentum.
17 Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity. (August 6, 2020). Component 2: Concept Note.
19
Table 3: IR2 Results at mid-term
Indicator Type Year 1
Achieved
Year 1
Target
Year 2
Achieved
Year 2 
Target
Year 3 
Achieved
Year 3 
Target
% Achieved
against
Combined 
Year 1-3 
Target
LOP 
Target
% Achieved
against LOP 
Target
IR–2: Community participation in early grade reading enhanced
Number of parent-teacher associations 
(PTAs) or community governance 
structures engaged in primary or 
secondary education supported with USG 
assistance
ES.1-13
Future 
PPR 
Reporting
N/A N/A 46 40 50 40 125% 151 33%
Number of educational programs 
disseminated ("number of disseminations 
of educational programs" in the revised 
AMELP)
Custom
Future 
PPR 
Reporting
N/A N/A 80 52 174 52 244% 221 115%
Number of sensitization and capacity￾building workshops held to increase 
awareness of the importance of DEGRA
Custom N/A N/A N/A N/A 12 12 100% 48 25%
Number of reading enrichment sessions 
organized by CSOs Custom N/A N/A N/A N/A 288 12 2400% 48 600%
Number of reading festivals organized 
with CSOs and school communities Custom N/A N/A N/A N/A 4 4 100% 22 18%
Number of school-improvement projects 
implemented by PTAs Custom N/A N/A N/A N/A 24 40 60% 258 9%
Percentage of CSOs and PTAs who state 
their internal capacity has improved Custom N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 60% N/A 73.3%
Can't be 
calculated
Percentage of households engaging in 
home-based reading activities Custom N/A N/A N/A N/A 49% 53.5% 92% N/A N/A
Percentage of students participating in 
extracurricular reading activities Custom N/A N/A N/A N/A 3% 4% 75% N/A N/A
20
EQ2.b) Has DEGRA been effective in mobilizing communities and engaging the PTAs in 
reading activities?
The IR–2 component encountered significant challenges that stalled progress until well into Year 3. In 
recognition of the importance of government buy-in, especially for CSO engagement, DEGRA 
reassessed its IR–2 strategy, which required time and joint planning with MENFOP. These deliberations 
led to disagreements on the project budget, so USAID suggested a pause on component 2 while finding 
a solution. An official seven-month slowdown took place between October 13, 2019 and May 20, 2020,
during which time budget adjustments and discussions with MENFOP took place. Once lifted, 
implementation of component 2 began.
18 COVID-19–related school lockdowns further aggravated 
challenges.19 Component 2 also underwent a shift in approach, as a planned collaboration with the Civil 
Society Organizations’ Strengthening Program (CSOSP) did not take place due to incompatible timing.
20
Lastly, the DEGRA staff member responsible for component 2 left in June 2021, causing further 
disruption, though two new staff members quickly took her place one month later.
These challenges aside, a barrier analysis as well as a social and behavioral change communication 
(SBCC) strategy informed DEGRA’s IR–2 approach. The barrier analysis21 identified largely pragmatic 
barriers, including that parents may lack access to books and time to read to children, may not be able 
to read and write themselves, and that homes may not have sufficient space or lighting for reading.
DEGRA’s SBCC strategy articulated the objective that caregivers “(1) do literacy and learning activities 
at home at least once a week; and, (2) participate in extracurricular learning activities at least three 
times per school year.”22 Caregivers (literate and illiterate) are the SBCC strategy’s priority audience,
with primary school teachers, directors, and MENFOP officials as secondary and influencing 
stakeholders.
23
In addition to SBCC messaging, IR–2 fostered efforts to strengthen ad mobilize PTAs and implement 
activities to spark interest in reading, including reading corners and learning festivals. This section 
examines DEGRA’s progress, though limited, in those efforts.
Sensitization campaigns for increased parental engagement
24
DEGRA produced messages for radio, television, social media, as well as posters; WhatsApp and 
Facebook served as the principal modes for transmission on social media. Radio and TV spots first aired 
in January 2021 in four languages (French, Arabic, Somali and Afar), and ran through July 2021. 
Stakeholders interviewed identified the process of developing the messages as highly participatory, 
including a workshop with MENFOP specialists to create the actual messages focusing on parental 
engagement. Specifically, FHI360 has worked closely with CRIPEN in the development of radio 
messages. Communities were also involved in developing messages, according to FHI360 and OSC, but 
time and approval processes within USAID and MENFOP limited actual community-level testing.
Messages demonstrated gender-sensitivity (e.g., a message featuring a father reading with his daughter), 
according to key individuals from DEGRA and MENFOP interviewed, though they admit it has proven 
more challenging to include messaging on disability inclusion.
18 Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity. (August 6, 2020). Component 2: Concept Note.
19 COVID-19 lockdowns began March 17, 2020 and continued until May 1. In practice, school did not resume however as summer vacation 
began. Students returned to classrooms at the beginning of the 2020-2021 school year.
20 A two-year (2018-2020) project with USAID funding. DEGRA had planned to use its PTA toolkit. (See Component 2 Concept Note.) 
21 Overseas Strategic Consulting, Ltd. (August 31, 2019). Barrier Analysis: Parental Engagement in Children’s Reading in Djibouti.
22 Overseas Strategic Consulting. (August 1, 2020). Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity: Social and Behavior Change Communication Strategy, 
p. 7.
23 FHI360. (July 31, 2021). Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity: FY 2021 Quarterly Report (April 1-June 30, 2021).
24 See Annex VI for more findings related to parents’ and children’s reading at home. 
21
Midterm evaluation data report mixed findings about messaging. Qualitative interviewees, among them 
notably four of six parents’ focus groups and two of five teacher groups, overwhelmingly found the 
messages positive and useful in offering parents helpful strategies. Some stated that messaging may even 
have contributed to parents’ greater involvement in their children’s education. At the same time, less 
than a third (29%) of the parents surveyed reported that they heard or saw messages about education 
from the MENFOP. Results are better for parents in the Djibouti Suburbs(45.3%, compared to 27.0% in 
Djibouti Inner City and 25.4% in other areas). While DEGRA has not performed a formal impact study 
on the messaging, an FHI and NGO representative shared that more informal appraisals identify some 
parents hearing the messages without really listening to the content, and similarly, that others may think 
the messages are irrelevant commercials and not pay close attention.
Of the parents aware of messaging, parents from the regions more frequently (74.3%) report having 
heard those messages on the radio, while parents in Djibouti Inner City (89.6%) and Djibouti Suburbs
(87.5%) pointed to television. Figure 6 presentsthe content parents found most memorable by location. 
Analysis shows that parents living in different areas heard different key messages. Investigation into how 
contextual factors may influence parents’ experience of messaging may prove helpful. 
Figure 6: Parents' reporting of key message content by location (n=168)
Parents also responded to both quantitative and qualitative questions about what should be done to help 
them play a more active role in their children’s school lives. More than half (57.7%) of parents surveyed 
stated that collaboration between teachers and parents should be improved. Parents in Djibouti Inner 
City (38.8%) and Djibouti Suburbs (39.3%) also reported the need for more sensitization. Finally, 26.4
percent of the parents in Djibouti Inner City suggested that general assembly meetings could also help. 
A broad swath of stakeholders interviewed, including two parents’ focus groups, an FHI representative, 
an NGO representative, and two national government officials, all agreed that in-person meetings are 
necessary to capitalize on sensitization messages. Two parent focus groups (in Djibouti Suburbs and in 
the Ali Sabieh regional capital) also suggested teachers should speak directly with parents.
Location-specific findings
Although the midterm evaluation cannot compare directly with baseline values, data reveal how parental 
support and children’s reading practices vary significantly by location:
Homework assistance: Almost all parents surveyed in Djibouti Inner City (95.1%) report that they help 
their children with their homework, while this percentage is smaller in Djibouti Suburbs at 84.5 percent. 
Less than a third (31.4%) of parents in the regions indicate helping their children with homework, an 
22
important distinction with implications for implementation. Student survey results demonstrate weaker 
trends, as about two-thirds (67.9%) of the students in Djibouti Inner City report receiving help at home 
often or very often, while the rate is less frequent in the Djibouti Suburbs (50%) and more so in the 
regions (19.2%). 
Students most frequently report that a sister (26.7%) or brother (32.6%) helpsthem with their 
schoolwork. Overall, 69 percent of the students have said that someone at home asks them to read 
letters or words. Children sufficiently able to do homework alone constitutes the main reason parents 
report for not helping their children in the Djibouti Suburbs and regions. 
Reading practices: Overall, nearly three-quarters (71.9%) of parents surveyed indicated that their 
children read aloud at home. The proportion of parents in Djibouti Inner City and the Djibouti Suburbs
who answered that children read aloud is more than thirty points higher than in the regions. Similarly, 
only one fifth (20.6%) of parents in areas outside of the capital report someone at home telling stories 
to their children, while many more do so in Djibouti Inner City (79.6%) and Djibouti Suburbs (66.0%).
Again, reports from students indicate lower rates, as half of the students (54%) in Djibouti Inner City 
reported that someone at home reads or tells them stories “often” or “very often.” The practice is less 
frequent in Djibouti Suburbs (36.6%) and the regions(14.1%). 
PTA mobilization and parental engagement
PTAs are relatively recent in Djibouti and were created to assist the director in mobilizing parents, but 
they were not designed or supported to initiate activities and thus, have limited capacity. DEGRA’s 
commissioned study of PTAs concluded that the large majority of PTAs sampled have weak capacity and 
have traditionally focused solely on janitorial duties and had limited male membership.
25 FHI staff and 
national education officials also indicated that not all schools have PTAs, and where they do exist, some 
may be poorly organized and ineffective. Often PTAs experience frequent parent turnover and lack of a 
clear mandate. Midterm evaluation findings also revealed, through discussion with the majority of 
evaluation participants across stakeholder types, that PTAs do not typically have experience working 
with reading initiatives and remain unaware of their potential to improve students’ learning. DEGRA is 
attempting to strengthen PTAs through partnerships with two local NGOs (UNFD and Paix et Lait). 
Their mandate is to lead trainings for parents and provide general support to PTAs.
Quantitative evaluation data provide additional insights into PTA functioning in Djiboutian public schools. 
Midterm evaluation survey results surprisingly indicate quite decent coverage of PTAs. Almost all 
directors surveyed (93.6%) report having a PTA at their school, though just under half (45.9%) of 
directors surveyed stated that the APE is very active and 52.3 percent moderately active. Similarly, more 
than nine parents out of ten stated that their school has a PTA in Djibouti Inner City (94.7%) and 
regions (92.5%), while fewer (78.3%) PTAs exist in Djibouti Suburbs. Parents surveyed pointed most 
frequently to a lack of financial resources (43.8%) as their greatest hindrance to participation. To 
ameliorate involvement in the PTA, parents mostly suggested to improve relationships between parents 
and teachers (52.2%) and to sensitize parents to the importance of the PTA (27%). 
Almost three-quarters (72.43%) of directors surveyed stated that they have organized a meeting with 
students’ parentsthis year, and half (52%) reported that almost all parents participated at this meeting. 
The most common topics discussed during the meetings were the importance of parental involvement in 
children’s learning to read (76.5%), followed by monitoring student performance (60.4%), new 
instructional methods for reading (47.2%), and the importance of communicating with children (36.4%). 
At the time of data collection, DEGRA NGO partners had recently begun their work with 50 schools 
within Djibouti City, while there are plans to add another 17 schools in the regions. DEGRA PTA 
25Guedi, I. S. (November 23, 2020). Rapport de la mission d’évaluation des APE des écoles primaires publique de Djibouti ville.
23
mobilization activities began in March 2021 and carried through the end of the school year in May. 
Unfortunately, activities overlapped with end-of-year pressures including student exams, and FHI360 and 
NGO staff indicated that, understandably, schools had other priorities than PTA capacity building and 
PTA-initiated reading activities. A broad swath of stakeholders, including regional inspectors, teachers,
and parent focus groups, indicated that parents had not been able to establish activities to support 
reading. Similarly, some argued that if school projects had been initiated, it was largely due to school 
directors, rather than PTAs.
Confirming qualitative findings above, since the beginning of the year, survey data indicate that PTAs 
have most frequently organized school cleaning (70.7%) and gardening (44.2%) activities. A third (32.4%) 
of the school directors reported that DEGRA has had an impact on the creation or revitalization of the 
PTA. Such findings should not surprise given DEGRA’s delays in implementing component 2. Results may 
improve as community-engagement activities intensify.
Reading corners
Few students in Djibouti have access to books at home and school libraries, if they exist, are often not 
in good condition, leaving them widely underused for a variety of reasons. As confirmation, a little over 
one quarter (26.5%) of the students surveyed for the midterm evaluation in Djibouti Inner City stated 
that they have magazines, newspapers, or books to read at home. This proportion is much lower in 
Djibouti Suburbs (10.4%) and regions (1.9%). In addition, parents in Djibouti Inner City (78.5%) and the 
Djibouti Suburbs (58.5%) more frequently reported that their school has a library when compared to 
the regions (17.9%). Only 10 percent of students and even fewer parents (2.6%) stated that they had
access to a library. Of the students who claimed to have access to a library, 35.3 percent never used it 
and 27.8 percent rarely used it. Some stakeholders, including a teacher focus group, a parent focus 
group, two national education officials, and DEGRA staff, agreed that school libraries often remained 
inaccessible. Except for rare cases where Grade 4 and 5 students may have access to books, school 
libraries may be in disrepair and/or students and even teachers may not be able to enter to peruse 
materials.
The installation of reading corners within classrooms, therefore, makes for a critical component of 
DEGRA’s community-strengthening activity, but it is also a source of debate and discussion between 
DEGRA and CRIPEN, as the latter organization already had a strategy in place to install reading corners. 
At the time of data collection, CRIPEN had created 375 corners. Reading corners consisted of a table 
with benches, a shelf, and 100 books, of which 50 could be lent while the other 50 would remain in the 
classroom. According to the most recent FY21 third-quarter report,
26 in support of the plan to set up 
20 reading corners, DEGRA had selected, purchased, and delivered 934 books to CRIPEN for school 
reading corners. National education officials and teachers would be responsible for books. Given 
CRIPEN’s experience with the reading corners and how the reading corners are located within the 
classroom, in reality it is not an appropriate activity for PTA involvement, according to reflections from 
a MENFOP national official, an NGO representative, and FHI360 headquarters. Stakeholders also shared 
that the types of books provided by DEGRA had created a topic of debate. The strategy shifted mid￾project from purchasing printed books in bookstores to working with open-source books that could be 
adapted to different contexts. 
Reading festivals
The concept note outlining Component 2 identifies how DEGRA intended for CSOs and school 
committees to organize “reading festivals” twice a year.
27 Discussions with FHI360 and local partner 
NGO UNFD noted that DEGRA has encountered difficulties implementing these events. Historically, 
26 FHI360. (July 31, 2021). Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity: FY 2021 Quarterly Report (April 1-June 30, 2021).
27 Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity. (August 6, 2020). Component 2: Concept Note.
24
CRIPEN had organized similar “reading challenges” as early as 200528. The project succeeded in 
organizing four reading festivals during Year 3 in two districts, with a limited number of schools 
participating. FHI360 provided financial backing, while CRIPEN led implementation. 
A high proportion (87.8%) of parents surveyed reported that their children participated in reading 
challenges in Djibouti Inner City, while figures were slightly lower (70.3%) in the Djibouti Suburbs and 
almost nonexistent (11.7%) in the regions. Parents aware of the activity generally agreed (87.3%) that 
these events motivated their children to learn how to read. Given the weak presence of DEGRA 
reading challenges, it may be possible that parent responses reflect either social desirability bias, hoping 
to provide the expected answer for data collectors, and/or that parents may be confusing the reading 
festivals with activities from other implementers.
EQ2.c) Has DEGRA been effective in reinforcing NGO capacities to carry out reading 
activities?
As DEGRA revitalized IR–2 in May 2020 after the lifting of the slowdown, FHI360 recruited two local 
NGOs (UNFD and Paix et Lait) to lead community-based activities with PTAs and parents. Each was 
assigned twenty-five schools in Djibouti Inner City. To foster effectiveness, DEGRA has initiated 
capacity-building strategies for the NGOs to support community engagement in reading. NGOs are 
expected to develop tools and resources that will guide PTAs to conduct extracurricular activities 
focused on reading. Findings demonstrate that collaboration with NGOs has been tainted by
miscommunication and administrative challenges.
NGO training has unfortunately also encountered delays that, in turn, pushed back community-level 
activities. Disruptions resulted from the “Ramadan period, travel issues, and a pause in collaborative 
work due to contractual issues on branding and marking.” One NGO, UNFD, did continue with training,
including awareness-raising workshops on the importance of reading for academic success, and on the 
importance of parental involvement. Two capacity-building workshops focused on school reading 
projects and the development of grant applications. Feedback from NGOs during qualitative interviews 
pointed to challenges with training. They indicated that the trainings did not take into account scheduling 
preferences or existing NGO capacities and needs. DEGRA’s partner OSC led the trainings, but had to 
do so remotely because of COVID-19 travel concerns. NGO feedback indicated that the online trainings 
did not prove compelling and that the time difference further complicated training efforts. At the same 
time, FHI360 and an NGO representative noted that NGO attendance at trainings had been irregular. In 
addition, FHI360 developed a guide for PTAs to lead discussions with parents. UNFD lamented not 
having been part of the design and writing process of the guide.
During data collection, the evaluation team learned that one of the NGOs, Paix et Lait, has resigned 
from the project because of budgetary and structural disagreements. This leaves only UNFD to carry 
forward direct support to PTAs. Yet UNFD also has indicated that despite having personnel available 
within the regions, the organization has no interest in working with schools outside of Djibouti City. It 
seems likely that DEGRA will encounter more implementation challenges with IR-2 in the future.
EQ3.a) Has DEGRA been achieving its intended outcomes for the IR-3?
DEGRA’s third intermediary result focuses on the systems level and aims to ensure that reading￾education policies are reformulated and reinforced. Three sub-IRs inform achievement of this result: 1) 
database on reading is established, 2) legal framework supporting reading development is reinforced, and 
3) technical commission for reading is created and functioning. Table 4 provides a midterm update of IR￾3.
28 Ministère de l’éducation nationale et de la formation professionelle (MENFOP). Défi lecture 2017 (12e édition). Published by UNICEF.
25
Table 4: IR-3 Results at midterm
Indicator Type Year 1
Achieved
Year 1
Target
Year 2
Achieved
Year 2 
Target
Year 3 
Achieved Year 3 
Target
% Achieved
against
Combined 
Year 1-3 
Target
LOP 
Target
% 
Achieved
against
LOP 
Target
IR3: Reading education policies are reformulated and reinforced
Number of sets of grade-level 
materials designed and aligned 
to standards
Custom 
- PPR
1 1 1 1 1 1 100% 5 60%
Number of MENFOP staff 
trained to develop standards 
and benchmarks for Grades 1-
5
Custom 
- PPR N/A N/A 22 20 41 20 145% 40 153%
Percentage of MENFOP 
Evaluation Unit staff trained 
and provided with appropriate 
evaluation tools and 
equipment
Custom N/A N/A 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Number of laws, policies, 
regulations or guidelines 
developed or modified to 
improve primary grade reading 
programs
Custom N/A N/A 1 1 N/A N/A 100% 2 50%
Number of reading 
assessments conducted Custom N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 2 100% 5 40%
26
DEGRA has met midterm targets for all five IR-3 indicators. DEGRA has revised three sets of TLMs 
(Grades 1-3). It has significantly exceeded the second indicator, the number of staff trained. This results 
from a change in approach, as the policy-linking activities involved teachers as well as higher-level 
government officials. DEGRA has also met its goal of training all members of the MENFOP evaluation 
staff unit. With regard to the fourth indicator, one policy (guidance note 662 on curriculum review)
29
had been developed during Year 2, so while there is no specific target for Year 3, the project remains on 
track. Finally, DEGRA has implemented two EGRAs, the first in November 2020 and the second in April 
2021. A third internal EGRA was underway in November 2021 at the time of data collection. DEGRA 
seems on track to meet its LOP targets, especially given progress achieved despite significant obstacles.
EQ3.b) Has DEGRA been successful in creating and enabling a favorable policy 
environment to improve reading instruction?
DEGRA has met its targets for its system-level component at midterm. Related accomplishments also
include the development of a dashboard that promotes the visualization and use of classroom￾observation data (see EQ1), and the subscription to a digital library for an educational research platform, 
CAIRN. Recall from EQ1 that DEGRA has led trainings for pedagogical advisors on the use of the 
dashboard.
30 In response to EQ3b, this section investigates DEGRA’s relationship with MENFOP and its 
operational structure to better understand changes in the policy environment. Progress on the 
development of the EGRA tool and related capacity building round out this section.
Relationship with MENFOP
Both FHI360 and MENFOP leadership describe their collaboration as healthy. DEGRA has developed a 
structure for collaboration with MENFOP that formally includes a Steering Committee as well as a 
Reading Promotion Commission. In practice, MENFOP has appointed focal points for each IR that are 
able to work directly with DEGRA technical leads. It has also established an informal technical 
committee. This section addresses the formal bodies. Their revitalization of these bodies figures among 
tasks ahead for FY22.
31
Steering Committee falteringwith mixed results: At the same time, findings indicate that the DEGRA 
Steering Committee is not fully functional. Several factors contribute to this situation, including COVID￾19 lockdown interruptions and dependence on the presiding SG’s presence, who is highly solicited and 
travels frequently. The Steering Committee met twice in 2020, and never in 2021.
32 Nonetheless, the 
SG, when interviewed, identified all the themes, discussions, and recommendations from the Steering 
Committee as highly relevant. Efforts are underway to reinstate the committee and hold a meeting 
before the end of 2021.
Another factor likely also accounts for the absence of regular Steering Committee meetings. Curricular 
revision for IR1 required intensive collaboration between DEGRA partners and, as a result, MENFOP 
technical staff and FHI360 staff formed a technical committee that met at least weekly to make progress. 
While not all members of the Steering Committee were involved in the technical committee, many 
were, rendering moot the need for regular Steering Committee meetings. While largely positive, the 
highly productive technical committee and resulting lack of Steering Group meetings may have further 
challenged an already fragile IR2. 
29 République de Djibouti. (December 31, 2018). Circulaire No.662: Circulaire de cadrage des travaux de revision des curricula et des manuels de 
l’enseignement fundamental. 
30 FHI360. (2021). Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity: Annual Work Plan (Year 4: October 1, 2021-September 30, 2022).
31 FHI360. (2021). Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity: Annual Work Plan (Year 4: October 1, 2021-September 30, 2022).
32 Meetings took place on February 9, 2020 and June 29, 2020. (Source: FHI360 – Year 2 Annual Report)
27
Reading Promotion Commission inactive yet promising: Similarly, discussions with key MENFOP and 
FHI360 personnel indicate that the Reading Promotion Commission is not functional.
33 At the same 
time, MENFOP officials interviewed convey that they see value in the commission, though they stipulate
that it must remain distinct from the DEGRA Steering Committee. As a cross-ministerial commission, it 
requires a high level of coordination and the direct involvement of the SG. Officials also insisted that the 
commission remain outside the project and will likely not involve FHI360. A MENFOP official cautioned 
that a similar commission already existed with CRIPEN, called the Groupe technique de la promotion de 
la lecture. Still, MENFOP leadership emphasized that, while the mandate of the Reading Promotion 
Commission had proved confusing at first, MENFOP now had greater clarity. As a high-level official in 
MENFOP stated, 
“It should remain. Even the fact that we did not hold a meeting earlier, really, I think 
it’s a good thing. Even if we didn’t do it voluntarily, now we have more information. 
Before we didn’t have a lot of information. We could have met, but it would have 
been like a second Steering Committee. Now, we have strong evidence. We will 
have the findings from the midterm evaluation, and then there are the EGRA results, 
and we’ve been doing that for nearly two years. We are in the third year of 
experimentation. We now have information that can feed the commission’s 
reflections.” (MENFOP Secretary General, KII)
This quote addresses the status and potential of the Reading Commission while also demonstrating 
MENFOP’s espoused commitment to evidence-based decision making. 
EGRA tool development and capacity-building
Findings indicate that DEGRA has succeeded in working closely with the MENFOP Evaluation Unit to 
improve their capacity to lead EGRA from start to finish. While COVID-related lockdowns could have 
severely hampered DEGRA’s progress, teams embraced online training, with positive results. STS and 
FHI developed a model wherein they divided formal synchronous group training into shorter sessions
and instituted a more regular coaching approach, which allowed them to accompany evaluation staff with 
practical tasks.
When asked for feedback on the EGRA tool, MENFOP leadership expressed great satisfaction. They 
noted that as an international tool, EGRA will allow them to check students’ performance regularly. 
Members of the Evaluation Unit proved more critical. While they now seem satisfied with the tool, they
described an arduous and highly debated process with ministerial colleagues, as well as FHI360 experts,
before arriving at the tool’s final contextualized version. FHI360 and STS also acknowledged an iterative, 
and at times contested, process during which the Ministry required adaptations to the subtasks. As a 
result of this process emphasizing contextualization, the EGRA tool diverges from the prescribed EGRA 
toolkit. Nonetheless, stakeholders overwhelmingly insist that the process has proved very rewarding as 
MENFOP is fully on board. Ensuring buy-in was particularly important as the Ministry had outright 
rejected the results of the 2009 EGRA. Having approval of the EGRA tool makes for a significant 
milestone. There are some concerns that the Evaluation Unit is highly solicited and that MENFOP is 
currently working on other sorts of assessments. Time will tell if MENFOP will manage to truly take on 
EGRA’s administration and analysis, but the signs are promising.
33 Note that the FY4 workplan reported a ministerial note that appointed members of the Technical Commission for the Promotion of Reading 
as of 29 March 21. (See above reference.)
28
EQ3.c) Has DEGRA been effective in collaborating with CRIPEN, CFEEF, the Ministry’s 
cabinet through the Office of the Secretary General, the Office of the Executive Secretary, 
the Office of the General Inspector, and the Evaluation Unit? 
The response to this evaluation question builds on the findings from EQ3.b above that identify the 
structural tools undergirding the relationship between DEGRA and MENFOP. This question further 
investigates the collaborations between FHI360 and key entities by relying largely on interview data.
Effective collaboration
DEGRA works closely with ministerial staff at both a leadership and more technical levels. Interviews 
with FHI360 and partner staff, as well as MENFOP officials further reveal those strong relationships
between DEGRA and MENFOP; their teams have found a synergy based on both personal and technical 
considerations. The SG strongly supportsthe project and had developed a close working relationship 
with the former DEGRA COP.
34 He has encouraged FHI to work directly with the focal points. The 
collaborations between FHI360 and CRIPEN, CFEEF, IG, and M&E focal points developed during the 
design of TLMs seem particularly strong, according to MENFOP leadership and key DEGRA staff. Four 
national-level education officials, as well as FHI360 and STS personnel, also pointed to professional and 
personal connections between MENFOP key officials and DEGRA staff as highly beneficial to project 
progress. All DEGRA leads are former MENFOP or CRIPEN staff. Accordingly, stakeholders’ comment 
that these connections allow for easier access, more open discussions, and more effective collaboration. 
Ministry officials also noted that even on occasions of strong disagreement with FHI360 staff, both 
entities have managed to find a solution.
The MENFOP Evaluation Unit offers a special case for study, as it collaborates both with STS on EGRA 
development and analysis and with FHI360 headquarter staff on the creation of the observation tool and 
dashboard (see EQ1). Relevant officials indicated satisfaction with both collaborations and noted they 
have been a source of capacity-building. For instance, an M&E representative shared how FHI360 and 
STS have proved receptive to the needs of the Evaluation Unit. Again, the individual underlined the 
utility of online working sessions to learn important data-collection and analysis software like SPSS, 
STATA, Tangerine, Power Bi, and ODK. At the same time, the Evaluation Unit identified challenging 
elements of collaboration. These include FHI360’s sometimes rigid training tools, not always adapted to 
the skills and needs of trainees. It leaves participants with a sense of inefficient trainings. Colleagues also 
noted how STS trainings can be difficult when American colleagues may need support or translation in 
French. Time differences can likewise prove problematic. Overall, however, these issues are minor and 
collaboration appears largely effective. We turn next to more complex areas.
Challenging areas of collaboration
Some areas of collaboration have proved more challenging than others, though there have been 
improvements. Collaboration with the Inspector General’s Office, for instance, was difficult in the 
beginning but has since become stronger. The quote below provides an example of how FHI360 and the 
Inspector General’s Office have worked together to develop a strong working relationship, despite an 
initially troubled start. 
“We make a plan based on our needs. It was a bit disturbing in the beginning. We 
were destabilized. During the first workshop, they told us, ‘This is the project,’ and I 
think that was the main difficulty. . .. Then, we came to an agreement about how we 
would work together, and since then, we’ve been able to agree upon a strategy. And 
each time, when there were difficulties, we would call a meeting. But, since the 
beginning, everything has come into place and it’s really a collaboration with a team 
34 DEGRA’s second COP joined the team in August 2021 and had only held the position for a few months at the time of data collection. 
29
who makes themselves available and is responsive from both sides.” (Inspector 
General’s Office, KII)
A remaining challenge concerns the overlapping responsibilities between the Inspector General’s Office 
and the CFEEF, which complicate DEGRA’s training efforts. Unfortunately, relationships relevant to IR-2 
have become more difficult between FHI360 and MENFOP entities over time. According to one 
MENFOP official, challenges include focal points having more urgent priorities.
35 The reading corners 
initiative also continues as a source of tension. CRIPEN staff interviewed made it clear that CRIPEN has 
a plan in place and is looking to FHI360 to support their work, rather than change direction. FHI360 has 
also needed to help CRIPEN navigate USAID’s strict financial regulations, which can prove onerous at 
times.
EQ4) What have been some primary factors that have contributed to success or 
presented specific challenges in DEGRA’s implementation? What alternative approaches 
could lead to better results?
The response to this question synthesizes many of the findings from earlier sections to clearly delineate 
supportive and hindering factors to DEGRA’s success at the midterm timepoint. 
Factors contributing to success
Internal
Effective close collaboration between FHI360, its partners (STS, OSC, and UNFD), MENFOP, and USAID:
Enhanced by historic relationships, the Ministry, implementing partners, and donors interviewed 
underlined the importance of the partnership developed among key entities. Team members exhibit a 
high level of engagement and a strong desire to succeed.
Close relationship between FHI360, STS and OSC: FHI360 involved technical specialists from headquarters 
in conversations supporting OSC’s SBCC component and the Evaluation Unit. Involvement reinforced 
in-country expertise and enhanced collaboration. FHI also promoted transparency and collaboration,
which in turn has promoted strong relationships between DEGRA subcontractors and ministerial 
colleagues.
Development of a relationship of trust with the French Curriculum Review Board (CRC of CRIPEN): While 
at first, CRIPEN had resisted change, FHI360 patiently worked to bring partners on board. The CRC 
now invites and solicits FHI360’s inputs at meetings and takes recommendations into account, as well as 
submitting products for review.
36
Regular meetings: FHI360 established regular meetings with MENFOP and the Evaluation Unit, as well as
biweekly meetings with USAID. The Year 1 annual report points to meetings with MENFOP as “key to 
making progress and obtaining buy-in” and “a common understanding of the work plan and an efficient 
planning process.”37 The Year 2 annual report highlighted meetings with USAID as helping to keep the 
project “on track.”38 Interviews with FHI360 and USAID affirmed the utility of the meetings.
Active mitigation of COVID-19 obstacles: FHI360 creatively addressed challenges related to the COVID￾19 pandemic including 1) FHI360 equipped MENFOP TLM designers with laptops and internet access 
during the lockdown;
39 MENFOP leadership recognized this effort as highly responsive and effective; and 
35 Notably this refers to the Regional Directorate (DR) and Public Schools Directorate (DEP) focal points, specifically.
36 FHI360 (October 31, 2020). Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity: Annual Report (Year 2)
37 FHI360 (October 31, 2019). Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity: Annual Report (Year 1), p. 16.
38 FHI360 (October 31, 2020). Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity: Annual Report (Year 2)
39 FHI360 (October 31, 2020). Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity: Annual Report (Year 2)
30
2) FHI360 and STS found creative solutions for trainings given that international travel was no longer 
supported. They implemented shorter trainings and followed up more often, allowing for unanticipated 
coaching opportunities and possibly more effective learning.
“Remote working, it taught us to save time. It taught us to be much more efficient 
and it’s really a blessing in disguise. We also took over the EGRA enumerator 
training with good results.” (Evaluation Unit, interview)
External
Collaborative trainings: Due in part to COVID-19 complications, DEGRA developed and relied on a pool 
of pedagogical advisors and CFEEF trainers for teacher and pedagogical advisor training. The Evaluation 
Unit, the MENFOP IT service, and the IG also served as co-trainers for the classroom-observation tool 
and supervision dashboard.
Ministerial expertise: Among other technical expertise, OSC pointed out the importance of CRIPEN 
having the expertise and materials available, so that SBCC messaging could be produced internally rather 
than outsourcing to an external and more expensive provider.
Recruitment of local consultant to support SBCC work: Due to COVID-19, it was no longer possible for 
an international consultant to lead the SBCC work with CRIPEN. Rather, a local consultant joined the 
effort. This has allowed for more regular direct contact CRIPEN, while OSC has provided technical 
support. This may have resulted in a more effective process.
Consensus on problem: Ministry officials came onboard to increase efforts to improve children’s reading. 
Similarly, parents interviewed expressed the desire to see their children succeed in school. Time will tell 
whether or not parents can convert their enthusiasm into tangible support.
Size: Djibouti’s relatively small size means that DEGRA and MENFOP can touch all schools without 
great difficulty. At the same time, the country has a fairly large number of well-educated experts and 
access to international donors.
Challenging factors
Internal 
Recruitment challenges and turnover of key personnel: DEGRA experienced challenges recruiting key 
personnel including the Senior Reading Specialist (IR1), the Senior Community Mobilization Specialist 
(IR2), the Finance and Operations Manager, the Procurement and Grants Officer, and the MEL Officer. 
In addition, the COP, the IR2 lead, the Finance and Operations Manager, and the MEL Officer all 
resigned in June 2021. DEGRA managed to quickly recruit and replace three of four positions, with the 
MEL Officer role remaining vacant. Although initial recruitment troubles contributed to programming 
delays, recent resignations seem to have had little effect on project operations, at least at midterm.
External
Unanticipated high costs of printing and training: A presidential decree required that FHI360 use a 
printing company based in India at a higher-than-expected price. The cost for training also proved more 
expensive than anticipated. The DEGRA budget had been based on a government venue (CFEEF), yet it 
was frequently in use and not available. A misunderstanding occurred with MENFOP about who was to 
pay for food and refreshments.
40
40 FHI360 (October 31, 2019). Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity: Annual Report (Year 1).
31
Quick turnaround: High demand on MENFOP’slimited resources combined with a short time to deploy 
a full revision of the primary school reading curriculum resulted in a challenging TLM development 
process. In addition, DEGRA needed to train teachers directly rather than using a cascade model. Delays 
also resulted from the time necessary to get CRIPEN (CRC) on board. Revisions did not start until 
May.41
MENFOP resources highly solicited: Other organizations, foundations, and international/local 
organizations regularly request support from MENFOP focal points, including the Evaluation Unit. End￾of-year activities and exams also require MENFOP energies. DEGRA must therefore compete for 
attention. Backlogs have caused some delays and required intensified coordination efforts.42
Overlapping responsibilities and lack of smooth cooperation between the IG and the CFEEF: MENFOP 
guidelines stipulate that the IG is responsible for planning teachers’ annual training, while the CFEEF is in 
charge of its implementation. In reality, CFEEF trainers and IG’s pedagogical advisors must work hand in
hand to best prepare teachers.
43
Delayed implementation of IR-2: As indicated in EQ2, IR-2 activities encountered significant delays and 
even a slowdown. Budget changes and revisions to the IR-2 strategy and the SBCC strategy ensued. 
MENFOP focal points were also particularly stretched between their other duties and DEGRA, often 
making them unavailable to support community engagement. The strategy also required revision to 
account for weaker NGO capacity in training PTAs than originally conceptualized. 44 Activities began in 
earnest in Year 3. 
Inexistent or inactive PTAs: As indicated in EQ2, many PTAs throughout Djibouti are not highly engaged,
while other schools do not have PTAs at all. 
COVID-pandemic complications: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in numerous delays in activity 
implementation and general supply-chain issues:
• The printing of TLMs experienced delays in India. 
• MENFOP resources were pulled away from DEGRA to address the crisis.
• Trainings, SBCC strategy workshops, and community sensitizations could not be held as 
originally planned during lockdown.45
• International travel stalled: STS and FHI360 trainers could not travel and instead offered shorter 
online sessions and more substantial coaching and practical exercises. OSC shifted from hiring 
an international consultant to a national expert for SBCC campaign design and implementation. 
• The number of people who could attend sensitizations and trainings was limited to ensure social 
distancing, affecting educator trainings as well as parent sensitizations. 
• EGRA was postponed from March 2020 to November 2020. Measurement shifted to focus on 
students beginning Grade 3, rather than on students at the end of Grade 2.
• Steering Committee meetings were postponed.
Climate issues: Flash flooding and extreme heat made transportation even within Djibouti City difficult. 
Access to some remote schools became further complicated. 
41 FHI360 (October 31, 2019). Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity: Annual Report (Year 1).
42 FHI360. (July 31, 2021). Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity: FY 2021 Quarterly Report (April 1-June 30, 2021)
43 FHI360 (October 31, 2019). Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity: Annual Report (Year 1).
44 FHI360 (October 31, 2019). Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity: Annual Report (Year 1).
45 FHI360 (October 31, 2020). Djibouti Early Grade Reading Activity: Annual Report (Year 2)
32
Sociocultural and socioeconomic barriers: Commensurate with findings from the barrier analysis,
46 some 
parents remained unaware of the important role they can play in supporting their children’s reading, 
especially parents with no or little schooling. Parents with lower socioeconomic status and fewer 
resources face additional difficulties.
EQ5) Do the original assumptions and the theory of change still hold? If not, what 
adaptations are needed to ensure that DEGRA remains on track to achieve its expected 
results?
To answer this question, the evaluation team relied on discussions with FHI360 staff and key MENFOP 
partners, as well as its own experience supporting development projects and working with theories of 
change. Midterm evaluation findings from earlier report sections also inform analysis.
47
Overview of the theory of change
DEGRA’s theory of change resembles other USAID early grade reading projects in that it identifies 
three main components as essential to learning to read: 1) improved reading instruction, 2) improved 
community and family support, and, 3) a supportive policy environment. On review, the actual theory of 
change document (see Annex 1—SOW) is quite sparse. The document identifies the three components 
above as the first part of an If -Then statement resulting in improved reading outcomes for Grades 1 
thru 5. The theory of change mimics the project’s results framework. The document also identifies four 
assumptions. They cover the GoDj’s agreement on the importance of reading, its continued support, a 
stable operating environment, and sufficient financial support from USAID.
Assessment of the theory of change
Overall, the three components of the theory of change and the ensuing outcome are valid and continue 
to apply to DEGRA’s design and implementation. At the same time, detail is lacking to articulate clear 
linkages between project activities and outcomes. For example, component 1 indicates that “reading 
instruction in school is improved.” Yet how? DEGRA has been revising TLMs and offering educator 
training and coaching. These are the elements that DEGRA posits will lead to a change in teaching 
practice, thereby enhancing the learning environment and improving student performance. The findings 
for question EQ1 above, however, indicate that although DEGRA is providing teacher training, the 
proportion of teachers attending remains low, while teacher mobility is high. Therefore, an additional 
assumption around the theory of change seems necessary: that a requisite proportion of teachers can 
and will attend trainings. If low teacher attendance at trainings remains the norm for professional 
education trainings in Djibouti, the situation warrants a different assumption and activities should be 
reassessed. In that case, what might DEGRA implement that can help further motivate and incentivize 
teachers to participate in professional-development activities? As this example illustrates, further 
unpacking the linkages between project elements, possibly to include a visual mapping, may help us
better understand the connections between project activities, anticipated outcomes, and underlying 
assumptions. 
In addition to teachers attending professional-development sessions, stakeholders and findings above 
point out several assumptions meriting consideration:
PTA capacity and existence: DEGRA’s model relies on the mobilization of parents and PTAs, yet 
findings show that some schools lack PTAs. FHI360 staff also indicate that procedures to establish PTAs 
may prove particularly complex within Djibouti. Similarly, NGO capacity to support and strengthen 
46 Overseas Strategic Consulting, Ltd. (August 31, 2019). Barrier Analysis: Parental Engagement in Children’s Reading in Djibouti.
47 Due to the nature of the question, these findings reflect evaluation team judgments more so than for the other questions. For other 
evaluation questions, judgments are largely reserved for the conclusions section.
33
PTAs and parents’ reading habits with their children also turned out weaker than expected. IR2’s slow 
start indicates a need to revisit the many underlying assumptions that link project activities to parents’ 
behavioral change.
Rural/urban/suburban disparities: When interviewed about the theory of change, MENFOP 
leadership noted that interventions are especially necessary for the most remote schools. Midterm 
evaluation findings also indicate that suburban schools face very specific and significant challenges. The 
theory of change does not acknowledge the distinctions between those environments and the 
assumptions made, which can stand in the way of them also benefiting from DEGRA activities. 
Children’s home language and the language of instruction: When asked about the validity of the 
theory of change, two FHI360 DEGRA staff underlined the challenges children encounter in the early 
grades due to language as an issue bringing into question the approach.
48 EQ1 findings above suggest that 
DEGRA’s model proves more responsive to student needs within this multilingual context than the 
previous instructional model. These dynamics should also figure within underlying assumptions in the 
theory of change.
School functioning: In addition to risks associated with unrest or political violence, COVID-19 has 
demonstrated worldwide that health concerns may threaten government service provision. DEGRA and 
MENFOP may benefit from putting into place solutions in advance were another pandemic or other 
similar risk to threaten school function.
49
Interlinkage of project components: When interviewed, USAID colleagues pointed to the understood 
synergy existing between the three components. DEGRA’s design is based on simultaneous evolution 
within the three results areas. In the case of DEGRA, IR1 has outperformed IR2 and IR3 to varying 
extents, and IR2 efforts were significantly delayed. The theory of change may be revised to clarify and 
correct, if necessary, understandings about component relationships. 
EQ6) What has the implementer achieved so far to ensure sustainability?
At midterm (beginning of Year 4), encouraging signs of the possible sustainability of DEGRA elements 
are visible. MENFOP’s engagement and partnership undergirds many of these developments. FHI360 
staff also pointed to the early integration of capacity building within the project life cycle as fostering 
sustainability. While DEGRA aims to initiate a Steering Committee and a Reading Promotion 
Commission (see EQ3 above), it works closely with existing entities seeking to develop their capacity. 
This section provides details of encouraging signs relevant to sustainability, as well as some areas where 
challenges persist. 
Encouraging signs of sustainability
Emerging evidence of sustainability at midterm includes capacity building, resource 
development, and some system-level changes:
Pre-Service reading instruction module: CFEEF’s support to develop and integrate a module on 
reading instruction as part of the pre-service curriculum constitutes a major advancement and bodes 
well for sustainability, as indicated by both CFEEF and FHI360 staff when interviewed.
Teachers trained: Midterm evaluation survey data indicate that more than half (60.9%) of teachers 
surveyed have participated in DEGRA trainings, though a lesser proportion do so in Djibouti Suburbs. 
48 See Annex Table 10 in Annex VI for more precise details on students’ language profile.
49 The evaluation team notes that an analysis of the effects of COVID-19 on the education system was beyond the scope of this evaluation. 
Nonetheless, findings do indicate that MENFOP initiated a distance learning regimen that may have benefitted some students, particularly 
those in urban areas.
34
According to project-monitoring data, just under half (45%) of Grade 1 and 2 teachers received coaching 
in Year 3. 
Pool of pedagogical trainers established: Using a cascade model, pedagogical advisors are able to 
deliver trainings independently to colleagues.
“We have improved pedagogical advisors’ capacities. As of today, they have learned a 
lot, and that is going to rest with them even without us. And the fact that the pool of 
trainers is able to duplicate trainings shows how much they have absorbed. For 
instance, recently, I was distributing the training plan for them and they had such a 
good reaction to one of the examples. They reacted and proposed something 
different. We really see the transfer of competencies and their appropriation of the 
tools.” (FHI staff, KII)
TLMs produced for Grades 1-3: Although TLMs still require some improvement and fine-tuning, the 
package of TLMs for Grades 1 and 2 has been completed. Grade 3 materials were in the process of 
being printed and distributed during data collection. The project aims to partially complete Grades 4 and 
5 by the end of the DEGRA project. TLMs also incorporate a GESI lens and privilege empowering 
images of girls and women, as well as of children and adults with disabilities. These changes will remain 
in place for the near future, as will competencies the CRIPEN team achieved during the development 
process. 
Improved GoDj capacity: DEGRA has made strides in improving the capacities of MENFOP colleagues. 
CRIPEN’s ability to develop video and audio messages, for example, increased during the development 
of the DEGRA SBCC campaign. Additional capacity building may be necessary to orchestrate a full media 
campaign, however. Moreover, DEGRA further developed the capacity of the Evaluation Unit, and the 
team should be able to fully oversee EGRA by the end of the project. The longevity of these gains 
remains fragile, however, as the team is small and depends entirely on projects such as DEGRA or the 
World Bank’s Expanding Opportunities for Learning (PRODA) project. Whether or not system-level 
changes have taken place that institutionalize activities like EGRA in workflows and budgets constitutes 
an area requiring additional exploration.
“STS and the team of [FHI360] headquarters staff accompanies trainings, so that the 
Evaluation Unit is able to carry out assessments, to manage, to pilot, to analyze the 
results . . . . The Ministry has initiated an evaluation with the World Bank in French 
and Math, I think. The Evaluation Unit is also piloting this, and there is a visible 
transfer of skills in relation to the experience gained at EGRA and the transfer to 
piloting this other assessment." (FHI360 staff, interview) 
New classroom observation tool and supervision dashboard: Pedagogical advisors and directors now 
routinely use the revised classroom-observation tool to support teacher practice. In addition, MENFOP 
hosts the new supervision dashboard on a website that the Ministry IT team created, demonstrating 
ownership and interest. The Secretary General indicated when interviewed that he sees value added in 
the dashboard and is considering its application for other subject areas as well as middle and high school 
levels. As findings for EQ1 note, there remainssome reticence regarding the dashboard, and further 
efforts are still needed to ensure that it meets the needs of teachers, pedagogical advisors, and the 
MENFOP regional and national hierarchy to prove sustainable. 
Reading proficiency benchmarks established: DEGRA worked with the GoDj to establish benchmarks 
for Grades 2-5 through a policy-linking process. These benchmarks will remain and can guide EGRA and 
other future assessments.
35
Challenges to sustainability
Complications to long-term change remain, however, especially for community engagement:
Research database subscription is project dependent: For instance, as part of systems-strengthening 
and to promote evidence-based practice, DEGRA provides a subscription to MENFOP that allows 
access to a research database, CAIRN. Some MENFOP colleagues found access very useful. At the same 
time, there is no mechanism in place for its payment beyond the project.
Behavioral change requires time beyond project end: Parental engagement to support reading 
requires a behavioral shift that will likely not be achieved even within the full five years of project 
implementation. With IR2 efforts still fairly nascent at midterm, more time is needed to determine 
possible sustainability.
PTAs are precarious: Many PTAs are not yet legally established. Existent PTAs are still in the process 
of understanding their new role and learning how to initiate and run activities. More effort is needed to 
support PTA-driven initiatives, as this requires a cultural shift and a changed understanding of their role 
vis-à-vis the school administration and community. It is unlikely that these new practices will be fully 
acquired by the end of the project. 
36
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, DEGRA’s accomplishments at midterm are impressive, especially given the deeply challenging
operating environment the project has navigated since launch. The project has faced minor internal 
challenges related to staff turnover while handling significant challenges related to climate issues, 
sociocultural and economic barriers, inactive PTAs, a complex ecosystem of GoDj institutions, and of 
course, COVID-19 complications. In many cases, COVID-19 challenges prompted creative and 
innovative solutions that have strengthened project operation, like shorter training sessions with more 
regular coaching opportunities. A number of internal factors also seem to support the project’s success,
such as its effective collaboration among partners, regular meetings, active mitigation of COVID-19 
obstacles, and emphasis on effective and close partnerships with MENFOP and USAID. MENFOP’s 
competence and engagement have proven invaluable throughout the process and bode well for long￾term improvements. 
Most significantly, student performance results, based on the DEGRA midterm performance evaluation 
EGRA, show meaningful improvement in students’ reading scores. DEGRA has already reached its life￾of-project target for the topline indicator of students’ reading scores at the beginning of Year 4 (43% 
achieved compared to 30% targeted). These results are laudatory and distinguish themselves from many 
other EGR projects in other countries that struggle to meet benchmarks. Results also indicate 
disparities between student learning by location, pointing to a need for continued focus on Djibouti 
Suburbs, where results proved weakest. The release of results from DEGRA’s internal midterm EGRA 
evaluation will be important for determining if internal findings corroborate these external midterm 
evaluation conclusions.
The midterm evaluation is limited in its ability to identify causes for the positive changes, yet findings 
provide insights into possible contributing factors. Parents and teachers interviewed alike indicated that 
many children gain confidence and find enjoyment in reading. Many parents and educators assert that 
children are able to read earlier under DEGRA than children who learned under the previous reading 
method focused on a whole-language approach. In contrast, DEGRA employs a progressive phonics￾based syllabic strategy that begins with the alphabet and allows students to initiate a step-by-step 
process based on decoding. An innovation of DEGRA’s approach within the Djiboutian context is the 
introduction of oral comprehension as a competency for the first time. This element responds to the 
needs of children who have not benefited from early childhood education and may also help buffer the 
challenges that many children speaking national languages face as they enter a novel Francophone 
environment. At the same time, DEGRA may wish to redouble efforts to make parents aware of the 
benefits of oral-comprehension exercises, as some parents criticized the focus on oral activities in the 
new approach. 
Teacher training is also likely to contribute to improved results, though teacher attendance remains low 
and symptomatic of a larger challenge within the education sector. DEGRA’s pivot to developing a pool 
of trainers offers an effective strategy, though it also suffers from regional disparities. Similarly, many 
teachers positively experience DEGRA’s emphasis on supervision and the coaching of teachers by 
pedagogical advisors and school directors. But, yet again, application is inconsistent. Overall, continued 
attention to training and supervision provision and compliance is necessary and will require substantial 
efforts from MENFOP to increase delivery and improve attendance. Educators in the most remote areas 
may be in most need of support. Finally, DEGRA’s collaborative development of the supervision 
dashboard with MENFOP marks a definite project success, even though feedback is mixed. The tool will 
benefit from further streamlining and advocacy to promote its use and unleash its full potential.
Curricular revision and the production of new teaching and learning materials (TLMs) that accompany 
the new DEGRA approach are the fruit of a joint development process between DEGRA and the GoDj. 
TLMs are user-friendly, provide diverse texts, and elicit higher-order critical thinking skills. While 
37
beyond the scope of this evaluation, the TLMs seem to be gender-sensitive and disability-inclusive. At 
the same time, discussions with educators and parents indicate that disability inclusion may be an area 
for further attention, as parents and educators indicate some unease with an inclusive approach. Findings 
also suggest that many children are taking their student materials home, constructing an important 
bridge between school and the home environment, though children in Djibouti Suburbs seem to have 
less access to materials than students in Djibouti Inner City and the regions. 
DEGRA’s community strengthening component, IR-2, has suffered multiple setbacks and makes for the 
weakest link in the project’s approach at midterm. An imposed slowdown, as well as COVID-19 
lockdowns, delayed implementation until well into Year 3. Findings indicate that parents are hearing 
SBCC messages, but more so in urban areas, as might have been expected. Parental and PTA 
mobilization constitute other key aspects of IR-2. PTA mobilization faces particular system-level 
challenges as PTAs are a fairly recent phenomenon in Djibouti and fostering their operationalization to 
support reading initiatives and outreach will require a cultural and structural shift. Along with changing 
parental attitudes, this work will take time and is likely to continue to lag as other project areas advance. 
DEGRA’s identification of reading corners and reading festivals as exciting events that can galvanize 
community enthusiasm for reading is accurate, but CRIPEN has already been implementing these 
activities. DEGRA should seek to support and amplify CRIPEN’s initiatives. Lastly, setbacks with NGO 
training and coordination further exacerbate the challenges DEGRA encounters in its community￾engagement efforts and render future progress more tentative.
In terms of systems-strengthening, DEGRA has met its midterm targets. Many of the elements indicated 
above, such as educator training, TLM development, and the creation and implementation of the 
supervision dashboard, also contribute to capacity building of the larger education sector. The 
development of the EGRA tool and its embrace by MENFOP, as well as MENFOP’s Evaluation Unit’s 
improved capacity to fully oversee an EGRA process, also make for impressive achievements. FHI360 
staff and its partners (STS and OSC) enjoy a collegial and productive relationship with MENFOP 
leadership and technical staff. Findings demonstrate that focal points and DEGRA technical staff work 
well together and have open and constructive conversations that promote progress. Nonetheless, 
DEGRA experiences difficulties when navigating the overlapping responsibilities between the Inspector 
General’s Office and the CFEEF. DEGRA’s leadership should continue to seek solutions by working 
through high-level ministerial counterparts.
At the same time, the two flagship bodies of the DEGRA/MENFOP collaboration, the Steering 
Committee and the Reading Promotion Commission, have not been functional. All entities expressed 
renewed commitments to reinvigorating institutional efforts in Year 4. Because of the high level of 
functionality that has occurred without these bodies, DEGRA should be mindful that efforts to reinstate 
them should not come at the expense of already productive collaborative arrangements. The final 
evaluation should revisit the value of these bodies. 
The evaluation team notes evidence of emerging sustainability of project results, including structural 
changes like the CFEEF’s pre-service reading instruction module, revised TLMs, the supervision 
dashboard, and government-approved established benchmarks for reading competencies. Capacity
building also may foster long-term changes, notably educators who benefited from DEGRA trainings in 
new instructional methods and the establishment of a pool of trainers for cascade trainings.
Finally, while DEGRA’s achievements at the midterm point are many, close analysis of the theory of 
change points to areas that require further comprehensive development. The evaluation team urges 
FHI360 to initiate working sessions with partners to fully unpack the project’s hidden assumptions about 
the linkages between each component activity and project results. While DEGRA is already meeting 
many of its outcome targets for IR-1 and IR-3, a more clearly articulated a comprehensive theory of 
change and shared understanding among partners may help to further enhance already strong project 
results and perhaps provide solutions for IR-2.
38
RECOMMENDATIONS
The list of actions below derives from the findings and conclusions to provide suggestions for DEGRA’s 
continued implementation through project end. 
1. Extend the project timeline at least until the end of the 2023-2024 academic year to allow for 
complete implementation of DEGRA support to Grade 5. 
2. Initiate a collaborative workshop with MENFOP leadership and technical officials and DEGRA staff 
and partners to review and enhance the project’s theory of change. Discussions should focus on the 
linkages between project activities/components and targeted outcomes, as well as underlying 
assumptions.
3. Accelerate replacement of key personnel, such as the M&E Manager.
Improved reading instruction (IR1)
4. Review TLM production process to: 1) Improve quality control for the design and printing of TLMs, 
so as to correct and avoid minor errors. 2) Improve the printing process and mitigate supply-chain 
complications, so materials are delivered on time.
5. Improve teacher’s access to TLM materials, so they can independently replace as needed. In order 
to replace materials that become damaged or lost, make available teacher kits with letter labels and 
manipulatives, as well as Big Books and posters for sale. Provide or create a telephone software 
application to help teachers with French vocabulary, especially when working with students who live 
in very remote areas and have less exposure to French in other contexts.
6. Ensure all children have access to the student manual and workbook. Find ways to encourage 
parents to buy materials, perhaps through sensitization campaigns or through awareness-raising 
between more advantaged and less advantaged schools and families.
7. Offer teachers and directors alternative training modalities to improve teacher attendance. For 
example, allow teachers based in regions to attend trainings in Djibouti City. Consider creating 
training videos with CRIPEN assistance. Videos can be made available by saving them to pedagogical 
advisor tablets, as well as by providing options for download onto phone (YouTube, Vimeo, etc.) 
and/or provision via USB key.
8. Track teacher participation in trainings through a centralized system to be able to identify teachers 
who might need assistance.
Investigate possible collaboration with PRODA.
Also consider other incentives to improve educator performance and enthusiasm for trainings. 
Teacher/director merit recognition may be a possible activity and may include an award ceremony 
and dissemination via media channels.
9. Continue to prioritize teacher supervision through structural changes: 1) reduce additional tasks for 
pedagogical advisors, so that they focus on supervision; 2) ensure that pedagogical advisors have an 
adequate fuel allowance; 3) clarify expectations for a quantity of monthly visits to remote schools. If 
the supervision of remote areas remains a priority, ensure that pedagogical advisors have fuel 
allowance.
10. Review supervision dashboard to streamline required data entry. Place emphasis on information 
necessary for MENFOP, ensuring coaching takes place, as well as pedagogical advisor responsiveness 
to teacher needs.
39
11. Tailor future trainings to cover formative evaluations to improve teacher and director capacity and 
comfort with DEGRA-recommended practices. Equip them during training and coaching to follow 
progress at the classroom and school level.
12. Investigate and strengthen opportunities to support inclusive education for children with disabilities. 
Efforts should focus on the system, classroom, and community levels.
Enhanced community participation (IR2)
13. Review and revise DEGRA’s IR-2 strategy to adapt activities, targets, and work plan to the realities 
of PTA capacity and function in accordance with the MENFOP/CRIPEN strategy. Consider a 
workshop approach bringing together stakeholders. Discussions could begin with the theory of 
change and should include considerations for sustainability.
Potentially reconsider implementation in regional areas given setbacks. It may make more sense to 
consider efforts in Djibouti Inner City as a pilot for scale-up in future projects in the regions.
14. Coordinate with and support current MENFOP efforts to improve PTA capacity. Notably, the GoDj 
has established a Presidential Advisor to create PTA groups (Groupements). Investigate 
collaborations with this entity to effectively leverage PTA activities.
15. Further enhance SBCC media campaign using other media and coordination with other events. 
Focus on the importance of oral comprehension as a bridge to reading and writing.
16. Support CRIPEN’s implementation of reading corners and reading festivals through financial and 
technical means. Consider ways that SBCC messaging can reference events.
Systems-strengthening (IR3)
17. Assist the Secretary General in initiating the work of the Reading Promotion Commission with clear 
objectives. Leverage USAID contacts as necessary to promote participation among other 
institutions. Support the revival of the DEGRA Steering Committee, being sure to maintain 
productivity of technical working mechanism.
18. Continue to support the MENFOP Evaluation Unit with capacity-building activities. Strategize ways 
to increase the number of participants benefiting from capacity building in anticipation of likely staff 
turnover given demand for expertise.
19. Seek strategies to navigate overlapping responsibilities between the IG Office and CFEEF. 
20. Work with MENFOP to identify a way to finance the CAIRN platform beyond the end of DEGRA.
Monitoring and Evaluation & Finance
21. Equate EGRA and ENI assessments to see whether the correlation is sufficient and if ENI could be 
an acceptable, less expensive alternative to EGRA for regular assessment of student performance. 
EGRA would be reserved for more periodic assessments and when a diagnostic is necessary to 
adjust instruction and support. The equating exercise can be performed at the same time as an 
EGRA for minimal additional cost.
22. Perform a study to explore existing reading corners and identify best practices as well as areas for 
improvement. Consider activities to link schools, so that those with more effective reading corners 
can mentor others. Public-private partnerships may also present a viable mechanism for increasing 
resources.
23. Improve DEGRA’s financial analysis capability by setting up budget visualization by activity. This issue 
especially concerns the community-engagement component (IR-2). Review of the IR-1 and IR-3 
budgets indicate that activity-level analysis is already possible.
40
ANNEXES
Annex I: Evaluation Statement of Work
USAID/Djibouti
DEGRA EVALUATION STATEMENT OF WORK
I. INTRODUCTION
This is a Statement of Work (SOW) for a mid-term performance evaluation of USAID/Djibouti’s Early 
Grade Reading Activity (DEGRA) implemented by FHI360 under Contract No. 72060319C00001.
II. PURPOSE OF THE EVALUATION
The mid-term performance evaluation of the Djibouti DEGRA activity will be conducted to determine 
activity effectiveness, document lessons learned, and make recommendations for improvement. This 
evaluation will determine the extent to which the activity is on track to meet its targets as defined in its 
objectives and to test the development hypothesis and key assumptions underlying the project design.
DEGRA is at the mid-point of its implementation and this evaluation will provide USAID/Djibouti with 
an objective and external assessment to: (1) enhance the effectiveness of the intervention during its 
remaining implementation, and; (2) inform the design of future activities.
III. USE OF EVALUATION FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
USAID/Djibouti will use the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of this evaluation to determine 
what, if any, adjustments to the DEGRA activity and/or its broader portfolio are necessary to more 
effectively achieve the U.S. government strategic objectives in Djibouti. It will also inform 
USAID/Djibouti in planning any follow-on programming beyond the current end date of this activity. 
Other U.S. government stakeholders, including USAID/Washington and U.S. Embassy in Djibouti 
counterparts, will gain a better understanding of how well the activity has contributed to improving 
reading achievement for Djiboutian children at the primary school level (grades 1-5). Additionally, 
USAID will share the findings of this evaluation with the Government of Djibouti (GoDj) through the 
Ministry of Education and other international development partners to further coordinate and strengthen 
USG’s technical assistance in Djibouti.
Audience and Intended Users:
□ USAID;
□ FHI 360, DEGRA’s implementing partner;
□ The Government of Djibouti through the Ministry of Education (MENFOP)
□ Other international development partners such as the World Bank, UNICEF, and AFD.
41
IV. BACKGROUND
The objective of the USAID/Djibouti Basic Education activity is to improve reading achievement for 
Djiboutian children at the primary school level (grades 1-5). The scope of this activity is nationwide.
DEGRA has been revising the national primary school reading curriculum; therefore, nearly
all primary school students in urban and rural areas of Djibouti (Life of Project target of approximately 
247,000 students) will benefit from DEGRA’s interventions.
DEGRA works with the Government of Djibouti’s (GoDj) Ministry of National Education and Vocational 
Training (MENFOP) to develop an evidence-based design of effective interventions to improve reading 
skills, both in urban and rural primary schools. The development hypothesis is that if the reading 
instruction in classrooms is improved, communities’ engagement around the reading activities is 
enhanced, and the policy environment for reading is reinforced, children’s reading outcomes will 
improve. Improved learning outcomes will in turn help reduce repetition and dropout rates in the later 
years of primary school. Most importantly, helping pupils read at grade- level or above in early grades 
will make them better prepared for success in the future.
USAID/Djibouti operates under the U.S. Embassy’s Integrated Country Strategy (ICS) and DEGRA 
supports Mission Objective 3.1: “Improve delivery of education, electricity, justice, and health services 
by furthering collaboration among citizens, civil society, and government, and advocating reforms, in 
coordination with relevant ministries and other development partners”.
DEGRA’s interventions are designed to achieve three principal Intermediate Results:
IR 1: Reading Instruction Improved: During the design of the Basic Education activity, USAID 
completed a series of reading analyses that included: curriculum classroom materials review; a pre￾service and in-service teacher training study; an analysis of teacher perceptions and attitudes and how 
these influence teacher practices in reading instruction; and a book production sector study. DEGRA 
addresses gaps identified in the analyses by improving curriculum and reading materials and improving 
teachers capacity to teach reading.
IR 2: Community participation in early grade reading enhanced: DEGRA supports Parent-Teacher 
Associations (PTAs) and leverages the engagement of civil society organizations (CSOs) involved in 
reading. It organizes community events on the importance of reading; enhances the engagement of 
families in supporting their children to read at home and strengthens the capacity of teachers, students, 
and parents to work together to improve children’s reading skills.
IR 3: Policy Environment to Support Reading improved: The activity enhances MENFOP’s capacity to 
develop an enabling policy environment to conduct improved reading instruction. Appropriate guidelines 
and policies for reading instruction are being developed to increase the time allocated for reading 
instruction, standards and benchmarks. Data generated by the analyses mentioned in IR 1 will serve as an 
evidence base for policy dialogue with the MENFOP. Policymakers at the central and regional levels will 
be involved in DEGRA’s implementation and monitoring phases to ensure that generated data meet 
MENFOP and beneficiary needs, which in turn, enhance ownership of new policies.
42
DEGRA Results Framework
Goal: Improve reading achievement for Djiboutian children at the primary school level (grades 1-5)
IR1. Reading Instruction
Improved
IR2. Community participation in 
early grade reading enhanced
IR3. Policy environment to support 
reading improved
Sub-IR 1.1 Improved curriculum 
and reading materials used in 
primary schools
Sub-IR 2.1 Family and community 
engagement to support reading 
increased
Sub-IR 3.1 Database on reading is 
established
Sub-IR 1.2 Teacher practice in 
reading instruction improved
Sub-IR 2.2 CSOs and PTAs 
capacity to implement reading 
initiatives increased
Sub-IR 3.2 Legal framework 
supporting reading development is 
reinforced
Sub-IR 3.3 Technical commission for 
reading is created and functioning
The Theory of Change
The theory of change is based on the premise that if:
1) reading instruction in schools is improved;
2) family and community support to reading is strengthened; and
3) the policy environment to support reading is strengthened,
Then the reading skills of children in grades one through five will improve.
Key Assumptions
The activity is based on the following sets of assumptions, and it is clear that there are risks associated 
with each of them:
□ A first assumption is that the Ministry of Education considers this effort as essential to 
developing an evidence base for reading interventions. The continued political will and 
cooperation with entities of the GoDJ is critical, and loss of political will and support for the 
Basic Education activity are the biggest risks that it faces for effective implementation and 
achievement of results.
□ This activity is also based on the assumption that the government continues to support the 
improvement of reading in primary education and is willing to use evidence to inform policy 
changes.
□ Another major assumption is continued peace and stability in Djibouti. If unrest or political 
violence breaks out against the government, activity implementation will most likely halt until 
peace is restored.
□ Sufficient and continued appropriation and allocation of USG basic education funds is yet 
another core assumption of the activity. If sufficient funds are not available in the activity’s 
out-years, USAID is prepared to cut back on the interventions. With deep and significant cuts 
43
to the activity’s budget, interventions may have to be re-prioritized or DEGRA may 
prematurely end.
Context
DEGRA began implementation at a critical time for the Government of Djibouti as MENFOP had just 
launched a new three-year Education Action Plan (2017-2020) that focused on improving children’s 
learning outcomes with a focus on reading and mathematics in primary education. MENFOP is now in the 
process of preparing its new long term Master Plan (2020-2035) where literacy and numeracy in basic 
education remain a priority for the government.
Since the passage of the Education Law of 2000, MENFOP began implementing reforms that led to 
concrete results in access to primary education, such as the Gross Enrolment Rate (GER) increased from 
49.5 percent in 2003 to 78.5 percent in 2015. To meet one of the Millennium Development Goals for 
2015, the GoDj increased the education budget from 16 percent of the national budget in 2007 to 20 
percent in 2016. Despite the increase in access to schools, many challenges remain. For example, efforts 
to increase enrollment of girls and other under-represented groups are lacking. An estimated 37 percent of 
school-aged children have dropped out of school or never attended. Pre- school is not compulsory and 
only five percent of children attend formal pre-school, while approximately 68 percent of children attend 
Koranic community-based preschools. Steps need to be taken to ensure that recent enrollment gains are 
not lost, especially at critical transition points such as the end of both primary and middle school 
education. The repetition rate in early primary education is five percent until grade five, the final year of 
primary school, where the rate jumps to nine percent.
The education system also suffers from a range of problems, such as weak institutional structures, low 
quality of teacher training and in-service continuing education, large class sizes, and dismal student 
achievement rates in major subjects. The increase in enrollment rates has not been accompanied by an 
increase in the number of classrooms. For example, 42 percent of classes take place in schools with 
double shifts, limiting the possible hours of instructional time and extracurricular activities that can take 
place in a given school building. The average primary school class size is 49 students, making it 
challenging for teachers to effectively manage their classes.
During DEGRA’s design phase, the USAID-funded National Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA),
conducted in 2012, found that children were not reading at grade level in French. Children had the most 
difficulty in reading made-up words, fluency in reading a text aloud, and reading comprehension. Fifty 
percent of second graders in the sample were not able to read a single made-up word. In terms of word 
reading, 45 percent of learners in second grade were incapable of reading a single word in a passage of 
reading. In terms of fluency, students in grade two were able to read an average of 11 words per minute. 
Grade five students read an average of 39 words per minute, which is way below the proficiency standard 
of 60 words per minute.
In June 2021, FHI 360 conducted a policy linking workshop on benchmarks which showed that among 
the 620 children from Grade 2 who passed the EGRA test, 21,3% reached the minimum global 
proficiency on reading words or decoding, 20% on the identification of letters and sounds, 6,1% on 
reading comprehension and 11,7% on oral comprehension.
44
Moreover, performance evaluation of the previous 2009-2013 USAID education project, and the 
Workforce Development Assessment conducted in April 2014, all highlight the need to reinforce basic 
literacy to improve learning achievement. Only 40 percent of fifth graders achieved the minimum mastery 
for the primary education cycle in 2013. 
EVALUATION QUESTIONS
USAID would like to explore several questions through this mid-term evaluation. Evaluation questions 
will be finalized in collaboration with USAID during the evaluation design phase. Draft questions 
include:
1.Has DEGRA been achieving its intended outcomes?
a. Has DEGRA been effective in mobilizing communities and engaging the PTAs in reading activities?
b. Has DEGRA been effective in reinforcing NGO capacities to carry out reading activities?
c. DEGRA been effective in collaborating with CRIPEN, CFEEF, the Ministry’s cabinet through the 
Office of the Secretary General, the Office of the Executive Secretary, the Office of the General Inspector 
and the Evaluation Unit?
d. What is the impact of new instructional methods of teaching reading introduced by DEGRA on 
children’s learning outcomes?
e. Are there comparisons/conclusions that can be discerned from students benefiting from DEGRA and 
those that did not?
f. Has DEGRA been successful in creating and enabling a favorable policy environment to improve 
reading instruction?
g. Has Pedagogical supervision and support been sufficient in the country, particularly in the remote rural 
schools?
h. What is the impact of pedagogical supervision and support on children's learning outcomes?
2.What have been some primary factors that have contributed to success or presented specific challenges 
in DEGRA’s implementation?
a. What alternative approaches could lead to better results?
3.Do the original assumptions and the theory of change still hold?
b. If not, what adaptations are needed to ensure that DEGRA remains on track to achieve its expected 
results?
4. What has the implementer achieved so far to ensure sustainability?
The following are key data sources the evaluation team could review to address the evaluation questions:
45
● Project Appraisal Document (PAD);*
● A copy of the DEGRA Award;*
● Annual Reports;
● Quarterly Reports;
● Field/Site Visit Reports;
● Field/Site Visit Reports;
● Portfolio review documents;
● Performance Plan and Report*;
● Original and revised MEL Plans;
● Work Plans;
● EGRA Report;
● Analysis of “Barriers to Community Participation” Report;
● FHI 360 GESI Study;
● FHI 360 Communication strategy; and and
● MENFOP Education Action Plan (2017-2020).
* The PAD, DEGRA contract and PPR documents contain procurement-sensitive information and will 
only be shared with the final selected offeror.
V. EVALUATION DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
It is anticipated that a mix of methodological approaches including quantitative and qualitative methods 
will be needed to answer the final evaluation questions, including those outlined above and ensure 
multiple levels of triangulations. There will be emphasis on collecting reliable empirical data and/or 
objectively verifiable evidence, as opposed to anecdotal evidence. The evaluation team, in collaboration 
with USAID, will finalize the evaluation methods before fieldwork begins.
The evaluation team is expected to conduct a rapid assessment of the basic education sector and the 
management capabilities of the implementing partner to inform both the design of a follow-on education 
activity that meets the MENFOP’s priorities and managerial aspects. Suggested data collection methods 
include:
(a) Desk Review: The evaluation team will conduct a desk review of available primary and secondary 
documents including background documents, DEGRA work plans, performance monitoring plans, 
and reports, relevant GoDj policy documents, and third-party research reports.
(b ) Key Informant Interviews (KIIs): The evaluation team will conduct in-depth interviews with key 
stakeholders and partners, and also with USAID staff most knowledgeable about DEGRA. USAID 
will provide a list of key DEGRA stakeholders among which the evaluation team will purposely 
select a sample of respondents to interview. The exact number of interviews will be determined by the 
evaluation team based on need and scope.
(c) Focus Group Discussions (FGDs): The evaluation team will conduct focus group discussions with 
key stakeholder groups, identified in consultation with USAID. The team will develop a semi￾structured interview guide that will be used for the interviews.
46
(d ) School Visits: The evaluation team will conduct field visits to select schools in the capital and in the 
regions to review and observe how well learning and reading activities are conducted in classrooms.
(e) Quantitative and Qualitative Data Analysis: The evaluation team will suggest a robust data plan with 
quantitative and qualitative emphasis and methods that show how KIIs and surveys will be 
transcribed and analyzed to draw conclusions. The plan should be comprehensive enough to provide 
detail for data collection and analysis for each and every question.
(f ) Gender Considerations: Evaluation design, methodology, data collection, analysis and report should 
adequately capture the situations, experiences, and outcomes of both males and females students 
benefiting from DEGRA activities. The evaluation team should consider methods that can help 
identify both positive and negative unintended consequences for girls in primary school. Evaluation 
data collection instruments and protocols should reflect an understanding of gender roles and 
constraints in a particular cultural context as well as reflect local contexts and norms concerning the 
conditions under which girls are underrepresented in formal education at all levels.
(g) Evaluation Limitations:
The offerors must disclose any limitations to the evaluation and how they plan on mitigating them.
(h ) Summary Evaluation Design Matrix:
Offerors should include in their proposals a draft evaluation design matrix that summarizes the data 
source, collection, and analysis plan for each evaluation question.
Evaluation 
Questions
Data 
Source(s)
Data Collection 
Methodology
Data Analysis 
Methodology
Current DEGRA Indicator 
that is most relevant
USAID/Djibouti’s preferred timeline to implement the evaluation is on/about August 9, 2021.
DELIVERABLES AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
USAID/Djibouti anticipates that the evaluation will take approximately 49 days to complete. This 
includes approximately 30 days in-country followed by approximately 15 days in the evaluator 
organization’s Headquarters/Home Office completing the draft and final reports. Offerors should provide 
a detailed timeline with their proposal.
47
The evaluation team will serve under the technical direction of USAID/Djibouti’s Monitoring & 
Evaluation Specialist who will also be the USAID activity manager for this evaluation. Coordination of 
all meetings with senior level GoDj representatives and implementing partner staff will be accomplished 
through USAID/Djibouti staff.
The following deliverables are required:
1. In-Briefing with USAID/Djibouti: The in-brief meeting between USAID and the evaluation team 
will allow both parties to clarify evaluation expectations. Within 2 working days of arrival in 
Djibouti, the evaluation team will meet with USAID/Djibouti, including the Country 
Representative, for introductions and to discuss the team’s understanding of the assignment, 
initial assumptions, evaluation questions, methodology, and work plan, and/or to adjust the SOW, 
if necessary.
2. Evaluation Design Proposal/Inception Report: The evaluation team will prepare and provide a 
detailed planning report to USAID/Djibouti before commencing the evaluation. The inception 
report will provide a projected timeline and describe in detail the final evaluation questions, 
methodology, and data collection methods (including draft interview questions and data 
collection tools) that will be used. It will also include any limitations to the evaluation design, and 
a data analysis plan. The data analysis plan should clearly describe the evaluation team’s 
approach for analyzing quantitative and qualitative data (as applicable), including proposed 
sample sizes, specific data analysis tools, and any software proposed to be used, with an 
explanation of how/why these selections will be useful in answering the evaluation questions for 
this task. Qualitative data should be coded as part of the analysis approach, and the coding used 
should be included in the appendix of the final report. Gender, geographic, and role (beneficiary, 
implementer, government official, NGO, etc.) disaggregation must be included in the data 
analysis where applicable. The report must be provided within 15 working days after 
signing of the contract.
3. Interim Meetings: The contractor will organize one briefing session to provide USAID/Djibouti 
feedback on data collection progress and discuss potential challenges and emerging opportunities. 
If desired or necessary, briefings by phone can be arranged.
4. Out brief: The team will make a presentation of key preliminary findings of the evaluation to 
USAID/Djibouti at the close of fieldwork and before the team departs Djibouti. The debriefing 
must include a discussion of preliminary findings, conclusions and recommendations. The 
evaluation team leader will share the draft PowerPoint slides for USAID’s review prior to the 
presentation.
5. Draft Report: The evaluation report should separately and comprehensively address each of the 
objectives and evaluation questions listed in the Scope of Work as well the findings, conclusions, 
and recommendations which should be clearly supported by the collected and analyzed data. 
Findings should be presented graphically where feasible and appropriate, using graphs, tables and 
charts. The final report should make specific, feasible, and actionable recommendations, 
including recommendations that may be relevant to the implementation of the second half of 
DEGRA as well as for the design of future projects in both technical and managerial aspects. The 
final report should not exceed 30 pages in length (not including appendices, lists of contacts, etc.) 
and should contain an evaluation abstract, an executive summary, table of contents, main text 
including findings, conclusions and recommendations. Annexes should include the Scope of 
Work, description of the methodology used, lists of individuals and organizations consulted, data 
collection instruments (i.e. questionnaires and discussion guides, etc.), a bibliography of 
documents reviewed, and a table mapping all Findings/Conclusions/Recommendations. The 
48
executive summary should accurately represent the report as a whole and should not exceed two 
pages in length. A translated executive summary in French must also be provided.
6. Final Report: After receiving the draft version of the report, USAID/Djibouti will have 10 
working days to respond with comments. The team will then have five working days to revise the 
report and resubmit it to USAID. Four hard copies of the final report, two in English and two in 
French, as well as electronic copies of both versions will be provided as well as an abstract. A 
statement of differences will be appended to the final report should USAID, the IP, or the 
Evaluation Team disagree with any of the evaluation findings and be unable to resolve these 
differences.
7. Final Presentation: The final report is to be accompanied by a virtual PowerPoint presentation 
that aims to debrief select stakeholders of the findings, conclusions and recommendations from 
the mid-term evaluation. A draft of the final deck should be submitted to USAID/Djibouti prior to 
finalization and the virtual presentation.
The report should be formatted in accordance with USAID’s general branding guidelines and follow the 
recommended format included in USAID’s How to Guide for Preparing Evaluation Reports.
Other Evaluation Deliverables
Submission of Dataset(s) to the Development Data Library:
Per USAID’s Open Data policy (see ADS 579, USAID Development Data) the contractor must also 
submit to the COR and the Development Data Library (DDL), at www.usaid.gov/data, in a machine￾readable, non-proprietary format, a copy of any dataset created or obtained in performance of this award, 
if applicable. The dataset should be organized and documented for use by those not fully familiar with the 
intervention or evaluation.
Please review ADS 579.3.2.2 types of data to be submitted to the DDL to determine applicability.
Submission of Final Evaluation Report to the Development Experience Clearinghouse:
Per USAID policy (ADS 201.3.5.18) the contractor must submit the evaluation final report and its 
summary or summaries to the Development Experience Clearinghouse (DEC) within three months of 
final approval by USAID.
VI. LOGISTICS
The evaluation team will arrange visits to the interview sites in consultation with the evaluation manager 
and if possible and needed, the evaluation activity manager may accompany the evaluation team to the 
field but will not participate in interviews. A list of key stakeholders and partners from among which the 
evaluation team should select interviewees will be provided and these interviews should be conducted in￾person whenever possible. USAID will facilitate introductions of key stakeholders selected for interviews 
to the evaluation team. The evaluation team will be responsible for all logistics related to this evaluation.
49
With current pandemic-related disruptions, although lessening, the Mission’s strong preference remains 
for this evaluation to be conducted in-country but virtual alternatives could also be considered in light of 
severe logistical challenges. Offerors are highly encouraged to develop and submit proposals that take 
into account an entirely in-person data collection process.
VII. EVALUATION TEAM COMPOSITION AND QUALIFICATIONS
The evaluation team will consist of the following 4 professionals: A Senior Reading Specialist that will 
act as the evaluation Team Leader; a Capacity Building/Organizational Development Specialist, a Local 
Consultant who is also an Education Specialist, and a Local Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist. The 
following are the desired profiles:
1. Evaluation Team Leader / Senior Reading Specialist
Must have a minimum of a master’s degree in Education or an applicable social science
field;
Must have extensive knowledge and 8-10 years of experience in curriculum designing and 
methodologies of teaching French as a second language;
Sound, proven knowledge in USAID Evaluation Policy;
Significant experience in designing and carrying out evaluations on education projects in Africa and 
has experience in conducting Early Grade Reading evaluations;
Track record of successful oversight, as team leader, of evaluations of complex international technical 
assistance projects;
Proven experience leading the drafting/finalization of evaluation reports (report samples will be 
required);
Extensive experience in conducting evaluations and assessments of donor funded projects in Africa 
and familiarity with the NGO sector;
Extensive knowledge and skills in designing qualitative and survey research instruments and 
methodologies;
Strong knowledge of evaluation theories and methods and excellent quantitative and qualitative data 
collection and analysis skills, including relevant data analysis software;
Excellent analytical and report writing skills; S/he should be fluent in English and French.
2. Capacity Building/Organizational Development Specialist
Must have a Postgraduate Degree in Public Administration, Social Sciences, Education, or a related 
field, preferably focused on capacity building of public institutions;
Will have evaluation experience and 5 years’ experience in capacity building, training and 
organizational development programs in emerging countries;
Direct work experience as specialist in training required;
Extensive experience in developing, implementing and evaluating training curricula; Experience 
working with Governments Institutions & donor community, preferably in Africa;
Will have knowledge and experience in community mobilization and involvement of communities 
including PTAs and CSOs around reading activities;
50
Must have participated in performance and impact evaluation of donor funded development projects, 
preferably in Africa;
Demonstrated ability to undertake content analysis and write a full or components of an evaluation 
report;
S/he should be fluent in English and French.
3. Local Consultant/Education Specialist
Must have a minimum of Postgraduate Degree in Education, Social Sciences or a related field;
Will have significant experience in assessing or evaluating education programming in Djibouti;
Must have detail knowledge of Djibouti’s education issues, development context and key 
stakeholders;
Must have at least 5 years’ experience consulting for International Development agencies
on Djibouti education trends and developing informative products based on quantitative and
qualitative data gathering;
Sound knowledge of donor-funded education projects and an understanding of USAID programs;
Should be fluent in French and English.
4. Local Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist
Advanced degree in the field of Statistics, Public Administration, Economics, and/or other relevant 
field;
Minimum of 7 years of experience in monitoring and evaluation; Strong understanding of data 
collection and analysis methodologies;
Substantial experience in designing and conducting evaluations of international development 
programs;
Must have good knowledge of USAID programming policies and practices. Proficiency in 
quantitative analysis softwares such as SPSS;
All team members will provide written disclosure of conflicts of interest (COI) and key personnel will 
submit their COI disclosure with the proposal.
Illustrative Level of Effort Table
Task Expat Team 
Leader
Expat 
Capacity 
Building 
Expert
Local 
Consultant
Local M&E 
Specialist
Travel to Djibouti 2 2
In-Brief with USAID/Djibouti 1 1 1
Inception Report (including documentation 
gathering and review)
7 7 7
51
Inception Report Presentation to USAID/Djibouti 1 1 1
Field Work (Data collection in Djibouti) 15 15 15 15
Data Analysis, preliminary report and preparation 
of presentation
5 5 5 5
Final presentation of key preliminary findings 1 1 1 1
Expats Depart from Djibouti 2 2
Draft Evaluation Report preparation 10 10
Final Evaluation Report including two-page briefer 
(executive summary)
5 5
Total 49 49 30 21
VIII. FINAL REPORT FORMAT
1. Abstract
2. Executive Summary
3. Evaluation Purpose
4. Background on the Context and the Activity and its Interventions under evaluation
5. Evaluation Questions
6. Methodology
7. Limitations to the Evaluation
8. Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations
9. Annexes (including bibliography and references)
The evaluation abstract of no more than 250 words should describe what was evaluated, evaluation 
questions, methods, and key findings or conclusions. The executive summary should be two pages and 
summarize the purpose, background of the activity being evaluated, main evaluation questions, methods, 
findings, and conclusions and recommendations (plus lessons learned, if applicable). The evaluation 
methodology shall be explained in the report in detail. Limitations to the evaluation shall be disclosed in 
the report, with particular attention to the limitations associated with the evaluation methods (e.g., in 
sampling; data availability; measurement; analysis; any potential bias such as sampling/selection, 
measurement, interviewer, response, etc.) and their implications for conclusions drawn from the 
evaluation findings. All team members will provide written disclosure of conflicts of interest (COI) and 
key personnel will submit their COI disclosure with the proposal.
IX. CRITERIA TO ENSURE THE QUALITY OF THE EVALUATION REPORT
Per ADS 201, criteria to ensure the quality of the evaluation report (hyperlink), draft and final evaluation 
reports will be evaluated against the following:
52
□ Evaluation reports should represent a thoughtful, well-researched, and well-organized effort to 
objectively evaluate the strategy, project, or activity;
□ Evaluation reports should be readily understood and should identify key points clearly, 
distinctly, and succinctly;
□ The Executive Summary should present a concise and accurate statement of the most critical 
elements of the report;
□ Evaluation reports should adequately address all evaluation questions included in the SOW, or 
the evaluation questions subsequently revised and documented in consultation and agreement 
with USAID;
□ Evaluation methodology should be explained in detail and sources of information or data 
properly identified;
□ Limitations to the evaluation should be disclosed in the report, with particular attention to the 
limitations associated with the evaluation methodology (selection bias, recall bias, unobservable 
differences between comparator groups, etc.);
□ Evaluation findings should be presented as analyzed facts, evidence, and data and not based on 
anecdotes, hearsay, or simply the compilation of people’s opinions;
□ Conclusions should be specific, concise, and include an assessment of quality and strength of 
evidence to support them supported by strong quantitative and/or qualitative evidence;
□ If evaluation findings assess person-level outcomes or impact, they should also be separately 
assessed for both males and females; and
□ If recommendations are included, they should be supported by a specific set of findings and 
should be action-oriented, practical, and specific.
53
Annex II: Evaluation Methods and Limitations
The mid-term performance evaluation of the DEGRA activity took place between September and 
December 2021, with data collected between November 9 and 18, 2021. The evaluation team included 
a team leader (TL) and a capacity-building/OD & M&E expert (CBE), both of whom traveled to Djibouti 
to work in country; two local experts from Djibouti, and two ITS technical backstop specialists (see the 
team’s composition in Annex X). DirDobiro Conseils Consulting & Services (DDCC&S), a local data￾collection firm, hired data collectors and organized the logistics of data collection. 
Annex Figure 1: Evaluation process
Annex Figure 1 provides an overview of the evaluation process, which took place in three phases:
1) Preparation: Review of project documents and other relevant documents, identification of 
stakeholders, development of quantitative and qualitative data-collection instruments, training of 
enumerators;
2) Quantitative and qualitative data collection;
3) Data analysis and report writing.
Evaluation Methodology
54
The evaluation methodology is a convergent mixed-methods approach,
50 in which quantitative and 
qualitative data collection take place simultaneously. This approach provides for both breadth and depth
to yield answers to the evaluation questions. The evaluation approach allowed for broad coverage of 50 
schools to gauge teaching and learning effectiveness at the classroom level using quantitative tools, while 
at the same time digging deeply into the factors that influence these results at the school-management
(teaching staff and PTAs) and/or institutional level through a focused qualitative approach. Qualitative 
efforts focused on four inspections and seven schools. The design is predicated on the concept of 
progressive focus (PF), which allows for the close examination of emerging themes and the exploration 
of outlier results.
Document Review: Review of documents provided an understanding of activity objectives and 
implementation characteristics, contexts, and challenges, and it helped identify and describe achieved 
activity results. Further consultation of documents throughout the analysis and writing process allowed 
for triangulation with primary data (see list of documents in Annex VII).
Quantitative Methods: At the school-classroom level, in 50 schools, the evaluation employed the 
following instruments. (See Annexes III and IV for survey and observation tools.)
• EGRA-Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA)
• Student survey questionnaire
• Classroom observation tool
• Classroom inventory
• Teacher/Director questionnaire
• Parent questionnaire
Qualitative Methods: The TL, CBE, and local experts visited seven schools, where they focused on 
gauging teachers’ views on the new program and materials, as well as parents’ (PTA members')
awareness and understanding of issues related to parental engagement and the PTA’s activities through 
the following interviews:
• Focus group discussions (FGDs) with parents (members of the PTA)
• FGDs with teachers
• Key informant interviews (KIIs) with school directors
At the systems level, to gain a deeper understanding of how policies are interpreted and implemented at 
all levels of the educational system, the evaluation conducted:
• KIIs with regional key government officials: education inspectors and pedagogical advisors(CP) 
• KIIs with MENFOP DEGRA focal points, which included the General Secretary (SG), the 
General Inspector (IG), the Executive Secretary (SE), the Director of the Center for Basic 
Education Teacher Training (CFEEF), the Regions Director (DR), the Public Schools Director
(DEP), and the Executive Secretary of the OQEA 
• KIIs with government partners: Centre de Recherche, Information et de Production de 
l'Éducation Nationale (CRIPEN) 
• KIIs with key staff from DEGRA-implementing organizations (FHI360 and its partners)
50 Creswell, J. W. & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting nixed methods research (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
55
• KII with donor (USAID) and other international organizations (World Bank, World Food 
Program [WFP], and UNICEF)
The evaluation matrix below provided a guiding conceptual framework for the evaluation, linking 
evaluation questions to data sources, methods, and data analysis. More details regarding document 
review and the specific relevant survey questions per evaluation question can be found in Annex IX.
Annex Table 1: Evaluation Matrix
Evaluation Questions Data Source Method Data Analysis
EQ1.a Has DEGRA been achieving its 
intended outcomes for reading 
instruction [IR-1]?
EQ1.b Are there 
comparisons/conclusions that can be 
discerned from students benefiting from 
DEGRA and those that did not? [IR1.1]
EQ1.c What is the impact of new 
instructional methods of teaching 
reading introduced by DEGRA on 
children’s learning outcomes? [IR1.1]
EQ1.d What is the impact of 
pedagogical supervision and support on 
children's learning outcomes? [IR1.2]
EQ1.e Has pedagogical supervision and 
support been sufficient in the country, 
particularly in the remote rural schools? 
[IR1.2]
See Annex IX for details of 
documents used by question
Document 
Review
Coding and 
categorization, 
triangulation
USAID Djibouti, 
FHI360 Management,
NGO partners, 
MENFOP focal points, 
Regional Inspectors and CPs, 
Teachers, School Directors, 
Parents/PTA
KIIs and FGDs Coding and 
categorization, 
triangulation
Classroom Observation Classroom 
Observation 
Tool
Descriptive 
analysis, 
triangulation
Students EGRA Descriptive 
analysis, 
triangulation
Teachers, Parents, School 
Directors, Students
Questionnaire Descriptive 
analysis, 
triangulation
EQ2.a Has DEGRA been achieving its 
intended outcomes for the community 
participation [IR-2]?
EQ2.b Has DEGRA been effective in 
mobilizing communities and engaging 
the PTAs in reading activities? [IR2.1]
EQ2.c Has DEGRA been effective in 
reinforcing NGO capacities to carry out 
reading activities? [IR2.2]
See Annex IX for details of 
documents used by question
Document 
Review
Coding and 
categorization, 
triangulation
USAID Djibouti, 
FHI360 Management,
NGO partners, 
MENFOP focal points, 
Regional Inspectors and CPs, 
Teachers, School Directors, 
Parents/PTA
KIIs and FGDs Coding and 
categorization, 
triangulation
Teachers, Parents, School 
Directors, Students
Questionnaire Descriptive 
analysis, 
triangulation
EQ3.a Has DEGRA been achieving its 
intended outcomes for the IR-3?
EQ3.b Has DEGRA been successful in 
creating and enabling a favorable policy 
See Annex IX for details of 
documents used by question
Document 
Review
Coding and 
categorization, 
triangulation
56
Evaluation Questions Data Source Method Data Analysis
environment to improve reading 
instruction? [IR3.2]
EQ3.c Has DEGRA been effective in 
collaborating with CRIPEN, CFEEF, the 
Ministry’s cabinet through the Office of 
the Secretary General, the Office of the 
Executive Secretary, the Office of the 
General Inspector, and the Evaluation 
Unit? [IR3.3]
USAID Djibouti, 
FHI360 Management,
MENFOP focal points, 
Regional Inspectors and CPs, 
Teachers, School Directors 
KIIs and FGDs Coding and 
categorization, 
triangulation
EQ4 What have been some primary 
factors that have contributed to success 
or presented specific challenges in 
DEGRA’s implementation? What 
alternative approaches could lead to 
better results?
See Annex IX for details of 
documents used by question
Document 
Review
Coding and 
categorization, 
triangulation
USAID Djibouti, 
FHI360 Management,
NGO partners, 
MENFOP focal points, 
Regional Inspectors and CPs, 
Teachers, School Directors, 
Parents/PTA
KIIs and FGDs Coding and 
categorization, 
triangulation
EQ5 Do the original assumptions and 
the theory of change still hold? If not, 
what adaptations are needed to ensure 
that DEGRA remains on track to 
achieve its expected results?
See Annex IX for details of 
documents used by question
Document 
Review
Coding and 
categorization, 
triangulation
USAID Djibouti, 
FHI360 Management,
NGO partners, 
MENFOP focal points
KIIs and FGDs Coding and 
categorization, 
triangulation
EQ6 What has the implementer 
achieved so far to ensure sustainability?
See Annex IX for details of 
documents used by question
Document 
Review
Coding and
categorization, 
triangulation
USAID Djibouti, 
FHI360 Management,
NGO partners, 
MENFOP focal points, 
Regional Inspectors and CPs 
KIIs and FGDs Coding and 
categorization, 
triangulation
Sampling
This section provides an overview of the quantitative and qualitative strategies that informed 
stakeholder selection.
Quantitative sampling
The quantitative sampling employed a three-stage stratified cluster approach. At the first stage, the 
schools were stratified by region, while in the second stage, within each school one stream for each 
57
target grade was selected. At the third stage, within each selected stream, students were stratified by 
gender. A total of 50 schools were randomly sampled in Djibouti-Ville, Ali Sabieh, Arta, Dikhil, Obock, 
and Tadjourah regions. Annex Table 2 details the number of schools selected by region.
Annex Table 2: Number of schools sampled per region
Region / Circonscription Number schools
Djibouti-Ville 29
Ali Sabieh 5
Arta 4
Dikhil 5
Obock 4
Tadjourah 3
Total 50
In each school, one stream51 with Grade 1, 2, and 3 was selected to participate in the evaluation, and the 
teachers of Grades 1 and 2 were observed during a reading lesson. Teachers and the school director 
subsequently completed a questionnaire. Data collectors randomly selected 10 to 12 students52 in Grade 
353 to take part In the EGRA assessment. These same students also sat for a questionnaire. In total, 
1,279 individuals took part in quantitative activities, as further detailed in Annex Table 3. (See later 
sections on data collector identification and training below.)
Annex Table 3: Respondents in quantitative sample, by tool
Instrument Quantity
EGRA – Student Questionnaires 556
Director – Teacher Questionnaires 144
Observation 95
Parent 484
Total 1,279
Annex Table 4 provides the calculation of power given the sample size and confidence interval. 
51 The term stream designates that, in many schools, there may be multiple classes within each grade. When this is the case, the administration 
often groups them so that there may be an A stream for instance, with Grade 1 class A, Grade 2 class A, etc.
52 Due to a reduced number of enumerators available for data collection, it was decided following enumerators training to reduce the total 
amount of students to be assessed in each school from 12 to 10.
53 Due to the timing of the evaluation, Grade 3 was selected as a proxy for Grade 2 learning outcomes. FHI360 used the same approach for the 
November 2020 EGRA baseline, therefore the results are comparable.
58
Annex Table 4: Quantitative sample power calculation
Instrument Sample Size Sampling Method (project 
and comparison schools)
Confidence interval and power
ME: Margin of Error
EGRA 50 schools 
(600 students in 
Grade 3)
12 (6 boys/6 girls) students 
randomly selected from one 
Grade 3 (if there is more than 
one grade 3, one will be 
randomly selected)
ME of 5.9% with 95% confidence 
interval and power to detect a 8.2% 
change in improved literacy 
outcome
Classroom 
observation
50 schools 
(100 observations)
Grade 1 and 2 Teachers ME of 10.5% with 95% confidence 
interval and power to detect a 
14.1% change
Teacher 50 schools
(150 teachers) 
Grade 1 and 2 Teachers ME of 10.5% with 95% confidence 
interval and power to detect a 
14.1% change
Parents 50 schools 
(500 parents)
6 students randomly selected 
in grades 1, 2, and 3 per 
school will be asked to bring 
one parent to school for an 
interview. 
4 additional parents will be 
members of the PTA. They 
will be identified through 
discussion with the school 
director.
ME of 7.1% with 95% confidence 
interval and power to detect a 9.7% 
change
Qualitative sampling
Seven schools took part in the more extensive qualitative data collection using FGDs and KIIs. The 
selection criteria included the existence of a PTA and the type of community (remote/regional capital 
and inner city/suburban). As indicated in Annex Table 5, the sample included seven schools from three 
regions.
Annex Table 5: Number of schools for FGD per region
Region Number of schools
Djibouti-Ville 2
Ali Sabieh 1
Arta 1
Obock54 2
Tadjourah 1
TOTAL 7
54 In Obock, two different schools were used for parents and teachers
59
Once at the school/classroom level, the evaluation team used a purposeful sampling methodology for 
the selection of FGD and KII participants. Annex Table 6 provides precise information about the specific 
institutions that participated in data collection, as well as the total and gender-specific counts. The 
criteria for purposeful selection privileged the most knowledgeable stakeholders who have active 
involvement in the project and/or the school and who could best contribute their inputs. We also 
sought representativity in terms of gender and age, and considered parents’ involvement in the school, 
such as participating in the PTA and/or the school-management committee (SMC).
Annex Table 6: Participants in qualitative sample by stakeholder 
Stakeholders Total Female Male Participants
MENFOP-National level 8 4 9 13
CFEEF 1 1 2 3
CRIPEN 1 3 3
MENFOP-DEP 1 1 1
MENFOP-DGE/DEP 1 1 1
MENFOP-IG 1 1 1
MENFOP-Observatoire Qualité 1 1 1
MENFOP-SE 1 1 1 2
MENFOP-SG 1 1 1
Regional Officials 4 2 6 8
MENFOP-Inspection 4 2 6 8
Donor and International Organizations 4 5 3 8
USAID 1 1 2 3
UNICEF 1 2 1 3
WFP 1 1 1
World Bank 1 1 1
Program Implementer and Partners 11 9 7 16
FHI360 7 4 5 9
OSC 1 1 1 2
Paix et Lait 1 1 1
STS 1 2 2
UNFD 1 2 2
School level 16 37 26 63
60
Stakeholders Total Female Male Participants
PTA members 6 22 10 32
School Directors 4 1 3 4
Teachers 6 14 13 27
Grand Total 43 57 51 108
Training 
The enumerator training workshop took place in Djibouti-Ville from November 2 to November 7,
2021. Twenty-two trainees attended the workshop alongside three supervisors. The workshop aimed to 
train enumerators on the following tools: Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA), the associated 
student questionnaire, the classroom observation tool, and three survey tools (teacher, director and 
parent). The training also covered procedures to be followed during data collection to ensure data 
quality.
The training lasted three days and featured a classroom environment, as well as practical exercises in a 
nearby primary school on the fourth day. Following the practice, the training reviewed procedures for 
data submission, supervision, and communication with the evaluation team.
The training team conducted Assessor Accuracy Measurement (AAM) simulations on EGRA to 
familiarize the enumerators with the process and examine their level of accuracy. Quiz results informed 
the training team of trainees’ comprehension of survey tools and EGRA protocols. Trainers determined 
that the AAM level was good and that the results of the quiz proved acceptable, even if some aspects 
had to be reviewed.
Annex Table 7: Data collection team composition by gender
EGRA Teacher Parents
Male 2 6 6
Female 4
Total 6 6 6
Data collection
Mid-term external evaluation data collection for the quantitative element of the DEGRA project took 
place in the Djibouti-Ville, Arta, Ali Sabieh, Obock, Tadjourah, and Dikhil regions of Djibouti from 
November 9 to November 18, 2021. A total of six teams of three enumerators participated in data￾collection activities, along with three supervisors. One enumerator in each team acted as team leader. 
Supervisors informed the director of the team visit and explained the evaluation process. 
On the first day of data collection, the IT Shows evaluation team provided data quality assurance by 
traveling to the schools where teams were present to check that enumerator teams were conducting 
the data collection according to the rules and protocols established during the training.
During the quantitative data collection, the evaluation team also visited schools to conduct KIIs and
FGDs with directors, teachers, and parents, as well as KIIs with regional inspections.
Data analysis
61
The evaluation questions guided the analysis for both quantitative and qualitative strands. While ongoing 
quality assurance of quantitative data was performed during data collection, the main analyses began 
after data were complete. Files were imported from SurveyCTO and Tangerine into STATA for analysis 
by the statistician, who ran descriptive analyses and additional disaggregation as needed. Quantitative 
data were used to assess learning outcomes(EGRA) and to triangulate findings from FGDs and KIIs. 
Analysis of qualitative data worked from the transcription of interviews and began in the field as 
interesting or significant points emerged. Once collection was complete, thematic coding drew on
findings organized by evaluation question and approach. An Excel coding process also occurred 
simultaneously. In all cases, evaluators paid attention to trends and outliers, as well as illustrative quotes.
CONTRAINTS AND LIMITATIONS
Data-collection challenges
The evaluation team encountered challenges throughout the evaluation process due to the compressed 
time available for quantitative data collection. Despite best planning efforts, on arrival, it became clear 
that the school calendar for the term had shifted and school holidays were delayed, necessitating a
rescheduling of the enumerators’ training. Additionally, on the first day planned for data collection, the 
MENFOP conducted an independent national evaluation (ENI) in all schools in Djibouti, leaving the data￾collection team with only eight working days to collect data in all schools. 
Limitations
In addition to challenges in the field, limitations cropped up related to the research methods. As with 
most qualitative research, because of a purposive sample, the results are not generalizable, though they 
are transferable, as elements of this study can connect to others’ experiences and thereby provide 
valuable insights that may be applicable to other stakeholders. Annex Table 8 below identifies biases, 
limitations, and constraints, as well as the mitigation strategies the ET employed to address them.
Annex Table 8: Bias, limitations and constraints
Bias, Limitations, Constraints Mitigation Strategy
Design Limitation: No control group 
and timing of the evaluation
- Analysis takes advantage of a mixed-methods design that 
provides rich descriptions of phenomena and also takes into 
account data from DEGRA previous evaluations to show change 
over time where possible
- Interpretation of results recognizes that students of Grade 3 
were evaluated while the benchmark concerns the end of Grade 
2
- Analysis takes into account that students missed part of their
first year of school because of lockdowns related to COVID-19 
(Spring 2020)
Selection / Sample bias / Sample size - Schools are randomly selected while ensuring a mix of 
rural/urban schools, and adequate regional representation
- While the sample size does not suffice to draw robust 
conclusions at the regional level, data were collected in each 
region. Post-stratification weighting was used to correct for any 
underrepresentation of population characteristics 
- Analysis of results recognizes that small rural schools might be 
underrepresented in the total number of schools, as they would 
not have the requisite number of students per grade for data 
collection
62
Bias, Limitations, Constraints Mitigation Strategy
- Students at sampled schools were randomly selected using a 
random number generator
- Recruitment for focus group participants took into account 
multiple variables, including but not limited to gender, child 
grade, student age, grade taught, level of education, and 
socioeconomic status 
- Analysis called on a diverse group of stakeholders and multiple 
data sources to triangulate findings to answer EQs
- Among parents sampled, PTA members, who are often better 
educated, are overrepresented. Analysis accounts for 
overrepresentation.
Response bias - Explained the purpose of the evaluation to participants
- Conducted an informed consent process with each evaluation 
participant that covers the confidentiality of respondents (where 
applicable) and their responses
- Cross-checked and triangulated key questions
- Trained data collectors to establish trust, so that respondents 
provide reliable answers
- Outliers in reporting were identified and discussed
Response bias related to gender - Trained data collectors to be sensitive to gender issues
- Followed local norms and protocols addressing safety and 
engagement (including getting to the place where interviews are 
conducted, etc.) 
- Women were included in focus groups and made to feel safe, 
empowered, and comfortable
Constraints related to availability of 
respondents
- Accommodated the schedules and commitments of parents, 
community leaders, teachers, and school directors to talk to 
them when available
- Found places convenient for participants to meet
- Accommodated women’s childcare and home responsibilities 
that may keep them from participating—e.g., allowing them to 
bring toddlers and/or provide children with something to do or 
have someone available to watch them outside the room, etc.
Inter-rater reliability (IRR) can be a 
concern when gathering data as a 
team
- Frequent answers were pre-coded for questionnaires
- Assessor Accuracy Measurement (AAM) was performed during 
the training for EGRA 
63
Annex III: Data Collection Instruments: Survey and Observation Tools
QUESTIONNAIRE – DIRECTEUR/ENSEIGNANT
Cette section doit être remplie par l’intervieweur
Date : (JJ-MM-AAAA)
Région : (Spécifier)
Numéro d’identification unique de l’école : (Spécifier)
Nom de l’école : (Spécifier)
Bonjour Monsieur, Madame le/la directeur/trice
Je suis venu(e) dans votre école aujourd’hui pour m’entretenir avec vous du projet DEGRA, qui est un projet 
d’éducation financé par l’USAID et mis en œuvre par F.H.I. en collaboration avec le ministère de l’Éducation 
Nationale. L’objectif de ce projet est d‘améliorer l’apprentissage de la lecture. Cet entretien entre dans le cadre de 
l’évaluation à mi-parcours du projet DEGRA. Je souhaiterai vous poser quelques questions sur votre école. Les 
informations collectées serviront à renforcer davantage le projet afin d’améliorer le niveau de lec ture des enfants. 
Vous avez le droit de mettre fin à votre participation à tout moment. L’interview prendra en moyenne 30 minutes.
Bonjour Monsieur, Madame
Je suis venu(e) dans votre école aujourd’hui pour m’entretenir avec vous du projet DEGRA, qui est un projet 
d’éducation financé par l’USAID et mis en œuvre par F.H.I. en collaboration avec le ministère de l’Éducation 
Nationale. L’objectif de ce projet est d‘améliorer l’apprentissage de la lecture. Cet entretien entre dans le cadre de 
l’évaluation à mi-parcours du projet DEGRA. J’aimerais vous poser classe lors d’une leçon de lecture de l’année 1 
et 2. Les informations collectées serviront à renforcer davantage le projet afin d’améliorer le niveau de lecture des 
enfants. Vous avez le droit de mettre fin à votre participation à tout moment. L’interview prendra en moyenne 30 
minutes plus le temps pour l’observation. 
Avez-vous des questions à poser sur cet entretien ? [Laisser le temps pour poser des questions et répondre au 
besoin]
Me donnez-vous la permission de poursuivre entretien? Oui / Non
Si non remercier et arrêter l’entretien.
Nº Question Réponse
1. Caractéristiques de l’enseignant/directeur, formation
Je vais commencer par vous poser quelques questions sur votre parcours professionnel
101 Êtes-vous le directeur de cette école (ou son 
remplaçant/adjoint) ?
NB : Cette question permet de sélectionner 
les questions relatives à l’école.
o Oui
o Non
64
Nº Question Réponse
102 Le répondant est-il de sexe masculin ou 
féminin ?
NB : Observez, ne demandez pas
o Masculin 
o Féminin
103 Quel âge avez-vous ?
NB : Mettre 99 si la personne ne veut pas 
répondre, ou indiquer son âge approximative
_______
104 Quel(s) niveaux(s) enseignez-vous ? • 1
ère Année
• 2
ème Année
• 3
ème Année
• 4
ème Année
• 5
ème Année
• Aucune 
105 Depuis combien d’années êtes-vous dans 
l’enseignement ?
_____ années
106 Depuis combien d’années êtes-vous dans 
cette école ?
_____ années
107 [Q104 = 1 ou 2]
Depuis combien d’années enseignez-vous en 
1
ère ou 2ème année ?
NB : Il s’agit d’années successives
_____ années
108 [Q104 = 1 ou 2]
Votre classe est-elle simples ou multiples 
niveaux ?
o Simple
o Multiple
109 De quel type de contrat bénéficiez-vous ? o Fonctionnaire
o Suppléant
o Remplaçant
o Stagiaire
o Autre
110 Quel est votre grade ? o Instituteur Adjoint (IA)
o Instituteur (I)
o Pas de grade
111 Quel est votre niveau d’étude le plus élevé ? o Brevet des collèges (BEPC)
o Baccalauréat ou licence 1
o Licence 2 (Bac +2) 
o Licence 3 (Bac +3)
112 Quelle formation initiale au métier 
d’enseignant avez-vous reçu ?
o L’école Normale
o CFEEF
o Aucune
113 Avez-vous reçu une formation continue au 
cours des 2 dernières années ?
NB : 2020 et 2021
o Oui
o Non
65
Nº Question Réponse
114 [Q104 = 1 ou 2]
Parlez-vous les langues suivantes ?
NB : Lire les options
• Français
• Somali
• Afar
• Arabe
• Amharique
115 [Q104 = 1 ou 2]
Quelle langue vos élèves parlent-ils 
principalement entre eux ?
NB: Langue parlée en dehors de la classe
o Français
o Somali
o Afar
o Arabe
o Amharique
116 [Q104 = 1 ou 2]
Parlez-vous cette langue suffisamment pour 
pouvoir communiquer avec vos élèves ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
117 [Q104 = 1 ou 2]
Dans la classe, utilisez-vous d’autres langues 
que le Français pour expliquer quelque 
chose ?
o Très souvent (Plusieurs fois par jour)
o Souvent (2 ou 3 fois par jour)
o Régulièrement (1 fois par jour)
o Rarement (Moins d’une fois par jour)
o Jamais
2. Information sur l’école [Uniquement Directeur]
Je vais maintenant vous poser quelques questions sur votre école
201 Quels niveaux sont enseignés au sein de 
votre établissement ?
• 1
ère Année
• 2
ème Année
• 3
ème Année
• 4
ème Année
• 5
ème Année
• Toutes les sections
202 Selon quelle modalité votre école 
fonctionne-t-elle ?
o Simple flux
o Double flux 
o Simple flux / Double flux
o Le temps plein
203
M
Combien d’élèves garçons sont inscrits dans 
votre école ?
/______ /
203
F
Combien d’élèves filles sont inscrites dans 
votre école ?
/______ /
204 Combien y a-t’il de salles de classe utilisées 
dans votre école ?
NB : Si l’école est en double flux, additionner 
les 2 flux
/______ /
205
M
Combien d’enseignants de sexe masculin y￾a-t’il dans votre école ?
NB : Inclure le directeur s’il enseigne une 
classe
/______ /
66
Nº Question Réponse
205
F
Combien d’enseignants de sexe féminin y-a￾t’il dans votre école ?
NB : Inclure la directrice si elle enseigne une 
classe
/______ /
206 Votre école fournit-elle un logement pour le 
directeur/trice ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
207 Votre école dispose-t-elle d’une cantine ? o Oui
o Non
208 Votre école a-t-elle un accès l’eau ? o Oui
o Non
209 Votre école a-t-elle un accès l’électricité ? o Oui
o Non
210 Votre école a-t-elle accès à une 
photocopieuse ?
o Oui
o Non
211 Votre école a-t-elle accès à une imprimante
?
o Oui
o Non
212 Votre école dispose-t-elle de coins de 
lecture dans certaines classes ?
o Oui
o Non
213 Votre école dispose-t-elle d’une 
bibliothèque ?
o Oui
o Non
214 Combien de jours l’enseignant de 1ère année 
(sélectionné pour l’étude) a-t’il été absent 
de l’école durant le mois d’octobre ?
NB : Le nombre de jour total est 19
______
214 Combien de jours l’enseignant de 2ème année 
(sélectionné pour l’étude) a-t’il été absent 
de l’école durant les 2 premières semaines 
du mois d’octobre ?
NB : Si même enseignant indiquer la même 
réponse
______
3. Information sur la gestion de l’école et en particulier de l’APE [Uniquement Directeur]
Je vais maintenant vous poser quelques questions sur l’implication des parents
301 Avez-vous organisé une réunion des parents 
d’élève cette année ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
302 [QT301 = Oui]
Quel a été le taux de participation à cette 
réunion ?
o Très importante (Presque tous)
o Importante (Plus de la moitié)
o Assez faible (Moins de la moitié)
o Très faible (Quasiment aucun)
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
67
Nº Question Réponse
303 [QT301 = Oui]
Quels thèmes avez-vous abordé lors de cette 
réunion de parents d’élèves ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• Information sur la nouvelle méthode de lecture
• Importance de l’appui des parents dans 
l’apprentissage de la lecture
• Importance de communiquer avec ses enfants
• Importance de lire et raconter des histoires
• Importance de suivre les résultats et progrès
• Importance de la fréquentation scolaire
• Importance de la scolarisation des filles
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
304 Votre école dispose-t-elle d’une association 
de parents d’élève (APE) ?
o Oui
o Non
305 [QT304 = Oui]
Comment qualifiez-vous le niveau d’activité 
de l’APE ?
NB : Très active : Organise des réunions 
mensuellement et tient des procès-verbaux, 
Modérément active : se réunit une fois par 
trimestre
o Très active
o Modérément active
o Pas du tout active
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
306 [QT304 = Oui]
Votre APE a-t-elle un projet pour l’école ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
307 [QT306 =Oui]
Votre projet d’école a-t’il été initié ou 
revitalisé sous l’initiative du projet DEGRA ?
NB : Les ONG sont Paix et Lait et UNFD
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
308 [QT306 = Oui]
Quels sont les objectifs principaux de ce 
projet ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• Création ou amélioration de la bibliothèque de 
l’école
• Création de coin lecture dans les classes
• Organisation de festivals de lecture
• Jardin
• Amélioration/Construction d’un préau
• Nettoyage de l’école
• Organisation du soutien scolaire
• Soutien de la scolarisation des filles
• Intégration des réfugiés
• Amélioration des dispositifs d’hygiène
• Organisation des journées citoyennes
• Cantine
• Aucun
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
309 [QT304 = Oui]
Quelles activités ont été organisées par l’APE 
depuis le début de l’année
• Création ou amélioration de la bibliothèque de 
l’école
• Création de coin lecture dans les classes
• Organisation de festivals de lecture
• Jardin
68
Nº Question Réponse
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses • Amélioration/Construction d’un préau
• Nettoyage de l’école
• Organisation du soutien scolaire
• Soutien de la scolarisation des filles
• Intégration des réfugiés
• Amélioration des dispositifs d’hygiène
• Organisation des journées citoyennes
• Cantine
• Aucun
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
310 [QT303 = Oui]
Pensez-vous que l’APE joue un rôle actif 
pour promouvoir la pratique de la lecture en 
dehors de l’école ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
311 [QT303 = Oui]
Pensez-vous que l’APE a été créée ou 
redynamisée suite aux interventions du 
projet DEGRA ?
NB : Par les ONG sont Paix et Lait et UNFD
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
312 Y-a-t’il des ONG ou des organisations à base 
communautaire actives dans le domaine de 
l’éducation dans votre communauté ?
NB : Il peut s’agir de Paix et Lait, UNFD ou 
d’autres associations
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
313 [QT312 = Oui]
Quelles activités ont été organisées par ces 
associations extérieures ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• Création ou amélioration de la bibliothèque de 
l’école
• Création de coin lecture dans les classes
• Organisation de festivals de lecture
• Jardin
• Amélioration/Construction d’un préau
• Nettoyage de l’école
• Organisation du soutien scolaire
• Soutien de la scolarisation des filles
• Intégration des réfugiés
• Amélioration des dispositifs d’hygiène
• Organisation des journées citoyennes
• Cantine
• Aucun
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
314 [QT312 = Oui]
Pensez-vous que ces organisations jouent un 
rôle actif pour promouvoir la pratique de la 
lecture en dehors de l’école ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
69
Nº Question Réponse
4. Enseignement de la lecture et l’écriture Uniquement Enseignant Année 1 et 2
Je vais maintenant vous poser quelques questions sur l’enseignement de la lecture et la participation des 
élèves. 
400 Avez-vous reçu une formation à la lecture 
dans la cadre du projet DEGRA ? Si Oui 
lesquelles ?
NB : Lister les options une par une, cocher si 
oui
• Programme et TLM Année 1 - Août 2019
• Lecture Année 1 -Octobre 2019
• Autour du Langage - Décembre 2019
• Écriture Année 1- Février 2020
• Lecture et Langage Année 1 et 2 - Août 2020
• Écriture Année 2 -Octobre 2020
• Compréhension - Décembre 2020
• Formation genre - Mars 2021
• Je n'ai participé à aucune formation DEGRA
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
401 [QT400 = Pas de formation]
Pourquoi n’avez-vous pas participé à une 
formation sur la lecture ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• On ne m’y a pas convié
• Je suis nouveau/nouvelle dans l’enseignement
• Je suis nouveau/nouvelle en 1ère ou 2ème année
• Les per diem sont insuffisants pour couvrir les 
frais
• J’habite trop loin du centre de formation
• Je ne peux pas me permettre de laisser ma 
famille pour plusieurs jours
• J’ai trop de travail à faire pour l’école
• J’étais malade / enceinte
• Cela ne m’intéresse pas
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
402 Avez-vous bénéficié d’une formation de 
proximité organisée par un CP ?
o Oui
o Non
403 [QT401 = Pas de formation]
Comment avez-vous fait pour vous 
familiariser avec le nouveau programme ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• J’ai demandé l’aide de mes collègues
• J’ai utilisé le guide de l’enseignant
• J’ai bénéficié d’un appui particulier du CP
• Je suis allée voir des vidéos au CFEEF
• Je n’ai rien fait
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
404 [QT401 <> Pas de formation]
Que pensez-vous de l’utilité de cette 
formation ?
o Très utile
o Assez utile
o Pas vraiment utile
o Pas du tout utile
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
405 Quelles composantes du nouveau 
programme vous semblent-elle difficile à 
mettre en œuvre ?
NB : lister les options
• Compétences alphabétiques (Étiquettes lettres et 
syllabes)
• Conscience phonologique (Comptine, carte et 
jeton)
• Compréhension orale et vocabulaire (Comptine, 
big book)
• Lecture de mots et texte 
• Graphisme écriture
• Techniques d’évaluation
70
Nº Question Réponse
• Aucune
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
406 Pensez -vous que le nouveau programme de 
lecture permette aux élèves d’apprendre 
plus facilement ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
407 Disposez-vous du nouveau guide de 
l’enseignant ?
NB : demander à l’enseignant de vous le 
montrer
o Oui
o Non
408 Pensez-vous que le nouveau guide de 
l’enseignant est facile à utiliser ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
409 Pensez-vous que la progression dans le 
curriculumest bien adaptée aux capacités 
d’apprentissage de vos élèves ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
410 Pouvez -vous me décrire ce qu’est la 
conscience phonologique ?
Réponses correctes: 
Les mots sont composés de phonèmes ou de 
sons. Percevoir, découper et de manipuler les 
unités sonores du langage telles que la 
syllabe, la rime et le phonème
• Réponse correcte
• Réponse fausse
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
411 Pensez-vous que la conscience 
phonologique (sons, syllabes) permette un 
meilleur apprentissage de la lecture ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
412 Pensez-vous que le livret de l’élève est bien 
conçu et facile d’utilisation ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
413 Pensez-vous que le livret permette une 
amélioration des apprentissages en lecture ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
71
Nº Question Réponse
414 Pensez-vous que le manuel de l’élève est 
bien conçu et facile à utiliser ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
415 Pensez-vous que ce manuel permette une 
amélioration des apprentissages en lecture ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
416 Pensez-vous que les big bookssont bien 
conçu et facile à utiliser ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
417 Pensez-vous que les big bookssoient une 
méthode efficace pour l’amélioration du 
langage et de la compréhension orale ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
418 Pensez-vous que les étiquettes de lettres et 
de syllabes permettent un meilleur 
apprentissage de Compétences 
alphabétiques ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
419 Pensez -vous que le matériel pédagogique 
de lecture prenne en compte l’aspect genre
?
NB : Les filles sont représentées dans les 
images et les histoires et pas nécessairement 
dans des rôles stéréotypés
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
420 Pensez -vous que le matériel pédagogique 
de lecture prenne en compte les questions 
d’inclusion sociales (handicap) ?
NB : Les enfants en situation de handicap 
sont représentés dans les images et les 
histoires
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
421 D’habitude, est-ce que vos élèves participent 
activement en classe ?
o Oui, beaucoup
o Oui, parfois
o Oui, un peu
o Non, pas du tout
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
422 Qui participent le plus en classe— les filles 
ou les garçons ?
o Les filles
o Les garçons
o Il n’y a pas de différence
72
Nº Question Réponse
423 Avez vos reçu une formation relative au 
genre et à l’inclusion sociale ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
424 [QT423 = Oui]
Cette formation faisait-elle partie du projet 
DEGRA?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
425 [QT423 = Oui]
Suite à cette formation avez-vous modifié 
votre pratique de l’enseignement ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
426 [QT423 = Oui]
De quelle manière avez-vous modifié votre 
pratique pour prendre en compte l’aspect 
genre ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• J’interroge les filles autant que les garçons
• J’assigne les corvées aux filles et aux garçons de 
équitablement
• Je pose des questions relatives aux stéréotypes 
lors des discussion 
• Je donne des exemples de femmes qui 
réussissent
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
5. Apprentissage de la lecture - Évaluation des élèves Uniquement Enseignant Année 1 et 2
Je vais maintenant vous poser quelques questions sur l’enseignement de lecture et l’évaluation des élèves 
501 Combien d’heures par semaine consacrez￾vous à l’enseignement de la lecture / 
français ?
NB : Hors écriture
/______ /
502 Pensez-vous que le temps consacré à 
l’apprentissage de la lecture /français soit 
suffisant ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
503 Comment contrôlez-vous les progrès 
scolaires des élèves en lecture au cours de 
l'année scolaire ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses.
• Je fais une évaluation à la fin de chaque module 
(Test CFEEF)
• Je fais des évaluations de lecture toutes les 
semaines sur quelques élèves
• J’interroge régulièrement chacun de mes élèves
• Je ne fais rien de particulier
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
504 Êtes-vous satisfait des performances de vos 
élèves en lecture ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
505 [QT504 = Oui] • Les nouvelles méthodes d’apprentissage (DEGRA)
• La formation de l’enseignant
73
Nº Question Réponse
Comment expliquez-vous les bonnes 
performances de vos élèves en lecture ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses.
• Les qualités pédagogiques de l’enseignant
• Le faible nombre d’élèves par classe
• Le soutien des parents
• Parents ont un bon niveau d’éducation
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
506 [QT504 = Non]
Comment expliquez-vous les mauvaises 
performances de vos élèves en lecture ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses.
• Les élèves ne parlent pas ou peu le français
• Les élèves ne travaillent pas assez à la maison
• Les élèves sont souvent absents
• Le temps consacré à la lecture n’est pas suffisant
• Nombre trop élevé d’élèves par classe
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
507 Pensez-vous que la nouvelle méthode 
(DEGRA) a permis l’amélioration des 
apprentissages et des performances en 
lecture des élèves ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
6. Observation, appui et suivi des enseignants 
Je vais maintenant vous poser quelques questions sur l’appui aux enseignants
601 [QT104 = 1 ou 2]
Depuis le début de l’année avez-vous reçu la 
visite d’un conseiller pédagogique ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
602 [QT601 = Oui]
Combien de fois avez-vous reçu la visite d’un 
conseiller pédagogique ?
_____
603 [QT104 = 1 ou 2]
Pensez-vous que la fréquence des visites du 
conseiller pédagogique soit :
o Suffisante
o Insuffisante
o Trop fréquente
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
604 [QT601 = Oui]
Pensez -vous que l’appui apporté par le 
conseiller pédagogique vous a permis de 
vous améliorer ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
605 [QT601 = Oui]
Quel type d’appui ou de conseil le conseiller 
pédagogique vous a-t’il apporté ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses.
• La gestion de la classe et la discipline
• Pédagogie sur les méthodes d’apprentissage de 
la lecture
• Utilisation du matériel pédagogique
• Préparation des leçons
• Déroulement de la leçon et le temps consacré à 
chaque activité
• Technique d’évaluation
• Technique de travail en groupe
• Amélioration de la participation des élèves
• Encouragements et félicitations
74
Nº Question Réponse
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas/ Pas de réponse
606 [QT101 = Non]
Depuis le début de l’année, combien de fois 
avez-vous été observé par votre directeur 
(trice) lors de l’enseignement la lecture ?
o 5 à 10 fois
o 2 à 4 fois
o 1 fois
o Aucune
o Ne sait pas /Pas de réponse
607 [QT101 = Non]
Pensez-vous que la fréquence des 
observations par le directeur soit :
o Suffisante 
o Insuffisante
o Trop fréquente
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
608 [QT606 <> aucune]
Quel type d’appui ou de conseils le directeur 
(trice) vous a-t’il apporté ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses.
• La gestion de la classe et la discipline
• Pédagogie sur les méthodes d’apprentissage de 
la lecture
• Utilisation du matériel pédagogique
• Préparation des leçons
• Déroulement de la leçon et le temps consacré à 
chaque activité
• Technique d’évaluation
• Technique de travail en groupe
• Amélioration de la participation des élèves
• Encouragements et félicitations
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
609 [QT606 <> aucune]
Pensez -vous que l’appui apporté par le 
directeur (trice) vous a permis de vous 
améliorer ?
o Oui vraiment
o Oui plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
610 [QT101 = Oui]
Avez-vous participé à une formation sur le 
rôle du directeur dans l’encadrement de la 
lecture ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
611 [QT610 = Non]
Pourquoi n’avez-vous pas participé à la 
formation sur le rôle du directeur dans 
l’encadrement de la lecture ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• On ne m’y a pas convié
• Je suis nouveau en tant que directeur
• Les per diem sont insuffisants pour couvrir les 
frais
• J’habite trop loin du centre de formation
• Je ne peux pas me permettre de laisser ma 
famille pour plusieurs jours
• J’ai trop de travail à faire pour l’école
• J’étais malade / enceinte
• Je suis proche de la retraite
• Cela ne m’intéresse pas
• Autre, spécifier
• Pas de réponse / ne sait pas
612 [QT610 = Oui] o Très utile
o Assez utile
75
Nº Question Réponse
Que pensez-vous de l’utilité de cette 
formation d’encadreur ?
o Pas vraiment utile
o Pas du tout utile
o Ne sait pas /Pas de réponse
613 [QT101 = Oui]
Depuis le début de l’année, combien de fois 
avez-vous observé vos enseignants de 1ère 
et 2ème année ?
o 5 à 10 fois
o 2 à 4 fois
o 1 fois
o Aucune
o Ne sait pas /Pas de réponse
614 [QT101 = Oui]
Pensez-vous que la fiche d’observation 
utilisée pour l’encadrement soit bien conçue 
et permette d’apporter un appui efficace ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
615 [QT101 = Oui]
Pensez-vous que le rôle de d’encadreur 
pédagogique doit faire partie de la fonction 
de directeur ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
616 [QT101 = Oui]
Pensez-vous que cet encadrement 
pédagogique de proximité permette à 
l’enseignant d’améliorer durablement ses 
pratiques pédagogiques ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
76
QUESTIONNAIRE – ELEVE
Cette section doit être remplie par l’intervieweur
Date : (JJ-MM-AAAA)
Région : (Spécifier)
Numéro d’identification unique de l’école : (Spécifier)
Nom de l’école : (Spécifier)
Bonjour ! 
Je m’appelle _____ et j’habite_____. 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.
Je travaille avec ton directeur et les enseignants pour améliorer l’apprentissage de la lecture. Tu as été 
sélectionné(e) pour participer à cette étude.
Je veux te poser quelques questions. Tu n’es pas obligé de participer si tu ne le veux pas. Si tu arrives à une 
question à laquelle tu préfères ne pasrépondre, ce n’est pas grave, on peut passer.
Est-ce que tu es d’accord pour participer ? Peut-on commencer ?Oui / Non
Si non remercier et arrêter l’entretien
Nº Question Réponse
1. Caractéristiques de l’élève
101 Le répondant est-il de sexe masculin ou 
féminin ?
NB : Observez, ne demandez pas
o Masculin 
o Féminin
103 Quel âge as-tu?
NB : Mettre 99 si la personne ne veut pas 
répondre
o _______
103 Quelle langue parles-tu en général à la 
maison ?
o Français
o Somali
o Afar
o Arabe 
o Amharique
o Autre
104 En quelle classe es-tu cette année ? o 1
ère Année
77
Nº Question Réponse
NB : Pour le test EGRA, si l'enfant n'est pas 
en en 3ème année, mettre fin à l'entretien 
(Revenir au consentement), indiquer le 
problème en commentaire et aviser le chef 
d'équipe
o 2
ème Année
o 3
ème Année
o 4
ème Année
o 5
ème Année
105 En quelle classe étais-tu l’année dernière ?
NB : le but est d’identifier les redoublants
o 1
ère Année
o 2
ème Année
o 3
ème Année
o 4
ème Année
o 5
ème Année 
o Aucune
106 Es-tu allé à la maternelle avant d’entrer à 
l’école primaire ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
2. Absence
201 Est-ce que tu as été absent à l’école au mois 
d’octobre ?
NB : Avant les vacances
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
202 [QS201=Oui]
Pour quelle raison as-tu été absent ?
o L’école est loin de ma maison
o J’ai été malade/il s’est blessé
o Je n’avais pas payé l’école
o Je n’avais pas de matériel ou d’uniforme 
o J’ai aidé ma famille avec les corvées ou le 
travail agricole 
o J’ai participé aux funérailles ou aux festivités 
traditionnelles
o Ma famille manque de moyens pour se 
procurer de la nourriture
o J’avais trop faim
o Je n’avais pas fait mes devoirs
o Mes camarades m’ont poussé à manquer 
l'école
o Mes parents pensent que l’école ce n’est pas 
important
o Mon enseignant était absent
o Je n’aime pas l’enseignant
o L’école était fermée
o J’ai peur d’être frappé
o J’avais mes règles
o Autre
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
3. Pratique de la lecture à l’école
301 Est-ce que tu aimes apprendre à lire ? o Oui
o Non
78
Nº Question Réponse
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
302 Qu’est-ce qui te plait le plus dans la leçon de 
français ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• La comptine / poésie
• La lecture des lettres ou des syllabes
• La lecture des mots
• La lecture des textes
• Les histoires lues par l’enseignant
• Discussion/ questions de compréhension
• Jeux de rôle
• Le graphisme
• L’écriture
• Le dessin
• La dictée
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sais pas /Pas de réponse
303 Qu’est-ce qui te plait le moins dans la leçon 
de français ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• La comptine / poésie
• La lecture des lettres ou des syllabes
• La lecture des mots
• La lecture des textes
• Les histoires lues par l’enseignant
• Discussion/ questions de compréhension
• Jeux de rôle
• Le graphisme
• L’écriture
• Le dessin
• La dictée
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sais pas /Pas de réponse
304 Qu’est-ce qui est le plus difficile dans la 
leçon de français ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• La comptine / poésie
• La lecture des lettres ou des syllabes
• La lecture des mots
• La lecture des textes
• Les histoires lues par l’enseignant
• Discussion/ questions de compréhension
• Jeux de rôle
• Le graphisme
• L’écriture
• Le dessin
• La dictée
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sais pas /Pas de réponse
4. Pratique de la lecture à la maison
401 As-tu un manuel de lecture à l’école ?
NB : Le manuel est le livre avec lequel il lit
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
402 As-tu un manuel de lecture à la maison ?
NB : Il peut s’agir du manuel de l’école qu’il 
emmène à la maison, ou d’un second manuel
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
403 As-tu un livret d’activité à l’école ? o Oui
o Non
79
Nº Question Réponse
NB : Le livret est le livre sur lequel il écrit o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
404 As-tu un livret d’activité à la maison ?
NB : Il peut s’agir du livret de l’école qu’il 
emmène à la maison, ou d’un second livret
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
405 Y-a-t’il des magazines, des journaux ou des 
livres dans ta maison ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
406 En dehors de l’école, combien de fois 
t’exerces-tu par semaine à lire des lettres et 
des mots ?
o Très souvent (5 fois par semaine ou plus)
o Souvent (2 à 4 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
407 En dehors de l’école, combien de fois par 
semaine lis-tu des histoires ?
o Très souvent (5 fois par semaine ou plus)
o Souvent (2 à 4 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
408 Y-a-t’il des personnes dans ta famille qui 
savent lire ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
409 [QS408= Oui]
Qui sont les personnes qui savent lire ?
NB : lister les options si nécessaires
• Père □ Mère
• Frère □ Sœur
• Grand-père □ Grand-mère
• Oncle □ Tante
• Autre personne
410 Combien de fois par semaine est-ce que 
quelqu’un dans ta famille te lit ou te raconte
des histoires ?
NB : Quel que soit la langue
o Très souvent (5 fois par semaine ou plus)
o Souvent (2 à 4 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
411 Combien de fois par semaine reçois-tu de 
l’aide pour tes devoirs à la maison ?
o Très souvent (5 fois par semaine ou plus)
o Souvent (2 à 4 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
412 [QS411 <> = jamais/ pas de réponse]
Qui t’aident le plus pour faire tes devoirs à la 
maison ?
• Père □ Mère
• Frère □ Sœur
• Grand père □ Grand-mère
• Oncle □ Tante
• Autre personne
413 [QS411 <> = jamais/ pas de réponse] o Oui
o Non
80
Nº Question Réponse
Est-ce quelqu’un te fait lire des lettres et des 
mots ?
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
414 Quand tu rentres chez toi, est-ce que 
quelqu’un te demande ce que tu as appris à 
l’école ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
415 Si tu as de bonnes notes à l’école, que font 
tes parents ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• Ils me complimentent
• Ils me récompensent
• 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
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
416 Si tu as de mauvaises notes à l’école, que 
font tes parents ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• Ils essaient de m'aider à travailler
• Ils me disent que je dois travailler plus
• Ils me grondent
• Ils me punissent (pas en tapant)
• Ils me tapent
• Ils ne font rien
• Je n'ai jamais de mauvaises notes
• Ils ne connaissent pas mes notes
• Autre
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
417 Que fais-tu aprèsl’école ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• Je garde les animaux
• Je travaille aux champs
• J’aide à la maison
• Je vais chercher de l’eau
• Je vais chercher du bois 
• 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
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
5. Activités en dehors de l’école
501 As-tu accès à une bibliothèque dans l’école 
ou à proximité ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
502 [QS501 = Oui]
A quelle fréquence vas-tu dans cette 
bibliothèque ?
o Souvent (une fois par semaine)
o De temps en temps (1 fois par mois)
o Rarement (Moins d’une fois par mois)
o Jamais
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
503 As-tu un répétiteur ou un cours de soutien 
aux devoir ?
o Oui
o Non
81
Nº Question Réponse
NB : Payant o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
504 Participes tu à un groupe d’étude ou de 
soutien scolaire ?
NB : Gratuit géré par des bénévoles ou les 
enseignants
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
505 As-tu participé à une compétition de lecture 
/ festival de la lecture ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
6. Rapport avec l’enseignant
601 D’habitude, est-ce que le maitre/la 
maitresse te pose des questions pendant la 
leçon en classe ?
o Très souvent (Plusieurs fois par jour)
o Souvent (2 ou 3 fois par jour)
o Régulièrement (1 fois par jour)
o Rarement (Moins d’une fois par jour)
o Jamais
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
602 D’habitude, est-ce que tu essayes de 
répondre aux questions du maitre/de la 
maitresse en classe ?
o Très souvent (Plusieurs fois par jour)
o Souvent (2 ou 3 fois par jour)
o Régulièrement (1 fois par jour)
o Rarement (Moins d’une fois par jour)
o Jamais
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
603 Qu’est-ce que tu aimes chez ton enseignant
?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• L’enseignant(e) explique bien les leçons
• L’enseignant(e) utilise une approche amusante
• L’enseignant(e) nous encourage
• L’enseignant(e) est généreux
• L’enseignant(e) est gai
• L’enseignant(e) ne nous tape pas
• L’enseignant(e) ne nous humilie pas [moquer]
• J’aime tout
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
604 [QS603 <> J’aime tout]
Qu’est-ce que tu n’aimes pas chez ton 
enseignant ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• L’enseignant(e) n’explique pas bien les leçons
• L’enseignant(e) est ennuyeux (se)
• L’enseignant(e) nous critique
• L’enseignant(e) n’est pas gentil
• L’enseignant(e) est triste
• L’enseignant(e) nous tape 
• L’enseignant(e) nous humilie [moquer] 
• L’enseignant(e) est souvent absent(e)
• Je n’aime rien
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
605 Qu’est-ce que tu aimes à propos de ton 
école ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• Mon enseignant est gentil
• J’aime apprendre
• Je mange à la cantine
• J’apprends des choses utiles
• Je participe à des activités/jeux en classe
82
Nº Question Réponse
• J’ai accès à l’eau
• J’ai accès à des latrines
• Je pratique du sport à l’école
• Il y a des vendeuses de friandises
• Je m’amuse bien avec mes camarades
• J’aime tout
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
606 [QS605 <> J’aime tout]
Qu’est-ce que tu n’aimes pas à propos de 
ton école ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• L’enseignant est méchant
• Je n’apprends pas des choses utiles/c’est 
ennuyant
• Je ne comprends pas les leçons, c’est trop difficile
• Je ne parle pas le français
• L’école manque de matériels : c’est-à-dire des 
livres, des tableaux, etc.
• L’école est trop loin
• Les latrines sont salles
• L’école est salle
• La nourriture fournie est mauvaise
• Il n’y a pas de nourriture fournie
• Il n’y a pas d’accès à l’eau
• Les autres élèves me taquinent/m’intimident
• Je n’ai pas d’habit/d’uniforme
• L'école n'est pas sécurisée
• L'école est menacée par des groupes armés
• Je n'aime rien
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
7. Statut Socio-économique
701 Chez toi y a-t’il une télévision ? o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
702 Chez toi y a-t’il une radio ? o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
703 Chez toi y a-t’il un frigo ? o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
704 Chez toi y a-t’il un ordinateur ou une 
tablette ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
705 Chez toi avez-vous de l’électricité presque 
tous les jours ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
706 Chez toi avez-vous de l’eau courante 
presque tous les jours ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
83
Nº Question Réponse
707 Est-ce qu’un membre de ta famille a une 
voiture ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
708 Chez toi y a-t’il un téléphone fixe (pas 
mobile) qui fonctionne ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
84
QUESTIONNAIRE – PARENT
Cette section doit être remplie par l’intervieweur
Date : (JJ-MM-AAAA)
Région : (Spécifier)
Numéro d’identification unique de l’école : (Spécifier)
Nom de l’école : (Spécifier)
Bonjour ! 
Je m’appelle __________________. Je suis venu(e) dans votre école aujourd’hui pour faire une étude sur le projet 
DEGRA, qui est un projet d’éducation financé par l’USAID mise en œuvre en collaboration avec le ministère de 
l’Éducation Nationale par F.H.I. L’objectif de ce projet est d’améliorer l’apprentissage de la lecture. Cette étude est 
l’évaluation à mi-parcours du projet. Les résultats serviront à renforcer davantage le projet. J’aimerais par 
conséquent vous poser quelques questions. Vous avez le droit de mettre fin à votre participation à tout moment. 
L’interview prendra en moyenne 30 minutes.
Avez-vous des questions ? [Laisser le temps pour poser des questions et répondre au besoin]
Est-ce que vous êtes d’accord pour participer ? Peut-on commencer ?Oui / Non
Si non remercier et arrêter l’entretien
Vérifier que le parent est membre de l’APE ou a un enfant en année 1 2 ou 3
Nº Question Réponse
1. Caractéristiques du parent
Je vais commencer par vous poser quelques questions sur vous-même et votre famille
101 Le répondant est-il de sexe masculin ou 
féminin ?
NB : Observez, ne demandez pas
o Masculin 
o Féminin 
102 Quel âge avez-vous ?
NB : Mettre 99 si la personne ne veut pas 
répondre, ou indiquer son âge approximative
_______
103 Quelle langue parlez-vous en général à la 
maison ?
o Français
o Somali
o Afar
o Arabe
o Amharique
o Autre
104
M
Combien de garçons avez-vous ? ____ garçons 
104
F
Combien de filles avez-vous ? ____ filles
85
Nº Question Réponse
105 Combien d’enfants avez-vous dans cette 
école ?
____ enfants
106 En quelles classes avez-vous des enfants 
dans cette école ?
NB: Il s’agit des enfants, dont la personne a 
la charge 
• 1
ère Année
• 2
ème Année
• 3
ème Année
• 4
ème Année
• 5
ème Année 
• Aucune
107 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
108 Quel est votre niveau en lecture en 
français(ou dans une autre langue) ?
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
109 Y-a-t’il une autre personne dans votre 
famille (vivant avec vous) qui lit en français 
ou dans une autre langue locale ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
110 Quel est votre niveau scolaire le plus élevé ?
NB : Cycle commencé ; si école Coranique 
indiquer Aucun
o Aucun
o Alphabétisé (Éducation adulte)
o Primaire
o Collège
o Lycée
o Université
o Autre 
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
111 Quelle est votre occupation (travail) 
principale ?
NB : Lire les options si nécessaire
o Cadres supérieurs 
o Professions intellectuelles et scientifiques 
o Professions intermédiaires 
o Employés administratifs-Cadres subalternes 
de l'administration 
o Personnel des services et vendeurs de 
magasins et marchés
o Agriculteurs et ouvriers qualifiés de 
l'agriculture et de la pêche 
o Artisans et ouvriers des métiers de type 
artisanal 
o Conducteur d'installations/machines et 
ouvriers de l'assemblage 
o Ouvriers et employés non qualifiés 
o Armée, sécurité 
o Retraité
86
Nº Question Réponse
o Mère au foyer
o Demandeur d’emploi
o Autre
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
2. Implication dans la vie scolaire [Uniquement enfant en 1ère, 2ème ou 3ème année]
Maintenant je vais vous poser quelques questions sur la scolarité de votre enfant en 1ème, 2
ème ou 3ème année 
NB : Si plusieurs choisir l’enfant le plus âgé. 
201 Quel est le genre de cet enfant ? o Garçon 
o Fille
202 Comment qualifiez-vous le niveau de lecture 
de cet enfant ?
o Très bon
o Bon
o Moyen
o Mauvais
o Très mauvais
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
203 Avez-vous des enfants qui ont appris à lire 
avec une méthode antérieure à celle utilisée 
actuellement ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
204 [QP203 = Oui]
Pensez-vous que la nouvelle méthode 
permette aux enfants de mieux apprendre à 
lire ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
205 Votre enfant dispose-t-il à l’école du 
matériel scolaire suivant :
NB : Le livret est le livre avec lequel il écrit, 
tandis que manuel est le livre avec lequel il lit
• Livret d’activité 
• Manuel de Français
• Aucun
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
206 [QP205 <> Aucun]
Votre enfant ramène-t-il à la maison le 
matériel suivant :
• Livret d’activité
• Manuel de Français
• Aucun
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
207 [QP205 = Aucun]
Votre enfant dispose-t-il à la maison d’une 
copie supplémentaire du matériel suivant :
NB : Certains enfants ont un 2nd exemplaire à 
la maison
• Livret d’activité
• Manuel de Français
• Aucun
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
208 [QP206 = Livret ou QP207 = Livret]
A quelle fréquence votre enfant utilise-t-il 
son livret d’activité à la maison ?
o Très souvent (5 fois par semaine ou plus)
o Souvent (2 à 4 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
209 [QP206 = Manuel ou QP207 = Manuel] o Très souvent (5 fois par semaine ou plus)
o Souvent (2 à 4 fois par semaine)
o Régulièrement (1 fois par semaine)
87
Nº Question Réponse
A quelle fréquence votre enfant utilise-t-il 
son manuel de lecture à la maison ?
o Rarement (Moins d’une fois par semaine)
o Jamais
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
210 Votre enfant utilise-t-il à la maison une autre 
méthode de lecture que celle de l'école ?
NB : par exemple la méthode Boscher
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
211 Votre enfant a-t’il un répétiteur ou un cours 
de soutien aux devoirs payant ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
212 Votre enfant participe-t-il à un groupe 
d’étude ou de soutien scolaire gratuit ?
NB : Géré par des bénévoles ou les 
enseignants
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
213 Vous-même (ou autres membres de la 
famille) aidez-vous votre enfant pour ses 
activités scolaires ?
NB : devoirs, pratique, jeux éducatifs…
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
214 [QP213= Oui] 
Pour quels types d’activité votre enfant 
reçoit-il de l’aide à la maison ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• Lire des lettres 
• Lire des mots
• Lire un texte
• Mathématiques
• Faire réciter les leçons
• Aide aux devoirs en général
• Vérifier que les devoirs sont faits
• Demande ce que l’enfant a appris à l’école
• Autre
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
215 [QP213 = Non]
Pourquoi personne dans votre famille n’aide 
votre enfant pour leurs activités scolaires ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• Mon enfant se débrouille bien seul
• Mon enfant refuse de travailler
• Ma famille ne s’intéresse pas à l’école
• Ce n’est pas le rôle de la famille mais celui de 
l’enseignant
• Ma famille n’a pas le temps
• Cela ne sert à rien
• Ma famille ne sait pas comment l’aider
• Ma famille ne parle pas assez bien le Français
• Personne dans ma famille ne sait lire
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
216 Est-ce que votre enfant lit à haute voix à la 
maison ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
217 Vous-même (ou d’autres membres de la 
famille) racontez-vous des histoires à votre 
enfants ?
NB : Quelque-soit la langue
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
88
Nº Question Réponse
218 [QP217 = Oui]
A quelle fréquence racontez-vous des 
histoires à votre enfant ?
o Très souvent (5 fois par semaine ou plus)
o Souvent (2 à 4 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
3. Accès aux livres
Maintenant je vais vous poser quelques questions sur le thème de l’accès aux livres 
301 Disposez-vous chez vous des livres ou 
documents écrits suivants :
NB : Lister les options une par une
• Livres pour enfants
• Manuel de lecture
• Livres religieux
• Tout autre genre de livre
• Journaux
• Magazines
• Brochures
• Manuels de lecture (Ex Boscher)
• Aucun
• Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
302 Y a-t’il une bibliothèque dans votre école ? o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
303 [QP302=Oui]
A votre connaissance, à quelle fréquence vos 
enfants se rendent dans la bibliothèque de 
l’école ?
o Souvent (une fois par semaine)
o De temps en temps (1 fois par mois)
o Rarement (Moins d’une fois par mois)
o Jamais
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
304 Y a-t’ilune bibliothèque publique à 
proximité de chez vous ?
NB : En dehors de celle de l’école
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
305 [QP304=Oui]
A quelle fréquence vos enfants se rendent 
dans cette bibliothèque ?
o Souvent (une fois par semaine)
o De temps en temps (1 fois par mois)
o Rarement (Moins d’une fois par mois)
o Jamais
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
306 Votre école a-t’elle déjà participé à un défi 
de lecture ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
307 [QP306 = Oui]
L’un de vos enfants a-t‘il participé à ce défi 
de la lecture ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
308 Pensez-vous que les défis de lecture 
motivent les enfants à apprendre à lire ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
89
Nº Question Réponse
309 Si vos enfants ont de bonnes notes à l’école, 
que faites-vous ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• Je lui donne une récompense 
• Je lui achète quelque chose
• Je le complimente
• Je lui dis que s’il travaille bien il va réussir dans la 
vie
• Je l’encourage
• Je sourie, je suis contente
• Je ne fais rien
• Il n’a jamais de bonnes notes
• Je ne connais pas ses notes
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
310 Si vos enfants ont de mauvaises notes à 
l’école, que faites-vous ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• Je l’encourage à mieux travailler
• Je lui donne des conseils
• Je lui dis qu’il doit travailler plus
• Je l'aide à apprendre
• Je lui trouve un tuteur ou un cours de soutien 
scolaire (payant)
• Je lui trouve un groupe d'étude (APE gratuit)
• Je ne fais rien
• Je manifeste mon mécontentement
• Je le gronde
• Je lui donne une punition (pas punition 
corporelle)
• Je le frappe
• Il n’a jamais de mauvaises notes
• Je ne connais pas ses notes
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
311 Selon vous, apprendre à lire, est-il important 
pour une fille ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
312 [QP311 = Oui]
Pourquoi est-il important pour une fille 
d’apprendre à lire ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• Je ne fais pas de différence entre les filles et les 
garçons
• Une fille qui sait lire peut mieux participer dans la 
vie active et sociale
• Une fille qui sait lire peut avoir un travail payé
• Une fille qui sait lire est une meilleure mère
• Une fille qui sait lire est plus autonome
• Une fille qui sait lire peut aider sa famille
• Une fille qui sait lire ne peut pas être trompée
• Lire, c'est un plaisir
• Lire, c'est un droit humain
• Ne sait pas / pas de réponse 
313 [QP311 = Non]
Pourquoi n’est-il pas important pour une 
fille d’apprendre à lire ?
• Les filles n’ont pas besoin d’étudier pour jouer 
leur rôle d’épouse et de mère
• Les filles ne doivent pas être autonomes
90
Nº Question Réponse
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• Les filles n’ont pas besoin d’avoir un métier 
rémunéré
• Les filles n'ont pas besoin de participer dans la vie 
active et sociale
• Lire n'est pas intéressant
• Ce n'est pas tout le monde qui a besoin de lire
• Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
314 Selon vous, que faudrait-il faire pour aider 
les parents à être plus actifs dans la vie 
scolaire de leurs enfants ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses, si le parent est 
lui-même très engagé dans la vie scolaire de 
ses enfants, demandez ce qui concerne les 
autres parents
• Réunion d’information via APE 
• Améliorer collaboration entre enseignants et 
parents
• Assemblées générales
• Réunions d’information organisées par le 
directeur
• Sensibilisation
• Formation aux techniques de soutien scolaire
• Message WhatsApp
• Message radio
• Message télévision
• Message Facebook
• Affiche / Poster
• Mettre en place des groupes d’étude
• Organiser des clubs de lecture
• Organiser des évènements autour de la lecture 
(compétition/festivals/défi)
• Demander aux parents d'aider leurs enfants
• Activités de fabrication d’outils pédagogiques 
(ex : carton lettre)
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
4. Absence et inscription
Maintenant je vais vous poser quelques questions sur les absences de vos enfants
401 L’un de vos enfants inscrit à l’école primaire 
a-t’ilmanqué l’école au mois d’octobre ?
NB : Demander le prénom des enfants 
absents, et poursuivre l'entretien en 
remplaçant "cet enfant" par le prénom de 
l'enfant
o Oui
o Non
402 [QT401 = Oui]
En quelle classe est cet enfant ?
NB : Si multiple choisir l’enfant le plus jeune 
scolarisé
o 1
ère Année
o 2
ème Année
o 3
ème Année
o 4
ème Année
o 5
ème Année 
403 [QT401 = Oui]
Quel est le genre de cet enfant ?
o Garçon 
o Fille
404 [QT401 = Oui] • L’école est loin de la maison
• Il/elle été malade
91
Nº Question Réponse
Pour quelles raisons cet enfant a-t’il été 
absent ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• Il/elle été excisée ou circoncit
• Je n’avais pas payé l’école
• Il/elle n’avait pas de matériel ou d’uniforme 
• Il/elle a aidé ma famille avec les corvées ou le 
travail agricole à la maison
• Il/elle a participé aux funérailles ou aux festivités 
traditionnelles
• Notre famille manque de moyens pour se 
procurer de la nourriture
• Il/elle avait trop faim
• Il/elle n’avait pas fait ses devoirs
• Ses camarades l’ont poussé à manquer l'école
• Je pense que l’école ce n’est pas important
• Son enseignant était absent
• Il/Elle n’aime pas l’enseignant
• L’école était fermée
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse 
405 Est-ce que tous les enfants de 6 à 15 ans 
dans votre famille vont à l’école ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
406
M
[QT405=Non]
Combien de garçons ne vont pas à l’école
/_____/ garçons 
406
F
[QT405=Non]
Combien de filles ne vont pas à l’école
/_____/ filles
407 [QT405=Non]
Pourquoi ne vont-ils pas à l’école ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• Maladie de l’enfant
• Handicap de quelque sorte 
• Maladie d’un membre de la famille
• Prendre soin de ses frères et sœurs 
• Problèmes de famille 
• Pas d'argent pour le matériel scolaire 
• L’enfant ne voulait pas aller 
• Refus des parents 
• L'intimidation à l'école 
• L’enfant est en échec scolaire
• Distance de l'école
• Travaux des champs
• Garde les animaux
• Aide au petit commerce (ventes au marché)
• Aide à la maison pour les travaux domestiques
• Autre préciser 
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
5. Campagne de communication
Maintenant je vais vous poser quelques questions sur la politique du gouvernement en matière de lecture
501 Avez-vous vu ou entendu des messages sur 
l’éducation émanant du ministère de 
l’éducation ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
92
Nº Question Réponse
502 [QT501=Oui]
Vous souvenez-vous du contenu des 
messages ? Quels étaient-ils ?
• Information sur la nouvelle méthode de lecture
• Importance de la lecture
• Importance de l’appui des parents dans 
l’apprentissage de la lecture
• Importance de communiquer avec ses enfants
• Importance de lire et raconter des histoires
• Importance de suivre les résultats et progrès
• Importance de la fréquentation scolaire
• Importance de la scolarisation des filles
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
503 [QT501=Oui]
Où avez-vous vu ou entendu ces messages ?
• WhatsApp
• Radio
• Facebook
• Télévision
• Poster / Affiche
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
6. Association des parents d’élèves
Maintenant je vais vous poser quelques questions sur l’association des parents d’élèves
601 Y-a-t’il une APE dans votre école ? o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
602 [QP601 = Oui]
Êtes-vous membre de l’association de 
parent d’élèves (APE) ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
603 [QP602 = Oui]
Quel est votre poste au sein de l’APE ?
o Président(e)
o Vice-président(e)
o Secrétaire général
o Trésorier
o Trésorier adjoint
o Coordinateur Parent / Enseignant
o Membre simple
o Autre, spécifier
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
604 Selon vous, quels rôles doit jouer une APE ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• Établir un lien entre la direction et les parents
• Sensibiliser de la communauté
• Promouvoir l’importance de la lecture
• Organiser des évènements autour de la lecture
• Organiser des groupes d’étude
• Aider au recrutement des élèves
• Suivi des absents
• Sensibilisation sur la scolarisation des filles
• Appui aux enseignants
• Suivi de l’éducation des élèves
• Création d’un meilleur environnement scolaire et 
sanitaire à l’école
• Gestion des fournitures et des manuels scolaires
93
Nº Question Réponse
• Amélioration et entretien de l’école (l’entretien 
des bâtiments, latrines, points d’eau)
• Organisation des journées citoyennes
• Sécurisation de l’école (Clôturer l’école, engager 
un gardien etc.)
• Mobilisation de ressources pour l’école 
(financières et/ou matérielles)
• Hygiène et propreté des enfants
• Assurer la communication entre l’école et la 
communauté (communication)
• Plaidoyer auprès de la mairie pour des appuis
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
605 Pensez-vous que l’APE joue un rôle 
important dans votre école ?
o Oui, vraiment
o Oui, plus ou moins
o Non, pas vraiment
o Non, pas de tout
o Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
606 [QP601 = Oui]
L’APE de votre école rencontre-telle des 
difficultés dans l’exercice de ses activités ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
607 [QP606 = Oui]
Quelles sont ces difficultés ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• Mauvaises relations ou incompréhension entre 
les parents et le corps enseignant
• Le président de l’APE n’est pas un bon leader
• Les membres ne se sont pas intéressés
• Les membres n’ont pas le temps de participer
• Manque de connaissance des membres
• Manque de moyens financiers
• Manque de formation des membres
• Pas assez de membres actifs
• Pas de bureau
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
608 Selon vous que faudrait faire pour 
dynamiser l’APE ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• Améliorer les relations entre les parents et le 
corps enseignant
• Changer de président
• Veiller à un bon emploi des fonds
• Former les membres
• Sensibiliser les parents sur l’importance du rôle 
de l’APE
• Modifier la programmation pour prendre en 
compte la disponibilité des parents
• Créer une association des mères d’élèves
• Mise à disposition d’un bureau
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / pas de réponse
609 [QP601 = Oui] o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
94
Nº Question Réponse
Pensez-vous continuer à être un membre 
actif de l’APE ou devenir membre dans les 
années à venir ?
610 [QP609=Oui]
Pourquoi souhaitez-être membre de l’APE 
dans les années à venir ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• Parce que le directeur me l’a demandé
• Pour être avec d’autres parents
• Pour être proche de mes enfants
• Pour suivre mes enfants
• Pour soutenir l'éducation des enfants
• Pour participer au développement de ma 
communauté
• Pour le plaisir d'aider
• Pour sortir de chez moi
• Pour apporter mon soutien au projet de l’école
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
611 [QP609=Non]
Pourquoi ne souhaitez-vous pas être 
membre de l’APE dans les années à venir ?
NB : Ne pas lire les réponses
• Cela ne m’intéresse pas
• Cela prend trop de temps
• C'est fatiguant
• Parce que les autres ne participent pas
• Parce que mon époux/épouse s'en plaint
• Parce que l’APE est mal géré
• Parce que l’APE a un manque de leadership
• Parce que nous ne recevons pas de 
compensation
• Je dois toujours remplacer les absents
• Parce que mes enfants ne seront plus dans cette 
école
• Parce que je n’ai rien à contribuer
• Parce que je ne sais pas lire
• Autre, spécifier
• Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
7. Statut Socio-économique
Maintenant je vais vous poser quelques questions sur votre ménage
701 Chez vous y a-t’il une télévision ? o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
702 Chez vous y a-t’il une radio ? o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
703 Chez vous y a-t’il un frigo ? o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
704 Chez vous y a-t’il un ordinateur ou une 
tablette ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
705 Chez vous avez-vous de l’électricité presque 
tous les jours ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
95
Nº Question Réponse
706 Chez vous avez-vous de l’eau courante 
presque tous les jours ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
707 Est-ce qu’un membre de ta famille a une 
voiture ?
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
708 Chez vous y a-t’il un téléphone fixe (pas 
mobile) qui fonctionne 
o Oui
o Non
o Ne sait pas / Pas de réponse
96
OBSERVATION DE CLASSE
Cette section doit être remplie par l’intervieweur
Date de l’observation :
Région :
Numéro d’identification unique de l’école :
Nom de l’école :
Niveau observé
Heure de début de l’observation
Heure de fin de l’observation
Nº Question Réponse
8. Plan de la leçon / Inventaire de la classe
101 Quelles activités ont été observées ?
PS : Si nécessaire vérifier auprès de 
l'enseignant/e. 
• Compétences alphabétiques (Étiquettes lettres et 
syllabes)
• Conscience phonologique (Comptine, carte et 
jeton)
• Compréhension orale et vocabulaire (Comptine, 
big book)
• Lecture de mots et texte 
• Graphisme écriture
• Évaluation
L’enquêteur demande aux élèves de montrer ou demande à l’enseignant
102 Big books (grand livres) o Complet 4 (1 par module)
o Incomplet 1 à 3
o Aucun
103 Poster des comptines o Complet (30 leçons)
o Incomplet 
o Aucun
104 Quelle proportion d’élèves a les 
cartons et jetons (conscience 
phonologique) ?
o Tous les élèves
o La plupart des élèves
o Moins que la moitié des élèves
o Aucun
105 Quelle proportion d’élèves a des 
étiquettes de lettres et syllabes 
(principe alphabétique) ?
o Tous les élèves
o La plupart des élèves
o Moins que la moitié des élèves
o Aucun
106 Quelle proportion d’élèves a une 
ardoise et une craie ?
o Tous les élèves
o La plupart des élèves
o Moins que la moitié des élèves
o Aucun
97
Nº Question Réponse
107 Quelle proportion d’élèves a un 
manuel ?
o Tous les élèves
o La plupart des élèves
o Moins que la moitié des élèves
o Aucun
108 Quelle proportion d’élèves a un livret 
d’activité ?
o Tous les élèves
o La plupart des élèves
o Moins que la moitié des élèves
o Aucun
109 Y a-t’il des livres d’histoire ? o Oui ○ Non
110 Y-a-t’il un coin lecture aménagé dans 
la classe ?
o Oui ○ Non
9. Séance de lecture
201 Compétence alphabétique • L’enseignant/e fait découvrir des lettres de l’alphabet 
• L’enseignant/e fait écouter et mémoriser la chanson des 
lettres de l’alphabet 
• L’enseignant/e propose aux élèves des activités de 
reconnaissances visuelles des lettres de l’alphabet
• L’enseignant/e fait lire les lettres aux élèves 
• L’enseignant/e propose des activités pour identifier les 
syllabes formées avec la lettre à l’étude
• L’enseignant/e propose des activités pour former des 
syllabes avec la lettre à l’étude
202 Conscience phonémique • L’enseignant/e propose des activités orales pour identifier 
et/ou localiser les sons à l’étude
• L’enseignant/e propose des activités orales pour produire 
des mots avec le son à l’étude
• L’enseignant/e propose des activités orales pour 
manipuler (compter ou matérialiser) les syllabes des mots
• L’enseignant/e compte les mots des phrases (vers) avec 
l’aide des élèves
• L’enseignant/e fait répéter les mots du vers
•
203 Lecture du texte • L’enseignant/e dit ou chante le texte
• L’enseignant/e lit le texte de manière fluide et expressive 
tout en mimant et en concrétisant les scènes
• L’enseignant/e fait lire silencieusement le texte
• L’enseignant/e fait lire le texte à haute voix aux élèves en 
groupe
• L’enseignant/e fait lire le texte à haute voix aux élèves 
individuellement
• L’enseignant/e fait prononcer et répéter les répliques aux 
élèves
204 Compréhension de texte et 
vocabulaire
• L’enseignant/e explique les mots et les expressions 
difficiles
• L’enseignant/e pose des questions sur l’image de la 
comptine/du dialogue pour amener les élèves à anticiper 
sur le contenu
98
Nº Question Réponse
• L’enseignant/e pose des questions de compréhension 
pour vérifier les hypothèses émises
• L’enseignant/e propose aux élèves des jeux pour 
consolider leur vocabulaire
• L’enseignant/e fait reconstituer, compléter ou résumer le 
texte par les élèves 
• L’enseignant/e demande aux élèves d’exprimer leur avis 
sur le texte
• L’enseignant/e pose aux élèves des questions de 
compréhension littérale
• L’enseignant/e pose aux élèves des questions de 
compréhension inférentielle (Déduire le sens des mots 
nouveau, prédire certains éléments à partir de faits 
connus, questions commençant par ‘comment’)
10. Séance de graphisme
300 Technique d’écritures utilisées 
par l’enseignant
• Tracer en l’air
• Écrire sur une ardoise
• Écrire sur le livret de l’élève
• Écrire sur les fiches pré-imprimées
• Écrire sur les feuilles blanches
11. Évaluation
400 Techniques d’évaluation • L’enseignant/e évalue les élèves en les faisant lire 
individuellement et enregistre le résultat
• L’enseignant/e corrige les productions des élèves
• L’enseignant/e fait corriger les productions des élèves
• L’enseignant/e se déplace dans les différents groupes ou 
rangées pour contrôler, aider, vérifier, solliciter, 
questionner tous les élèves même ceux en difficultés
• L’enseignant/e fait des commentaires constructifs sur le 
travail des élèves pour clarifier leurs réussites et/ou leurs 
incompréhensions
• L’enseignant/e propose aux élèves en difficultés une 
activité de remédiation en fonction du résultat de 
l’évaluation
12. Culture de la classe
501 La classe est organisée en ilots/groupes 
de tables
o Oui ○ Non
502 Les élèves font les gestes clés : mains 
croisées… et la classe est bien disciplinée
o Oui ○ Non
503 L'enseignant/e incite les filles et les 
garçons à participer de manière égale 
aux activités de la séance
o Oui ○ Non
504 L'enseignant/e fait appel à tous les 
enfants, pas seulement à ceux qui ont la 
main levée
o Oui ○ Non
99
Nº Question Réponse
505 La plupart des élèves sont motivés et 
participent activement aux activités 
proposées
o Oui ○ Non
506 L'enseignant/e encourage les réponses 
des élèves de manière positive
o Oui ○ Non
507 L’enseignant/e encourage la 
collaboration des élèves par l’interaction 
entre pairs. (Travail en paire, en grands 
ou petits groupes)
o Oui ○ Non
508 L'enseignant/e reste dans la classe 
pendant tout le cours.
o Oui ○ Non
509 L’enseignant/e parle aux élèves avec 
gentillesse (Il/Elle ne crie pas)
o Oui ○ Non
510 L’enseignant/e traite les élèves avec 
respect (Il/Elle ne tape pasles élèves)
o Oui ○ Non
511 L'enseignant/e se consacre à sa classe 
(Il/Elle ne parle pas au téléphone ou 
avec des visiteurs extérieurs)
o Oui ○ Non
100
Annex IV: Data Collection Instruments: KII and FGD Unique Questions
Unique 
Question 
Question
Code
Unique question Stakeholders
U02 EQ0 Pouvez-vous nous expliquer votre rôle dans de la mise en 
œuvre du projet DEGRA ?
Depuis quand exercez-vous votre fonction ?
Dans quelles activités avez-vous participé ?
KII USAID
KII Partners
U03 EQ0 Pouvez-vous nous expliquer brièvement la mission de votre 
direction/bureau/service ?
Quel est votre rôle et depuis quand exercez-vous votre 
position ?
KII-MENFOP 
National
KII-MENFOP Local
U04 EQ0 Quelles classes enseignez-vous ? Et avez-vous jouer un rôle 
particulier dans la mise en œuvre du projet DEGRA ?
FGD-Teachers
KII - Director
U05 EQ0 Faites-vous partie d'une association de parent d'élève (APE) ?
Avez-vous joué un rôle dans la mise en œuvre des activités de 
DEGRA ?
FGD-Parents
U06 EQ0 Selon vous quelles sont les grandes forces et faiblesses du 
projet DEGRA ?
FGD-Teachers
FGD-Parents
U52 Q1A Pouvez-vous nous fournir les résultats atteints pour les 
indicateurs 1 à 9 ?
Comment expliquer vous ces résultats ?
KII-Partners
U07 Q1B Quelles différences constatez-vous entre les élèves ayant 
bénéficié du programme DEGRA par rapport à ceux qui avaient 
appris à lire avec la méthode précédente (APC) ?
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
KII-MENFOP Local
FGD-Teachers
KII-Director
FGD-Parents
U08 Q1C Comment le projet DEGRA a-t’il réussi à construire un 
consensus sur l’approche pédagogique d'apprentissage de 
lecture (curriculum) ? En particulier concernant la progression, 
la compréhension orale et la phonologie ?
Quelles difficultés le projet a-t’il rencontré pour parvenir à ce 
consensus ?
Comment le projet a-t’il résolu ces difficultés ?
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
KII-MENFOP Local
U09 Q1C Le projet DEGRA vise l'introduction de nouvelles méthodes 
pédagogiques. Avez-vous mis en place ces nouvelles méthodes ?
Si oui, quelles en est votre appréciation ? Avez-vous constaté 
que ces méthodes ont eu un effet sur les performances des 
élèves ?
KII-Director
FGD-Teachers
U10 Q1C Avez-vous participé à la conception des outils pédagogiques ?
Comment s'est déroulé la phase de conception des outils 
pédagogiques (Guide de l'enseignant, manuel de l’élève, livret, 
livres de lecture) ?
Quelles sont les forces de la démarche de conception des 
outils pédagogiques ?
KII-Partners
KII USAID
KII-MENFOP 
National
101
Unique 
Question 
Question
Code
Unique question Stakeholders
Quelles difficultés le projet a-t’il rencontrés lors de la 
conception des outils pédagogiques ?
U11 Q1C Êtes-vous satisfait des matériaux développés par le projet ?
Quels sont les points forts et leurs points faibles ?
Pensez-vous qu'il faille apporter des améliorations ? Si oui, 
lesquelles ?
KII USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
KII-MENFOP Local
FGD-Teachers
KII-Director
U12 Q1C Avez-vous participé à formation concernant la prise en compte 
du genre et de l'inclusion sociale dans le développement du 
matériel pédagogique ?
Cette formation a-t-elle changé votre manière de voir les 
choses en matière de développement du matériel 
pédagogique ? Pensez-vous que cette démarche va perdurer ?
Pensez-vous que ces nouveaux outils pédagogiques prennent 
bien en compte le genre et de l'inclusion sociale ?
Si oui, pourquoi ? Si non, pourquoi ?
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
U13 Q1C Le projet DEGRA vise l'introduction des nouvelles méthodes 
pédagogiques. Avez-vous remarqué que les méthodes avaient 
changé ? Si oui, quelle en est votre appréciation ? Avez-vous 
constaté que ces méthodes ont eu un effet sur les 
performances des élèves ? Vos enfants, plus précisément ? Si 
oui, lequel ?
FGD-Parents
U14 Q1C Le projet DEGRA cherche à promouvoir l'éducation inclusive, 
c'est à dire, l'éducation des filles et des enfants en situation de 
handicap. Croyez-vous que les méthodes DEGRA contribuent à 
ce changement ?
Si oui, pourquoi ?
Si non, pourquoi ?
FGD-Teachers
KII-Director
FGD-Parents
U15 Q1C Le projet DEGRA cherche à promouvoir l'éducation inclusive, 
c'est à dire, la scolarisation des filles et des enfants en situation 
de handicap. Constatez-vous des efforts à ce fin ? Qu'en 
pensez-vous ? Que pourrait-être l'impact de cette approche sur 
vos enfants ?
FGD-Parents
U16 Q1C Avez-vous participé aux formations destinées aux enseignants ?
A votre connaissance tous les enseignants des 2 premières 
années du programme ont-ils participé ? Si non pourquoi ?
La situation est-elle différente dans les zones rurales ? Quels 
sont les difficultés rencontrées dans ces zones pour former les 
enseignants ?
A votre connaissance, qu'est-ce qui a été mis en place pour les 
enseignants qui n'ont pas pu participer ou qui sont nouveaux ?
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
KII-MENFOP Local
FGD-Teachers
KII-Director
U17 Q1C Suite aux formations, dans quelles mesures les techniques 
pédagogiques utilisées par des enseignants ont-elles changé ? 
Pouvez-vous nous citer des exemples ?
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
KII-MENFOP Local
102
Unique 
Question 
Question
Code
Unique question Stakeholders
FGD-Teachers
KII-Director
U18 Q1C Pensez-vous que les nouvelles méthodes mise en place par 
DEGRA ont permis une amélioration du niveau des élèves en 
lecture ?
Si oui, pourquoi ? Quels aspects en particulier se sont 
améliorés ?
Si non pourquoi ?
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
KII-MENFOP Local
FGD-Teachers
KII-Director
U19 Q1D Avec la mise en œuvre de DEGRA, dans quelles mesures les 
modalités de supervisions des enseignants ont-elles changé ?
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
KII-MENFOP Local
FGD-Teachers
KII-Director
U20 Q1D Pensez-vous que la supervision des enseignants par les 
conseillers pédagogiques et les directeurs d'école se traduise 
par une amélioration les apprentissages des élèves en lecture ?
Si oui, donnez des exemples précis. Si non, pourquoi ?
En quoi le soutien apporté par les directeurs et différent du 
soutien apporté par les conseiller pédagogiques?
Pensez-vous que les directeurs d'école et les conseillers 
pédagogiques soient en mesure de fournir aux enseignants 
l'encadrement souhaité en matière de pédagogie ?
Si oui, pourquoi ? Si non, pourquoi ?
Quelles difficultés particulières rencontrent les CP et les 
directeurs dans leur rôle d'encadreur pédagogique ?
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
U21 Q1D En tant qu'enseignant, avez-vous constaté des améliorations 
dans la supervision grâce au projet DEGRA ?
Racontez-nous comment la supervision a changé. Donnez-nous 
un exemple de la dernière fois que vous a été supervisé. 
Pensez-vous que cette supervision se traduise en une 
amélioration dans la performance des élèves ?
Si oui, donnez des exemples précis. Si non, pourquoi ?
Pensez-vous que les directeurs d'école et les conseillers 
pédagogiques soient en mesure de vous fournir l'encadrement 
souhaité en matière de pédagogie ?
Si oui, pourquoi ? Si non, pourquoi ?
Quelles difficultés particulières rencontrent les CP et les 
directeurs dans leur rôle d'encadreur pédagogique ?
FGD-Teachers
U22 Q1E Avez-vous participé à la formation relative à l'encadrement 
pédagogique en tant que directeur d'école ou conseiller 
pédagogique ?
Donnez-nous un exemple de la dernière fois que vous avez 
supervisé un enseignant. Avec quelle régularité faites-vous cette 
supervision ? Croyez-vous que cette supervision se traduit en 
une amélioration dans la performance des élèves ? Si oui, 
donnez des exemples précis
KII Directeur
KII-MENFOP Local 
(CP)
103
Unique 
Question 
Question
Code
Unique question Stakeholders
Quelles difficultés particulières rencontrent les CP et les 
directeurs dans leur rôle d'encadreur pédagogique ?
U23 Q1E Que pensez-vous de l'utilisation des tablettes pour 
l'observation des enseignants ?
Cet outil a-t’il facilité la tâche des CPs et des inspecteurs ?
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
KII-MENFOP Local
FGD-Teachers
KII-Director
U24 Q1E Pensez-vous que les zones rurales ont bénéficié du même 
soutien de proximité que les zones urbaines en matière de 
soutien pédagogique ?
Si oui, pourquoi ? Si non pourquoi ?
Quelles sont les difficultés spécifiques rencontrées par les 
écoles des zones rurales en matière de supervision ?
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
KII-MENFOP Local
FGD-Teachers
KII-Director
U53 Q2A Pouvez-vous nous fournir les résultats atteints pour les 
indicateurs 10 à 18 ?
Comment expliquer vous ces résultats ?
KII-Partners
U25 Q2B Avez-vous participé à la conception des messages de 
sensibilisation ?
Comment s'est déroulé la conception des messages de 
sensibilisation relatifs l'engagement des parents ?
Quelles difficultés avez-vous rencontrées ?
Comment y avez-vous fait face ?
Les messages conçus prennent-ils en compte la scolarisation 
des filles et l'inclusion sociale ?
Les messages conçus prennent-ils en compte les spécificités 
ethniques ou culturelles des différentes régions ?
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
U26 Q2B Que pensez-vous du contenu des messages de sensibilisation ?
Que pensez-vous des supports utilisés pour la transmission de 
ces messages (Facebook, radio, SMS..) ?
Pensez-vous que les messages de sensibilisation permettent une 
modification des comportements des parents ?
Si non pourquoi ?
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
U27 Q2B Avez-vous connaissance des messages de sensibilisation relatifs 
à l'engagement des parents créé dans le cadre du projet 
DEGRA ?
Avez-vous vu des posters, entendu les messages à la radio ou 
vu les messages sur Facebook ou à la télévision ?
Que pensez-vous du contenu des messages ?
Que pensez-vous des supports utilisé pour la transmission de 
ces messages (Facebook, radio, SMS..) ?
Pensez-vous que ces messages de sensibilisation permettent 
une modification des comportements des parents ?
Si non pourquoi ?
Partner-NGO
KII-MENFOP Local
FGD-Teachers
KII-Director
FGD-Parents
U28 Q2B DEGRA a-t’il été efficace pour mobiliser les communautés et 
faire participer les APE aux activités de lecture tels que des 
festivals de lecture, l'organisation de soutien scolaire, la mise en 
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
104
Unique 
Question 
Question
Code
Unique question Stakeholders
place de bibliothèques ou coin lecture ?
Si oui, dans quelle mesure ?
Si non, pourquoi ? Quelles ont été les difficultés rencontrées ?
National
KII-MENFOP Local
FGD-Teachers
KII-Director
FGD-Parents
U29 Q2B Quelles améliorations du fonctionnement des APEs avez-vous 
constatée qui peut être attribuée à l’intervention de DEGRA ?
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
KII-MENFOP Local
FGD-Teachers
KII-Director
FGD-Parents
U30 Q2B Les directeurs d'écoles ont-ils participé activement à la 
mobilisation des APEs pour un plus fort engagement des 
parents en particulier dans l'apprentissage de la lecture ?
Pouvez-vous nous citer des exemples ?
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
KII-MENFOP Local
FGD-Teachers
KII-Director
FGD-Parents
U31 Q2C DEGRA a-t’il été efficace pour renforcer les capacités des 
ONG à mener des activités de lecture ?
Quelles difficultés le projet a-t’il rencontré ?
Comment le projet a-t’il fait face à ces difficultés ?
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
U32 Q2C Par rapport au DEGRA, avez-vous (ou l'ONG) bénéficié des 
activités de renforcement de capacité ? Si oui, lesquelles?
Donnez-nous des exemples précis de comment vous avez pu 
appliquer ces apprentissages.
Si non, de quoi avez-vous (ou l'ONG) besoin pour être plus 
efficace dans le soutien aux communautés ?
KII- Partners 
(NGOs )
U54 Q3A Pouvez-vous nous fournir les résultats atteints pour les 
indicateurs 19 à 23 ?
Comment expliquer vous ces résultats ?
KII-Partners
U33 Q3B Quel est le rôle de de la commission de promotion de la 
lecture ?
Êtes-vous satisfait du fonctionnement de cette commission ?
Quelle sont les forces et les faiblesses de cette commission ?
Celle-ci a-t'elle rencontré des difficultés de fonctionnement ?
Pensez-vous que des améliorations soient nécessaires ? Si oui, 
lesquelles ?
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
U34 Q3B Quel est le rôle du comité de pilotage ?
Êtes-vous satisfait du fonctionnement du comité de pilotage du 
projet DEGRA ?
Celui-ci a-t’il rencontré des difficultés de fonctionnement ? Les 
rencontres ont-elles eu lieu selon le calendrier prévu (1 fois par 
trimestre) ?
Quelles sont les forces et les faiblesses de ce comité de 
pilotage ?
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
105
Unique 
Question 
Question
Code
Unique question Stakeholders
Pensez-vous que des améliorations soient nécessaires ? Si oui, 
lesquelles ?
U35 Q3B Êtes-vous satisfait de l'outil EGRA qui a été conçu en 
collaboration avec le ministère ?
Quelles sont les forces et les faiblesses de cet outil ?
Êtes-vous satisfait des seuils qui ont été établis?
Pensez-vous que cet outil puisse vous permettre de construire 
des politiques éducatifs qui répondent aux besoins spécifiques 
du Djibouti ?
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
U36 Q3B Pensez-vous que l'équité des genres et l'inclusion sociale fasse 
parti des priorités du ministère de l'éducation ?
Quels progrès restent-ils à faire dans ce domaine ?
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
U37 Q3B Le MENFOP est-il en mesure de prendre des décisions de 
politique éducatives en se basant sur les résultats des études 
menées, comme par exemple EGRA ?
Avez-vous des exemples de changement d'orientation dans les 
politiques éducatives, qui ont été initiées suite aux résultats 
d'études qui ont été menées ?
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
U51 Q3B Quel est le rôle des points focaux ? Quels sont vos 
interlocuteurs ? Sont-ils disponibles? La collaboration avec 
points focaux est-elle efficace ?
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
U38 Q3C FHI360 et ses partenaires ont-ils collaboré efficacement avec le 
CRIPEN, le CFEEF, le bureau du secrétaire général, le bureau 
du secrétaire exécutif, le bureau de l’inspecteur général et le 
service d’évaluation ?
Si oui, avez-vous des exemples de collaboration réussie ?
Quelles difficultés avez-vous rencontré ? Quels changements 
souhaitez voir mis en œuvre avant la fin du projet et/ou pour 
de futurs projets ?
KII-USAID
KII-MENFOP 
National
U48 Q3C Avez-vous collaboré avec les services suivants : CRIPEN, le
CFEEF, le bureau du secrétaire général, le bureau du secrétaire 
exécutif, le bureau de l’inspecteur général et le service 
d’évaluation ?
Avez-vous des exemples de collaboration réussie ?
Quelles difficultés avez-vous rencontré ? Quels changements 
souhaitez voir mis en œuvre avant la fin du projet et/ou pour 
de futurs projets ?
KII-Partners
U39 Q4A De quelle manière pensez-vous que la COVID 19 a affecté la 
mise en œuvre du projet ? Comment DEGRA a-t’il géré cette 
perturbation ? Qu'est-ce qui aurait pu être fait différemment en 
termes de réponse du projet vis-à-vis cette crise sanitaire ?
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
U40 Q4A Quels sont les facteurs internes que vous pourriez citer 
comme étant favorables à la mise en œuvre de DEGRA ? 
Facteurs internes: gestion, compétences du personnel/rotation, 
réseau de partenaires de développement favorable ou 
encombré, utilisation des ressources, zone de couverture, etc. 
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
106
Unique 
Question 
Question
Code
Unique question Stakeholders
U41 Q4A Quels sont les facteurs internes que vous pourriez citer 
comme entravant la mise en œuvre de DEGRA ? Qu'est-ce qui 
pourrait être fait différemment afin de faire face à ces difficultés 
et obtenir de meilleurs résultats ?
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
U42 Q4A Quels sont les facteurs externes que vous pourriez citer 
comme étant favorables à la mise en œuvre de DEGRA ?
Facteurs externes : environnement politique, difficultés de 
transport, météo/pluies, collaboration avec le bailleur ou 
d'autres partenaires, difficultés à recruter des ONG pour IR2, 
etc.
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
U43 Q4A Outre la COVID 19, quels sont les facteurs externes que vous 
pourriez citer comme entravant la mise en œuvre de DEGRA ? 
Qu'est-ce qui pourrait être fait différemment afin de faire face à 
ces difficultés et obtenir de meilleurs résultats ?
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
U44 Q4A Concernant la pandémie de COVID-19, quels ont été les 
conséquences du confinement ?
Ces mesures de prévention de la maladie ont-elles eut un 
impact sur l'amélioration de l'instruction de la lecture, et pour 
les performances des élèves en particulier ?
FGD-Parents
FGD-Teachers
KII-Directeur
U45 Q4A A part la COVID-19, pouvez-vous citer d'autres facteurs qui 
entravent la réussite du projet afin d'améliorer l'apprentissage 
de la lecture ?
FGD-Parents
FGD-Teachers
KII-Directeur
U46 Q5A La théorie du changement est basée sur la prémisse que si : 1) 
l'enseignement de la lecture dans les écoles est amélioré ; 2) le 
soutien de la famille et de la communauté à la lecture est 
renforcé ; et 3) l'environnement politique pour soutenir la 
lecture est renforcé, alors les compétences en lecture des 
enfants de la première à la cinquième année s'amélioreront. 
Croyez-vous que cette perspective soit toujours pertinente ?
Y-a-t'il d'autres hypothèses ou des facteurs contextuels qui 
doivent être prise en compte ? Expliquer votre réponse. 
Donner des exemples si possibles.
KII-USAID
KII-Partners
KII-MENFOP 
National
U47 Q6A Le projet DEGRA a une vie de 5 ans. Le projet est actuellement 
dans sa troisième année. Voyez-vous des signes ou des 
exemples qui indiquent la possibilité que les acquis du projet 
s'installent de façon indépendante du projet ? Quelles sont les 
signes d'une pérennité des succès ? Sur le plan de changement 
des croyances, habitudes ? Sur le plan des changements 
institutionnels ou structurels ?
KII-USAID
KII Partners
KII MENFOP
FGD Parents
FGD Teachers
U49 REC Quelles recommandations proposez-vous pour l'amélioration 
du projet dans ses deux dernières années?
KII-USAID
KII Partners
KII MENFOP
U50 RAE Selon vous, quelles devraient être les axes prioritaires de la 
politique d'éducation à Djibouti pour les années à venir, pour 
lesquelles un appui serait souhaitable ?
KII-USAID
KII Partners
KII MENFOP
107
Unique 
Question 
Question
Code
Unique question Stakeholders
U55 RAE Quel est votre rôle au sein de votre organisme (World Bank, 
Unicef, AFD) ?
World Bank
Unicef
AFD
U56 RAE A ma connaissant, votre organisme met en œuvre les projets 
suivants, pouvez confirmer ou compléter cette liste et apporter 
quelques clarifications sur les activités menées ?
World Bank
Unicef
AFD
U57 RAE Selon vous, quels sont les progrès importants réalisés par 
Djibouti aux cours des 5 dernières années dans le secteur de 
l’éducation ?
World Bank
Unicef
AFD
U58 RAE Selon vous, quels sont les défis auxquels le secteur de 
l’éducation doit faire face, et que pourrait-on faire pour
remédier à ces problèmes ?
World Bank
Unicef
AFD
U59 RAE Quels sont les projets du secteur de l'éducation dans lesquels 
votre organisme planifie de s’investir dans les 5 années à venir ?
World Bank
Unicef
AFD
U60 RAE Pensez -vous qu'il existe des besoins non satisfaits ou des 
chevauchements entre les interventions des organismes 
internationaux ?
MENFOP
108
Annex V: Detailed EGRA Results
Annex Figure 2: Percentage of zero score
Annex Table 9: Benchmark by subtasks
EGRA Subtask Benchmark
Letter identification At least 36 letters identified correctly
Text reading At least 28 words read correctly
Comprehension of text read At least 2 questions answered correctly
Comprehension of text heard At least 2 questions answered correctly
Global benchmark At least 68 items correct
109
Annex Figure 3: Percentage of students attaining or exceeding the benchmark by timepoint
Annex Figure 4: Percentage of students attaining or exceeding the benchmark by zone
110
Annex Figure 5 : Percentage of students attaining or exceeding the benchmark by gender
111
Annex VI: Additional Quantitative Tables
Note: Some results presented below may vary slightly from results presented within the narrative above. The tables below report out “I don’t 
know” responses where applicable, whereas these results are not included within the report narrative.
Annex Table 10: Summary statistics for students participating in EGRA sample (unweighted)
Djibouti Inner Djibouti Suburbs Regions Total
Frequency Percent Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage
Gender
Male 94 49.5% 56 47.5% 138 55.6% 288 51.8%
Female 96 50.5% 62 52.5% 110 44.4% 268 48.2%
Language
Somali 149 78.4% 107 90.7% 133 53.6% 389 70.0%
Afar 23 12.1% 10 8.5% 115 46.4% 148 26.6%
Arab-Other 18 9.5% 1 0.8% 0.0% 19 3.4%
Age 162 85.3% 93 78.8% 117 47.2% 372 66.9%
8 years old 13 6.8% 9 7.6% 24 9.7% 46 8.3%
9 years old 15 7.9% 16 13.6% 107 43.1% 138 24.8%
Other/DNK 14 7.4% 4 3.4% 22 8.9% 40 7.2%
Repeater 68 35.8% 29 24.6% 17 6.9% 114 20.5%
Preschool 190 118 248 556
Overall 94 49.5% 56 47.5% 138 55.6% 288 51.8%
112
Annex Table 11: Summary statistics for parents participating in survey (unweighted)
Djibouti Inner Djibouti Suburbs Regions Total
Frequency Percent Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage
Gender
Male 36 20.2% 20 18.7% 75 37.7% 131 27.1%
Female 142 79.8% 87 81.3% 124 62.3% 353 72.9%
Language
Somali 155 87.1% 90 84.1% 101 50.8% 346 71.5%
Afar 11 6.2% 13 12.1% 98 49.2% 122 25.2%
Arab-Other 12 6.7% 4 3.7% 0 0.0% 16 3.3%
Age
20-29 11 6.2% 13 12.1% 24 12.1% 48 9.9%
30-39 60 33.7% 42 39.3% 88 44.2% 190 39.3%
40-49 82 46.1% 42 39.3% 47 23.6% 171 35.3%
50+ 24 13.5% 8 7.5% 34 17.1% 66 13.6%
DNK 1 0.6% 2 1.9% 6 3.0% 9 1.9%
Number of children in the school
1 child 72 40.4% 45 42.1% 91 45.7% 208 43.0%
2 children 73 41.0% 42 39.3% 62 31.2% 177 36.6%
Other 33 18.5% 20 18.7% 46 23.1% 99 20.5%
Education
None 79 44.4% 33 30.8% 118 59.3% 230 47.5%
Primary school 39 21.9% 33 30.8% 13 6.5% 85 17.6%
Above Primary 60 33.7% 41 38.3% 68 34.2% 169 34.9%
No French spoken 86 48.3% 36 33.6% 131 65.8% 253 52.3%
Can read 48 27.0% 35 32.7% 18 9.0% 101 20.9%
Overall 178 36.8% 107 22.1% 199 41.1% 484 100.0%
113
Annex Table 12: Summary statistics for teachers participating in survey (unweighted)
Djibouti Inner Djibouti Suburbs Regions Total
Frequency Percent Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage
Director 17 33.3% 11 33.3% 20 35.1% 48 34.0%
Teacher (grade 1&2) 34 66.7% 23 69.7% 40 70.2% 97 68.8%
Gender
Male 26 32.9% 9 11.4% 44 55.7% 79 56.0%
Female 25 40.3% 24 38.7% 13 21.0% 62 44.0%
Language
Somali 31 91.2% 23 100.0% 40 100.0% 85 87.6%
Afar 8 23.5% 8 34.8% 17 42.5% 33 34.0%
Age
20-29 10 19.6% 13 39.4% 32 56.1% 58 41.1%
30-39 8 15.7% 8 24.2% 15 26.3% 30 21.3%
40+ 33 64.7% 12 36.4% 9 15.8% 53 37.6%
Nb years teaching - 1st or 2nd grade
1st year 6 17.6% 5 21.7% 10 25.0% 21 21.6%
2nd year 4 11.8% 6 26.1% 13 32.5% 23 23.7%
3rd year + 24 70.6% 12 52.2% 17 42.5% 53 54.6%
Type of contract - All
Civil servant 46 90.2% 22 66.7% 26 45.6% 94 66.7%
Student teacher 5 9.8% 11 33.3% 31 54.4% 47 33.3%
Education - All
École Normale 29 56.9% 13 39.4% 14 24.6% 56 39.7%
CFEEF 19 37.3% 19 57.6% 42 73.7% 80 56.7%
None 3 5.9% 1 3.0% 1 1.8% 5 3.5%
Overall 51 33 57 141
114
Annex Table 13: Summary statistics for school type participating in survey (unweighted)
Djibouti 
Inner Percentage Djibouti 
Suburbs Percentage Regions Percentage Total Percentage
Type schools
Simple flux 6 35.3% 4 36.4% 10 50.0% 20 41.7%
Double flux 10 58.8% 7 63.6% 10 50.0% 27 56.3%
Simple flux / Double flux 1 5.9% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 2.1%
School canteen 0 0.0% 1 9.1% 19 95.0% 20 41.7%
Water access 16 94.1% 10 90.9% 15 75.0% 41 85.4%
Electricity access 17 100.0% 11 100.0% 10 50.0% 38 79.2%
Photcopying machine 16 94.1% 10 90.9% 5 25.0% 31 64.6%
Printer 14 82.4% 4 36.4% 4 20.0% 22 45.8%
Reading corner 1 5.9% 2 18.2% 7 35.0% 10 20.8%
School library 8 47.1% 3 27.3% 6 30.0% 17 35.4%
Overall 17 35.4% 11 22.9% 20 41.7% 48 100.0%
115
Annex Table 14: Summary statistics for school enrollment participating in survey (unweighted)
Djibouti 
Inner
Standard 
deviation
Djibouti 
Suburbs
Standard 
deviation Regions Standard 
deviation Total Standard 
deviation
Gender student
Boys 415.9 237.9 438.1 165.7 156.9 120.1 313.1 220.9
Girls 383.5 217.4 396.8 152.2 118.6 109.4 276.2 209.7
Total 799.4 452.4 834.9 315.3 275.6 226.3 589.3 428.4
Gender teachers
Male 16.0 5.9 16.2 6.6 7.5 3.3 12.5 6.6
Female 9.5 5.2 10.5 6.2 2.1 2.7 6.6 5.9
Total 25.5 9.0 26.6 9.9 9.6 5.5 19.1 11.3
116
Annex Table 15: Student answers to key questions (weighted answers)
Question Female Male Djibouti 
Inner
Djibouti 
Suburbs Regions Total
Student has manual at school 92.9% 93.4% 99.5% 90.7% 91.4% 93.2%
Student has workbook at school 88.9% 89.6% 96.3% 91.5% 86.2% 89.3%
Student has books, magazines, or newspapers at home 9.3% 6.3% 22.6% 9.3% 1.9% 7.6%
Frequency of family member reading a story 
Very often 11.7% 8.3% 27.9% 15.3% 2.1% 9.8%
Often 15.2% 16.4% 24.7% 20.3% 11.6% 15.8%
Sometimes 13.2% 10.5% 11.6% 17.8% 10.5% 11.8%
Rarely 25.8% 22.7% 12.6% 21.2% 28.9% 24.1%
Never 30.8% 40.4% 20.5% 22.9% 44.6% 36.0%
Does not know 3.3% 1.7% 2.6% 2.5% 2.3% 2.4%
Frequency of family member helping with
homework
Very often 14.0% 10.9% 33.7% 22.0% 2.4% 12.3%
Often 23.9% 20.3% 33.2% 28.0% 16.5% 21.9%
Sometimes 13.0% 13.4% 12.1% 20.3% 12.0% 13.2%
Rarely 26.8% 29.8% 8.4% 16.1% 38.4% 28.4%
Never 19.7% 25.5% 11.1% 13.6% 29.2% 22.8%
Does not know 2.6% 0.2% 1.6% 1.5% 1.3%
Does someone ask you what you have learned at school? 61.9% 67.3% 93.7% 84.7% 50.0% 64.8%
What do your parents do when you get good 
grades?
They praise me 19.4% 23.5% 12.6% 25.4% 24.0% 21.6%
They reward me 32.6% 25.6% 51.1% 54.2% 15.0% 28.8%
They say they are happy 29.0% 23.2% 55.3% 23.7% 15.7% 25.9%
117
Question Female Male Djibouti 
Inner
Djibouti 
Suburbs Regions Total
They do nothing 31.1% 34.6% 16.3% 16.9% 42.7% 33.0%
What do your parents do when you get bad grades?
They try to help me 13.8% 13.2% 21.1% 14.4% 10.5% 13.4%
They tell me that I need to work more 20.1% 16.5% 46.3% 37.3% 3.7% 18.2%
They scold me 3.0% 3.3% 5.0% 3.1%
They punish me 4.1% 3.7% 4.2% 5.1% 3.5% 3.9%
They hit me 14.8% 8.9% 15.3% 16.9% 9.1% 11.6%
They do nothing 37.5% 42.0% 12.1% 24.6% 53.5% 40.0%
Do you have a private tutor? - YES 16.7% 12.9% 45.8% 20.3% 2.1% 14.6%
How often does the teacher ask you questions? 
Very often 20.9% 17.6% 46.3% 21.2% 8.8% 19.1%
Often 20.7% 20.1% 36.3% 28.8% 12.7% 20.4%
Regularly 29.1% 25.6% 10.0% 34.7% 31.7% 27.2%
Rarely 28.2% 35.1% 5.3% 14.4% 45.5% 31.9%
Never 0.9% 1.5% 1.6% 0.8% 1.2% 1.3%
Does not know 0.3% 0.5% 0.1%
118
Annex Table 16: Answers of parents of children in Grade 1 or 2 to key questions (weighted answers)
Question Female Male Djibouti 
Inner
Djibouti 
Suburbs Regions Total
How would you qualify your child’s reading level?
Very good 12.2% 5.6% 16.6% 15.5% 6.2% 10.2%
Good 26.2% 29.4% 23.3% 29.9% 28.1% 27.2%
Average 42.6% 48.7% 50.3% 43.3% 42.3% 44.5%
Bad 11.3% 10.6% 8.0% 8.2% 13.1% 11.1%
Very bad 2.2% 0.5% 1.2% 3.1% 1.5% 1.7%
Does not know / no answer 5.5% 5.3% 0.6% 8.8% 5.5%
Do you believe that the new reading approach allows 
children to learn better? - YES 95.9% 100.0% 97.8% 96.6% 96.5% 97.0%
How often does your child use the workbook at 
home?
Very often 39.2% 34.4% 42.6% 41.1% 34.3% 37.8%
Often 40.1% 44.4% 50.3% 45.6% 35.4% 41.3%
Regularly 15.3% 15.9% 6.5% 10.0% 21.7% 15.4%
Rarely 2.4% 0.8% 3.3% 2.5% 2.0%
Never 1.9% 1.6% 0.6% 2.9% 1.8%
Does not know / no answer 1.2% 3.0% 3.1% 1.7%
How often does your child use the manual at 
home?
Very often 35.4% 36.3% 42.3% 34.5% 32.6% 35.7%
Often 38.8% 37.0% 42.3% 51.2% 32.7% 38.2%
Regularly 19.1% 22.9% 14.7% 10.7% 25.6% 20.3%
Rarely 2.7% 0.8% 0.6% 3.6% 2.5% 2.1%
Never 2.8% 2.9% 5.1% 2.9%
Does not know / no answer 1.2% 1.5% 0.9%
119
Question Female Male Djibouti 
Inner
Djibouti 
Suburbs Regions Total
Does your child have a private tutor? - YES 22.2% 13.4% 35.0% 37.1% 8.8% 19.5%
Do you or a family member helps your child with 
homework? - YES 58.1% 46.4% 95.1% 84.5% 30.4% 54.5%
Do you tell or read stories to your children? - YES 46.2% 30.7% 79.1% 66.0% 19.8% 41.4%
What do you do if your child gets good grades?
I praise me 12.5% 9.8% 9.0% 11.2% 12.9% 11.6%
I reward me 63.4% 54.1% 74.7% 76.6% 50.3% 60.5%
I encourage him/her 23.9% 13.7% 37.6% 37.4% 9.4% 20.8%
I do nothing 1.6% 0.5% 2.2% 0.9% 1.0% 1.3%
What do you do if your child gets bad grades?
I encourage him/her 27.2% 21.2% 24.7% 27.1% 25.2% 25.4%
I try to help him/her 22.6% 18.2% 40.4% 22.4% 12.7% 21.2%
I tell him/her that I need to study more 15.6% 13.0% 12.9% 15.0% 15.5% 14.8%
I scold him/her 1.6% 1.9% 1.7% 4.7% 1.0% 1.7%
I punish him/her 0.6% 2.8% 0.4%
I hit him/her 10.1% 5.2% 2.2% 4.7% 12.3% 8.6%
120
Annex Table 17: All Parents answers to key questions (weighted answers)
Question Female Male Djibouti 
Inner
Djibouti 
Suburbs Regions Total
Is it important for girls to learn how to read?
Yes, absolutely 64.0% 55.4% 77.0% 61.7% 54.6% 61.3%
Yes, more or less 26.0% 39.6% 22.5% 37.4% 31.7% 30.2%
No, not really 1.5% 2.3% 0.6% 2.7% 1.7%
No, not at all 3.5% 2.7% 5.4% 3.2%
Does not know / no answer 5.1% 0.9% 5.7% 3.5%
Did you hear the MENFOP messages about parent 
engagement? - YES 29.3% 27.6% 27.0% 44.9% 25.4% 28.7%
On which media did you hear/see the messages?
WhatsApp 3.3% 4.2% 1.0%
Radio 55.1% 52.7% 22.9% 41.7% 74.3% 54.4%
Facebook 2.1% 1.7% 8.3% 2.0%
Television 65.8% 59.5% 89.6% 87.5% 41.6% 63.9%
121
Annex Table 18: Parent member of the PTA answers to key questions (weighted answers)
Question Female Male Djibouti 
Inner
Djibouti 
Suburbs Regions Total
Do you believe that the PTA plays an important 
role in your school?
Yes, absolutely 57.8% 42.9% 75.8% 68.2% 39.7% 53.2%
Yes, more or less 27.5% 39.5% 21.9% 29.9% 35.5% 31.2%
No, not really 2.4% 5.8% 1.9% 5.3% 3.5%
No, not at all 4.9% 3.3% 7.4% 4.4%
Does not know / no answer 7.4% 8.6% 2.2% 12.2% 7.8%
Is your PTA facing some difficulties? - YES 8.3% 5.5% 4.2% 3.1% 10.0% 7.3%
What should be done to increase parents’ 
engagement?
Improve teacher-parents relationship 52.4% 52.9% 52.8% 56.1% 51.5% 52.5%
Train members 17.5% 12.2% 20.2% 14.0% 14.5% 15.9%
Sensitize parent regarding the importance of PTAs 28.6% 23.5% 50.6% 53.3% 10.3% 27.0%
Consider availability of parents when programming 4.9% 2.9% 10.7% 6.5% 0.9% 4.3%
Will you remain a member of the PTA next year? - YES 67.1% 58.7% 67.4% 64.3% 62.9% 64.3%
Why will you remain a member of the PTA?
To be with other parents 16.7% 20.5% 17.5% 17.5% 18.2% 17.9%
To be close to my children 32.7% 30.0% 28.9% 23.8% 35.8% 31.9%
To follow my children 40.3% 35.3% 55.7% 49.2% 27.5% 38.7%
To support children's education 24.4% 9.2% 28.9% 19.0% 15.7% 19.7%
To participate in the development of my 
community 18.6% 21.9% 21.6% 23.8% 17.4% 19.6%
122
Question Female Male Djibouti 
Inner
Djibouti 
Suburbs Regions Total
Why will you stop being a member of the PTA?
I am not interested 32.4% 23.0% 11.1% 18.2% 38.3% 28.7%
It takes too much time 38.7% 27.1% 51.1% 45.5% 24.5% 34.1%
It’s exhausting 9.3% 16.1% 22.2% 18.2% 6.3% 12.0%
My spouse complained about it 17.8% 2.6% 40.0% 15.2% 11.8%
The PTA is badly managed 16.1% 7.7% 40.0% 21.2% 12.8%
Because I do not know how to read 5.7% 1.7% 2.2% 3.0% 5.1% 4.1%
123
Annex Table 19: Teachers of Grades 1 or 2 answers to key questions (weighted answers)
Question Female Male Djibouti 
Inner
Djibouti 
Suburbs Regions Total
Which DEGRA training did you participate in?
Programme et TLM Année 1 - Août 2019 3.4% 3.6% 11.8% 4.3% 3.5%
Lecture Année 1 - Octobre 2019 12.3% 25.2% 17.6% 8.7% 23.9% 19.9%
Autour du Langage - Décembre 2019 6.9% 3.6% 14.7% 8.7% 4.9%
Écriture Année 1- Février 2020 8.6% 17.1% 8.8% 13.0% 15.7% 13.6%
Lecture et Langage Année 1 et 2 - Août 2020 27.1% 49.5% 38.2% 21.7% 46.2% 40.3%
Écriture Année 2 - Octobre 2020 5.1% 9.5% 14.7% 7.0% 7.7%
Compréhension - Décembre 2020 8.6% 5.4% 20.6% 2.9% 6.7%
None of these trainingsreceived 50.8% 31.0% 38.2% 60.9% 33.6% 39.1%
Did you receive a proximity training delivered by the CP? -
YES 65.3% 75.5% 85.3% 82.6% 62.6% 71.3%
How did you familiarize yourself with the new 
method?
I asked my colleagues 8.9% 33.8% 30.8% 7.1% 22.3% 20.5%
I used the teacher guide 86.5% 96.1% 69.2% 92.9% 100.0% 91.0%
I received assistance from the CP 3.9% 7.7% 1.8%
I did nothing 10.1% 23.1% 5.4%
How useful was the training?
Very useful 84.2% 85.6% 85.3% 82.6% 85.6% 85.0%
Fairly useful 9.7% 7.5% 8.8% 17.4% 5.8% 8.4%
Not really useful 1.7% 2.9% 0.7%
Not at all useful 5.7% 5.6% 3.3%
Does not know / no answer 4.5% 1.2% 2.9% 3.1% 2.5%
124
Question Female Male Djibouti 
Inner
Djibouti 
Suburbs Regions Total
What component of the program is difficult to 
implement?
Alphabetical principal 29.6% 19.7% 50.0% 26.1% 12.6% 23.8%
Phonetic awareness 43.5% 37.8% 58.8% 52.2% 29.4% 40.1%
Comprehension and vocabulary 16.3% 21.7% 17.6% 34.8% 16.1% 19.5%
Words and text reading 15.9% 16.1% 23.5% 17.4% 12.6% 16.0%
Writing 12.0% 9.0% 23.5% 17.4% 2.9% 10.2%
Evaluation techniques 12.0% 4.8% 23.5% 13.0% 7.8%
None 17.9% 55.4% 5.9% 26.1% 57.4% 40.0%
Do you believe that the new reading approach allows 
children to learn better? - YES 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Do you have a teacher guide? - YES 88.1% 94.9% 91.2% 100.0% 90.4% 92.1%
Do you believe that the teacher guide is easy to use? 
– YES 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Do you believe that the new curriculum is adapted to the 
students’ capacity? – YES 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Do you believe that the student workbook is well designed? 
– YES 100.00% 97.40% 100.00% 95.70% 98.60% 98.40%
Do you believe that the student manual is well designed?
– YES 100.00% 96.10% 97.10% 95.70% 98.60% 97.80%
Do you believe that the Big Books are well designed? 
– YES 93.80% 98.80% 94.10% 95.70% 98.00% 96.80%
Do you believe that TLM paid attention to gender issues? -
YES 86.00% 92.50% 97.10% 95.60% 85.40% 89.80%
Do you believe that TLM paid attention to inclusion issues? 
- YES 53.40% 49.80% 88.30% 56.50% 35.00% 51.30%
Who participates the most in class?
Girls 43.9% 41.1% 38.2% 43.5% 43.5% 42.3%
Boys 42.1% 25.2% 47.1% 47.8% 22.0% 32.2%
125
Question Female Male Djibouti 
Inner
Djibouti 
Suburbs Regions Total
There is no difference 13.9% 33.7% 14.7% 8.7% 34.5% 25.6%
How do you evaluate your students?
At the end of each module – Test CFEEF 66.0% 85.1% 85.3% 60.9% 78.5% 77.3%
Every week for a few students 54.8% 59.9% 44.1% 47.8% 66.0% 57.8%
I regularly evaluate each one of my students 32.2% 18.2% 23.5% 47.8% 17.6% 24.0%
Are you satisfied with your students’ results? 
- YES 92.30% 100.00% 97.10% 95.70% 97.00% 96.80%
How do you explain these good results?
The new curriculum 22.7% 59.1% 39.4% 36.4% 49.2% 44.8%
Teacher training 74.2% 74.1% 66.7% 68.2% 78.8% 74.2%
Quality/capacity of the teacher 25.7% 69.2% 27.3% 31.8% 67.6% 52.1%
Low number of students per class 14.2% 23.5% 15.2% 18.2% 22.1% 19.8%
Parent’s engagement 37.7% 18.0% 30.3% 54.5% 16.2% 25.7%
How often did you receive the visit of a CP this 
year?
1 time 40.4% 50.9% 55.6% 35.0% 44.7% 45.7%
2 times 31.2% 23.1% 18.5% 45.0% 24.6% 27.1%
3 times 24.2% 16.9% 18.5% 10.0% 25.7% 20.5%
4 to 5 times 4.2% 9.2% 7.4% 10.0% 5.0% 6.7%
Do you believe that the frequency of CP visits is?
Sufficient 64.4% 43.7% 58.8% 60.9% 47.2% 52.2%
Insufficient 32.8% 53.6% 38.2% 39.1% 49.4% 45.0%
Excessive 2.8% 1.2% 2.9% 1.9% 1.9%
Does not know / no answer 1.6% 1.5% 0.9%
Do you believe that the support of the CP has enabled you 
to improve? – YES 100.0% 98.0% 96.3% 100.0% 100.0% 99.0%
126
Question Female Male Djibouti 
Inner
Djibouti 
Suburbs Regions Total
How often were you observed by your director this 
year?
Never 21.0% 8.1% 14.7% 27.3% 9.5% 13.7%
1 time 23.8% 24.8% 14.7% 18.2% 30.3% 24.4%
2 to 4 times 29.2% 59.2% 38.2% 45.5% 49.9% 46.3%
5 to 10 times 23.2% 7.8% 32.4% 9.1% 8.2% 14.5%
Does not know / no answer 2.8% 2.1% 1.2%
Do you believe that the frequency of director’s 
observations is?
Sufficient 65.0% 89.7% 76.5% 59.1% 85.7% 79.0%
Insufficient 22.6% 5.2% 23.5% 36.4% 1.5% 12.7%
Does not know / no answer 12.3% 5.1% 4.5% 12.8% 8.2%
Do you believe that the support of the director has enabled
you to improve? – YES 100.0% 96.7% 100.0% 93.7% 98.2% 98.1%
127
Annex Table 20: Directors’ answers to key questions (weighted answers)
Question Female Male Djibouti 
Inner
Djibouti 
Suburbs Regions Total
Did you organize a general parent assembly this year? - YES 72.7% 72.3% 76.5% 63.6% 73.0% 72.3%
What was the participation rate?
Very high 62.5% 50.1% 69.2% 57.1% 43.6% 52.0%
Hight 25.0% 49.9% 30.8% 28.6% 56.4% 46.0%
Very Low 12.5% 14.3% 2.0% 14.3%
What theme did you discuss?
Information on new reading method 87.5% 39.6% 76.9% 71.4% 28.9% 47.2%
Parent engagement with learning how to read 87.5% 74.5% 61.5% 85.7% 80.8% 76.5%
Importance of communication with children 62.5% 31.5% 46.2% 42.9% 30.8% 36.4%
Importance of following children’s progress 62.5% 60.0% 69.2% 71.4% 54.1% 60.4%
Importance of attendance 50.0% 33.7% 30.8% 42.9% 37.1% 36.3%
Importance of girls’ enrollment 12.5% 54.3% 46.2% 14.3% 56.1% 47.7%
How would you qualify the activity level of your 
school?
Very active 80.0% 39.7% 60.0% 54.5% 38.1% 45.9%
Moderately active 20.0% 58.2% 40.0% 45.5% 58.9% 52.3%
Not at all active 2.1% 3.0% 1.8%
Do you believe that the PTA was revitalized by 
DEGRA?
Yes, absolutely 36.4% 11.8% 23.5% 18.2% 11.9% 15.7%
Yes, more or less 18.2% 15.7% 17.6% 18.2% 15.0% 16.1%
No, not really 36.4% 47.6% 47.1% 45.5% 45.5% 45.9%
No, not at all 9.1% 22.6% 11.8% 18.2% 24.6% 20.5%
Does not know / no answer 2.2% 3.1% 1.9%
128
Question Female Male Djibouti 
Inner
Djibouti 
Suburbs Regions Total
Does your PTA have a school project? - YES 80.0% 48.5% 73.3% 72.7% 40.3% 53.3%
Was the school project initiated or revitalized by DEGRA? 50.0% 25.0% 27.3% 37.5% 29.8% 30.8%
What are the main objectives of the school project?
School library 25.0% 28.8% 27.3% 25.0% 29.8% 27.9%
Reading corner 50.0% 4.8% 9.1% 37.5% 8.2% 15.2%
Reading festival 25.0% 14.9% 36.4% 25.0% 17.2%
Garden 50.0% 46.6% 45.5% 37.5% 53.6% 47.4%
School cleaning 87.5% 76.7% 72.7% 87.5% 79.5% 79.2%
School playground improvement 12.5% 7.4% 27.3% 8.6%
Student tutoring 62.5% 31.8% 36.4% 25.0% 47.5% 38.8%
Canteen 12.5% 21.3% 9.1% 12.5% 29.8% 19.3%
Hygiene improvement 12.5% 14.9% 36.4% 12.5% 14.3%
Is there some NGO or CSO active in your school? - YES 63.6% 30.8% 35.3% 54.5% 31.4% 36.0%
Did you participate in DEGRA director training? 63.6% 71.0% 76.5% 72.7% 66.5% 69.9%
How useful was this training?
Very useful 71.4% 90.4% 61.5% 87.5% 100.0% 87.7%
Fairly useful 28.6% 7.2% 30.8% 12.5% 10.2%
Not at all useful 2.4% 7.7% 2.0%
Do you believe that observing and advising teachers is part 
of your role? 90.9% 98.3% 100.0% 81.8% 100.0% 97.1%
129
Annex VII: List of Services and Organizations Consulted and Planning of School Visits
Code Organization Position
01 FHI360 Chief of Party
02 FHI360 Policy Adviser
03 FHI360 Curriculum Development Specialist
04 FHI360 M&E Officer
05 FHI360 Responsible for the IR2
06 USAID Responsable Éducation
07 MENFOP-SG Secrétaire Général +CP
08 CFEEF Point Focal : Programme de formation initiale et continue des 
enseignants
09 CRIPEN Point Focal : Révision du curriculum et développement TLM
10 MENFOP-SE Point Focal : Évaluation des apprentissages et EGRA
11 MENFOP-DEP Point Focal : Équité genre et inclusivité sociale
12 MENFOP-IG Point Focal : Encadrement pédagogique des enseignants
13 MENFOP-DGE/DEP Point Focal : Renforcement des APE et CGE-Directeur des régions
14 MENFOP-Observatoire Qualité Point Focal : Développement des politiques de lecture
15 UNFD Directeur des programmes de l'UNFD
16 Paix et Lait Directeur Exécutif de Paix et Lait
17 FHI360 Finance Manager
18 FHI360 HQ FHI IR2
19 OSC HQ OSC IR2
20 STS HQ STS IR3
21 MENFOP-IG Service Éducation en Région Tadjourah
22 MENFOP-IG Service Éducation en Région Obock
23 MENFOP-IG Service Éducation en Région Ali-Sabieh
24 MENFOP-IG Service Éducation en Région Arta
25 MENFOP-Teacher Enseignants Balbala
26 MENFOP-Teacher Enseignants Djibouti-Ville
27 MENFOP-Teacher Enseignants Région Tadjourah + Directeur
28 MENFOP-Teacher Enseignants Région Obock 
29 MENFOP-Teacher Enseignants Région Ali-Sabieh
30 MENFOP-Teacher Enseignants Région Arta + Directeur
31 MENFOP-Director Directeur Balbala
130
Code Organization Position
32 MENFOP-Director Directeur Djibouti-Ville 
34 MENFOP-Director Directeur Région Obock
35 MENFOP-Director Directeur Région Ali Sabieh
37 APE Parents Djibouti-Ville
38 APE Parents Djibouti
39 APE Parents Région Tadjourah
40 APE Parents Région Obock
41 APE Parents Région Ali Sabieh
42 APE Parents Région Arta
43 World Bank Program manager
44 Unicef Program manager
46 WFP Program manager
11/9 11/10 11/11 11/14 11/15 11/16 11/17 11/18 Total
Ali Sabieh 1 1 1 1 1 5
Arta 2 2 4
Dikhil 1 1 1 1 1 5
Djibouti-Ville 6 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 29
Obock 1 1 1 1 4
Tadjourah 1 1 1 3
Total 6 6 7 7 6 6 6 6 50
131
Annex VIII: List of Documents Reviewed
Code Document description
D00 DEGRA Evaluation SOW
D00 IT Proposal DEGRA-Djibouti
D01 DEGRA Activity Annual Report FY19
D02 DEGRA Activity Annual Report FY20
D03 DEGRA Progress Quarterly Report FY19_Q2
D04 DEGRA Progress Quarterly Report FY19_Q3
D06 DEGRA Progress Quarterly Report FY20_Q1
D07 DEGRA Progress Quarterly Report FY20_Q2
D08 DEGRA Progress Quarterly Report FY20_Q3
D09 DEGRA Progress Quarterly Report FY21_Q1
D10 DEGRA Progress Quarterly Report FY21_Q2
D11 DEGRA Progress Quarterly Report FY21_Q3
D13 DEGRA Work Plan FY19
D14 DEGRA Work Plan FY20
D15 DEGRA Work Plan FY21
D16 DEGRA Barrier Analysis
D17 DEGRA Social & Behavior Change Communication Strategy
D18 DEGRA Étude Diagnostique Basée sur l'Équité Genre et l'Inclusion Sociale (EGIS)
D19 DEGRA Portfolio Review FY20
D20 DEGRA Portfolio Review Sheet FY20
D21 DEGRA Activity Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan
D22 DEGRA LOP EGRA Concept Note
D23 DEGRA Baseline EGRA Report
D24 EGRA Tool
D24 EGRA Stimuli
D25 DEGRA Award
D26 DEGRA Project Appraisal Document PAD
D27 DEGRA Concept note for IR2 community engagement
D28 DEGRA TLM Evaluation criteria
D29 DEGRA Evaluation of TLM Year 1
D30 DEGRA Evaluation of TLM Year 2
D33 Djibouti Assistance to Éducation Évaluation 2009
D34 Évaluation des Élèves de l'Année 2 en Lecture 2009
132
Code Document description
D35 Évaluation des Élèves de l'Année 2 en Lecture et Mathématiques 2010
D36 Plan d'action de l'éducation - 2017-2020
D37 MENFOP circular of January 3rd, 2019
D38 Djibouti Digital Foundations Project
D39 Reading benchmark approved
D40 Djibouti Education Program (Projet AIDE) | FHI 360
D41 L'observatoire de la qualité des enseignements Parution nº3 - Janvier 2019
D42 SCS Djibouti PRECAD
D43 Analyse du Système Éducatif de Djibouti
D44 Poverty and Equity Assessment of Djibouti
D45 DEGRA Lesson observation tool Year 1-2
D46 DEGRA Lesson observation tool Year 3
D47 DEGRA Evaluation of PTA / SMC
D48 DEGRA CAL Scope of work
D49 DEGRA List of schools EGRA 2020 & 2021
D50 DEGRA Head Teacher Training Guide
D51 DEGRA CP training Report 2020-09
D52 DEGRA Teacher Training Guide
D53 DEGRA Teacher training Écriture A1 2020-02
D54 DEGRA Teacher training TML A1 2020-08
D55 DEGRA Teacher training Lecture A1 2020-10
D56 DEGRA Teacher training Report 2020-12
D57 ANNUAIRE STATISTIQUE 2020-2021
D58 Performance Plan and Report - 2019
D59 Performance Plan and Report - 2020
D60 Niveaux fondamentaux de qualité et d'équité Question and Scoring Matrix
D61 DEGRA Community Mobilization Discussion Guide
D62 DEGRA Teacher Guide Grade 1
D63 DEGRA Teacher Guide Grade 2
D64 DEGRA Presentation
D65 DEGRA Team Proximity Training
D66 Organigram MENFOP
D67 Training Plan
D68 DEGRA Focal points
133
Code Document description
D69 EGRA Summary of Tool Adaptations
D70 TDR Comité de pilotage
D71 TDR Commission de promotion de la lecture
D72 TDR Conseillers pédagogiques
D73 Note defining CP work modalities
D74 Revised Note defining CP work modalities
D75 décret 63 Fonction des conseillers pédagogiques 
D76 Circular 662 Framing of curriculum revision
D77 Student teacher enrolment by gender
D78 Labor Management Procedures Education Emergency Response to COVID
D79 MENFOP priority framework 2021-2022
D80 World Bank-Djibouti Country Partnership Framework for the Period FY22 FY26
134
Annex IX: Evaluation Framework
Evaluation Questions Desk Review Data Collection
EQ1.a Has DEGRA been 
achieving its intended outcomes 
for reading instruction [IR-1]?
D01-D0255 DEGRA Activity Annual Report 
D03-D12 DEGRA Quarterly Progress Reports
D13-D15 Work Plans
D19-20 DEGRA Portfolio Review FY20
D21 AMELP
D22 EGRA Concept note
D23 DEGRA Baseline EGRA Report
D28-30 TLM evaluations
D36 Plan d'action de l'éducation 2017-2020
D41 L'observatoire de la qualité des 
enseignements Parution nº3 - Janvier 2019
D45-46 Lesson observation tool
D50-56 Training guides and report
D59-60 Performance Plan and Report
Quantitative: 
Indicators (Monitoring 
Data): 1 to 9
Student survey: QS30056
Teacher survey: QT500
Parent survey: QP200
Qualitative:
KII FHI360
KII MENFOP
KII CFEEF
KII CRIPEN
FGD Teachers
EQ1.b Are there 
comparisons/conclusions that 
can be discerned from students 
benefiting from DEGRA and 
those that did not? [IR1.1]
D22 EGRA Concept note
D23 DEGRA Baseline EGRA Report
D24 EGRA Tool
D34 Evaluation des Élèves de 2ème Année en 
Lecture 2009
D39 Reading Benchmark
D69 EGRA Summary of Tool Adaptations
Quantitative: 
EGRA
Teacher survey: QT500
Parent survey: QP200
Qualitative:
KII FHI360
KII Partners
KII MENFOP
KII CFEEF
KII CRIPEN FGD Parents
FGD Teachers
EQ1.c What is the impact of 
new instructional methods of 
teaching reading introduced by 
DEGRA on children’s learning 
outcomes? [IR1.1]
D22 EGRA Concept note
D23 DEGRA Baseline EGRA Report
D24 EGRA Tool
D34 Evaluation des Élèves de 2ème Année en 
Lecture 2009
D39 Reading Benchmark
D41 L'observatoire de la qualité des 
enseignements Parution nº3 - Janvier 2019
D62 DEGRA Teacher Guide Grade 1
D63 DEGRA Teacher Guide Grade 2
D65 DEGRA Team Proximity Training
D66 Student teacher enrolment by gender
D68 DEGRA Training Plan
Quantitative: 
EGRA
Student survey: QS300
Teacher survey: QT400 -
QT500
Parent survey: QP200
Qualitative:
KII FHI360
KII MENFOP
KII CFEEF
KII CRIPEN FGD Teachers
EQ1.d What is the impact of 
pedagogical supervision and 
support on children's learning 
outcomes? [IR1.2]
D50-56 Training guides and report Quantitative: 
Teacher survey: QT600
Classroom Observation
Qualitative:
KII FHI360
55 Codes reflect the ET’s cataloguing system after preliminary document review.
56 These numbers represent sections of the tools most relevant to the EQ. They may adjust slightly as tools become further refined during the 
data collector training.
135
Evaluation Questions Desk Review Data Collection
KII MENFOP
KII CFEEF
KII CRIPEN FGD Teachers
EQ1.e Has pedagogical 
supervision and support been 
sufficient in the country, 
particularly in the remote rural 
schools? [IR1.2]
D50-56 Training guides and report Quantitative: 
Teacher survey: QT600 
(crossed with location)
Classroom Observation
Qualitative:
KII FHI360
KII MENFOP
KII CFEEF
KII CRIPEN FGD Teachers
EQ2.a Has DEGRA been 
achieving its intended outcomes 
for community participation [IR￾2]?
D01-D02 DEGRA Activity Annual Report 
D03-D12 DEGRA Quarterly Progress Reports
D13-D15 Work Plans
D16 Barrier Analysis
D17 DEGRA Social & Behavior Change 
Communication Strategy
D19-20 DEGRA Portfolio Review FY20
D21 AMELP
D27 DEGRA Concept note for IR2 community 
engagement
D42 SCS Djibouti PRECAD
D47 Report on evaluation of PTA / SMC
D59-60 Performance Plan and Report
D61 DEGRA Community Mobilization 
Discussion Guide
Quantitative: 
Indicators (Monitoring 
Data): 10-18
Student survey: QS400
Teacher survey: QT300
Parent survey: QP300-400-
500-600
Qualitative:
KII FHI360
KII MENFOP
FGD Teachers
EQ2.b Has DEGRA been 
effective in mobilizing 
communities and engaging PTAs 
in reading activities? [IR2.1]
D16 Barrier Analysis
D17 DEGRA Social & Behavior Change 
Communication Strategy
D27 DEGRA Concept note for IR2 community 
engagement
D33 Djibouti Assistance to Education 
Evaluation 2009
D42 SCS Djibouti PRECAD
D47 Report on evaluation of PTA / SMC
Quantitative: 
Student survey: QS400
Teacher survey: QT300
Parent survey: QP300-400-
500-600
Qualitative:
KII FHI360
KII Partners
KII Agent
FGD Parents
FGD Teachers
EQ2.c Has DEGRA been 
effective in reinforcing NGO 
capacities to carry out reading 
activities? [IR2.2]
D16 Barrier Analysis
D17 DEGRA Social & Behavior Change 
Communication Strategy
D27 DEGRA Concept note for IR2 community 
engagement
D42 SCS Djibouti PRECAD
D47 Report on evaluation of PTA / SMC
Quantitative: 
Student survey: QS500
Teacher survey: QT300
Parent survey: QP300-400-
500-600
Qualitative:
KII FHI360
KII Partners
KII Agent
FGD Parents
FGD Teachers
136
Evaluation Questions Desk Review Data Collection
EQ3.a Has DEGRA been 
achieving its intended outcomes 
for the IR-3?
D01-D02 DEGRA Activity Annual Report 
D03-D12 DEGRA Quarterly Progress Reports
D03-D12 DEGRA Quarterly Progress Reports
D13-D15 Work Plans
D19-20 DEGRA Portfolio Review FY20
D21 AMELP
D36 Plan d'action de l'éducation 2017-2020
D37 MENFOP circular of January 3rd, 2019
D59-60 Performance Plan and Report
D70 TDR Comité́de pilotage
D71 TDR Commission de promotion de la 
lecture
D79 MENFOP priority framework 2021-2022
Quantitative: 
Indicators (Monitoring 
Data): 19 à 23
Qualitative:
KII FHI360
KII MENFOP
FGD Teachers
EQ3.b Has DEGRA been 
successful in creating and 
enabling a favorable policy 
environment to improve reading 
instruction? [IR3.2]
D18 DEGRA Étude Diagnostique Basée sur 
l'Équité Genre et l'Inclusion Sociale (EGIS)
D36 Plan d'action de l'éducation 2017-2020
D37 MENFOP circular of January 3rd, 2019
D39 Reading Benchmark
D41 L'observatoire de la qualité des 
enseignements Parution nº3 - Janvier 2019
D42 SCS Djibouti PRECAD
D47 Report on evaluation of PTA / SMC
D70 TDR Comité́de pilotage
D71 TDR Commission de promotion de la 
lecture
D72 TDR Conseiller pédagogique
D73 & D74 Note defining CP work modalities
D75 Décret 63 Fonction des conseillers 
pédagogiques 
D76 Circular 662 Framing of curriculum 
revision
Qualitative:
KII FHI360
KII Partners
KII MENFOP
EQ3.c Has DEGRA been 
effective in collaborating with 
CRIPEN, CFEEF, the Ministry’s 
cabinet through the Office of 
the Secretary General, the 
Office of the Executive 
Secretary, the Office of the 
General Inspector, and the 
Evaluation Unit? [IR3.3]
D01-D02 DEGRA Activity Annual Report 
D03-D12 DEGRA Quarterly Progress Reports
Qualitative:
KII FHI360
KII Partners
KII MENFOP
EQ4 What have been some 
primary factors that have 
contributed to success or 
presented specific challenges in 
DEGRA’s implementation? 
What alternative approaches 
could lead to better results?
D01-D02 DEGRA Activity Annual Report 
D03-D12 DEGRA Quarterly Progress Reports
Qualitative:
KII FHI360
KII Partners
KII Agents
KII MENFOP
FGD Parents
FGD Teachers
137
Evaluation Questions Desk Review Data Collection
EQ5 Do the original 
assumptions and the theory of 
change still hold? If not, what 
adaptations are needed to 
ensure that DEGRA remains on 
track to achieve its expected 
results?
D38 Djibouti Digital Foundations Project
D43 Analyse du Système Éducatif de Djibouti
Qualitative:
KII FHI360
KII Partners
KII Agents
KII MENFOP
FGD Parents
FGD Teachers
EQ6 What has the implementer 
achieved so far to ensure 
sustainability?
D01-D02 DEGRA Activity Annual Report 
D03-D12 DEGRA Quarterly Progress Reports
D13-D15 Work Plans
D19-20 DEGRA Portfolio Review FY20
Qualitative:
KII FHI360
KII Partners
KII Agents
KII MENFOP
FGD Parents
FGD Teachers
138
Annex X: Team Composition
Names Title Main Qualifications / Responsibilities
Isabelle 
McMahon
Team Leader Multilingual international development professional with more than 25 
years of experience. Expertise in qualitative and mixed-methods design 
and analysis, applied research, and promoting use of evidence-based 
findings for organizational learning and project improvement.
Experienced with planning, management, and monitoring of 
quantitative and qualitative data-collection processes integrating 
technology where effective, as well as quality-assurance procedures. 
Capacity to clearly, concisely, and convincingly express ideas and 
concepts in written, oral, and visual form. Fields of expertise include 
education, nutrition, health, WASH, governance, and economic 
development. Clients include U.S. federal agencies, non-profit 
organizations in the U.S. and overseas, foundations, international 
organizations, and donors.
For the DEGRA midterm evaluation, responsibilities include:
• Prepare the inception report, including evaluation design and 
instruments
• Perform desk review
• Pilot instruments
• Conduct training on questionnaires and observation
• Conduct KIIs and FDGs
• Lead early findings workshop
• Coordinate report writing
• Lead results presentation conference
Alice 
Michelazzi
Capacity￾Building/OD & 
M&E Expert
Experienced education M&E and capacity-building consultant with 
strong EGRA and EGMA experience. Has supported EGRA data 
collection in 15 countries in more than 20 languages. Experience in 
tools adaptation, enumerators training, supervision of data collection. 
Experience in developing MEL (Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning) 
and FOI (fidelity of implementation) frameworks for education 
interventions.
For the DEGRA midterm evaluation, responsibilities include:
• Review instruments
• Conduct training of EGRA enumerators
• Conduct KIIs and FDGs
• Co-lead early findings workshop
• Assist in report writing 
Amina Said 
Chire
Local Consultant Highly experienced consultant with nearly 15 years of experience in 
design, implementation, and research. Has evaluated projects, 
conducted studies, and is deeply familiar with the Djibouti education 
sector. Has worked with CRIPEN, the Ministry of Education, and 
trained teachers, among other responsibilities. Has extensive 
experience in data collection and analysis, publishing and editing. This 
experience has been accumulated through university teaching, 
scientific research, expertise working with international organizations 
including most UN agencies and other international development 
139
Names Title Main Qualifications / Responsibilities
agencies. Fluent in English and French. Ms. Chire currently leads a local 
research organization.
For the DEGRA midterm evaluation, responsibilities include:
• Review instruments
• Perform desk review
• Pilot instruments
• Conduct KIIs and FDGs
• Assist in report writing
Ismail 
Ahmed
Local M&E 
Expert
Highly experienced evaluator with extensive experience in systemic 
analysis, organization diagnostics, environmental and project 
evaluations, surveys management, data-collection tools, questionnaire 
development, and participatory approaches and methodologies. 
Experienced in M&E systems, plan and indicators development, 
baseline, data-collection tools, M&E guidelines and procedures update, 
quality control, knowledge management. Skilled in SPSS; fluent In 
French and English. Has a significant role in overall evaluation design, 
management of data collection, and surveys.
For the DEGRA midterm evaluation, responsibilities include:
• Review instruments
• Perform desk review
• Pilot instruments
• Conduct KIIs and FDGs
• Assist in report writing
Karla 
Giuliano 
Sarr
Researcher Has more than 10 years of experience conducting research, 
evaluation, technical assistance, and capacity building in international 
education. Areas of expertise include early-grade reading, multilingual 
education, girls’ education, education in crisis and conflict, qualitative 
and mixed-methods research. Regional expertise: Africa, Francophone 
Africa specifically. Fluent in French, native English speaker. Supports
and contributes on evaluation methods and capacity-building task 
areas.
For the DEGRA midterm evaluation, responsibilities include:
• Validate the inception report, including evaluation design and 
instruments
• Perform desk review
• Write report 
• Co-lead results presentation conference
140
Names Title Main Qualifications / Responsibilities
Michel 
Rousseau Statistician
Vast experience conducting educational assessment studies in many 
countries mainly in Africa. Has excellent knowledge and skills with 
many facets of research design, sampling, tools development, data 
analysis, and results dissemination. Also has more than 10 years of 
experience in teaching psychometrics, assessments, and quantitative 
research at university level. Supports the team in conducting analysis.
For the DEGRA midterm evaluation, responsibilities include:
• Validate evaluation design and sampling methods
• Analyze qualitative data
• Assist in report writing
DDCC&S Data 
Enumerators
For the DEGRA midterm evaluation, responsibilities include:
• Organize training
• Recruit enumerators
• Collect survey and interview data from identified participants in 
target schools and communities
• Record and report results to technical staff
141
U.S. Agency for International Development
1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20523