gpoba education annual report 2011 final

8/3/2019 GPOBA Education Annual Report 2011 FINAL

1/23

Global Partnership on Output-Based Aid

Education Program

Annual ReportProgram Year 1

School Year 2010 2011


2/23

Country Director Introduction

East Meets West Foundation (EMW) has recently completed the first year of a new educationprogram funded by the Global Partnership on Output-Based Aid (GPOBA). The GPOBAEducation program provides a tuition subsidy to poor and underprivileged grade 10 students in thepoorest provinces of Vietnam.

In the first year 7,338 grade 10 students were enrolled into the program from schools in Bac Kan,Bac Giang, Phu Tho, Quang Binh, Quang Tri, Thua Thien-Hue, Da Nang, Quang Nam, Quang Ngai, Binh Dinh, Phu Yen and Thai Binh provinces. These students were selected on the basis of meeting selection criteria; students must be from a poor or disadvantages background, must havepassed the 9th grade and have a good behavior record.

At the completion of the first year 6,935 students have successfully passed grade 10 (95%) andreceived US$699,614 in tuition subsidies. The program has had a positive effect on drop out rates

with many schools reporting a fall in the drop out rate compared to the last school year. Thenumber of drop outs from the program was 318 (4.3%) with the main reason being a poorperformance at school by the student. The drop out rate for program students of 4.3% issignificantly lower than the average drop out by students of 9.7% for the previous school year.

Feedback from the schools has been very positive, with many poor students benefiting from theincreased focus on their performance, and schools requesting to expand the program to othergrades.

For the next year of the program, the number of students will be increased to 7,843 students toensure full use of the funds available for tuition subsidies. There will be six schools leaving theprogram as they were converted to government funded public schools (so students do not need thetuition subsidy), they will be replaced by eight new schools bringing the total number of schools to66 for the programs second year.

This program is unique in that it utilizes the Output-Based Aid approach, the first time this

approach has been used in the education sector in Vietnam. Output-Based Aid is also known asperformance based aid and works by linking the payment of aid with the delivery of an output, inthis case the student performance is linked to the payment of a tuition subsidy. Schools must pre-finance the tuition fee for each participating student, and then on successful completion of the termand satisfactory attendance and behavior by the student, the school receives the tuition subsidy forthe term. The OBA approach requires the schools to actively seek to improve a students


3/23

Table of Contents

Country Director Introduction .................................................................................................. 2 Table Of Contents ..................................................................................................................... 3 List Of Acronyms ....................................................................................................................... 4 Program Summary ..................................................................................................................... 5

PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES ......................................................................................................................... 5 PROGRAM OUTLINE ...................................................................................................................................... 5 Program Implementation .......................................................................................................... 7

PLANNING ...................................................................................................................................................... 7 TRAINING P ARTNERS .................................................................................................................................... 7 S TUDENT ENROLMENTS ............................................................................................................................... 8 MONITORING & E VALUATING .................................................................................................................... 8 MEETING S TUDENT BENEFICIARIES .......................................................................................................... 9 V ISITING SCHOOLS ........................................................................................................................................ 9 R EPORT & DISBURSE .................................................................................................................................. 10

ANNUAL R EVIEW CONFERENCE ............................................................................................................... 11 Program Results ...................................................................................................................... 12 Student Drop Outs ................................................................................................................... 13 Program Challenges And Recommendations ......................................................................... 15 Concluding Remarks ............................................................................................................... 16

Annex 1: Analysis Of Program Students ................................................................................. 17 Annex 2: Student Results By School Year 1 .......................................................................... 21 Annex 3 : Students Results By Province Year 1 .................................................................... 23


4/23

List of Acronyms

CPC Communal Peoples CommitteeMOET Ministry of Education and Training DOET Department of Education and Training SPA Study Promotion AssociationDPC District Peoples Committee

EMW East Meets West FoundationGA Grant AgreementGPOBA Global Partnership for Output-Based AidIVA Independent Verification AgentMOU Memorandum of Understanding PPC Provincial Peoples CommitteePSS Professional Secondary SchoolUSS Upper Secondary School

WB World Bank OBA Output-Based AidOM Operations Manual


5/23

Program Summary

Purpose and Objectives

The GPOBA Education Program seeks to contribute to the sustainable development of a youthful,educated and skilled workforce for Vietnam by providing approximately 7,500 tuition subsidies forunderprivileged 10th grade students. The subsidy is designed to allow these students access to high

school by covering students tuition costs, with the goal of 12th grade graduation in three years.Students come from 12 of the poorest provinces in northern and central Vietnam. They areidentified and chosen based upon capacity and merit by the partner-schools and program partner -the provincial Study Promotion Association (SPA). Student progress is monitored through rigorousschool and home visits in addition to in-depth reporting from the partner-schools on a term-by-termbasis.

The program has set four clear objectives, which are to:

Increase access to and success in upper secondary education for impoverished lowersecondary school graduates in 12 provinces of Vietnam

Increase capacity of local education partners (SPAs, schools) in 12 provinces to provideupper secondary education to a wider population in a more results orientated approach

Build a more positive community attitude towards the benefits of upper secondary educationfor skilled labor in 12 provinces by 2013

By 2013 demonstrate to participants, donors, education officials, and media that the OBAmodel can enhance upper secondary education in Vietnam

Program Outline

The GPOBA Education Program provides a tuition subsidy to participating schools that pre-financethe tuition of selected impoverished students.

The schools selected to join the program are either private, semi-public schools or public schools with private fee paying students. In Vietnam, semi-public and private schools have school fees thatare at least twice as high as those in public schools, which is unaffordable to the poor. Typically,students will apply to their local public school first but if their entrance examination marks or their


6/23

academic skills, PSS education aims at preparing students for the job market in a specific profession.In the GPOBA Education Program there are 58 USS and eight PSS schools, the USS will receive aUS$90 tuition subsidy per student per year, and the PSS will receive a US$160 tuition subsidy perstudent per year (as tuition costs are higher at PSS).

To participate in the program students must have passed the ninth grade, come from adisadvantaged background (poor/nearly poor, economic hardship, ethnic minority, disabled, Agent

Orange victim, or orphaned) and have a record of good behavior at school.Once the student is accepted into the program they must meet the following criteria each schoolterm for their school to be eligible for the tuition subsidy:

minimum Grade Point Average (GPA) requirements attendance record at school of 80% or higher a satisfactory behavior record at school

Schools are required to keep records of the program students grades, attendance and behavior foreach term. Schools must also provide anonymized testing for final term exams to prevent grading bias towards program students.

To assist schools with program implementation, EMW have partnered with the Study Promotion Associations (SPA) in each province. The SPAs are government mass organizations that work toactively improve education in Vietnam. SPAs provide training to schools and support theenrollment of students, as well as providing individual support to students. SPAs are not-for-profitorganizations.

At the completion of each school term the school completes a School Term Report and forwards arecord of student results to EMW and GPOBA complete with a request for tuition subsidy disbursement. Before the tuition subsidy is disbursed, an Independent Verification Agent (IVA),contracted by GPOBA, will audit a sample of schools and students results and verify the request iscorrect. Only on successful completion of the audit will the disbursement be provided to theparticipating schools.

Students that fail or drop out of the program can be replaced by new students at the beginning of the following school year. Students can also sit re-sit exams at the end of the school year for subjectsin which they have performed poorly.


7/23

Program ImplementationEast Meets West FoundationGPOBA Education Program.20 years, developing a vast poassistance to children with disa

EMW began its implementat

implementation of the progra

Figure 2: Pr

Planning The first phase of implementathe following key program deli

Approval of Operation Approval of key progr

and Disbursement Agr Signing of MOU agree Development of progr Preparation of training

Training Partners The GPOBA Education PrOutput-Based Aid approachschools and studentsperformance criteria before tuipaid. For this reason it is criticsuccess that program partnSPAs) understand the progrclearly. To ensure this, EMW to all 69 participating schooPromotion Associations at

(EMW) have been appointed as the impleEMW has carried out numerous programs intfolio of completed projects on poverty redubilities, and promotion of general education.

on of the GPOBA Education Program in

can be separated into six phases as shown in

ogram implementation phases with timeline Y

tion was planning for the program. This invoerables:

al Licenses for all 12 program provincesm documents with the donor (Operations Maeement)

ents with program partners (SPA and schoolm procedures and documentsmaterials

gram utilizes anand requires thatmeet stringenttion subsidies areal to the programrs (schools andam requirementsprovided training ls and 12 Study

four different

entation agent for the Vietnam for more thantion, public healthcare,

early April 2010. The

Figure 2.

ear 1

lved the completion of

ual, Grant Agreement

)


8/23

Student Enrolments Student enrolments commenced at thestart of the school year (September 2010)

with a target number of 7,562 students.During the enrolment period, five schoolsdropped out of the program as they wereconverted from private to government

funded public schools and thus no longermet the program requirements. This wasunfortunate; however three new schools

were introduced to the program asreplacements. At the end of theenrolment period 7,330 students weresuccessfully enrolled; 6,370 USS studentsand 960 PSS students. At the end of the

first term a further 5 schools dropped outof the program as they were converted togovernment funded public schools.Fortunately, five private schools in ThaiBinh province were able to join the program so that for Term 2 there were 7,338 students enrolled;6,378 USS students and 960 PSS students.

To enroll into the program students and their families needed to complete a Student HouseholdForm, provide a certified letter of poverty status, and sign a letter of commitment to the program.

Monitoring & Evaluating During the first year of the program, EMW

visited all 69 participating schools and 945program students (13% of beneficiaries).During these visits we were able to review the students application, verify they met the

program requirements and encourage thestudent to study well at school. We alsoinspected the facilities at the schools and

were able to give advice to schools aboutprogram requirements and implementation,and prepare them for the Independent

Figure 4: Students in computer class at Nguyen BinhKhiem, Phu Tho


9/23

Meeting Student Beneficiaries During school and household visits, we have had the opportunity to meet many students and theirfamilies and listen to their stories. Two students share their stories with us below.

Bac Giang Province Nguyen Thi Chi

In Bac Giang province we met with high school student Nguyen Thi

Chi. Chis parents are divorced and both have left her. Chis fathermoved to south Vietnam with his new wife, though he sometimescomes back to Bac Giang to visit her. Chi lives with her grandparentsnow, but they have a low income and are considered nearly poor.

After finishing 9th grade, Chi went to work in a garment factory. Hergrandparents could not afford to send her to upper secondary school.

Then she heard about the GPOBA Education program and is now enrolled as a 10th grade student. She wants to finish high school and if

possible attend university.Nguyen Thi Chis story has been featured in a video made by the World Bank and can be seen here:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFKPjr6606E&noredirect=1

Binh Dinh Province- Pham Viet Duc

In Binh Dinh province we met with high school

student Pham Viet Duc. Ducs father died four yearsago and he lives with his mother and one sister who isin the 9th grade. Ducs family is considered nearly poor.His mother earns about US$10/month by producing

white wine. They have to rent land for farming andtheir house is old and in bad condition. Duc alsosuffers from chronic bronchitis. In the 9th grade he

was a good student and now he is continuing onto the

10th grade with the program tuition subsidy. Hismother wants him to receive as much education aspossible.

Visiting Schools One repeated observation noted during our field


10/23

On one field trip we visited a nearby public school and the difference between facilities was very obvious. Private and semi-private schools are predominately funded by the collection of school feesfrom parents. The schools are located in poor communities and schools cannot set schools fees toohigh or families will be unable to afford schooling for their children. As a result the schools do nothave much money for spending on facilities other than basic services the school must provide (clean

water, electricity etc).

Report & Disburse At the end of each school term, all schoolssend a School Term Report with disbursementrequest to EMW and GPOBA. A majoractivity in this phase is the audit of the schoolsand students by the Independent Verification

Agent (IVA). The IVA Auditors check the students

application including certified letter of poverty status, visit a sample of students householdsand check exam papers grades against theschools records and reports.

This year the auditors visited all 69participating schools and 241 studentsh h ld h d h b

Figure 7: Laboratory at nearby publicschool

Figure 8: Typical laboratory equipmentstorage room at a private school


11/23

Annual Review Conference At the conclusion of the school year, an Annual Conference was held for the program in Da Nang on 28th July, 2011. The Conference was attended by 152 participants from schools, SPAs, NationalSPA, MOET, EMW and IVA.

The objectives of the conference were to: Review GPOBA Education Program

Program Implementation Year 1 Student and Program Results Strength, weaknesses,

challenges Improvements, solutions

Meet and share ideas with otherparticipants, discuss the program

challenges and makerecommendations during a groupdiscussion

Discuss Work Plan for 2011-12

Presentations and speeches were deliveredby:

o Mr Vu Dinh Chuan, Director Of Upper Secondary Education Ministry Of Education And Training

o Prof. Dr. Tran Xuan Nhi, Vice President of SPA of Viet Namo Minh Chau Nguyen, Country Director EMW o Prof. Dr. Dao Thai Lai, Independent Verification Agento Nguyen Ngoc Minh, Principal, The He Moi School, Hue Provinceo Catherine Ganley, Hoang Ngoc Tung , Nguyen Thi Kim Hong, Ha Thi Thu Huong,

GPOBA Education Program Team, EMW

During the conference, schools and SPAs highlighted program challenges and put forthrecommendations for improving the program in the second year. These will be discussed later in thisreport.

Figure 10: Group discussions at the AnnualConference


12/23

Program Results At the completion of the first year, 95 % (6,935) of program students successfully passed grade 10and received US$699,614 in tuition subsidies. The program has had a positive effect on drop outrates, with approximately 70% of schools reporting a fall in the drop out rate compared to theprevious school year. The number of drop outs from the program was 318 (4.3%), with the mainreason being a poor performance at school by the student. The drop out rate for program studentsof 4.3% is significantly lower than the average drop out by students at participating schools of 9.7%for the previous school year.

The results for Year 1 are summarized below in Table 1.

Table 1: Student Results Summary Year 1, 2010-11

School Type No of students Term 1

No of students Term 2

No of studentsPass Term 1

No of studentsPass Annual

% Drop out of school

USS 6370 6378 524882%

608095%

2263.5%

PSS 960 960 90294%

85589%

929.6%

TOTAL 7330 7338 615084%

693595%

3184.3%

Every USS student in the program that met the program requirements received $90 per year; andevery PSS students received $160 per year. In year 1 of the program, a total of US$699,614 worth of tuition subsidies were paid to program beneficiaries as detailed in Table 2.

Table 2: Tuition Subsidy Payments Summary Year 1, 2010-11

School Type No of students Term 1

No of students Term 2

TuitionSubsidy Term 1

TuitionSubsidy Term 2

Total TuitionSubsidy Year 1

USS 6370 6378 $240,715 $315,477 $556,192

PSS 960 960 $74,371 $69,051 $143,422


13/23

Student Drop OutsIn the final year reports, all scof school and included the rereason provided (37%) was the

Figure 11:

When discussing with schoolidentified the poor quality of poor LSS education makes itUpper Secondary Schools. Asmore likely to drop out of sch

Other reasons why studentssupport their families (22%), istill some families that are infamily income. The next mostnot interested in continuing thin peer groups that all drop ou

In addition to reporting on r

0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%40%

% r e a s o n g i v e n

R

ools reported on the number of program stuasons why. There were 318 student drop oupoor performance of the student at school.

Reasons for program student drop outs Yea

the reasons for the poor performance of ducation at the Lower Secondary School (LSifficult for students to transition to the higha result, these students have difficulty passinol.

ropped out of schools included students hadicating that even with the assistance of the tpoor economic situation requiring the stud

common reason provided as a poor attitudeir studies. Some schools have reported studof school and display little to no interest in st

asons for drop outs, schools also reported

37%

22% 21%

8% 6% 6%

asons for drop outs Year 1

dents that dropped outs (4.3%) and the main

1

tudents, many schoolsS) level (Grade 6-9). Ar level of education intheir subjects and are

ving to go to work touition subsidy there arent to contribute to theby the student who is

nts who are socializing dying.

on drop outs rates for


14/23

From these results, it is evident that GPOBA program students have a drop out rate less than half of all Grade 10 students at participating program schools. There are two reasons for this:

Schools are more focused on student performance schools ensure students attend tutoring,track their grades and performance during the year and encourage them to study to stay inthe GPOBA program

Schools select competent students for the GPOBA program schools must bear the risk with the Output Based Approach; payment of the tuition subsidy is to passing students only.For this reasons schools will more likely select students that can meet the programrequirements and are interested in furthering their education.


15/23

Program Challenges and RecommendationsDuring the first year of the program there were many challenges faced by all program partners andparticipants. The Annual Conference provided a chance for these issues to be discussed between allprogram participants. A summary of the key issues and the solutions and recommendations areshown in Table 3.

Table 4: Challenges and Recommendation Summary Year 1, 2010-11

Challenge Details RecommendationsPoverty Certificationdifficult for somestudents

Difficult for students to obtain acertified poverty letter in someprovinces. This can be due toconcerns by government authoritiesabout certifying too many families aspoor/nearly poor and the impact ongovernment benefits/spending.

In these circumstances allow theschool to certify poverty statusaccording to criteria set by EMW.

The school must visit studentshousehold to verify. EMW tocheck also.

Students performpoorly at school

Students have poor quality educationin lower secondary school and findGrade 10 difficult.

Schools should ensure students canattend tutoring classes when they start Grade 10. Schools advised tobe more proactive in assisting thesestudents with their study and focuson learning gaps. EMW to focusschool visits on students and theirfamilies and encouraging studentsto study well

Schools change topublic school andleave the program

Schools operating status changes togovernment funded public schoolsand are no longer eligible toparticipate in the program and donot require tuition subsidies forstudents

These schools have been replaced with private schools and all new schools in the program to beprivate.

Disbursementpayments not onschedule

Disbursement payments late toschools and SPAs

New disbursement schedule for Year 2 with all audits plannedcarefully at the start of the year.Using experience of Year 1 shouldsee an improvement in thedisbursement timing in Year 2


16/23

Challenge Details RecommendationsSchool facilities needimprovement

Schools in poor areas lack goodquality facilities (libraries, computers,laboratory equipment)

EMW have been able to accessfunds through our donors to help

with improving school facilities insome schools. Also schools can usethe GPOBA education program toincrease student numbers at theschool and therefore increaseschools income for use onfacilities.

Concluding Remarks The first year of the GPOBA Education Program has benefited 6,935 Grade 10 students who may have otherwise dropped out of high school without the assistance of the program. An impressive

95% of students have passed Grade 10 with only 4.3% dropping out. This is an improvement on thedropout rates for Grade 10 students at the participating schools in the previous year.

Feedback from the schools has been very positive, with many poor students benefiting from theincreased focus on their performance, and schools requesting to expand the program to othergrades.

Our main challenge for the second year is to improve the performance of the program students.

EMW will continue to visit schools and students, and we will work with schools to encourage thestudents to study well at school. Our aim for the next school year is that the number of passing student will be great than 95% and drop outs lower than 4.3%.

One of EMWs additional challenges is to improve the timing of payments to the schools for tuitionsubsidies. With the experience of the first year and careful scheduling this will be possible for Year 2.

For the second year of the program, the number of students will be increased to 7,843 students to

ensure full use of the funds available for tuition subsidies. There will be six schools leaving theprogram as they were converted to government funded public schools (so students do not need thetuition subsidy), they will be replaced by eight new schools bringing the total number of schools to66 for the programs second year.

We look forward to bringing the benefits of the program to these new schools and students and our


17/23

ANNEX 1: Analysis of program studentsProgram beneficiaries are located in twelve provinces, including three provinces in Northernmountainous area and eight others located alongside the Central Coast and Truong Son MountainRange of Vietnam. The provinces are Bac Kan, Bac Giang, Phu Tho, Quang Binh, Quang Tri, Thua

Thien-Hue, Da Nang, Quang Nam, Quang Ngai, Binh Dinh, Phu Yen and Thai Binh.


18/23

In the first year 7,338 studeallocation of students and scho

Each school was set a targetFeasibility Study. These numabove and below the target nu

Student Analysis by Entry CProgram beneficiaries are studpoor, economic hardship, or f minority. The classification

Vietnam based on average houDecision 1752 CT/TTg - 21.0

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

162

864

S t u

d e n t N u m

b e r s

St

No. of Schools 1 5

nts were successfully enrolled from 64 parols per province is shown in Figure 1:

number of students to enrol based on theers were adjusted during the enrolment periber.

iteriaents from impoverished households that are crom disadvantage backgrounds such as disablf poor and nearly poor is clearly defined

sehold income per family member per month.2010

Urban (averageincome per person, permonth in one

Rural (avera per person, pin one house

1076

798

495554

170

752

1020

dent Numbers by Province

6 8 6 4 3 5 8

icipating schools. The

results of the programod as schools enrolled

lassified as poor, nearly ed, orphaned or ethnicy the Government of

s shown below.

e incomeer monthhold)

1161

278

16 2


19/23

in the community, authoritiesfrom the community, or famildeath or illness in the family hardship by the local authority

The majority of students (93%are from disadvantaged backg breakdown of the students by

Note there are also three stude visibly display on the graph.

The majority of ethnic minoritand Phu Tho (36) provinces. TCor, Bana, Hon and HRo ethethnic minority households.

do not want families using the certificationies are recently poor or nearly poor due to a ). In these cases we allowed families to be

and asked the SPA to verify these cases were

) are from economically disadvantaged househrounds such as ethnic minorities, disabled ontry criteria is shown below:

nts that are Agent Orange affected (0.04%), a

y students in the program are from Ban Kanhese students are from Tay, Hmong, Dao, Nnic groups. In Bac Kan province 92% of pro

Econ Hardship

33%

Orph4%

Poor25%

early Poor

35%

tudents by Entry Criteria

to claim other benefitsunfortunate event (eg

certified as economicsuitable.

olds; the remaining 7%orphaned students. A

percentage too small to

(149), Quang Nam (41)ng, San Chi, Ca Dong,ram students are from

Disabled0.4%

thnic Minority

3.0%n


20/23

Student Analysis by gender The GPOBA Education program sets no targets or requirements for the gender make up of studentbeneficiaries. Of the final students enrolments, 56% of students are male and 44% of students arefemale.

# Province Enrolled # MaleStudents

# FemaleStudents

01 Bac Kan 162 118 (73%) 44 (27%)02 Bac Giang 864 492 (57%) 372 (43%)03 Phu Tho 1076 630 (59%) 446 (41%)04 Quang Binh 170 110 (65%) 60 (35%)05 Quang Tri 495 290 (59%) 205 (41%)06 Thua Thien-Hue 554 353 (64%) 201 (36%)07 Da Nang 170 128 (75%) 40 (24%)08 Quang Nam 752 506 (67%) 246 (33%)09 Quang Ngai 1020 467 (46%) 553 (54%)10 Binh Dinh 1161 545 (47%) 616 (54%)11 Phu Yen 278 152 (55%) 126 (45%)12 Thai Binh 636 285 (45%) 351 (55%)

TOTAL 7338 4076 3260PERCENTAGE 56% 44%

At Professional Secondary Schools that offer subjects in electronics and computing there are ahigher percentage of males taking these classes. This increases the percentage of males in theprogram in provinces with Professional Secondary Schools, in particularly for Quang Binh, DaNang, Hue, Quang Nam, and Quang Tri.

In Bac Kan province, where there is the highest concentration of ethnic minority students, there is alarger percentage of males (73%) to females (27%) in the program. In ethnic minority communities

women marry when they are younger and tend to leave school early as a result.


21/23


22/23

Page 22 of 23

ProvinceSchool

No. School NameEnrolledTerm 1

EnrolledTerm 2

# DropOut

Year 1

AvgGPA

Term 1

PassTerm

1%PassTerm 1

AvgGPA

AnnualPass

Annual%PassAnnual

AverageDays

Absent09-02 THPT Bn Cng Chu Vn An 195 195 5 5.97 168 86% 6.31 190 97% 0.6009-03 THPT Bn Cng Lng Th Vinh 137 137 9 5.16 31 23% 5.23 124 91% 2.6209-04 THPT Dn Lp Hong Vn Th 24 24 0 6.01 24 100% 6.11 24 100% 0.5909-05 THPT Bn Cng Nguyn Cng Phng

81 81 4 5.42 61 75% 5.72 74 91% 2.63

09-06 THPT Trng nh 83 83 0 5.64 83 100% 5.67 83 100% 0.5909-07 THPT Bn Cng Nguyn Cng Tr 181 181 9 4.81 49 27% 5.37 159 88% 2.6109-08 THPT Bn Cng L Qun 119 119 3 5.73 56 47% 5.97 115 97% 0.60

Binh Dinh 10-01 THPT Bnh Dng 106 106 2 5.58 66 62% 5.83 99 93% 0.0810-02 THPT Ng My 62 62 3 5.65 37 60% 6.04 57 92% 2.4710-03 THPT Nguyn Hu 97 97 6 6.00 73 75% 6.06 87 90% 2.5610-04 THPT Tam Quan 106 106 8 5.23 58 55% 4.99 87 82% 0.6610-05 THPT Nguyn Tr ng T 50 50 4 5.56 35 70% 5.90 46 92% 4.25

10-06 THPT Nguyn B nh Khim 125 125 4 5.23 71 57% 5.72 121 97% 0.1810-07 THPT Phan Bi Chu 112 112 7 5.48 69 62% 6.15 101 90% 1.2410-08 THPT Trn Cao Vn 71 71 2 5.65 43 61% 6.43 69 97% 7.5410-09 THPT Nguyn Thi H c 90 90 2 6.02 78 87% 6.03 87 97% 3.1910-10 THPT Ha Bnh 43 43 0 5.77 39 91% 5.84 42 98% 2.7410-11 THPT Nguyn Diu 35 35 4 5.05 11 31% 5.65 31 89% 3.1810-12 THPT An Lng 51 51 3 4.78 16 31% 5.16 43 84% 0.7410-13 THPT Ty Sn 42 42 1 4.80 9 21% 5.11 37 88% 3.2610-14 THPT Trn Quang Di u 66 66 5 4.60 12 18% 4.93 56 85% 2.30

10-15 THPT s 2 Ph Ct 71 71 1 5.66 59 83% 5.83 70 99% 1.1410-16 THPT S 2 Tuy Ph c 34 34 6 5.25 21 62% 5.57 26 76% 3.70Phu Yen 11-01 THPT Dn Lp Duy Tn 153 153 8 6.18 141 92% 6.52 143 93% 6.0

11-02 THPT Dn Lp Nguy n B nh Khim 125 125 12 5.83 110 89% 6.07 113 100% 5.1Thai Binh 12-01 THPT Dn lp Dim i n 0 247 0 6.25 247 100% 3.6

12-02 THPT Nguyn Hu 0 156 0 6.16 156 100% 2.512-03 THPT Trn Th Dung 0 102 0 5.98 101 99% 1.712-04 THPT Nguyn Cng Tr 0 65 0 6.04 65 100% 3.812-05 THPT Nguyn Thi Bnh 0 66 0 6.33 66 100% 4.2

PROGRAM TOTAL 7330 7338 318 5.81 6150 84% 5.95 6935 95% 3.64PERCENTAGE 4.3% 84% 95%*PSS schools absenteeism recorded by subject, not day so not shown here


23/23

Page 23 of 23

ANNEX 3 : Students results by province Year 1

ProvinceEnrolledTerm 1

EnrolledTerm 2

Student dropouts Year 1

Student dropout %

AvgGPA

Term 1Pass

Term 1%PassTerm 1

AvgGPA

AnnualPass

Annual%PassAnnual

Avgdays

absentBac Kan 162 162 8 4.9% 5.78 162 100% 5.88 154 95% 5.2Bac Giang 864 864 27 3.1% 6.08 848 98% 6.02 836 97% 2.80Phu Tho 1076 1076 21 2.0% 6.30 1022 95% 6.40 1051 98% 6.32Quang Binh 798 170 4 2.4% 6.23 741 93% 5.59 163 96% 0.90Quang Tri 495 495 57 11.5% 5.71 405 82% 5.96 439 89% 4.00Thua Thien-Hue 554 554 31 5.6% 5.97 540 97% 5.95 523 94% 5.34Da Nang 170 170 27 15.9% 5.87 142 84% 5.71 143 84% 7.29Quang Nam 752 752 35 4.7% 6.25 683 91% 6.47 707 94% 4.14Quang Ngai 1020 1020 30 2.9% 5.67 659 65% 5.88 969 95% 2.07Binh Dinh 1161 1161 58 5.0% 5.42 697 60% 5.74 1059 91% 2.21

Phu Yen 278 278 20 7.2% 6.04 251 90% 6.32 256 92% 5.60Thai Binh 0 636 0 0.0% 6.10 635 100% 3.1PROGRAMTOTAL 7330 7338 318 5.94 6150 84% 6.00 6935 95% 4.17

gpoba education annual report 2011 final

Documents