Last in Line, Last in School 2009

Transcription

1 Last in Line, Last in School 9 Donor trends in meeting education needs in countries affected by conflict and emergencies Rewrite the Future

2 Last in Line, Last in School 9 Donor trends in meeting education needs in countries affected by conflict and emergencies

3 The International Save the Children Alliance is the world s leading independent children s rights organisation, with members in 8 countries and operational programmes in more than 1.We fight for children s rights and deliver lasting improvements to children s lives worldwide. This report was written by Victoria Turrent. Management and oversight of the report was led by Janice Dolan. Research and analysis were supported by Gowri Vijayakumar and Joe Collenette. Special thanks for their comments, guidance and inputs are due to Allison Anderson, Kitty Arrie, Elena Avenati, Saïd Belkachla, Laura Brannelly, Peter Buckland, Tanya Cox, Christa Dammermann, Emily Echessa, Olga Gormalova, Joe Hall, Sharyn Hanly, Malin Hansson, Bo Tovby Jørgensen, Kim Kerr, Edilberto Loaiza, Lucia Losoviz, Anne Haaranen, Birgit Lundbak, Daniel Meienberger, Rachel Maranto, Dina Morad, Kate Moriarty, Albert Motivans, Fosca Nomis, Kjersti Okkelmo, Koarai Rie, Marinke Ros, Andrea Sharrock, Trond Sæbø Skarpeteig, David Skinner, Marianne Victor and Ravi Wickremasinghe. Save the Children is a member of the Global Campaign for Education. Published by International Save the Children Alliance Cambridge House Cambridge Grove London W LE UK First published 9 International Save the Children Alliance 9 Registered Charity No. 178 This publication is copyright, but may be reproduced by any method without fee or prior permission for teaching purposes, but not for resale. For copying in any other circumstances, prior written permission must be obtained from the publisher, and a fee may be payable. Cover picture: Children sit in what remains of a classroom in Muza Harabad, Pakistan, after their school was hit by an earthquake. (Photo: Tom Pietrasik) Edited by Frances Ellery Typeset by Grasshopper Design Company Printed by Page Bros (Norwich) Ltd Printed on recycled paper

4 Contents Abbreviations and acronyms Executive summary iv vi 1 Introduction 1 Aid, education and conflict-affected fragile states () 3 Education : continue to miss out 3 Education falls short of requirements Education still not a priority for donor investment in 8 Towards a new architecture for 9 3 Education in emergencies 11 Humanitarian funding for education falls short of need 11 Donors still give education a low priority in emergencies 13 Conclusion 1 Recommendations 1 Bibliography 17 Endnotes 18 Appendix 1: Methodology 1 Appendix : Donor profiles Appendix 3: Comparative table assessing donor performance and progress 37

5 Abbreviations and acronyms CAP CERF CHF CRS DAC DFID EC ECHO EFA ERF FTI G8 GFE GNI IASC INEE LICs MDG OCHA ODA OECD UN UNESCO UNICEF UPE Conflict-affected fragile states Consolidated Appeals Process Central Emergency Response Fund Common Humanitarian Fund Creditor Reporting System Development Assistance Committee Department for International Development (of the UK) European Commission European Community Humanitarian Office Education for All Emergency Response Fund Fast Track Initiative Group of Eight Global Fund for Education Gross National Income Inter-Agency Standing Committee Inter-agency Network for Education in Emergencies Low-income countries Millennium Development Goal Middle-income countries Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs Official development assistance Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development United Nations United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation United Nations Children s Fund Universal primary education iv

6 ANNA KARI/SAVE THE CHILDREN Mary, 1, lost her father and uncle during the war in Liberia. Now she s a student at Zeah Town School, which Save the Children UK supports. During the war, the fighters burned our houses and killed my father and my uncle. My mother and I ran away to the Ivory Coast.We got lost on the way and walked in the bush for 1 days.we only had leaves to eat. It is still hard for me to think about that. My mother lives in Monrovia now, so I m staying with my auntie. She sells pepper soup to earn money. I help her in the evenings so she can make more money. I started school in [at the age of eight]. I still think about my father and my uncle and I feel sad. But when I m at school, I feel very happy about learning new things and I enjoy playing with my friends. I hope that school will help me to forget the hard times I ve had. I am thinking a lot about my future nowadays I want to become a doctor. v

7 Executive summary This third annual Last in Line, Last in School report examines recent trends in donor support for education for children living in conflict-affected fragile states () and those caught up in emergencies. Its broad conclusion is that, although donors have increased their focus on meeting the education needs of children in these countries and situations, there is still a long way to go. If trends continue, will not receive the levels of basic education needed to achieve the education Millennium Development Goal (MDG) of universal primary education (UPE) until 3, well beyond the 1 deadline. Education is recognised as one of the most vital investments a government can make. As well as being every child s right, it has a crucial role to play in safeguarding children, empowering women, promoting democracy and protecting the environment. It is essential for the recovery and development of. Regardless of this critical role, on average between and 7, received just over a quarter of basic education, despite being home to more than half million of the world s 7 million out-of-school children. Basic education commitments to increased marginally from $.9 billion in to $1.bn in 7 well below the estimated $.bn required annually to achieve UPE in these countries. It is staggering that such a small proportion of global education continues to be directed to those countries most at risk of failing to achieve the goal. Furthermore, of total allocated to, on average just % went to education, compared to 1% in other low-income countries (LICs). This suggests that education is not seen by donors as a priority for investment in. While the demand for investment in governance and infrastructure is inevitably higher in, and this is critical for enabling wider education reforms to reach remote schools, it is clear that not enough attention is being p to addressing the immediate educational needs of conflict-affected populations, where one in three primary-aged children is out of school. Education is now more widely recognised as a component of humanitarian. Financing of education in emergencies rose from $17 million in 7 to $3m in 8. However, less than half 8% of requests for education funding in humanitarian crises in the Consolidated Appeals Process (CAP), through which the majority of humanitarian is allocated, were met in 8. Too few donors have committed themselves at a policy and budgetary level to providing education in situations where there is a lack of will and/or capacity to respond to education needs, or as a component of humanitarian response. Only half of the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) donors have policy commitments to providing education in countries affected by conflict and fragility, and only five have included education in their emergency strategies. A far greater commitment to meeting the educational needs of children in is needed if UPE is to be achieved by 1. This will require: greater recognition of the important role education can play in establishing strong state structures in a coordinated effort by all donors to deliver to education in these countries a commitment to initiate and restore education services as part of humanitarian response support for mechanisms that are appropriate to the complex development environments of. vi

8 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Finally, it will require an abrupt increase in the amount of education directed to and those countries affected by emergencies. This needs to address short-term education needs, and be sustained over the long term, for rebuilding institutions and systems. Reaffirming commitment to the MDGs and maintaining flows that are consistent with them is vital in the current climate of global financial instability, especially in those less able to withstand economic shocks. The future of children living in and emergencies must not be jeopardised by the failure of the international community to keep its promise to provide primary education for every child, no matter where they live. Save the Children, therefore, calls on all donors to act now to: 1. Increase long-term predictable for education in This requires donors to: ensure funding is equitable, based on need, with at least % of new basic education commitments going to increase basic education to meet the $9bn annual external financing requirement for achieving good quality UPE prioritise education in, ensuring that at least 1% of ODA in is allocated to education meet the Education for All-Fast Track Initiative (EFA-FTI) financing gaps and ensure adequate funding of the FTI s Education Transition Fund.. Ensure that education needs in emergency situations are met This requires donors to: establish policies on education in emergencies that ensure education is an integral part of humanitarian response allocate a minimum of.% of humanitarian to education to meet education funding requirements in emergency situations support coordination for education in humanitarian response through the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) Education Cluster. vii

9 Country Number of primary-aged children out of school Afghanistan 1,81, Conflict-affected fragile states Angola 8, Burundi 3, Cambodia 13, Central African Republic 37, Chad 1,18, Colombia 37, Côte d Ivoire 1,1, Democratic Republic,3, of Congo Eritrea 38, Ethiopia 3,71, Guinea 389, Haiti 7, Iraq 8, Liberia 3, Myanmar (Burma) 1, Nepal 7, Nigeria 8,97, Pakistan,81, Republic of Congo 3, Rwanda 33, Sierra Leone 8, Somalia 1,8, Sri Lanka 1, Sudan,798, Timor Leste 7, Uganda 1,18, Zimbabwe 81, TOTAL 39,, Conflict-affected fragile states Source: UNESCO, 8; UNICEF Child Info 1

10 1 Introduction Remarkable gains towards universal primary education (UPE) have been made in many of the world s poorest countries since the UN General Assembly adopted the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in. However, conflict-affected fragile states () remain the biggest threat to achieving UPE by 1. Currently, more than half some million 3 of the world s 7 million out-of-school children live in countries scarred by current or recent conflict, many with governments unwilling or unable to deliver basic services, or which are struggling to cope in the aftermath of emergencies. Access to good quality education in such situations is critical to the wellbeing of children and young people. Children s right to education, and the need for continuity of education, do not lapse during crises or displacement (United Nations, 7). Indeed, in these circumstances education is a lifeline. Research has shown that in emergency situations, safe, good quality education is central to providing a protective environment for children affected by traumatic events (Aguilar and Retamal, 9). In post-conflict situations, reconstruction and reformation of the education system are increasingly viewed as essential strategic elements in reducing the risk of a country relapsing into conflict (Buckland, ). Getting children back to school is widely viewed as a quick win that yields tangible benefits enhancing peace and signalling prospects for the future as well as contributing to longer-term economic growth and political stability. However, government resources are often too stretched between competing sectors to meet education demands. International assistance therefore plays a pivotal role in improving performance and progress towards providing UPE. Support for education in has been galvanised through an increased academic and policy focus, including through Save the Children s Rewrite the Future campaign, and: the Inter-agency Network for Education in Emergencies (INEE) the designation of education as a UN cluster in humanitarian response the Education for All-Fast Track Initiative (EFA-FTI) plans for an Education Transition Fund (ETF) to support education in fragile contexts the UN General Assembly Debate on Education in Emergencies, raising awareness among Member States that education in emergencies is a crucial lifesaving intervention with implications for the peace and prosperity of societies. However, this increased attention has not been reflected adequately in funding levels. Despite recent increases, for education in remains pitifully inadequate and far from the levels required to meet the educational rights and needs of children who live in. Too few donors have committed themselves at a policy and budgetary level to education in these countries, or as a component of humanitarian response. Meeting the educational needs of children in is ultimately dependent on overall funding levels as well as on more innovative ways of delivering. Most donors continue to fall short of their commitment to increase official development assistance (ODA) flows to.7% of Gross National Income (GNI), and must make unprecedented increases to meet the targets they set themselves for achieving annual commitments of $13bn 7 by 1 (UNESCO, 8). 1

11 LAST IN LINE, LAST IN SCHOOL 9 In the current global financial crisis, there is increased pressure on budgets. Many low-income countries, including which are highly dependent on external assistance are facing an even more uncertain future. Already the crisis is hitting export revenues and flows of private investment, remittances and other income to developing countries (OECD, 8). Millions of people are facing steep oil and food price rises. By the end of 1, it is estimated that 9 million more people will be living in extreme poverty as a result of the financial crisis. 8 It is much harder for to withstand external shocks such as the current financial crisis. Governments are even less likely to invest in services, including education, and families are forced to make tough choices. As parents lose jobs, even those children already receiving an education are being pulled out of school to earn money for the family. 9 Reaffirming commitment to the MDGs and maintaining flows is, therefore, vital in the current climate of global financial instability. Some progress, but still last in line In 7, Save the Children began to monitor education flows to, and as part of humanitarian response. This 9 Last in Line, Last in School report reflects on progress made so far, drawing comparisons with previous years and determining recent trends in the allocation of education. Education flows are analysed within a needs-based framework, exploring the funding situation for and emergencies in particular. The report demonstrates that education continues to fall short of what is required to achieve UPE by 1, and that while funding for has improved in recent years, it is not enough to meet pressing educational needs in those countries. Significantly, there needs to be greater recognition of the important role education can play in establishing strong state structures in. Donors must make an urgent coordinated effort to deliver to meet education needs in these countries, and to establish an architecture that is geared towards quick and flexible disbursement and building administrative capacity. The report also highlights recent shifts in support for education during emergencies. Gradually, education s key role as an integral part of humanitarian response is being accepted, as reflected in increased funding. However, many donors still do not have policies in place to ensure that education is a central component of their emergency. As a result, education funding during humanitarian crises continues to fall far short of what is needed. All children have the right to education, regardless of their circumstances. With one in three children in still out of school, and in light of the current financial crisis, donors must make a coordinated and committed effort to ensure that what gains have been made are not lost, and that millions more children are not denied an education. Save the Children calls on all donors to increase long-term predictable to meet the education financing requirements of, and to ensure that all education needs in emergency situations are fulfilled.

12 Aid, education and conflict-affected fragile states This chapter looks at recent trends in education funding, and at what progress has been made since the first Last in Line, Last in School report (Save the Children, 7). It makes comparisons between the volumes of education that are committed to conflict-affected fragile states () and other low-income countries (LICs), and highlights where donors need to do more to achieve universal primary education (UPE) by 1. 1 Full details of the data sources, limitations and methodology can be found in Appendix 1. Individual donor analysis and profiles, with a summary of key recommendations by donor, are in Appendix. A table illustrating individual donor performance and progress since the 7 report can be found in Appendix 3. Education : continue to miss out Recent trends: While education commitments to have risen, their share of the global education envelope remains low at 1%. Based on current trends, basic education commitments to will not reach the US$. billion 11 required annually to achieve UPE until 3. Action required: Increase significantly volumes of education directed to, as well as increasing their share of the global education envelope. Education to low-income countries should be distributed equitably, according to need, between and other LICs. A minimum of % of all new basic education funding should be allocated to. Between 1999 and 7, annual allocations to education increased from US$.7 billion to $.bn in, and from $1.9bn to $.7bn in other Figure 1: Education and basic education commitments to and other LICs,,,19,, (constant ) 3, 3,,, 1, 1, 1,93 7,37 1,17,17 1,17,38 1,17,91 1, 1,91, 1,78 3,89,1,7,7 (constant ) 3, 3,,, 1, 1, , , ,71 78,77 1,1 1, ,1 1, 1,18 1,7 Source: OECD Creditor Reporting System (CRS) database 3

13 LAST IN LINE, LAST IN SCHOOL 9 LICs (Figure 1). However, the amount actually made available and disbursed is much lower in 7 it was just $1.bn in and $1.9bn in other LICs. 1 are continuing to falter in their progress towards meeting the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) most notably in their progress towards achieving UPE. Of the 1 for which projections are available, only two Cambodia and Myanmar (Burma) are expected to achieve UPE by The remaining countries are either moving away from the goal or making progress too slowly. 1 Significant increases in funding levels are needed if the educational needs of children in are to be met by 1. Despite an increase on previous years, 7 commitments to basic education in ($1.bn) were less than a quarter of what is needed to achieve UPE in these countries. It is estimated that 8% $.bn of the $9bn annual external financing requirement should be directed to. Figure : Distribution of education and basic education commitments in developing countries (average 7) Source: OECD CRS 38% % 13% 1% Education Basic education 1% 8% 7% 3% As a result of large basic education commitments by the Netherlands, Japan and the UK, basic education commitments to increased by an average of $1 million per year between and 7. While this is an encouraging trend and reflects growing political support for education in, it is not enough. Based on additional annual increases of this size, the $.bn of basic education required annually would not be reached until 3, well beyond the 1 deadline for achieving UPE. There has been considerable discussion and donorstated commitment on the importance of targeting towards low-income countries. However, since publication of the first Last in Line, Last in School report in 7 (Save the Children, 7), the average share of education apportioned to all low-income countries between and 7 dropped to less than half from 1% to 9%. The average share of education to has increased only marginally from 18% to 1%, as the result of increases in the levels of education allocated to these countries in and 7 (Figure ). More than half of all education is now allocated to middle-income countries (), or recorded as unallocated. 1 On average between and 7, 1% of all education went to just two China and Indonesia. Given their Dakar and G8 commitments, 1 donors need to ask themselves whether this allocation is consistent with distributional equity, and achievement of international education goals (UNESCO, 8). Over the same period, the share of basic education allocated to increased from 3% to 7%. While this is a positive trend, it remains well below what is needed, given that are home to more than half the world s out-of-school population. The low share of basic education allocated to is of major concern when considered in light of the lack of progress these countries are making towards achieving UPE. Education has been shown to contribute to other goals such as increased economic growth, improved health, and better environmental management. Failure to achieve UPE will hinder progress to all other MDGs.

14 AID, EDUCATION AND CONFLICT-AFFECTED FRAGILE STATES Basic education per child The number of out-of-school children is a useful approximation for need, indicating how much basic education should be allocated per child (UNESCO, 8). Given the exceptionally high proportion of out-of-school children in, an out-of-school child in a conflict-affected fragile state is currently allocated less than half ($) that of an out-of-school child in another low-income country ($7), and less than a quarter of an out-of-school child in a middle-income country ($19) (Figure 3). This is despite one in three primary-aged children being out of school in, compared to one in 11 in other LICs and one in 33 in middle-income countries. On average, based on the number of primary-aged children in each country, a primary-aged child in a conflict-affected fragile state receives more basic education than a primary-aged child in another low-income or middle-income country. Figure 3: per child (average 7) 1 $ $7 US$ $ $8 $ $ Per out-of-school child Per school-aged child Source: OECD CRS, UNESCO (8)/UNICEF Child Info Education falls short of requirements Recent trends: While total education rose marginally in 7, commitments to basic education declined. The average proportion of education allocated to basic education has fallen from 1% to 37% since the 7 Last in Line, Last in School report. Basic education continues to fall short of the $9bn level of external financing required to achieve UPE each year. Only five donors are meeting 8% or more of their fair share, compared to eight last year. Action required: Individual donors including Australia, Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Japan, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland and the United States need to significantly increase their basic education commitments to meet their fair share of the external financing required to achieve UPE. The level of for education and basic education directed to is, of course, dependent on the overall level of education. With the exception of a large drop in, 17 education has increased consistently from $.3bn in 1999 to its 7 peak of $11bn (see Figure overleaf). Despite this increase, education levels continue to fall far short of the $1bn that is required annually to achieve Education for All (EFA). 18

15 LAST IN LINE, LAST IN SCHOOL 9 Figure : Education and basic education commitments and disbursements for all developing countries Education Basic education 1, 1,8 1,9 11,3 1, (constant ) 1, 8,,,,,9,9,1 8,7,17 9,11,7,9 8,91 7, 7,939 8,88 (constant ) 1, 8,,,,,3,78,87,81 1, 3,77 1,8,791,89 3,3,3 Amount needed,,79 3,19 3,3 Commitments Disbursements Commitments Disbursements Source: OECD CRS Basic education represents a 37% average share 19 of education, a drop from 1% since the 7 Last in Line, Last in School report well below the recommended figure of % (FTI Secretariat, ). While to education rose marginally in 7, there was a significant drop of almost one-third in the level of commitments to basic education from $.bn in to $3.bn in 7. This was the result of large basic education commitments being made by the Netherlands and the UK in. There is a risk that the downturn in the growth in basic education commitments will lead to a stagnation, or even decline, in disbursements. This is worrying as it has been estimated that $9bn in external assistance will need to be disbursed annually in order to achieve UPE by 1. Moreover, estimations of the external financing required to meet international education goals are likely to be under-estimates (UNESCO, 8). They are based on the costs of educating children already in school, and do not take into account the additional costs of reaching those who are currently outside the education system. This is particularly important for the financing of, because they are home to the highest numbers of out-of-school primary-aged children. The cost of getting these children into school will be significantly greater. Meeting the challenge to provide out-of-school primary-aged children with education will require a greater concentration of additional funding to be directed towards the most marginalised, those children currently outside the reach of the education system. These children are more expensive to reach, so an intensified and sustained political and financial effort on the part of donors is needed. The cost of inaction, however, will be higher, as education is one of the best investments a country can make contributing to increased individual incomes, economic growth, improved child and maternal health, and social cohesion.

16 AID, EDUCATION AND CONFLICT-AFFECTED FRAGILE STATES Donors fail to meet their fair share of financing requirements Using Gross National Income (GNI) to compare wealth across the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) countries, it is possible to identify how much each country should be contributing to the external financing requirement for UPE (its fair share ), and how close it is to achieving this target. Together, DAC donors committed less than a third 31% of the $9bn external financing requirement on average between and 7. Only three donors commit their fair share the Netherlands and Norway continue to lead the way, as in previous years, along with New Zealand, which has significantly increased its contribution from just 3% in the 7 Last in Line, Last in School report to 1% this year (Figure ). Since last year s report, there has been a drop in the number of donors meeting more than 8% of their fair share, from eight to five, with Denmark (%), Sweden (71%) and the UK (%) now committing less. 1 Thirteen of the DAC donors Australia, Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Japan, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland and the United States contribute less than % of their fair share. Of the G8 members, only the UK and Canada contribute more than % of their fair share. France (%), Germany (%), Italy (3%), Japan (18%), and the United States (1%) all contribute significantly less. 3 This is despite strong commitments to work with other donors and recipient governments to fund long-term plans to ensure that every child gets to school; and to pay particular attention to those low-income countries and fragile states furthest away from achieving UPE by 1 (G8, 7). Italy, which committed an average of just 3% of its fair share between and 7, will need to make a demonstrable effort to reverse its current standing, to set an example for other G8 leaders in advance of this year s summit in La Maddalena, Italy. Figure : Fair share contributions of donors to the $9 billion annual external financing requirement for UPE (based on average commitments from 7) % fair share committed % fair share Netherlands Norway New Zealand Luxembourg Ireland Sweden UK Canada Denmark Finland Australia Belgium Spain France Germany Japan Portugal USA Switzerland Austria Greece Italy Source: OECD CRS/World Bank GNI (), Atlas Method 7

17 LAST IN LINE, LAST IN SCHOOL 9 Education still not a priority for donor investment in Recent trends: There has been a slight increase in the priority given to education in (from % to % of ODA allocated to education) since the 7 Last in Line, Last in School report. However, this remains well below that of other LICs (1%). Action required: Greater priority to be given to education in in recognition of the right to education and role of education in establishing strong state structures. Nineteen of the DAC donors need to increase the proportion of they give to education in to a minimum of 1%. Many governments in have made strong policy commitments to education, but limited national budgets and competing demands often lead to a shortfall in the amount they can spend on the education sector (Brannelly and Ndaruhutse, 8). In countries for which data is available, spend on average 13% of total government expenditure on education, whereas other LICs spend 18%. External assistance therefore plays a pivotal role in supporting national efforts to meet children s right to education. However, education in is not a priority sector for donor investment. Just 13% of to social infrastructure and services is allocated to the education sector in a rise of 1 percentage point since our first report compared with % in other LICs (Figure ). In part this is because, where the capacity and/or will of the state are weak, donors have opted to support governance and civil society programmes (% in compared with 18% in other LICs). While establishing strong state structures is a priority in many fragile states, the part education can play both in terms of its role in development, and as one of the most visible state services, with an important symbolic value in establishing the legitimacy of the state needs to be more systematically acknowledged (Rose and Greeley, ). One of the biggest challenges to education service delivery in many is a lack of basic infrastructure. Investment in reconstructing infrastructure is therefore critical if education reforms are to reach remote schools. Nonetheless, there is clearly a difference in the degree to which education in and other LICs is funded in comparison to other sectors. Of total allocated to, an average of just % was allocated to education, compared with 1% of in other LICs. Eighteen donors allocated more than 1% of their to education in other LICs, but only four Greece, Ireland, Portugal and the World Bank allocated more than 1% of their to the education sector in. Despite its important role in creating a protective environment for children in situations of emergency and conflict, as well as its recognised benefits in kickstarting reconstruction in the aftermath of conflict, Figure : Distribution of sector-allocable to social infrastructure and services in and other LICs (average 7) Other 13% Education 13% Health 13% Government and civil society 18% Other % Education % Government and civil society % Population programmes 11% Water supply and sanitation 19% Health 19% Source: OECD CRS Water supply and sanitation 1% Population programmes 19% 8

18 AID, EDUCATION AND CONFLICT-AFFECTED FRAGILE STATES education in is not a priority investment sector for many donors. Just 11 of the DAC donors Australia, Canada, Denmark, the EC, Ireland, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, the UK, the USA, and the World Bank have policy commitments for supporting the provision of education in. Towards a new architecture for Recent trends: Over the past year, the Education for All-Fast Track Initiative (EFA-FTI) has worked to address the lack of financing available for through the FTI by establishing the Education Transition Fund (ETF). Action required: Genuine progress towards a new architecture for is dependent on endorsement of the ETF proposal at the FTI Partnership Meetings in April 9, and on the fund becoming fully operational and adequately resourced by a wide range of donors. The Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness 7 is based on the assumption that will be more effective if donors and recipients apply the principles of ownership, alignment, harmonisation, managing for results and mutual accountability in their development cooperation. However, as acknowledged by the 8 Accra Agenda for Action, 8 these principles need to be adapted to environments where there is weak ownership or capacity. As a result, a new architecture is emerging that addresses the need for financing mechanisms that provide flexible, rapid and long-term funding for. The Education for All-Fast Track Initiative Since it was established in, the FTI has focused on accelerating progress towards UPE by 1, based on a compact linking increased donor support for education to recipient countries policy performance and accountability for results. However, in recent years the FTI has come under criticism for failing to generate and disburse sufficient funds. In some cases, even countries that have been endorsed as meeting FTI criteria have not been allocated funds. To date, 18 donors 9 have contributed to the Catalytic Fund, the main funding mechanism of the FTI, 3 and the Netherlands and the UK have been the primary financers, collectively contributing 8% of all funds. The FTI Secretariat projects that the Catalytic Fund will face a deficit of $9m by spring 9 (FTI Secretariat, 8a). The FTI Secretariat estimates that the total long-term external financing gap for the countries expected to join the FTI by 1 will be around $bn per year (FTI Secretariat, 8b). Only nine of the 8 have been able to meet the requirements for FTI endorsement. Of these, only Cambodia, Rwanda and Timor Leste have received disbursements through the Catalytic Fund. Central African Republic, Ethiopia, Guinea and Sierra Leone have been allocated Catalytic Fund grants, but these are in process. Sierra Leone s grant has been in process for almost two years illustrating the disbursement problems the fund has faced. Slow disbursement continues to plague the Catalytic Fund, causing difficulties for countries heavily reliant on external assistance to fund national plans. However, recent changes in the FTI governance structure and procedures are expected to address this problem. Seven are scheduled for FTI endorsement in 9. At the time of writing the 7 Last in Line, Last in School report, nine had not been scheduled for endorsement. Two years on, these same nine Afghanistan, Côte d Ivoire, Myanmar (Burma), Nepal, Pakistan, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, and Zimbabwe are still not included in the FTI timetable for endorsement, denying 1 million children access to education, and millions more a good quality education. This fact alone is a compelling reason for finding alternative ways of financing education in through the Education Transition Fund. The Education Transition Fund The Education Transition Fund (ETF) has been established by the FTI to finance education plans in countries that do not meet the eligibility criteria for financing through the Catalytic Fund. 31 As a multi-donor trust fund managed by UNICEF, it will 9

19 LAST IN LINE, LAST IN SCHOOL 9 operate in tandem with the Catalytic Fund. It is intended to offer more flexible and less risk-averse financing, tailored to the immediate education needs of, at the same time as strengthening technical and administrative capacity, and addressing the fiduciary concerns of donors. The success of the ETF will depend on a wide range of donors adequately resourcing the fund, and on addressing issues of governments weak absorptive capacity. It will need to be quick in its decisionmaking and disbursal of predictable, and be flexible in responding to the diverse and changing contexts of. It is important that the ETF proposal is endorsed at the FTI Partnership Meetings in Copenhagen in April 9, and that the fund becomes fully operational shortly afterwards in order to accelerate progress towards UPE in. Global Fund for Education A Global Fund for Education (GFE) has recently been proposed, 3 to address slow progress towards achieving the EFA goals, to mobilise increased resources for education, and to improve donor accountability in delivering additional for education. It is intended to operate as a multilateral fund encompassing a wide range of modalities, building on the key strengths and experience of the FTI. The GFE represents a unique opportunity for galvanising increased focus on, and support for,. Commitment to meeting the educational needs of children in low-income countries and in particular will need to be clearly stated as part of the fund s mandate, in order to ensure progress towards UPE. It will need to be backed up with appropriate channels for delivering, in order to build capacity and increase predictability. 1

20 3 Education in emergencies Many children around the world living through emergencies and chronic crises are dependent on humanitarian to provide access to education. Conflict-affected fragile states () in particular rely heavily on humanitarian. On average between and 7, 1% of to was in the form of emergency assistance and reconstruction funding, compared with less than 3% in other low-income countries (LICs). Education has positive long-term effects that contribute to the rebuilding of systems in the aftermath of an emergency or crisis. It provides protection for children, and promotes justice and respect for human rights enhancing peace and stability (Aguilar and Retamal, 9). This chapter analyses trends in the allocation of humanitarian to education, examining donor commitments and policies for providing education in emergency situations. Humanitarian funding for education falls short of need Recent trends: Greater recognition of the need to fund education as part of humanitarian response has resulted in the amount of humanitarian allocated to education more than doubling from US$11 million in to $3m in 8. However, coverage of education in the Consolidated Appeals Process (CAP) continues to remain low with just 8% of requirements met in 8. Action required: Sustain the increase in flows to education in emergency situations, and ensure that education programmes are funded as part of humanitarian response. Despite greater recognition of the need to fund education in emergencies, and the amount of allocated having more than doubled from $11m in to $3m in 8 education still only receives % of humanitarian (Table 1). Table 1: Humanitarian allocated to education Year Humanitarian Aid to education Education as % of () () humanitarian 7, , ,9 3. Source: UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) Financial Tracking Service (FTS) 11

21 LAST IN LINE, LAST IN SCHOOL 9 Table : CERF contributions to education Year Total Aid to education Education () () as % of total Source: OCHA FTS These increases are the result of sustained advocacy for education in emergencies and several developments in humanitarian funding, including: the expanded Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF); the country-level pooled funding mechanisms that have incorporated education components Common Humanitarian Funds (CHFs) and Emergency Response Funds (ERFs); and the formation of an Education Cluster. A further development is the Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies (INEE) and Sphere s 33 announcement of a companionship agreement, whereby the INEE () Minimum Standards for Education in Emergencies, Chronic Crises and Early Reconstruction 3 will be mainstreamed throughout the Sphere standards, and vice versa. This is significant, as many humanitarian donors support Sphere and a number of them mention the standards in their humanitarian policy. Since, CERF contributions to education increased significantly, from $1.1m in to $.8m in 8 (Table ). This represents an increase in the proportion of CERF humanitarian funding disbursed to education activities from.% in to 1.% in 8. These increases are largely due to a revision of CERF guidelines to systematically include education as a funding sector in emergency response. Despite these positive trends, education in emergencies continues to be underfunded. Figures recorded by the Consolidated Appeals Process (CAP) the humanitarian sector s main tool for coordination, Table 3: Consolidated and flash appeals global requirements, and funding overall and for education Year Overall funding () Education () Funding Funding % of Funding Funding % of requirements received coverage requirements received coverage,1 3,3 % 1 % 7,1 3,7 7% 1 % 8 7,3,78 7% % Source: OCHA FTS 1

22 3 EDUCATION IN EMERGENCIES Coordination for education in emergencies: the education cluster The Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) Education Cluster (co-led by UNICEF and Save the Children) is intended to strengthen preparedness, coordination and technical capacity within the education sector in order to respond to humanitarian emergencies. An Education Cluster approach is currently active in 8 countries, 19 of which are. 3 At a global level, the cluster has a variety of roles, including: broadening understanding of the importance of education in humanitarian response; providing a rapid response to emergencies; coordinating the work of all the different agencies involved in a humanitarian response; supporting emergency preparedness plans; and enhancing the capacity of emergency response staff (Save the Children, 8a). At a national level, the cluster works to establish networks of agencies on the ground that can provide a coordinated, high-quality response to emergency situations; and it ensures collaboration with other clusters such as protection, shelter, camp management and early recovery. To date, the key donors to support the education component of the cluster appeal have been Denmark, Ireland, Norway and Sweden. In addition, UNICEF has supported the education cluster using funds from the grant for Education in Emergencies, Post-Crisis Transitions and Fragile States that it received from the Netherlands in late. strategic planning and programming show that while the trend towards increased for education is encouraging, funding is still well below what is needed. Although there has been increased coverage of education requirements, less than half of all funding requests to the CAP 8% were met in 8 3 (Table 3). Ten out of the 11 countries 37 that requested CAP funding included education requirements. However, experience shows that not all education needs/projects are put forward to be part of the CAP. This needs to happen more consistently in the future, to ensure that all education requirements are fully funded. In 9, education funding requested in the CAP reached its highest levels yet $383m up to February 9, compared with a total of $33m for 8. Twelve out of the 13 countries 38 requesting CAP funding included education requirements. The challenge will be to ensure that these funding needs are met over the course of the year. Donors still give education a low priority in emergencies Recent trends: Many donors still have not prioritised education as part of their emergency response. Nineteen of the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) donors allocate less than 3% of their humanitarian funding to education, and only five have explicitly stated their commitment to providing education in emergency situations. Action required: Donors must make explicit their intentions to fund education in emergencies in both their policy and budgetary commitments. As one of the largest humanitarian donors, the EC Humanitarian Office (ECHO) in particular must ensure priority for education in emergencies. All donors should allocate a minimum of.% 39 of their humanitarian to education. Bilateral donors record of supporting education in emergencies is mixed, with only a core few donors Australia, Denmark and Japan having consistently 13

23 LAST IN LINE, LAST IN SCHOOL 9 Figure 7: Percentage of humanitarian allocated to education by donor (average 8) Denmark Japan Australia Netherlands Norway EC Ireland Italy New Zealand Sweden Spain Canada Belgium Finland.7 USA.7 Switzerland.7 Germany. Austria. ECHO. France.3 UK.3 Luxembourg. Portugal Greece % humanitarian allocated to education..% = target amount needed to match education needs (based on CAP) Source: OCHA FTS allocated more than a 3% share of their humanitarian assistance to education (Figure 7). Just five donors Canada, Denmark, Japan, Norway, and Sweden have clear policies on education in emergencies. In 8 only Denmark met the target of allocating.% of its humanitarian to education. The EC Humanitarian Office (ECHO) one of the largest humanitarian donors allocates an average of just.% of its humanitarian to education, indicating that education has not been one of its priority areas. However, in February 8, ECHO launched a working document on children in humanitarian crises. One of the three themes of this paper focused on the important role of education in emergencies, and l down a commitment to develop more operational recommendations for its humanitarian interventions in education. It is hoped that this will translate into greater priority being given to education in ECHO s emergency response. 1

24 Conclusion As we enter the final stretch towards the 1 deadline for achieving the education Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), 7 million primaryaged children remain out of school. More than half of these million live in conflict-affected fragile states (). The benefits of providing access to education for these children have been widely acknowledged, yet funding levels continue to lag far behind what is required. In the wake of the global financial crisis, for education in has never been more vital, as national governments are likely to find it even more difficult to fund education. This report provides evidence of an increased focus on providing education for, as well as those countries experiencing emergencies. However, funding levels need to increase significantly, and support must be given to innovative delivery mechanisms, if the goal of universal primary education (UPE) is to be achieved by 1. Experience shows that some are unsuited to the partnership requirements embodied by the effectiveness agenda. This is often because they lack the capacity to design and/or implement education programmes, or the ability to raise sufficient domestic funds. Funding mechanisms, therefore, need to be tailored to address the specific needs of. In particular, they need to focus on building capacity and mitigating fiduciary risk, as well as ensuring that quicker and more predictable is delivered to the education sector. In the case of emergencies, what is needed is a commitment to initiate and restore safe, good quality education services as part of humanitarian response, laying a strong foundation upon which more stable and resilient systems and societies can be built in the reconstruction phase for sustainable development. It is essential that adequate resources for education are made available urgently for short-term interventions, and that is sustained over the long term for rebuilding education institutions and systems. The international donor community has a pivotal role to play in securing a dramatic expansion in educational opportunities for children in. Save the Children believes that the right to education should be made a reality for all children, regardless of their circumstances. 1

25 Recommendations 1. Increase long-term predictable for education in This requires donors to: Ensure funding is equitable based on need, with at least % of new basic education commitments going to Urgent action is needed by: Australia, Austria, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Switzerland, and the UK, as well as the European Commission. Increase basic education to meet the US$9 billion annual external financing requirement for achieving good quality UPE Urgent action is needed by: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the UK, and the USA. Prioritise education in, ensuring that at least 1% of ODA in is allocated to education Urgent action is needed by: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the UK, and the USA, as well as the European Commission. Meet the Education for All-Fast Track Initiative financing gaps, and ensure adequate funding of the FTI s Education Transition Fund Urgent action is needed by: All donors and UNICEF.. Ensure that education needs in emergency situations are met This requires donors to: Establish policies on education in emergencies that ensure education is an integral part of humanitarian response Urgent action is needed by: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland, the UK, and the USA, as well as the European Commission. Allocate a minimum of.% of humanitarian to education, to meet education funding requirements in emergency situations Urgent action is needed by: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the UK, and the USA, as well as the European Commission. Support coordination for education in humanitarian response through the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) Education Cluster Urgent action is needed by: All donors. 1