Regional: Higher Education in the Pacific Investment Program (Tranche 1)

Horizontal Tabs

Lessons

First-time executing and implementing agencies need handholding on Asian Development Bank (ADB) processes and requirements.

The investment program, of which this project was a part, was the first ADB-financed loan executed by the University of South Pacific (USP). The USP and project implementation unit (PIU) it established were thus at the outset unfamiliar with ADB processes and requirements. Although ADB provided training, key staff changes and the intermittent work arrangement with the project manager did not make matters less challenging. Furthermore, the omission of safeguards from ADB missions during implementation meant that there was no opportunity for the project to build USP safeguards capacity. The lessons learned from this project, including the need for handholding and proactive implementation support, particularly for new ADB partners, are being applied in the ongoing tranche 2 project of the investment program that involves the improvement of the USP Solomon Islands campus.

Project Cycle Stage:

Implementation

Flexibility in project schedule, to address unforeseen delays, is critical to the completion of projects.

At approval, tranche 1 project was expected to be implemented in 2.3 years. However, actual implementation took about 3.2 years, with the completion date extended once, from December 2014 to December 2015. Late delivery of steel from the People’s Republic of China and the need to clarify boundary issues were not foreseen, impacting an otherwise quick construction schedule. In addition to being flexible about adjusting to unforeseen delays, future projects can also benefit from continuous monitoring of schedules, early communication to ADB of the need for adjustments, and the adoption of mutually agreed upon changes in timetable.

Project Cycle Stage:

Implementation

Unreliable cost estimates can significantly hamper the smooth and timely completion of projects.

Low cost estimates at appraisal caused the largest delay in tranche 1 project implementation. While some of the underestimations came about because of inflation, others were due to the lack of a thorough examination of the factors that influenced the project cost. For example, the original civil works allocation underestimated the high cost of transporting building materials, construction equipment, and skilled labor by sea to the project site, more than 2,000 kilometers north of Fiji. The perceived higher risk of undertaking an infrastructure project in a remote and isolated location such as Kiribati, which was apparent in the low bidder turnout that pushed the contract price upward, was also glossed over. Cost underestimations, which necessitated the processing of additional financing and changes in the civil works contract, held back the construction of a new building in the USP Kiribati campus by about a year.

Project Cycle Stage:

Preparation

Adequate time should be allotted to monitoring and evaluation.

Monitoring of this project took place at regular 6-month intervals, but a comprehensive midterm review (MTR) was not undertaken. While this did not have a material impact on this project’s performance, MTRs should be worked out in future projects to provide implementers with a good grasp of how projects fare and what needs to be done to improve implementation and ensure the attainment of intended results. For this project, an MTR could have also facilitated the preparation of the project completion report, submission of which was delayed for about a year. Overall, there should be a conscious effort to include in the project schedule the conduct of evaluation activities, findings from which are critical to improving project performance.

Project Cycle Stage:

Preparation

Implementation

Ensuring quality higher education requires more than just improving school infrastructure and physical environments.

Rather than focusing on school infrastructure and campus physical improvements, ADB should consider investing more in improving the teaching and learning processes in higher education. Greater effort and more funds should also be allotted to addressing the issues in equity in access to quality higher education, especially in poor and remote islands in the Pacific.

Project Cycle Stage:

Preparation

Background

At program appraisal in 2011, many countries in the Pacific region were short of trained professionals and technical personnel who can adopt new technologies, drive innovation, and manage business and government effectively. These shortages were linked to limited higher education opportunities in the region, which drove students to seek opportunities outside that was unaffordable to most and can only be met 5% by public and private scholarships.

To help address the situation, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) approved a 3-tranche, $19 million multitranche financing facility (MFF) for the Higher Education in the Pacific Investment Program in June 2012. The program sought to support the University of South Pacific (USP) in expanding access to higher education by improving physical environments and learning programs. Established in 1968 by 12 Pacific island countries (PICs), the USP as of 2011 operated 14 campuses with 22,000 students in pre-degree and degree programs which comprised a small proportion of the 17–22 years age group in the 12 PICs.

The program aimed to strengthen USP’s regional role and support its four priorities: (i) improvement and expansion of regional campuses and accommodation facilities in Kiribati, the Solomon Islands, and Fiji, (ii) enhancement of information and communication technology (ICT)-based learning programs and curricula; (iii) improvement of student services; and (iv) improvement of governance and management systems. Its expected outcome was expanded and equitable access to quality higher education in USP member countries, especially for women and students from remote outer islands. Its anticipated impact was USP graduates contributing to the competitiveness and diversification of PIC economies.

This report covers tranche 1, approved along with the MFF for a loan of $2.6 million, and the $1 million additional financing, reallocated from tranche 3 and approved in May 2014. Tranche 1 and the additional financing funded the expansion of the USP campus in Kiribati, supported activities related to ICT-based education, and strengthened USP governance and project management capacity.

A new 3-story building was constructed, with 10 rooms equipped with ICT infrastructure for mixed modes of teaching, an ICT studio, and administration facilities. The new ICT equipment connects the Kiribati campus to other regional campuses and delivers faster and more reliable ICT-based learning courses, especially distance and flexible learning (DFL) courses. USP’s education management information system was also enhanced, using up-to-date ICT software and applications. For example, a Banner system that feeds the USP dashboard and business intelligence system with data on students, financial statements, and human resources for reporting, decision-making, and enterprise resource planning purposes was established.

As it substantially delivered on its planned outputs, tranche 1 significantly contributed to the attainment of the MFF intended outcome. Enrollment at the Kiribati campus already met the minimum 1,000-target by 2020, increasing from 943 in 2015 to 1,024 in 2016 and 1,453 in 2017. With corresponding decreases in other campuses, trends indicate that physical improvements in the USP campus and learning facilities were encouraging more students to stay in the country for higher education. Accessibility to quality tertiary education in Kiribati substantially decreased the costs incurred by government and other donors in sending students to the USP Laucala campus in Fiji. This also increased government capacity to educate more of its population with the same amount of education investment.

Importantly, significantly more females, comprising two-thirds of the total, had enrolled in the USP Kiribati campus in 2014–2018. While the enrollment headcount for both females and males in the Kiribati campus had increased steadily during the same period, the female enrollment rate was much higher than that of USP campuses overall, which was 55% in 2016 and 2017.

Rated successful by ADB’s Pacific Department, tranche 1 of the MFF had the USP as executing agency. A project implementation unit, established within USP’s Development, Marketing, and Communications Division, took charge of its day-to-day implementation.

Project Information

Project Name:

Higher Education in the Pacific Investment Program (Tranche 1)

Report Date:

September, 2018

Main Sector:

Education

Country:

Regional

Project Number:

42291-025

Report Type: