Ghana - Community Services - Education

The objectives in this ex-post performance evaluation target how the education sub-activity was implemented, if and how it has been sustained, and its perceived outcomes. To meet these objectives, MCC and Social Impact, Inc. (SI), outlined four evaluation questions: 1. What are the current conditions of MCC investments made for the education sub-activity? How do the conditions of MCC investments compare to non-MCC-supported sites? 2. How did the implementation process and/or post-completion maintenance contribute to current conditions of MCC investments? 3. What other factors explain both perceived school-level outcomes and the current conditions of schools? 4. What are the perceived outcomes of the investments in school infrastructure?

To answer the evaluation questions, SI supplemented existing data with two distinct but related data collection activities: first, a school conditions survey to answer Evaluation Question 1, and second, cross-case studies to answer Evaluation Questions 2, 3, and 4.

Overall findings show that on average, MCC schools are in better condition than non-MCC schools, while schools in the Southern zone are in better condition, on average, compared to those in Afram zone and Northern zone.

Qualitative data shows that differences in implementation and maintenance practices had an effect on the current condition of schools. Lack of maintenance funding and community buy-in were identified as major barriers to maintenance. Respondents also highlighted misuse of school facilities by community members (across all zones and schools), harsh weather (primarily in Afram and Northern zones, but all school types), and environment (primarily in low scoring MCC schools) adversely affected school conditions. However, PTAs and SMCs in high scoring MCC and non-MCC schools were more proactive in addressing these factors than those at low-scoring MCC schools. The perception across all zones in all study schools was that improvements in infrastructure positively affected enrollment, attendance, completion and learning.

Data and Resources

Field Value
accessLevel public
bureauCode {184:03}
catalog_@context https://project-open-data.cio.gov/v1.1/schema/catalog.jsonld
catalog_conformsTo https://project-open-data.cio.gov/v1.1/schema
catalog_describedBy https://project-open-data.cio.gov/v1.1/schema/catalog.json
identifier DDI-MCC-GHA-SI-EDU-2017-v02
landingPage https://data.mcc.gov/evaluations/index.php/catalog/172
license https://data.mcc.gov/terms-and-conditions.php
modified 2019-07-08
programCode {184:000}
publisher Millennium Challenge Corporation
resource-type Dataset
source_datajson_identifier true
source_hash 6f64504581791ce5648639bce7d2698ae1788dc9
source_schema_version 1.1
Groups
  • AmeriGEOSS
  • National Provider
  • North America
Tags
  • amerigeo
  • amerigeoss
  • ckan
  • education
  • geo
  • geoss
  • ghana
  • national
  • north-america
  • school-conditions
  • school-infrastructure
  • united-states
isopen False
license_id other-license-specified
license_title other-license-specified
maintainer Monitoring & Evaluation Division of the Millennium Challenge Corporation
maintainer_email impact-eval@mcc.gov
metadata_created 2025-11-22T01:09:15.988758
metadata_modified 2025-11-22T01:09:15.988762
notes The objectives in this ex-post performance evaluation target how the education sub-activity was implemented, if and how it has been sustained, and its perceived outcomes. To meet these objectives, MCC and Social Impact, Inc. (SI), outlined four evaluation questions: 1. What are the current conditions of MCC investments made for the education sub-activity? How do the conditions of MCC investments compare to non-MCC-supported sites? 2. How did the implementation process and/or post-completion maintenance contribute to current conditions of MCC investments? 3. What other factors explain both perceived school-level outcomes and the current conditions of schools? 4. What are the perceived outcomes of the investments in school infrastructure? To answer the evaluation questions, SI supplemented existing data with two distinct but related data collection activities: first, a school conditions survey to answer Evaluation Question 1, and second, cross-case studies to answer Evaluation Questions 2, 3, and 4. Overall findings show that on average, MCC schools are in better condition than non-MCC schools, while schools in the Southern zone are in better condition, on average, compared to those in Afram zone and Northern zone. Qualitative data shows that differences in implementation and maintenance practices had an effect on the current condition of schools. Lack of maintenance funding and community buy-in were identified as major barriers to maintenance. Respondents also highlighted misuse of school facilities by community members (across all zones and schools), harsh weather (primarily in Afram and Northern zones, but all school types), and environment (primarily in low scoring MCC schools) adversely affected school conditions. However, PTAs and SMCs in high scoring MCC and non-MCC schools were more proactive in addressing these factors than those at low-scoring MCC schools. The perception across all zones in all study schools was that improvements in infrastructure positively affected enrollment, attendance, completion and learning.
num_resources 6
num_tags 12
title Ghana - Community Services - Education