PROPOSAL TITTLE: PRIMARY SCHOOLS FEEDING

PROGRAMME IN RURAL AREAS IN

ETHOPIA, SNNPRS, GURAGE ZONE
SELECTED SITES.
ORGANIZATION: MIZAN PEACE AND DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION

CONTACT: Address: Wolkite, Ethiopia

E-mail: Mizan PandD@gmail.com;
Telephone: +251118847157

1|Pag
 Executive Summary
This is a primary school feeding project and is supposed to be implemented in Gurage
zone in selected school. It is a one year project and 300 primary students are planned
to be benefited from the project. The project will be fully financed by Muslim Aid USA
(MAUSA) and implemented by Mizan Peace and Development Association (MPDA).
The preliminary estimated cost of the project is $60,464.63 which is equivalent to 2,667,
700.00 Ethiopian Birr (ETB).

1. Introduction
The need for all people to have access to quality education is also regarded as an essential plank
for poverty reduction. Human capital – education, knowledge, skills, access to and
understanding of information is widely recognized as part of the livelihoods approach to address
poverty in developing countries. Thus, the aim of this project is to improve children schools
attendance and performance through launching school feeding programme in the rural areas of
Ethiopia. Such kinds of initiatives are already started in the Addis Ababa city administration
with the support of World Bank and other multinational Non-Governmental organizations. This
project will be implemented in the needy rural areas of Gurage zone where most of the
households are net food demanders. The project beneficiary-students will be entitled to get
breakfast and lunch meals during the school day.

2. Rationales of the intervention

Education is seen as a necessary condition for development. In addition, it is considered as a
right for every child. In many rural areas of Ethiopia, majority of the primary school student
parents are poor while others students are orphans. The introduction of free education resulted
in increased enrollments. However, still many parents are opted to send their children to work
than education because they are unable to put enough food on the family table. Therefore, this
intervention is expected to increase children school attendance in the short run. In the long run,

2|Pag
the outcome of this project is more than human capital accumulation—it will have a huge
impact on community transformation and modernization. Accordingly, the needy schools are
selected based on proportion of orphans (pupils/students) and the institution nature (government
school, community school or orphanage). And yet, the specific justifications for this
intervention are presented as follows.

a. Many poor and orphaned students’ drop-outs from schools due to poverty/ hunger
As a result, some of them will no longer have the enthusiasm of going to school
and therefore forced early marriage. However, due to this intervention many
students will be likely attracted to schools.
b. Food insecurity put a tremendous obstacle in providing basic education for all in
the rural areas.
c. Nutrition is one of cute and visible problems in most rural areas and to some extent
urban centers, but lack of funds to support such kinds intervention was a major
bottleneck.

3. Project Goal, Objectives & Results

Goals: The goal of this project is the meet and compliment “right to have access basic
education” for all and broaden the livelihoods of the future generations.

Objectives: The main objective of the project is to increase children school attendance and
cognitive capacity.
Project Results
 Nutritional benefits: It is evident that school feeding programme has a positive
impact on participating children. In some instances, parents may provide less food
at home, and the school meal simply replaces a home meal rather than adding food
to the child’s diet.

 Impact on education and the link between hunger and learning: It is believed
that children who are hungry or chronically malnourished are less able to learn,
regardless of the setting. But the converse— that children in school feeding and
food for education programmes are better able to learn.

 Impact on attendance: The evidence strongly suggests that school feeding

3|Pag
 programs can increase attendance rates, especially for girls. School feeding or take-
home rations serve as incentives for enrolling children in school and encouraging
daily attendance.

 Alleviate short-term hunger in malnourished or otherwise well-nourished

schoolchildren: Increase the attention and concentration of children/students
producing gains in cognitive function and learning.

4. Programme Implementation and Methodology

This school feeding programme will be implemented by MIZAN PEACE AND
DEVELOPMENT AASSOCIATION in coordination with MUSLIM AID USA (MAUSA)
and expected to be run for the next two years. And 300 students of primary schools will be
benefited from this project. In executing the project we will follow the following methodology
to achieve the expected results of the school feeding programme (SFP).

1. Build a consensus on a policy and objectives that focuses on how school

feeding can effectively contribute to improving education and to meeting the
nutrition and health needs of school-age children. Mizan Peace and
Development Association (MPDA) through its Programme officers with District
Education Officers (DEOs) work in closeness to agree on what ‘problems’ or
‘situations’ the school feeding programme will address, who the program will
serve, and which program models are feasible for implementation. School feeding
programmes are highly visible and as a result often have a significant political
dimension, particularly since they can represent a considerable income transfer.
This reality should not inhibit establishing a policy and objectives that will take
advantage of the substantial potential for improving the impact of SFPs on
education.

2. Develop targeting criteria and mechanisms that concentrate programme

resources on high risk children and communities. There is a built-in tendency
towards universal coverage - providing meals for all school-children particularly in

4|Pag
 the rural primary schools. Furthermore, programme coverage and targeting is always
subject to a series of political, logistical, technical and informational constraints. In
view of the fact that resources are finite, particularly in the poorest rural areas, and
that providing food is expensive, targeting is a critical element of any effort to
improve the impact of a SFP on education. Targeting is essential if the programme is
to reach families and communities that lack the resources to adequately provide for
their school-age children or those that need to be motivated to enroll their children in
school and to have them attend more regularly.

3. Elaborate appropriate guidelines for ration composition and the timing of

school meals. MPDA has established appropriate ration guidelines, for programme
officers and DEOs; to analyze the nutrition and health needs of school-age children.
Conditions in the education sector, such as levels of school enrollment, attendance,
and performance, the availability of infrastructure and the capacity to implement
different kinds of SFPs also need to be assessed. Information is also required on the
community’s perceptions and capacity to participate in school feeding programs.

4. Identify and address any potential bottlenecks in implementation; such as the

availability of supplies and other resources, the appropriateness of cooking
practices and the management of private sector inputs. The recommendation is
particularly relevant for MPDA programme officers who are already operating a
programme. Once school feeding programs are in place, altering them can meet
strong resistance, however, a range of new experiences is now available that has the
potential to alleviate some of the common obstacles to efficient and effective
programming. Where a school feeding programme already exists, a wealth of
information is readily accessible; a critical step towards a better programme is to
thoroughly analyze this on-going experience

5. Develop monitoring systems that focus on programme processes, that is, how a
programme is functioning, and institute an evaluation system to assess the
impact of the program on specific outcomes. The need to monitor and evaluate

5|Pag
 programs is not unique to SFPs, but this recommendation is critical to increasing
the impact of SFPs. Despite past experience; there is a dearth of concrete
information on the functioning and effectiveness of school feeding programs.

5. Programme Sustainability

MPDA has a clear plan on how to sustain this school feeding programme. However, in the short
term, the sustainability of the programme depends on continued support from fundraising and
donation of food stuffs from local private. In the long term, we will design strategy on how the
selected schools can able to run the programme without the support of external finance. MIZAN
also intends to introduce farming practices in schools farms through DEOs, PTAs, school
headmasters/ principals, parents and children to participate in school farming for future
provision and sustainability of food security in their respective schools hence cutting out
poverty. Furthermore, we will advocate this programme needs to be fully integrated into the
educational system.

6. Monitoring & Evaluation

MIZAN field programme officers monitor and visit these schools at least twice per month. They
monitor and speak to the pupils/students, teachers, and administrators, inspect documentation
such as stock books, distribution lists, and the school’s own attendance records. Each day, the
catering personnel’s include one extra plate; so that the monitoring officers can pick a meal at
random (from any of the plate). The removed sample is weighed and tested for value and
standard by the MIZAN field officers.
MIZAN, DEOs and the Head of schools work jointly on monitoring and evaluating the
programme; Posttest- only control group and small-scale evaluation surveys are conducted to
evaluate the programme for both its feeding and education components. Monitoring and
evaluation is the responsibility of both donor (MAUSA) and MIZAN. Donor monitoring will be
focused on effectiveness of the programme. This is done through a term-based report about the
programme to the donor and bi-annually project site visit. MIZAN monitoring officers are
responsible for collecting quantitative and qualitative data and evaluate vis-a-vise the progrmme
objectives and results.

6|Pag
7. Proposed Programme Budget
Total number of beneficiaries= 300students

Quantity No. Unit cost Total cost Total Donor

Beneficiaries (in ETB) ( in ETB birr) cost Remarks
NO. Description of Items (in USD)

1. Transportation - 40,000.00 40,000.00 906.62

2. Cooking Equipment - 200,000.00 200,000.00 4,533.1
3. Administration/ - 100,000.00 100,000.00 2,266.54
Logistical
4. Programme Staff/ - 250,000.00 250,000.00 5,666.36
Personnel/cooks
Subtotal 1 590,000.00 $13,372.62
LIST OF FOOD STUFFS

5. Maize/heterogeneous 19,200kg 50.00 960,000.00 21,758.84

6. Cooking Oil(flour) 360- 600.00 216,00.000 4,895.73
Jerri cans(5lit)
8. Rice 600-bags(5kg) 200.00 120,000.00 2,719.85
9. White Sugar 1500- kgs 50.00 75,000.00 1,699.90
10. Chocolate Of Cookies 24-boxes 2,000.00 48,000.00 1,087.94
11. Powdered Milk 50-boxes 1,000.00 50,000.00 1,113.27
12. Spaghetti, Macaroni 1500kg 50.00 75,000.00 1,699.90
13. Beef meat 48 9,000.00 432,000.00 9,791.48
14. Green Vegetables 24- pak 1,000.00 24,000.00 543.97
Subtotal 2 2,000, 000.00 $ 45,330.90

Total (subtotal 1+subtotal) 2, 590, 000 $58,703.53

Contingency (3 percent) 77, 700 $1,761.11

GRAND TOTAL 2, 667, 700 $60,464.63

Note: 1 USD= 44.12 ETB; where ETB is Ethiopian Birr