Asian Development Bank and Government of the Marshall Islands

Final Report:

ADB TA No. 4458 Increasing Ownership and
Effective Demand for Improved Education

A Pilot Project in Civil Service Reform and
Government Asset Rationalization

Republic of the Marshall Islands October 2005

Report prepared in the Ministry of Education for the government and people of the RMI
by:

Tim O’Meara, Ph.D., Team Leader and Lead Participatory Processes Specialist
Email: omearacons@mchsi.com

Ben Chutaro, Participatory Processes Local Consultant
Email: bako@ntamar.net

Questions or comments on the project may be directed to the individuals listed above or
to:

Biram Stege, Secretary of Education
Email: secmoe@ntamar.net

Stephen Pollard, ADB Country Program Manager for the RMI
Email: spollard@adb.org

List of Abbreviations

Associate of Arts degree (used by MOE and here to include other Associate
AA
degrees)
ADB
Asian Development Bank
Bachelor of Arts degree (used by MOE and here to include other Bachelor
BA
degrees)
CBGS
Community Based Governance System
CHS Calvary
High
School
CMI
College of the Marshall Islands
CSP
Country Strategy and Program
EPPSO
Economic Policy, Planning, and Statistics Office
ESL
English as a Second Language
EU European
Union
F Fail
FJ Fiji
Islands
FY Fiscal
Year
GED
Graduate Equivalency Degree (local High School level)
GRMI
Government of the RMI
HS High
School
ITBS
Iowa Tests of Basic Skills
JHS Jaluit
High
School
JOCV
Japanese Overseas Cooperation Volunteers
K-12
Kindergarten through 12th Grade
KHS
Kwajalein High School
LHS
Laura High School
MA
Master of Arts degree (used by MOE and here to include other Master degrees)
MCHS
Majuro Christian High School
MICNGOs
Marshall Islands Council of NGOs
MIHS
Marshall Islands High School
MIITF
Marshall Islands Intergenerational Trust Fund
MOE
Ministry of Education
MOF
Ministry of Finance
MOH
Ministry of Health
N
Number of cases

i

NGO Non-Governmental
Organization
NIHS
Northern Islands High School
OI Outer
Islands
PBB
Performance Based Budgeting
PI Philippines
PILL
Pacific Islands Literacy Levels
PSC
Public Service Commission
PTA
Parent Teacher Association
PSC
Public Service Commission
QPHS
Queen of Peace High School
RCHS
Rita Christian High School
RMI
Republic of the Marshall Islands
ROC Republic
of
China
SAT
Stanford Achievement Test
SDA
Seventh Day Adventist
SY School
Year
TA Technical
Assistance
TOEFL
Test of English as a Foreign Language
TOR
Terms of Reference
TQE
Teacher Quality Enhancement
US United
States
WASC
Western Association of Schools and Colleges
WB World
Bank
WUTMI
Women United Together in the Marshall Islands
ii

Executive Summary

1. The purposes of the Technical Assistance (TA) were to raise ownership and effective
demand for improved public services through strengthened, informed, and empowered
participation and to provide positive directions for further assistance to public service
development. Because of limited success in previous attempts at civil service reform, ADB and
GRMI decided to undertake a pilot project first to develop and assess stakeholder support for
civil service reform before determining whether or not to attempt a full-scale project.

2. The assistance was carried out as planned in the form of facilitated participatory processes.
Two rounds of consultations were carried out — the first in March and April of 2005 and the
second in July and August of 2005. The purpose of the first round of consultations was to brief
people on the state of education and to ask them what issues need to be addressed and what
options should be considered. Stakeholders were consulted individually and in group meetings
on Majuro. The Midterm Report, Briefing Paper: Issues and Options for Improving Education in
the RMI, summarizes the state of education, the first-round consultation program, and the
results of those first-round consultations.

3. The purpose of the second round of consultations was to seek a national consensus on
which specific options should be implemented to address the issues. Fifty-three group meetings
were conducted in this round. Thirty-eight government and public stakeholder groups were
consulted on Majuro — including groups from Jaluit, Likiep, and Wotje Atolls. In addition, four
groups were consulted on Ebeye, one on Lib Atoll, three on Arno Atoll, and five on Mili Atoll. A
total of 716 people participated in the second round of consultations. Results of both rounds
were presented to Cabinet.

4. A similar presentation scheduled for the Nitijela with the approval of the President and the
Speaker was, instead, repeatedly delayed and eventually blocked entirely by the Minister of
Education and other members of the ruling party. Comments made in the Nitijela by members
of the ruling parting falsely characterized the procedures and results of the project as
justification for blocking its presentation to the Nitijela and as justification for rejecting the report
outright and failing to act on the issues and options raised by stakeholders. The President did
later authorize publication of the project results in the Marshall Islands Journal, however, and
that publication did appear on Friday, October 14, 2005. These results demonstrate a mixture
of support and resistance within government for increased transparency and accountability.

5. The resistance comes because the stakeholder consultations and the research of official
government documents together show that the issues identified by stakeholders are primarily
caused either directly or indirectly by small-scale but widespread and longstanding abuse of the
civil service personnel system. Endemic corruption and abuse of the personnel system
undermines the education system itself and it undermines technical solutions that would otherwise
improve education. An important conclusion of the TA is that the RMI will not have an adequate
public education system as long as abuses in the civil service personnel system go uncorrected.

6. People thus want immediate reform of the civil service personnel system to improve
education and other public services. This result of the consultation program confirms the broad
stakeholder support for civil service reform documented last year in consultations to review and
update the ADB Country Strategy and Program for the RMI. Responses to the project have
also revealed some reluctance and even strong resistance, however, among members of
government, among Public Service Commission officers, and among Ministry of Education staff.
iii

7. Government has announced plans to conduct personnel and performance audits of MOE
and other ministries to begin addressing the civil service personnel issues. Carrying out and
acting on these audits would show strong and clear government commitment to transparency
and accountability. Failure to do so would send the opposite message.

8. Increasing accountability of the public service would improve education results now and
would provide a firm foundation for subsequent technical solutions. One option stands out as
the consensus of stakeholders for reforming the civil service. That option is to amend the
constitution and PSC Regulations to transfer authority for personnel matters to MOE and other
ministries and to provide a functioning Appeals Committee that is independent of government
influence. Stakeholders who support other options also require a functioning Appeals
Committee that is independent of government influence.

9. Another option stands out as the consensus of stakeholders for raising education
standards. That option is for public and private schools to pursue accreditation by the Western
Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC).

10. The TA facilitated stakeholder discussion of four major sets of issues that might attract a
request from GRMI for further ADB technical assistance to reform the civil service and otherwise to
improve public service delivery in education. Those four sets of issues include:

i)
Education Act and Rules and Regulations
ii)
PSC Act and Regulations
iii) MOE
Resource
Management
iv) MOE
Structure

11. The TA recommends that ADB favorably consider one or more requests, if any, by GRMI
for technical support to help implement institutional strengthening options to address the above
issues, but only after GRMI has demonstrated its commitment to civil service reform by
substantially solving the personnel issues raised by local stakeholders. Depending on the
option chosen, item (ii) PSC ACT and Regulations might actually involve dismantling PSC rather
than strengthening it.

12. The TA also recommends that ADB favorably consider a request, if any, by GRMI for
technical support of the planned personnel and performance audits of MOE and other
ministries. Government intends these audits as one of the first steps in solving the personnel
issues. No technical or other assistance is necessarily required for government to enforce
existing laws, however. As a result, it is feasible for GRMI to improve education service delivery
with or without major structural changes and with or without further technical or financial support
from ADB or other donors. GRMI could strengthen its position in making a request, if any, for
external support of the personnel and performance audits by beginning now to carry out reforms
of the civil service personnel system as identified by stakeholders during project consultations.

13. The TA recommends that any technical personnel that might be provided by ADB to
support the personnel and performance audits should make up a minority of the total number of
personnel working on the audits and should be junior members of the team. GRMI staff, or
independent consultants or staff of a commercial firm hired by GRMI, should make up the
majority of the team in order to retain GRMI ownership of the audits.
iv

I. INTRODUCTION

1. The overall purposes of the Technical Assistance (TA) were to raise ownership and
effective demand for improved public services through strengthened, informed, and empowered
participation and to provide positive directions for further assistance to public service
development.

2. The Government of the Marshall Islands (GRMI) requested the assistance from the Asian
Development Bank (ADB) following broad stakeholder consultations carried out from December
of 2003 through February of 2004 to update the Country Strategy and Program (CSP) of
assistance the ADB provides to the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI). Those consultations
included all government ministries and agencies as well as representatives of the private sector,
Non-Government Organizations (NGOs), and other members of civil society. The strong
consensus of those stakeholders was that the top priority for technical assistance was Civil
Service Reform and Government Asset Rationalization (see ADB CSP Update for the RMI,
2005 - 2007).

3. Because of limited success in previous attempts at civil service reform, ADB and GRMI
decided to undertake a pilot project first to develop and assess support for civil service reform
before undertaking any larger program of assistance. The education sector was chosen for the
pilot project because:

• Education is the nation’s #1 priority sector;
• Education is the largest part of the public service;
• Education touches the most families in the RMI at the most basic level;
• Issues in education reform are relatively easy for the public to understand;
• The Ministry of Education has already started a program of improvement on its own;
• The Ministry of Education offered to host the pilot project.

4. As a result, the Ministry of Education (MOE) became the executing agency for the TA, with
assistance from the Economic Policy, Planning, and Statistics Office (EPPSO) in the Office of
the President.

II. TERMS OF REFERENCE

1. Methodology
and Key Activities

5. Under terms of the approved TA Paper (p. 3; 11 November 2004), the assistance was to be
carried out in the form of scheduled, extensive, informed, and facilitated participatory processes.
Key activities were to be: (i) preparation of educational videos, radio programs, drama, articles,
and other media as relevant that describe the outcomes of the current delivery of primary
education as this can be understood best by the community of RMI; (ii) presentation of this
material to a series of targeted primary education providers and users and to other relevant
members of the community in order to raise awareness of principles, issues, and options,
followed by the facilitated participation of relevant stakeholders, and ultimately to design
alternative interventions and programs of assistance to improve public service delivery in
education; (iii) strengthening capacity of policy makers to use participatory processes; (iv)
independent monitoring and reporting of the entire process to provide directions for further RMI
public service development; and (v) presentation of the results to the leadership of the RMI.

1

2. Specific Terms of Reference for Individual Consultants

6. The project team consisted of two individual consultants — a Lead Participatory Processes
Specialist and Team Leader and a Local Social Development Analyst. The individual consultants’
specific terms of reference are summarized below (for details, see Attachment 1: Terms of
Reference):

1. Review the framework for social service provision as it applies to the RMI, including:

2. Work closely with counterpart personnel in the Ministry of Education and other relevant
government and non-government agencies.

3. Review all relevant, available studies relating to Education and to Public Service performance
and related matters in the RMI.

4. Prepare a detailed work program, action plan, and implementation schedule.

5. Liaise with the Ministry of Education, Mission Pacific, and MICNGOs.

6. Train 3 counterparts (one each from the Ministry of Education, NGO, and Ministry of Internal
Affairs).

7. Identify all relevant stakeholders in the urban areas of Majuro.

8. Organize and facilitate a series of participatory processes, consultations, and workshop(s).

9. Assess and report on the feasibility of establishing new institution(s) or relationships between
government and civil society.

10. Assess and report on the feasibility of further improvement to education service delivery.

11. Assist stakeholders in the design of further project assistance and independently comment on
the need for further assistance.

12. Undertake any other work that ADB staff may reasonably request.

7. In addition, the TA paper calls for “presentation of the overall results to the leadership of the
RMI” and “independent monitoring and reporting of the entire process,” which will be inserted as
TOR Items 13 and 14, respectively.

III. PROJECT
ACTIVITIES AND OUTCOMES

8. This section of the report summarizes the project activities that were carried out and the
project outcomes that were achieved under the respective TOR items listed above.

2

1. Review the framework for education provision in the RMI, including:

a) Priority setting and the adequacy of funds to education.

All recent national consultations have shown that education is the nation’s top priority.
Reflecting that priority, education takes by far the largest share of public spending each
year — about $38 million per annum in total for public primary and secondary education
and about $3,300 per public school student. This level of spending on public education is
among the highest in the Pacific (which in turn is among the highest in the developing
world). Most of the funds are provided by the US Compact, under which education is one
of three priority areas (the others being health and environment).

b) Timely transfer of prioritized funds from the center to the service provider.

Public education in the RMI is almost entirely centralized, so there is little or no transfer of
funds from the center. The degree of centralization is an issue in itself. The only
significant funds that are “transferred” from the center to the service providers are the
fortnightly paychecks of individual staff. There appears to be no major problem with the
timeliness of that transfer.

The transfer of school supplies and materials from the center to local schools is a serious
issue. It is more a symptom of fundamental management issues in MOE, however, rather
than being an independent issue. Because of the difficulty of securing school supplies
and materials from the center, school principals and head teachers often use school fees
(generally $20 per student), which are collected locally, to purchase supplies and
materials rather than attempting to get them from MOE.

c) Appropriateness of incentives structure that service providers face.

The two main positive incentives that public service providers face are: (1) their individual
pay and benefits and (2) the higher education and other professional training programs
provided free for individual staff (MOE reports that one such program, funded by the US
Compact Supplemental Education Grant, is also available to private school staff).

Interviews and document research undertaken by the TA show that individual pay and
benefits of public service providers in education bears no relationship to an individual’s
professional qualifications, job responsibilities, or performance. In addition, scores of staff
receive pay that is either below or (more often) above the appropriate ranges specified in
the PSC Act 1998 As Amended. Similarly, government provides higher education and
other professional training programs to public education staff with no apparent regard for
the public benefits that might be expected to derive from the training.

The main negative incentive that public service providers might be expected to face is
disciplinary action, with the ultimate action being dismissal or, in cases of serious
misconduct, even legal action. The TA could find no evidence of any disciplinary or legal
action, however, even in well documented cases of serious misconduct.

Overall, the incentives structure that service providers face must be judged as highly
inappropriate if the goal is taken to be efficiency and effectiveness in the provision of that
service.

3

d) Responsiveness and the ability of service receivers to take advantage of the services.

There is no significant issue of public access to primary schools. Indeed, MOE provides
local primary schools (grades K-8) in virtually every community in the Marshall Islands —
no matter how small or remote. Eleven out of 76 public primary schools have 25 or fewer
students, with the smallest having only six. In contrast, 20 public primary schools have
100 or more students, with the largest having over 900.

Responsiveness of service receivers is low, however. Analysis of 1999 census data and
public school enrollments shows that about 20% of school-age children did not enroll in
primary school at that time even though virtually everyone has immediate access to a
neighborhood school. Most observers believe that the enrollment ratio has declined
further since 1999, but no data is currently available. The reasons for the low enrollment
ratio have not been examined directly or in detail, but the major reasons undoubtedly
include (but are not limited to) the poor quality of the school environment and the poor
quality of the education being provided.

Forty-two of 76 public primary schools had average student scores of less than 30 out of
100 possible points on the locally developed high school entrance test over the three
years from 2002 through 2004. Most of that test consisted of multiple choice questions
offering only four possible answers. Sixty points out of 100 was required to “Pass” the
test, so a score of 30 points or less can be considered a very low “Fail”. No primary
school — public or private — had an average student score above “Fail” for the three
years from 2002 through 2004. A new test was presented in 2005, but the TA was not
allowed access to the test or the results.

Enrollment rates secondary school are much lower. Data is not very accurate, but it
appears that just over half of all children complete 8th grade (either public or private) and
about one quarter of all children complete high school (either public or private). Some
students prefer to go to one of 14 private, church-sponsored high schools in the RMI.
Other students attend these private high schools simply because they did not gain
admission to a public high school. A few students go overseas to attend high school.

Admission to a public high school is limited by the available space, which is increasing
now with the addition and planned expansion of Laura High School and Kwajalein High
School. Average scores on the high school entrance test, cited above, indicate that the
great majority of students who were admitted to a public high school from 2002 through
2004 had failed the local high school entrance test — usually by a wide margin. Those
remaining students who did not gain admission had even lower scores. It would be
accurate, therefore, to say that space in the public high schools is currently more than
adequate to serve the number of students who qualify academically for admission even
though space is not adequate to serve the number of students who want to attend.

2. Work closely with counterpart personnel in the Ministry of Education and
other relevant government and non-government agencies.

9. The TA was unsuccessful in attracting counterpart personnel from MOE. No other
government agencies were appropriate for providing counterpart personnel.

10. All TA activities were carried out with the specific approval of the Secretary of Education.
In other respects, the TA worked with little or no net support from the ministry. The Minister of

4

Education approved (or acquiesced to) the project at its inception, but later tried to undermine
the project behind the scenes and publicly rejected the results of the consultation program.
The Minister declined to meet with TA personnel to discuss matters.

11. Due primarily to the failure of MOE to provide counterpart personnel, the TA formally
proposed to ADB in early June that one or two additional local facilitators be hired from local
NGOs to help with the consultation program. That proposal was part of a broader proposal —
accepted by MOE and ADB in the project Inception Report of March, 2005 — which was
aimed primarily at supporting consultations on Kwajalein and the Outer Islands that were
outside the scope of the original TOR. A detailed budget for the proposal was provided to
ADB in mid June. ADB authorized other aspects of that proposal in early August, but did not
mention the proposal to add one or two local facilitators. An early August decision date was
too late in any case to select, mobilize, and train local facilitators for a consultation program
that began in mid July and ended in late August. As a result, the original two TA personnel
worked alone on the project.

3. Review studies relating to Education and to Public Service performance in
the RMI.

12. The content and results of the initial review are presented in the TA Midterm Report,
Briefing Paper: Issues and Options for Improving Education in the RMI (May 2005). Additional
studies and documents were reviewed during the second half of the project after the Briefing
Paper was issued. Results of that additional review were added as appropriate to the
information presented during the second round of consultations in July and August of 2005.
Attachment 4 (Newspaper Insert) presents a shortened version of that information.

4. Prepare a detailed work program, action plan, and implementation schedule.

13. A general work program, action plan, and implementation schedule was presented in the
Inception Report (March 2005). A detailed consultation schedule was prepared in early July,
but it remained unconfirmed while the TA awaited a decision from ADB on the proposal,
mentioned above in Item 2, to broaden the consultation program to include Kwajalein and the
Outer Islands and to extend the period of the consultation program to the end of August.

5. Liaise with the Ministry of Education, Mission Pacific, and MICNGOs.

14. The TA liaised with the Secretary of Education throughout the project.

15. The TA met with Mission Pacific as one of the NGO stakeholder groups during both the
first and second rounds of consultation. The TA also discussed with Mission Pacific the
possibility that Mission Pacific would prepare one or more videos as public information mass
media for the project. The TA decided against that course of action for two reasons, however.

16. First, the funding that Mission Pacific might have made available for that purpose, as
assumed in the approved TA paper, ran out in June, 2005. Because of the late start of the TA,
the project was not advanced far enough for the public information media to be prepared
before the funding ran out. Second, because of the sensitive social and political nature of
topics addressed by the project, the TA determined that it would be more constructive to focus
the presentation of briefing materials on the specific groups that were consulted by the TA

5

rather than blanketing the public with mass media presentations that would leave most
viewers with no outlet for their resulting comments.

17. The TA also met with the Marshall Islands Council of Non-Government Organizations
(MICNGOs) and its individual member organizations as NGO stakeholder groups during both
the first and second rounds of consultation. MICNGOs also provided a consultant to carry out
independent monitoring of project activities and the implementation by government and other
stakeholders of any commitments that might be made as a result of the project.

6. Train 3 counterparts (one each from the MOE, MICNGOs, and Ministry of
Internal Affairs).

18. TA personnel had no counterparts, so the Local Social Development Analyst was the only
person trained.

7. Identify all relevant stakeholders in the urban areas of Majuro.

19. Relevant stakeholders were identified during the inception phase and then consulted in
two rounds of consultation meetings. The TA recommended in its Inception Report of March,
2005, that relevant stakeholders included groups on Kwajalein and the Outer Islands and,
consequently, that the scope of the consultation program should be expanded to include those
areas. The TA also recommended that the term of the project be extended some 20 days to
accommodate the expanded scope. ADB eventually accepted both of those proposals.

8. Organize and facilitate a series of participatory processes, consultations, and
workshop(s).

20. The first round of participatory processes, consultations, and workshops was carried out
in Majuro during March and April of 2005. The purpose of the first round was to brief people
on the state of education and to ask what issues need to be addressed and what options
should be considered. Stakeholders were consulted individually and in group meetings. The
Briefing Paper: Issues and Options for Improving Education in the RMI summarizes the state
of education and the results of those consultations. Attachment 2 of that report presents the
list of group consultation and briefing meetings conducted at that time. Attachment 3 of that
report presents the list of individuals consulted outside the group meetings.

21. The second round of participatory processes, consultations, and workshops was carried
out from mid July through the end of August, 2005. The purpose of the second round was to
seek a national consensus on civil service reform in education and on which specific options
should be implemented to carry out the reform. The TA conducted 53 group meetings in this
round of consultations. Thirty-eight government and public stakeholder groups were consulted
on Majuro — including teachers groups from Jaluit, Likiep, and Wotje Atolls. In addition, four
groups were consulted on Ebeye, one on Lib Atoll, three on Arno Atoll, and five on Mili Atoll. A
total of 716 people participated in this round. The great majority of these meetings were
conducted in the Marshallese language. Attachment 2 of the present report lists the group
consultation and briefing meetings conducted during the second round. Attachment 3 of the
present report lists individuals consulted outside the group meetings.

6

9. Assess and report on the feasibility of establishing new institution(s) or
relationships between government and civil society.

22. One option stands out as the consensus of local stakeholders to raise education
standards by bringing in a new institution. That option is for public and private schools to
pursue accreditation by the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC). WASC
accreditation procedures help local schools apply ‘Best Practice’ to achieve education goals
determined by the schools themselves. WASC then provides independent, professional
monitoring in order to certify to local communities that the schools can be trusted to achieve
the education goals the schools have chosen. The accreditation process could begin with a
preliminary phase of reform guided by private consultants recommended by WASC. Such a
preliminary phase would be designed to help schools improve to the point that they could
actually apply to WASC for accreditation (see Slide 28, page 8 of Attachment 4, below).

23. Another option stands out as the consensus choice of local stakeholders to improve
service delivery in education by changing the relationship between government and civil
society. That option is for parents and other local community members to help provide basic
monitoring, oversight, and assessment of staff working in local schools (see Slide 31, page 9
of Attachment 4, below). MOE and the Public Service Commission (PSC) have shown that
they are not able to provide adequate monitoring of education staff — especial y in remote
locations — and MOE and PSC have also shown that they are not able or willing to hold staff
accountable even if they would monitor staff performance.

24. In such cases, a standard technique is to provide an independent check and balance over
both the service personnel and their managers by giving a formal assessment role to a group
representing those stakeholders who have the strongest interest in seeing that the services
are delivered properly. That group would probably be the parents of local students. The
parent members of local Parent Teacher Associations (PTAs) could be given that role or,
following the successful example of Likiep, a local school board could be given that role. The
specific membership could be determined locally. The same local group might share other
important management roles to some degree — perhaps participating in the planning and
formulation of local operating and capital budgets and grant applications. Such involvement
by local communities would follow the basic principle of the Community-Based Governance
System for local schools that was attempted for a few years in the RMI, beginning in 1991, but
then abandoned.

25. Finally, two higher level options to establish new institutions and relationships between
government and civil society were raised by local stakeholders in several meetings.
Stakeholders offered these options as solutions to a perceived unresponsiveness of
government to the fundamental needs of the general public. The first option is to amend the
constitution of the RMI to provide for the direct election of the president, which would have the
ultimate effect of separating the executive functions of government from the legislative
functions. The intended practical effect would be to protect the PSC, MOE, and the rest of the
public service from political interference. The second option was to amend the residency
requirements for voters and candidates in the election of senators so that senators would more
closely represent the interests of people living in their place of residence. While these two
options arose and were discussed at some consultation meetings during both rounds, neither
was included in the formal list of options presented to stakeholders in the second round of
consultations because the TA determined that the issues were rather too large and too far
reaching to fit within the intended scope of the present TA.

7

10. Assess and report on the feasibility of further improvement to education
service delivery.

26. The consultations and document research carried out by the TA show that the issues
identified by stakeholders are primarily caused either directly or indirectly by small-scale but
widespread and longstanding abuse of the civil service personnel system. Although there are
dedicated public servants in education, other people often take or avoid actions that sacrifice
the large, long-term public benefits of education for their own short-term personal benefits.
The dot-point items on the left side of Slide 29 (page 9 of Attachment 4, below) concerns PSC
Regulations and presents an itemized, but nevertheless partial list of such abuse. The first
dot-point item summarizes the situation best by noting that the PSC does not comply with
requirements to “avoid influence of political, religious, social, and family ties.” Instead, as the
PSC acknowledged during the consultations, such influence undermines all aspects of the
personnel system. An important conclusion of the TA is that the RMI will not have an
adequate education system as long abuses in the civil service personnel system remain.

27. The basic problem is that employment in the public education system has come to
resemble a make-work scheme, with personnel decisions heavily influenced by private
interests. Public service jobs are often created or filled to serve political or family interests.
Favoritism raises and protects some people while it lowers and injures others.

28. Although progress is now being made in some areas, abuse of the personnel system has
resulted in a public education work force that is inefficient, ineffective, and unaccountable.
Resources spent on education produce little of their intended public benefit, but instead seep
away to provide small personal benefits to many individuals who then have a vested interest in
preventing transparency and accountability. Without public oversight, personal interests then
undermine much of the private education system as well.

29. Endemic corruption and abuse of the personnel system undermines the education system
itself and it undermines technical solutions that would otherwise help to improve education.
Stakeholders thus want immediate reform of the civil service to improve education and other
public services. People want the corruption and abuse to stop, and they want staff that cannot
or will not perform to be fired now — not in 2008 or 2010 as proposed by MOE — even if that
means firing a close relative.

30. Increasing accountability of the public service would improve education results now — not
five or 10 years from now as forecast by MOE — and would provide a firm foundation for
subsequent technical solutions to further enhance efficiency and effectiveness.

31. One option stands out as the consensus of local stakeholders for reforming the civil
service. That option is to amend the constitution and PSC Regulations to transfer direct
authority for personnel matters to MOE and other ministries and to provide a functioning Public
Service Appeals Committee that is independent of government influence (see Slide 29, page 9
of Attachment 4, below). Other options that also attracted support all had the common
ingredient of a functioning Appeals Committee that is independent of government influence.

32. Options that would require a constitutional amendment, if pursued, might take some
months or years to implement. In the meantime, or perhaps as an alternative, the efficiency
and effectiveness of service providers in education could be enhanced immediately just by
enforcing current laws and regulations — including the Public Service Act and Regulations
and the Education Act and Rules and Regulations — by holding public servants accountable

8

for their actions or inactions and by carrying out an accreditation process for primary and
secondary schools.

33. No technical or other assistance is necessarily required for government to enforce existing
laws. As a result, it is feasible to improve education service delivery with or without further
support from ADB.

11. Assist stakeholders in the design of further project assistance and
independently comment on the need for further assistance.

34. The government of the RMI might call upon ADB (or other donors) to provide technical
assistance to help MOE develop a new strategic plan that deals directly with the issues raised
in the consultations and to restructure MOE as part of a broader civil service reform project
(see Slide 30, page 10 of Attachment 4, below). Those types of “institutional strengthening”
projects could further enhance education service delivery, but only if the personnel issues
were solved first.

35. Consequently, the TA recommends to the ADB that the ADB delay related technical or
loan assistance until the RMI substantially solves the civil service personnel issues raised by
local stakeholders. The ADB Country Program Manager for the RMI fully supports that
recommendation. At the request of the Country Program Manager, the TA has communicated
this official view to GRMI.

36. The Chief Secretary and the Minister of Finance have recently announced plans to
conduct personnel and performance audits of MOE and other ministries. GRMI may request
ADB assistance in conducting those audits. The TA recommends to the ADB that it favorably
consider such assistance. The Country Program Manager has advised that ADB could
support such audits if requested by GRMI. At the request of the Country Program Manager,
the TA has also communicated this official view to GRMI. Note, however, that nothing
prevents GRMI from addressing many of the personnel issues now without awaiting the
results of such audits.

37. The TA facilitated stakeholder discussion of four major sets of issues that might attract a
request for ADB technical assistance. Those sets of issues include:

v) Education Act and Rules and Regulations.
vi) PSC Act and Regulations.
vii) MOE
Resource
Management.
viii) MOE Structure.

38. Slides 28 – 36, on pages 8 through 12 of Attachment 4, below, list the options considered
by stakeholders for addressing each set of issues. The slides also indicate the level of and
basic reasons for stakeholder support (or lack of support) of each option. Note that these
slides indicate only the results of the stakeholder consultation program. The slides do not
indicate an official government position on any issue or option.

39. Government could approach ADB or other donors for technical assistance to help in the
detailed design and implementation of any or all of the options that government might
eventually select (including options not canvassed by the TA consultation program), but that
selection process has not been completed at the time of writing. Consequently, it was not

9

possible for the TA to work with stakeholders at the end of the project to help design further
project assistance in any greater detail than appears in the slides.

12. Undertake any other work that ADB staff may reasonably request.

40. The ADB Country Program Manager requested that the TA personnel develop options for
ADB to continue its support of civil service reform in the RMI after the completion of the current
project. The TA has, in turn, recommended to ADB the following four complementary courses
of action:

ix) Expand the scope of the TOR for the Local Social Development Analyst to include
facilitating a GRMI response to this Final Report if requested by GRMI (the current TOR
ends when the TA presents the “overall results to the leadership of the RMI;” [see also
Item 13, below]). The Local Social Development Analyst has enough time remaining in his
contract to carry out that activity if requested. ADB supports the recommendation.

x) Provide project funds for publication of the results of the second round of consultations so
the general public will have the same information provided to Cabinet and the Nitijela.
ADB supports that recommendation (see also Item 13, below).

xi) Favorably consider a request, if any, by GRMI for technical support of the planned
personnel and performance audits of MOE and other ministries. The TA recommends,
however, that any technical personnel that might be provided by ADB should make up a
minority of the total number of personnel working on the audits and be the junior members
of the team, with the majority of the team or at least its senior personnel made up either of
GRMI staff or of independent consultants or staff of a commercial firm hired by GRMI.
ADB supports that recommendation.

xii) Favorably consider a request, if any, by GRMI for technical support aimed at the
institutional strengthening of MOE, as outlined above in Item 11, but only after GRMI has
demonstrated its commitment to civil service reform by substantially solving the personnel
issues raised by local stakeholders. Depending on the specific option GRMI chooses, any
ADB support for “institutional strengthening” of PSC might actually involve dismantling
PSC and transferring most or all of its present functions to MOE and other line ministries.
Such technical support might also help recommend revisions to the Marshall Islands Code
relating to MOE and/or to PSC and/or to those parts of the constitution dealing with PSC.
ADB supports that recommendation.

xiii) Once GRMI has considered the results of the consultation program, selected the specific
options government wants to pursue, and made a request, if any, to ADB for further
technical assistance, ADB could prepare the necessary project documents and seek the
necessary project approvals, but delay implementation until GRMI has demonstrated its
commitment to civil service reform by substantially solving the personnel issues raised by
stakeholders. ADB supports that recommendation.

13. Present the overall results to the leadership of the RMI.

41. The TA planned to present the results first to MOE, then to public stakeholders, then to
Cabinet, and finally to the Nitijela. The TA attempted to arrange those meetings
accordingly. The TA was able to present the overall results of the consultation program to
10

senior MOE management on the afternoon of August 29 and to representatives of Majuro
stakeholders on the evening of August 29.

42. The Minister of Education declined to speak with the TA. As a result, the TA pursued
other avenues to arrange a meeting with Cabinet — first through the Chief Secretary and
then through the Minister in Assistance to the President. In contrast, the TA was quickly
successful in arranging with the Speaker to present the results to the Nitijela. The Nitijela
presentation was scheduled for the afternoon of 31 August — the last possible time before
the departure of the Team Leader — in order to allow the greatest possible opportunity for
the TA to meet first with Cabinet. In the end, the President postponed the presentation to
the Nitijela, but arranged a last-minute meeting with Cabinet late in the afternoon of 31
August.

43. Following the presentation to Cabinet, the President authorized the TA to make the
same presentation to the Nitijela as soon as it reconvenes again in September. The
Speaker also authorized the presentation to the Nitijela and placed it on the calendar. The
presentations was repeatedly delayed, however, and eventually blocked entirely by
pressure from the Minister of Education and other members of the ruling party. Comments
made in the Nitijela by members of the ruling parting falsely characterized the procedures
and results of the project to provide justification for blocking its presentation to the Nitijela
and for rejecting the report outright and failing to act on the issues and options raised by
stakeholders. The President did later authorize publication of the project results in the
Marshall Islands Journal, however, and that publication did appear on Friday, October 14,
2005. These results demonstrate a mixture of support and resistance within government
for increased transparency and accountability.

44. Following the TA presentation to Cabinet, Cabinet also agreed to prepare a formal
response to the TA findings. That response was to be included as an attachment to this
Final Report. The Local Social Development Analyst was made available to help facilitate
Cabinet discussions and preparation of a response if requested. No response has been
received to date.

14. Independent Monitoring and Reporting of the Entire Process

45. A representative of MICNGOs has been contracted separately to carry out the NGO
Independent Monitoring. That activity will be reported separately by the consultant carrying
out that monitoring. One change in the TOR will be mentioned here, however, because it
originated with a recommendation by personnel of the present TA. That recommendation
was to expand the scope and time period of the TOR for the NGO Independent Monitoring
to include monitoring and public reporting, over one year, of government and other
stakeholder implementation of results listed in the present report.
11

Attachment 1: Terms of Reference for Consultants

A. Lead Participatory Processes Specialist and Team Leader

1. An international consultant, Lead Participatory Processes Specialist and Team Leader, will
be recruited on an intermittent basis for a total period of 4 person months, over the ten months
duration of the project.
2. Four broad issues are often put out for assessing the effectiveness and impact of social
service provision: (i) the priority setting and the adequacy of aggregate funds allocation to social
services; (ii) the timely transfer of prioritized funds from the center to the service provider; (iii)
the appropriateness of incentives structure that service providers face; and (iv) the
responsiveness and the ability of service receivers to take advantage of the services provided.
The consultant will review this framework for social provision as it applies to the RMI. In addition
the consultant’s work will include, but not be limited to the following:
(i) At all times and at every opportunity work closely with counterpart personnel in both
the Ministry of Education and other relevant government and non-government
agencies to impart skills and knowledge in a hands-on manner.
(ii) Review all relevant, available studies relating to Education and to Public Service
performance and related matters in the RMI.
(iii) Review the proposed work program with relevant stakeholders and contributing
parties (including relevant NGOs, Mission Pacific, officials of the Ministry of Education,
Public Service Commissioners, and the local Social Development Analyst) and
prepare a detailed work program, action plan, and implementation schedule for the
TA.
(iv) Liaise with the Ministry of Education, Mission Pacific, the NGO that will independently
monitor the progress of the TA and coordinate all components and activities of the TA.
(v) Train 3 counterparts (one each from the Ministry of Education, NGO, and Ministry of
Internal Affairs) during the course of the execution of the TA in the methodologies and
approaches of participatory process planning.
(vi) Identify all relevant stakeholders interested in the supply and demand for improved
primary education services in the urban areas of Majuro.
(vii) Organize and facilitate a series of participatory processes, consultations, and
workshop(s) to bring all interested and relevant stakeholders to understand the status
and trends of primary education services in Majuro and to help the same stakeholders
to consider and to design future interventions, whether improved institutions, policies,
and, or development programs to seek to improve education service delivery.
(viii) Assess and report on the feasibility of establishing new institution(s) or relationships
between government and civil society that will continue to sustain the demand for
improved public performance.
(ix) Assess and report on the feasibility of further improvement to education service
delivery, and to further public service development.
(x) Assist stakeholders in the design of further project assistance and independently
comment on the need for further assistance, including participatory processes and
applications to program design in support of implementing the new Pacific Strategy
toward the end of the TA.
(xi) Report on all activities as per D 5.
(xii) Undertake any other work that ADB staff may reasonably request.
12

B. Local Social Development Analyst

3. A local Social Development Analyst will be hired on an intermittent basis, for a total
period of 4 months over the ten months duration of the project, to work with the Lead
Participatory Processes Specialist and Team Leader.

(i) At all times and at every opportunity work closely with counterpart personnel in both
the Ministry of Education and other relevant government and non-government
agencies to impart skills and knowledge in a hands-on manner.
(ii) Assist the Team Leader in reviewing the framework for social provision as it applies to
the RMI.
(iii) Help the Lead Participatory Processes Specialist to collate and review all relevant,
available studies relating to Education and to Public Service performance and related
matters in the RMI.
(iv) Help the Lead Participatory Processes Specialist to review the proposed work
program with relevant stakeholders and contributing parties (including relevant NGOs,
Mission Pacific, officials of the Ministry of Education, Public Service Commissioners,
and the local Social Development Analyst) and prepare a detailed work program,
action plan, and implementation schedule for the TA.
(v) Help liaise with the Ministry of Education, Mission Pacific, the NGO that will
independently monitor the progress of the TA and coordinate all components and
activities of the TA.
(vi) Help identify all relevant stakeholders interested in the supply and demand for
improved primary education services in the urban areas of Majuro.
(vii) Help organize and facilitate a series of participatory processes, consultations, and
workshop(s) to bring all interested and relevant stakeholders to understand the status
and trends of primary education services in Majuro and to help the same stakeholders
to consider and to design future interventions, whether improved institutions, policies,
and, or development programs to seek to improve education service delivery.
(viii) Assist the Team Leader with all improved education, and other public service delivery
feasibility assessments.
(ix) Identify any need for further assistance, including participatory processes toward the
end of the TA.
(x) Assist the Team Leader in all reporting as per D 5.
(xi) Undertake any other work that ADB staff may reasonably request.

C. NGO Independent Monitoring

4. An RMI NGO will be engaged on an intermittent basis for a total period of one month to
independently monitor the activities and progress of the TA and to report on the same to
Government and to the ADB at the conclusion of the TA. The NGO’s work will include, but not
be limited to the following:
(i) Attend a representative sample of the participatory discussions and other meetings,
including work programming meetings, and subsequent presentations of the results of
the exercise, and review all progress with the TA.
(ii) Maintain an ongoing summary of the nature and extent of preparations, discussions,
and presentations (who did what, and where, and how often, who attended, what was
discussed and what was decided).
13

(iii) Consider and summarize recommendations as to how the exercise could be improved
upon and repeated in the RMI.
(iv) Produce a hard copy report on the process and progress of the TA and deliver same
to both the ADB and the EA at the end of the entire exercise.
(v) Discuss summary report with the consultants, and with ADB and EA.

D. Consultants’ Reporting Requirements

5. The following reports will be prepared by the Lead Participatory Processes Specialist/ Team
Leader, assisted by the local Social Development Analyst, and submitted simultaneously to the
Government and ADB:

(i) An inception report four weeks from the commencement of services detailing initial
findings and recommendations for the future direction of the TA;

(ii) A progress report summarizing the progress of work, major findings and any
revisions to the forward program of the TA (possibly June 2005); and

(iii) A draft final and final report, based on the draft final report, incorporating the
comments and view received on the draft, possibly in October 2005.
14

Attachment 2: Second Round Group Consultation Meetings

Morning Afternoon Evening
July 18 2005

Upward Bound –
Parents & Students
6:00pm
July 20
PSC 10:00am
CMI Staff 3:00pm

July 21
Chamber of Commerce

11:30am
July 22
MOE Staff – 8:30am
CMI 3:00pm Students

July 23 – Sat

July 24 – Sun

July 25
MOE 8:30am
USP Staff 3:00pm

July 26
Mission Pacific 11:00am WUTMI 1:00pm

July 27
EPPSO 8:00am
PIER Consultants

1:00pm
July 28
MIHS Parents 10:00am
Youth to Youth in

Health 3:00pm
July 29
Colleen Taylor ADB
Youth Congress 1:00pm
Youth Social 8:00am
July 30 – Sat
Floyd Takeuchi WASC
Likiep Teachers

8:00am
3:00pm
Wotje Teachers 9:00am
July 31 – Sun

Aug 1
JOCV 10:00am
Mayor’s Association 1st

Round 4:00pm
Aug 2
Secondary Teachers
Middle School Teachers Mayor’s Association 2nd
8:30am
1st Round 3:00pm
Round 6:30pm
Aug 3
Chief Secretary
Middle School Teachers
EPPSO
2nd Round 3:00pm
Aug 4
Aljeltake Teachers
Delap Teachers 3:00pm
Assumption PTA
9:00am
6:00pm
Aug 5
9:00am WAM
Rita Teachers
Rita Parents
3:00pm (No Show)
5:30pm (No Show)
Aug 6 – Sat
Leave for Arno
Ulien Parents
Return to Majuro
15

Aug 7 – Sun

Aug 8

Coop School PTA
6:00pm
Aug 9
Staff of EZ Price 8:00am U.S.
Ambassador

2:30pm
Aug 10
Leave for Arno

Tutu Parents 4:30pm
Aug 11

World Teach 1:00pm

Laura Teachers &
Cluster PTA 3:00pm
Aug 12

MOE – Staff 3:30pm

Aug 13 – Sat

Jenrok Action
Committee 6:30pm
Aug 14 – Sun
Leave for Ebeye

10:00am
Aug 15
Ebeye Elementary
Queen of Peace
Ebeye Youth 5:00pm
Teachers 9:00am
Teachers 1:30pm
Ebeye Elementary
Parents 6:00pm
Aug 16
Leave for Lib Island
Lib Parents 12:00 noon
Return from Lib to
6:00am
Kwajalein 3:00pm
Aug 17
Meet with Major Klein – George Seitz Elementary Leave for Majuro
Host Nations 12:00 noon Admin (USAKA)
6:15pm
3:00pm
Aug 18

Middle School Parents
6:00pm (Postponed)
Aug 19

MIHS Teachers 3:00pm MIHS Parents 2nd
(Postponed)
Meeting 6:00pm
(Postponed)
Aug 20 – Sat
Leave for Arno Atoll

Lukoj Parents
Aug 21 – Sun

Aug 22
Leave for Mili Atoll

5:30pm – Takewa
5:00am
Parents (Postponed)
Aug 23

12:00pm – Nalu Parents 5:30pm – Mili Parents
Aug 24
Leave Mili for Lukonor 10:00am – Lukonor
3:00pm – Enejet Parents
& Enejet
Parents
Aug 25

Travel to Takewa
6:00pm - Takewa
Parents
Aug 26
Leave Mili Atoll for

MIHS Teachers 3:00pm
16

Majuro 5:00am
(No Show)
Aug 27 – Sat

Aug 28 – Sun

Aug 29

MOE final meeting
Stakeholder wrap up
4:00pm
meeting 6:00pm
Aug
30

Aug 31

Nitijela Briefing 1:00pm Team Leader departs
(Postponed)
5:30pm
Cabinet Briefing 3:30pm
17

Attachment 3: Individuals Consulted Outside Group Consultation
Meetings During Second Round Consultations

Office of the President

Hon. Witten Philippo
Minister in Assistance to the President

Nitijela
Hon. Litokwa Tomeing
Speaker
Michael Kabua
Senator, Kwajalein Atoll

Office of the Chief Secretary
Bobby Muller
Chief Secretary

Ministry of Education

Biram Stege
Secretary of Education
Mark Canney
Project Manager, ADB Education Project
Brenda Maddison
Assistant Secretary, Policy and Planning
Molly Helkena
Director, Professional Development
Trevor Rees
English Literacy Testing Consultant
Mashaishi Lometo
Head Teacher, Lukunwod Primary School
Martin Schneider
German Ph.D. student conducting research on Ailuk Atoll

Ministry of Finance

Casten Nemra
Assistant Secretary of Finance for Treasury
Bruce Billimon
Director, OIDA

Economic Policy, Planning, and Statistics Office
Carl Hacker
Director
Akeke Paul
Macroeconomist
Emi Chutaro
UNDP Project Manager
Ben Graham
ADB Pacific Island Economic Report Project Coordinator
Dr. Satish Chand
ADB Pacific Island Economic Report Project Economist
Fuat Andic
ADB Pacific Island Economic Report Project Tax Specialist
Stephen Boland
ADB Economist, EPPSO Strengthening Project
18

Glen McKinley
ADB Statistician, EPPSO Strengthening Project

Ministry of Internal Affairs
Stewart Hadfield
Team Leader, Preparing the Youth Social Services Project
Colleen Taylor
Youth Policy Specialist, ADB Preparing the Youth Social
Services Project

Ministry of Public Works

Tony Tomlinson
Senior Associate, Infrastructure, Beca International
Consultants

Ministry of Health

Kinra Mera
Health Assistant, Lib Atoll

Private Sector
Marie Maddison
Advisor/Administration Director, Women United Together in the
Marshall Islands
President, Executive Committee, Marshall Islands Council
of NGOs
Giff Johnson
Editor, The Marshall Islands Journal
Executive Committee, Marshall Islands Council of NGOs
Board of Directors, Majuro Cooperative School
Takbar Ishigura
Leiroij, Mili Atoll and Majuro Atoll
Chair, Jenrok Action Committee
Baron Bigler
College Student

College of the Marshall Islands
David Kupferman
Assistant Dean, Academic Affairs

Western Association of

Schools and Colleges
Floyd Takeuchi
Member, College of the Marshall Islands Review Team

Asian Development Bank
Stephen Pollard
Country Program Officer for RMI
Clay Wescott
Private Sector Specialist

19

United States Army

Kwajalein Atoll
Major Jeffrey Klein
Chief, Host Nation Office

United States Department of

the Interior
David Cohen
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Insular Affairs

United States Embassy

Greta Morris
Ambassador to the Republic of the Marshall Islands
Tom Maus
Military Liaison/Program Specialist, U.S. Embassy, Majuro
20

Attachment 4: Newspaper Insert Presenting to the Public the
Results of First and Second Rounds of Consultations

The following 12 pages show the contents of the newspaper insert.
21

Attachment 5: Selected Marshall Islands Journal Articles Relating to
Project
33

Document Outline

þÿ
þÿ
þÿ
þÿ
- þÿ
- þÿ
þÿ
- þÿ
  - þÿ
  - þÿ
  - þÿ
  - þÿ
  - þÿ
  - þÿ
  - þÿ
  - þÿ
  - þÿ
  - þÿ
  - þÿ
  - þÿ
  - þÿ
þÿ
þÿ
þÿ
þÿ
þÿ

last updated Sat Sep 01, 2012