.Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No: RES14409 RESTRUCTURING PAPER ON A PROPOSED PROJECT RESTRUCTURING OF THE UNIVERSITY OF GUYANA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT PROJECT APPROVED ON June 23, 2011 TO THE CO-OPERATIVE REPUBLIC OF GUYANA OCTOBER 28, 2014 Education Global Practice Latin America and the Caribbean Region ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS EA Environmental Assessment EQIP Education Quality Improvement Program ICT Information and Communications Technology Kbps Kilobytes Per Second LCDS Low Carbon Development Strategy Mbps Megabytes Per Second PAD Project Appraisal Document PDO Project Development Objective UG University of Guyana SDR Special Drawing Rights Regional Vice President: Jorge Familiar Country Director: Sophie Sirtaine Senior Global Practice Director: Claudia Maria Costin Practice Manager: Reema Nayar Task Team Leader: Hongyu Yang CO-OPERATIVE REPUBLIC OF GUYANA UG Science and Technology Support Project (P125288) CONTENTS A. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CHANGES................................................................................ ii B. PROJECT STATUS .................................................................................................................. iii C. PROPOSED CHANGES .......................................................................................................... iii ANNEX 1: RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND MONITORING ..................................................... 1 DATA SHEET Co-operative Republic of Guyana UG Science and Technology Support Project (P125288) LATIN AMERICA AND CARIBBEAN Education Global Practice . Report No: RES14409 . Basic Information Project ID: P125288 Lending Instrument: Specific Investment Loan Regional Vice President: Jorge Familiar Original EA Category: Partial Assessment (B) Country Director: Sophie Sirtaine Current EA Category: Partial Assessment (B) Director: Amit Dar Original Approval Date: 23-Jun-2011 Practice Manager: Reema Nayar Current Closing Date: 30-Jun-2017 Team Leader: Hongyu Yang . Borrower: Co-operative Republic of Guyana Responsible Ministry of Education Agency: . Restructuring Type Form Type: Full Restructuring Paper Decision Country Director Approval Authority: Restructuring Level 2 Level: . Financing (as of October 17, 2014 ) Key Dates Approval Effectiveness Original Revised Closing Project Ln/Cr/TF Status Signing Date Date Date Closing Date Date Effec- 23-Jun-2 P125288 IDA-49690 30-Sep-2012 13-Dec-2012 30-Jun-2017 30-Jun-2017 tive 011 Disbursements (in Millions) Curren- Un- % Project Ln/Cr/TF Status Original Revised Cancelled Disbursed cy disbursed Disbursed P125288 IDA-49690 Effective XDR 6.20 6.20 0.00 1.10 5.099 17.75 i . Policy Waivers Does the project depart from the CAS in content or in other significant Yes [ ] No [ X ] respects? Does the project require any policy waiver(s)? Yes [ ] No [ X ] . A. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CHANGES The main changes to the Project and rationale are: (a) Revisions to the results matrix to complete data that was not available at Appraisal, to align it with more realistic targets, and to better reflect Project activities. Specifically, the changes are: (i) introduction of baseline and targets for two PDO-level indicators; (ii) revision of targets for one PDO-level indicator; (iii) update targets for six intermediate results indicators; (iv) substitution of one intermediate results indicator with a new one that better reflects Project activities; and (v) deletion of two intermediate indicators. (b) Revisions to the disbursement estimates to reflect the delays in Project effectiveness. (c) Removal of Section V from the Financing Agreement to remove redundancy and increase clarity regarding the use of funds. Change in Implementing Agency Yes [ ] No [ X ] Change in Project's Development Objectives Yes [ ] No [ X ] Change in Results Framework Yes [ X ] No [ ] Change in Safeguard Policies Triggered Yes [ ] No [ X ] Change of EA category Yes [ ] No [ X ] Other Changes to Safeguards Yes [ ] No [ X ] Change in Legal Covenants Yes [ ] No [ X ] Change in Loan Closing Date(s) Yes [ ] No [ X ] Cancellations Proposed Yes [ ] No [ X ] Change to Financing Plan Yes [ ] No [ X ] Change in Disbursement Arrangements Yes [ ] No [ X ] Reallocation between Disbursement Categories Yes [ ] No [ X ] Change in Disbursement Estimates Yes [ X ] No [ ] Change to Components and Cost Yes [ ] No [ X ] Change in Institutional Arrangements Yes [ ] No [ X ] Change in Financial Management Yes [ ] No [ X ] Change in Procurement Yes [ ] No [ X ] Change in Implementation Schedule Yes [ ] No [ X ] Other Change(s) Yes [ X ] No [ ] Appraisal Summary Change in Economic and Financial Analysis Yes [ ] No [ X ] ii Appraisal Summary Change in Technical Analysis Yes [ ] No [ X ] Appraisal Summary Change in Social Analysis Yes [ ] No [ X ] Appraisal Summary Change in Environmental Analysis Yes [ ] No [ X ] Appraisal Summary Change in Risk Assessment Yes [ ] No [ X ] B. PROJECT STATUS The Project was approved by the Board on June 23, 2011 and became effective on December 13, 2012, after unforeseen delays in meeting some of the effectiveness conditions. The Project has three components: • Component 1: Education Quality Improvement Program (EQIP). • Component 2: Infrastructure Rehabilitation. • Component 3: Institutional Capacity Building. Under Component 1, the curriculum reform for the 15 undergraduate programs in the 4 Science and Technology faculties of the University of Guyana (UG) has been launched. 8 research grant proposals from teams of UG lecturers have been selected and are being financed. A second call for research grant proposals has been completed and 14 proposals were received and are currently being evaluated. Under Component 2, the design phase of the rehabilitation works for 13 buildings of the Science and Technology faculties has been completed. The design for campus-wide fiber optic network has been completed. The technical specifications for laboratory equipment have been finalized. Under Component 3, the Project Coordination Unit continues to be staffed and the technical committees meet regularly and actively participate in project implementation within technical areas as needed. Four studies have been programmed under the project to provide capacity building for planning, assessing, and developing directions for the University. One of the studies is finished and another one is in progress. . Development Objectives/Results Project Development Objectives Original PDO The objective of the Project is to strengthen the four Science and Technology faculties at UG through infrastructure, research and curricular improvements while building the basis for improved facilities management and future growth. Change in Project's Development Objectives: None C. PROPOSED CHANGES a) Change in Results Framework Explanation: The Results Framework, as included in the PAD approved by the Board, lacked some baselines and targets because the corresponding data were unavailable at the Project Appraisal. It also included one intermediate results indicator that is not aligned with the Project activities. Original targets for some indicators were not realistic. Some original targets were too ambitious and others were less so, as a result some targets have been revised. The changes to the Results Framework are explained below and detailed in Annex 1. iii Target years used in the Results Framework have been specified. Since the Project became effective in mid-December 2012, years 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 have been specified as 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017, respectively. PDO-level indicators The baselines and targets for two PDO-level indicators have been introduced, and their names revised. Baselines and targets were unavailable at the time of Appraisal and the corresponding methodologies and baseline measurements had to be developed during the first year of implementation. For PDO-level indicator 1, a survey has been designed and developed to measure the satisfaction (relative to expectations) of students, faculty and private sector employers with UG. The baseline and target are based on survey items that ask about satisfaction with UG in areas directly impacted by the Project. In addition, since it is expected that it will take more than 5 years for employers to feel the impact of the Project, the views of employers (measured in the overall survey) are not included in the PDO-level indicator. The name of PDO-level indicator 1 has been revised accordingly. For PDO-level indicator 2, an inventory of buildings, equipment and ICT has been conducted and a methodology was developed to measure their level of maintenance. By using this methodology, the baseline and target scores for buildings, equipment, and ICT have been developed. The name of PDO-level indicator 2 has also been revised to clarify what it is actually measuring. Targets for PDO-level indicator 3 have been updated to specify how many studies will be incorporated into the UG strategic plan, and when. The changes are described below and detailed in Annex 1: i) PDO-level indicator 1:  Previous indicator name: Strengthen science and technology faculties: Increase in student, faculty, and private sector satisfaction with the strength of the four science faculties at UG.  Revised indicator name: Increase in student and faculty satisfaction with the strength of the four science faculties at UG.  Previous baseline: Baseline to be established in year 1.  Revised baseline: Students: 11.85; Faculty: 4.04  Previous end of Project target: No target was set.  Revised end of Project target: Students: 15.34; Faculty: 12.10  Methodology: This is on a scale that ranges from 0 to 40. The minimum possible mean value is 0 and the maximum possible mean is 40. Larger values imply higher student and faculty satisfaction and smaller values represent lower satisfaction. ii) PDO-level indicator 2:  Previous indicator name: Basis for improved facilities management: New investments in buildings, equipment and ICT maintained in working order.  Revised indicator name: Maintenance of buildings and equipment in 13 rehabilitated buildings, and of ICT campus-wide.  Previous baseline: Baseline to be derived from inventory, to be established in year 1.  Revised baseline: Buildings: 54%; Equipment: 28%; ICT: 0%  Previous end of Project target: +30%  Revised end of Project target: Buildings: 70%; Equipment: 33%; ICT: 100%  Methodology: Scores stem from an annual inventory of buildings and equipment that follows a standardized protocol in order to assign a percentage score from 0% to 100% to each building and piece of laboratory equipment, as well as to UG’s ICT. iii) PDO-level indicator 3: Basis for Improved Growth: Studies produced by the Project are incorporated into the UG strategic plan:  Previous end of Project target: Incorporated iv  Revised end of Project target: The 4 studies are incorporated Intermediate result indicators The counterpart financing intermediate result indicator (previously named intermediate result indicator eight) and intermediate indicator seven (“Forward-looking studies completed”) have been removed. The targets for six other intermediate results indicators have been updated as a result of the emergence of updated information during the first 20 months of implementation. The name of intermediate results indicator 1 (“Updated curricula in each of 4 science departments”) has changed to clarify that curricula are being updated in 4 Science faculties, not departments. Its targets have been revised because the activity is being scaled up to all 15 existing programs in the 4 faculties. The end-of-Project target of intermediate result indicator 2 (“Number of scientific research projects funded”) has been decreased from 40 to 16 because the proposals that have received funding so far cost on average US$40,000, as opposed to the US$15,000 that had been initially planned. The end-of-Project target for intermediate result indicator 3 (“Rehabilitate and equip laboratory buildings”) has been decreased by one building, since alternative financing sources outside of the Project have been identified for one of the 14 buildings (the Center for Biodiversity), which was built more recently and hence requires less rehabilitation. The name of intermediate result indicator 4 has been modified from “Improve campus-wide drainage through new pumps and infrastructure in place and working” to “Campus-wide rehabilitation of the drainage system,” in order to more accurately reflect the nature of the work. Intermediate result indicator 5 (“Increase bandwidth through campus-wide internet network”) has been revised to reflect Project activities and the results that can be expected from them. The Project does not finance an increase of Internet bandwidth, but rather it finances the installation of a single, fiber optic campus-wide network and its connection to the e-government network. The indicator has therefore been substituted for a new one making reference to the establishment of the UG network and its connection with the e-government one. Some targets for intermediate indicator 6 (“Facility management plan established and under implementation”) have been altered to be more realistic. Finally, the definition of intermediate results indicator 9 (on Project beneficiaries) has been developed and targets revised accordingly. The changes are described below and detailed in Annex 1: i) Intermediate result indicator 1: Updated curricula in each of the 4 Science faculties:  Previous end of Project target: 12  Revised end of Project target: Revised curricula of 15 programs is approved by the Academic Board ii) Intermediate result indicator 2: Number of scientific research projects funded:  Previous end of Project target: 40  Revised end of Project target: 16 iii) Intermediate result indicator 3: Rehabilitate and equip laboratory buildings:  Previous end of Project target: 14  Revised end of Project target: 13 iv) Intermediate result indicator 4: Improve campus-wide drainage through new pumps and infrastructure in place and working  Revised indicator: Campus-wide rehabilitation of the drainage system v) Intermediate result indicator 5: Existence of a single, working UG connection to external networks  Previous indicator: Increase bandwidth through campus-wide internet network  Previous baseline: 256kbps  Previous end of Project target: 2Mbps  Revised indicator: Existence of a single, working UG connection to external networks  Revised baseline: No v  Revised end of Project target: Yes vi) Intermediate result indicator 6: Facilities management plan established and under implementation:  Previous target for year 3: Yes  Revised target for year 3: No  The end of Project target of Yes remains unchanged vii) Intermediate result indicator 7: Forward-looking studies completed:  Revised intermediate result indicator: Intermediate result indicator 7 is deleted. viii) Intermediate result indicator 8: Counterpart Financing provided to the Project  Previous intermediate result indicator: Specific amount allocated in the University budget for recurrent costs of the Project.  Revised intermediate result indicator: Intermediate result indicator 8 is deleted. ix) Intermediate result indicator 9: Direct Project beneficiaries (percent female):  Previous end of Project target: 6,300 (60%) enrolled students  Revised end of Project target: 14,601 (64%) enrolled and 1,697 graduated (66%) b) Revisions to the disbursement estimates Explanation: As a consequence of the delay in Project Effectiveness, the disbursement estimates have been revised as follows. Fiscal Year Current (USD) Proposed (USD) 2012 500,000.00 0.00 2013 2,000,000.00 299,882.00 2014 3,500,000.00 1,317,624.00 2015 2,500,000.00 2,000,000.00 2016 1,000,000.00 4,325,000.00 2017 500,000.00 2,057,494.00 Total 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 c) Other changes Explanation: Section V of the Financial Agreement (page 15) will be removed from the FA. Said obligation states that an exact amount has to be provided as counterpart funding each year of Project implementation. This level of detail has been assessed as unnecessary since the obligation of provision of counterpart funds and its purpose are more generally stated in Section 4.03 of the General Conditions in the following terms: “The Recipient shall provide or cause to be provided, promptly as needed, the funds, facilities, services and other resources required for the Project.” vi ANNEX 1: RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND MONITORING GUYANA: UG Science and Technology Support Project (P125288) Project Development Objective (PDO) Project Development Objective (PDO): The objective of the Project is to strengthen the four science and technology faculties at UG through infrastructure, research and curricular improvements while building the basis for improved facilities management and future growth. N=New Cumulative Target Values Description C=Continu Responsibility (indicator Core PDO Level Results Unit of Base- Frequ- Data Source/ ed 2013 for Data definition etc.) Indicators Measure line 2014 2015 2016 2017 ency Methodology R=Revised (Actual) Collection D=Dropped PDO Indicator # R Students Students Students Students Students Students Annual Online Online survey Scores here refer One: 11.85 11.85 12.73 13.60 14.47 15.34 surveys are designed and only to the items Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty conducted analyzed by directly related to Strengthen science 4.04 4.04 6.06 8.07 10.09 12.10 with students, statistics the Project’s and technology faculty and professor; activities; scores for faculties: private sector distributed student and faculty Increase in student representative UG Office of are used to monitor and faculty s to measure Quality this indicator. satisfaction with the their level of Assurance / strength of the four satisfaction Project The scale ranges science faculties at with UG in a Coordination from 0 to 40. The UG wide range of unit minimum possible areas. Details mean value is 0 and on the the maximum mean survey’s value is 40. Larger design and values imply higher analysis are quality assurance included in and smaller values the represent lower Operational quality assurance. Manual Baseline survey conducted in 2013. 1 N=New Cumulative Target Values Description C=Continu Responsibility (indicator Core PDO Level Results Unit of Base- Frequ- Data Source/ ed 2013 for Data definition etc.) Indicators Measure line 2014 2015 2016 2017 ency Methodology R=Revised (Actual) Collection D=Dropped PDO Indicator % R Buildings Buildings Buildings Buildings Buildings Buildings Annual Annual Independent Scores stem from Two: 54 54 54 60 65 70 Inventory of consultant an annual inventory buildings, of buildings and Basis for improved Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment equipment equipment that facilities 28 28 28 30 32 33 and ICT follows a management: verifies standardized Maintenance of ICT ICT ICT ICT ICT ICT whether they protocol in order to buildings, 0 0 0 100 100 100 are assign a percentage equipment in 13 maintained score from 0% to rehabilitated and in 100% to each buildings, and of working building and piece ICT campus-wide order. of laboratory The protocol equipment, as well for the as to UG’s ICT. measurement of the maintenance Baseline data from of buildings, Inventory in 2013. equipment and ICT (as a percentage) is detailed in the Operational Manual 2 N=New Cumulative Target Values Description C=Continu Responsibility (indicator Core PDO Level Results Unit of Base- Frequ- Data Source/ ed 2013 for Data definition etc.) Indicators Measure line 2014 2015 2016 2017 ency Methodology R=Revised (Actual) Collection D=Dropped PDO Indicator Text R No Project Studies The studies All 4 studies End of Minutes of Project Studies produced Three: financed have just related to the are Project Decisions Coordinator in by the Project are studies commenced creation of the incorporated taken by UG collaboration completed, Basis for improved incorporated . There are Biodiversity into the UG Academic / with Secretary reviewed and growth: Studies into the UG no results Institute and strategic plan Policy / of UG discussed by the produced by the strategic plan yet the Planning Governing UG Project are Assessment of Committee Council Academic/Policy/Pl incorporated into the Existing and/or the UG anning Committee UG strategic plan Human Governing and/or the UG Resources Council with Governing Council, have been respect to the with Decisions incorporated Biodiversity incorporated into into the UG Institute, the the UG strategic strategic plan Research and plan. Innovation Fund, the Studies are in Business relation to the Development following areas: Unit, and the Creation of the Assessment of Biodiversity Existing Institute, Set up of Human Research and Resources Innovation Fund, study Establishment of the Business Development Unit, and Assessment of Existing Human Resources. 3 N=New Cumulative Target Values Description C=Continu Responsibility (indicator Core PDO Level Results Unit of Base- Frequ- Data Source/ ed 2013 for Data definition etc.) Indicators Measure line 2014 2015 2016 2017 ency Methodology R=Revised (Actual) Collection D=Dropped INTERMEDIATE RESULTS Intermediate Results (Component One): Improving curriculum, teaching and research Intermediate Result Text R No updated Situational Program Revisions of Revisions Annual Approvals of Project Curriculum update indicator One: curricula in analysis of documents Year 1, Year of Year 1, courses by Coordinator / achieved when Updated curricula in the 4 Science 15 for the 15 2, Year 3, Year 2, Deans of UG Office of tested in the each of the 4 faculties programs is identified and Year 4 Year 3 and Science Quality classroom and Science faculties completed programs courses are Year 4 Faculties and Assurance subsequently completed completed. courses are Decisions by approved by UG approved the Academic Academic Board. by the Board The indicator refers Academic to the 15 existing Board. undergraduate programs in the 4 Science and Technology faculties. Intermediate Result # R 0 8 16 16 16 16 Annual Contracts Project Number of indicator Two: between the Coordinator / LCDS-related Number of scientific grantor and UG Office of research projects research projects the grantee Quality awarded. funded Assurance 4 N=New Cumulative Target Values Description C=Continu Responsibility (indicator Core PDO Level Results Unit of Base- Frequ- Data Source/ ed 2013 for Data definition etc.) Indicators Measure line 2014 2015 2016 2017 ency Methodology R=Revised (Actual) Collection D=Dropped Intermediate Results (Component Two): Infrastructure rehabilitation Intermediate Result # R 0 0 0 5 12 13 Annual Annual UG Facilities Rehabilitation indicator Three: Inventory of Management process would Rehabilitate and Buildings and office / involve work on equip laboratory Equipment Facilities electricity, water buildings Management and sewage supply Coordinator as well as security and other components. Equipping would involve laboratory equipment, consumables and other instructional materials. Intermediate Result Yes / R No No No No Yes Yes Annual Annual UG Facilities To improve basic indicator Four: No Inventory of Management drainage Campus-wide Buildings and Office / infrastructure. rehabilitation of the Equipment Facilities drainage systems Management Coordinator 5 N=New Cumulative Target Values Description C=Continu Responsibility (indicator Core PDO Level Results Unit of Base- Frequ- Data Source/ ed 2013 for Data definition etc.) Indicators Measure line 2014 2015 2016 2017 ency Methodology R=Revised (Actual) Collection D=Dropped Intermediate Result Yes / R No No No Yes Yes Yes Annual Report by the Manager of External networks indicator Five: No Manager of UG’s Center include Internet and Existence of a UG’s Center for the e-government single, working UG for Information network. connection to Information Technology external networks Technology verifying whether the single connection has been established and it is working, and what are its benefits to UG Intermediate Results (Component Three): Institutional capacity building Intermediate Result Yes/ R No No No No Yes Yes Annual Facilities UG Facilities The Facilities indicator Six: No Management Management Management Office Facility Plan and Office / creates and management plan Progress Facilities implements a established and Reports Management Facilities under Coordinator Management Plan implementation for the whole campus. 6 N=New Cumulative Target Values Description C=Continu Responsibility (indicator Core PDO Level Results Unit of Base- Frequ- Data Source/ ed 2013 for Data definition etc.) Indicators Measure line 2014 2015 2016 2017 ency Methodology R=Revised (Actual) Collection D=Dropped Intermediate Result # D 0 0 0 2 4 4 Annual Studies Project The 4 studies indicator Seven: completed Coordinator envisioned are: Forward looking Center for studies completed Excellence for the Study of Bio-Diversity, Research and Innovation Fund, Business Development Unit, Personnel Distribution. Intermediate Result Amount D 0 0 70,000 225,000 480,000 625,000 Annual Annual Project The amount indicator Eight: (US$) Budget for the Coordinator / allocated in the Counterpart University University University budget Financing provided Bursar’s for support to the to the Project Office recurrent costs of this Project. Targets are not cumulative. 7 N=New Cumulative Target Values Description C=Continu Responsibility (indicator Core PDO Level Results Unit of Base- Frequ- Data Source/ ed 2013 for Data definition etc.) Indicators Measure line 2014 2015 2016 2017 ency Methodology R=Revised (Actual) Collection D=Dropped Intermediate Result # of R 0 6,774 9,383 11,992 14,601 14,601 Annual UG Project Project Indicator Nine: students (64%) (64%) (64%) (64%) (64%) enrollment Coordinator / beneficiaries are Direct Project enrolled reports UG Office of defined as UG beneficiaries (%) the students who are (percent female) Vice-Chancell studying at the or, Registrar Turkeyen campus # of at some point students during the life of gradua- 1423 1493 1545 1597 1649 the Project, as well ted (%) (65%) (66%) (66%) (66%) (66%) as those students who graduated from the Turkeyen campus during the life of the Project. The value for 2013 corresponds to actual UG enrollment and graduation numbers at the Turkeyen campus in 2013/2014. 8