usaid kenya tusome early grade reading activity

USAID KENYA TUSOME EARLY GRADE READING ACTIVITY FY 2017 Annual Progress Report October 1, 2016–September 30, 2017

First submission: October 31, 2017; final version: June 26, 2020 This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by RTI International.

USAID KENYA TUSOME EARLY GRADE READING ACTIVITY FY 2017 ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT October 1, 2016–September 30, 2017

First submission: October 31, 2017 Final version: May 14, 2020

Award No: AID-615-C-14-00007

Prepared for Patrick Kollars, Contracting Officer (CO) Lilian Gangla, Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) United States Agency for International Development/Kenya C/O American Embassy United Nations Avenue, Gigiri P.O. Box 629, Village Market 00621 Nairobi, Kenya

Prepared by Kennedy Kibukho and Dunston Kwayumba RTI International 3040 Cornwallis Road P.O. Box 12194 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-2194 USA

DISCLAIMER

The views expressed by the authors do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government.

Tusome Annual Report, October 1, 2016 – September 30, 2017 iii

Table of Contents List of Figures .........................................................................................................................vi List of Tables ...........................................................................................................................vi Abbreviations ......................................................................................................................... vii 1. Executive Summary ......................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background ....................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Qualitative impact ............................................................................................. 3 1.3 Quantitative impact ........................................................................................... 7 1.4 Constraints and opportunities ........................................................................... 9 1.5 Quarter 1 work plan, FY 2018 ......................................................................... 10

2 Key Achievements (Qualitative Impact) ......................................................................... 10

2.1 Increased availability and use of appropriate textbooks and supplementary materials that support reading ................................................ 10

2.1.1 Enhance use of ICT and tablet tools ............................................... 11 2.1.2 Maintain textbook pupil-to-book ratios ............................................ 12 2.1.3 Disseminate Class 1 and 2 materials and homework books .......... 12 2.1.4 Revise Class 1 and 2 learning materials ........................................ 13 2.1.5 Develop guidelines for supplementary readers for Classes 1,

2, and 3 ........................................................................................... 13 2.1.6 Train National Technical Team members and KPA editors on

how to develop supplementary readers for Classes 1, 2, and 3 ...................................................................................................... 15

2.1.7 Develop scope and sequence for Class 3, in both Kiswahili and English ..................................................................................... 16

2.1.8 Develop Class 3 teaching and learning materials ........................... 16 2.1.9 Design materials for Class 3, in both Kiswahili and English ........... 17 2.1.10 Develop illustrations for materials for Class 3 ................................. 17 2.1.11 Edit materials for Class 3, in both Kiswahili and English ................ 17 2.1.12 Pilot Class 3 instructional materials ................................................ 18 2.1.13 Write Tusome exams ...................................................................... 19 2.1.14 Review and improve PTTC materials ............................................. 20 2.1.15 Develop Class 3 teachers’ guides .................................................. 21

2.2 Improved methods of reading instruction delivery .......................................... 21 2.2.1 Special-needs education interventions ........................................... 22 2.2.2 Training of officers from Directorate of Quality Assurance and

Standards ....................................................................................... 25 2.2.3 Sensitization training for QASOs, SCDEs, and other

government officers ........................................................................ 26 2.2.4 KICD–Tusome infusion training ...................................................... 26 2.2.5 Training of Tusome national trainers .............................................. 29 2.2.6 Tusome lead trainers’ training of CSOs and star teachers,

Terms 1 and 2 ................................................................................. 31 2.2.7 CSOs’ training of Class 1, 2, and 3 teachers .................................. 34 2.2.8 CSOs’ training of head teachers ..................................................... 36 2.2.9 Tusome national trainers’ training of Instructional Coaches ........... 37 2.2.10 Coaches’ training of APBET teachers for Classes 1, 2, and 3 ....... 39 2.2.11 Coaches’ training of APBET head teachers ................................... 40 2.2.12 CSOs’ and ICs’ leadership of zonal- and cluster-level

reflections ....................................................................................... 41 2.2.13 Progress on Youth Fund grants implementation ............................ 42

Tusome Annual Report, October 1, 2016 – September 30, 2017 iv

2.3 Supervision support to teachers and PTTC lecturers by CQASOs, SCDEs, and Tusome staff in teaching and assessing reading ....................... 43

2.3.1 Support to teachers by CSOs, ICs, and head teachers .................. 43 2.3.2 Tusome staff support for CSOs and ICs ......................................... 44 2.3.3 CDEs support and monitor Tusome programs ............................... 45 2.3.4 SCDEs supervise and monitor Tusome programs and upload

their observation data ..................................................................... 46 2.3.5 NTT monitoring visits to schools (public, private, APBET,

special needs) and PTTCs in counties ........................................... 47 2.4 Improved policy environment that promotes reading skills ............................. 47

2.4.1 Private sector partnerships (supported by WERK) ......................... 47 2.4.2 Support the review of the National Book Policy .............................. 47 2.4.3 Supporting development of policy guidelines ................................. 48 2.4.4 Plan for consultative meeting .......................................................... 49 2.4.5 Consultations with Tusome partners .............................................. 49 2.4.6 Consultation with KNEC to set the Class 3 and update Class

1 and 2 reading benchmarks; and set Class 1 and 2 SNE learner benchmarks ........................................................................ 49

2.4.7 Professional and institutional capacity building for MoE, TSC, KICD, and other relevant bodies ..................................................... 50

2.5 Lessons learned .............................................................................................. 50

3 Activity Progress (Quantitative Impact) .......................................................................... 52

3.1 Summary data on trainings and classroom observations ............................... 52 3.2 Summary data on support by Tusome technical staff ..................................... 52 3.3 Summary of support by NTT members, SCDEs, and QASOs ........................ 54

4 Constraints and Opportunities ....................................................................................... 54

4.1 Opportunities ................................................................................................... 54 4.2 Constraints ...................................................................................................... 55

5 Performance Monitoring ................................................................................................ 57

6 Progress on Gender Strategy ........................................................................................ 59

7 Progress on Links to Other USAID Programs ............................................................... 59

8 Progress on Links with Government of Kenya Agencies ............................................... 60

9 Progress on USAID FORWARD .................................................................................... 60

10 Sustainability and Exit Strategy ..................................................................................... 61

11 Subsequent Quarter’s Work Plan .................................................................................. 61

12 Financial Information ..................................................................................................... 62

12.1 Cash Flow and Budget Details ........................................................................ 62 12.2 New Subaward Details .................................................................................... 65

13 Activity Administration .................................................................................................... 66

13.1 Personnel ........................................................................................................ 66 13.2 Contract Modifications and Amendments ....................................................... 67

14 Information for Annual Reports Only ............................................................................. 68

14.1 Budget Disaggregated by County ................................................................... 68 14.2 Budget Disaggregated by Earmarks ............................................................... 68 14.3 Subawards ...................................................................................................... 68 14.4 List of FY 2017 Deliverables ........................................................................... 72 14.5 Summary of Non-USG Funding ...................................................................... 74

Tusome Annual Report, October 1, 2016 – September 30, 2017 v

14.6 Type of Accounting System Used During Reporting Period ........................... 75

Annexes

Annex A: Success Stories ............................................................................................. 76

Annex B: Numbers of Head Teachers and Teachers Trained in FY 2017, by County ........................................................................................................... 80

Annex C: Number of CSOs, ICs, and Star Teachers Trained, by Gender and County, FY 2017 ........................................................................................... 86

Annex D: SNE Head Teacher and Teacher Trainings, Term 1, FY 2017, by County ........................................................................................................... 89

Annex E: Term 3 2017 KICD–Tusome Infusion Training, SNE, by County .................. 92

Annex F: Term 3 2017 KICD–Tusome Infusion Training: CSOs, Head Teachers, and Teachers, by County, Public or Private Institution, and Gender ............. 95

Annex G: Classroom Observation Data ........................................................................ 98

Annex H: Youth Fund Grant Interventions .................................................................. 109

Annex I: Attendance at FY 2017 Sensitization Training for QASOs, SCDEs, and MoE/TSC/KICD Officers ....................................................................... 114

Annex J: Number of Zonal/Cluster Reflection Meetings, FY 2017 ............................. 117

Annex K: Performance Data Tables – Tusome-Wide Indicators................................. 120

Tusome Annual Report, October 1, 2016 – September 30, 2017 vi

List of Figures Figure 1: English reading performance by reader categories, at baseline and

midline ............................................................................................................. 2

Figure 2: Kiswahili reading performance by reader categories, at baseline and midline ............................................................................................................. 3

List of Tables Table 1: Work plan activities scheduled for October 1–December 31, 2017 ............... 10

Table 2: Learning materials and homework books distributed to schools ................... 13

Table 3: Characteristics of different levels of readers ................................................. 14

Table 4: Tusome Class 3 field-test sites ...................................................................... 18

Table 5: Percentage of CSOs supported, by region .................................................... 53

Table 6: NTT and MoE official (SCDEs and QASOs) classroom support ................... 54

Table 7: Cash flow report and financial projections (in US dollars) [REDACTED] ................................................................................................. 62

Table 8: Budget details (in US dollars) [REDACTED] ................................................. 63

Table 9: List of subawards issued to Youth Fund grantees in Q4 FY 2017 ................ 66

Table 10: Tusome hires, October 1, 2016, to September 30, 2017 .............................. 67

Table 11: Tusome positions to be hired in Q1 FY 2018 (October 1–December 31, 2017) ...................................................................................... 67

Table 12: Status of Tusome subawards, September 30, 2017 ..................................... 69

Table 13: List of all deliverables produced during FY 2017........................................... 72

Table 14: Summary of FY 2017 leverage [REDACTED] ............................................... 75

Tusome Annual Report, October 1, 2016 – September 30, 2017 vii

Abbreviations ACOR Acting Contracting Officer’s Representative APBET Alternative Provision of Basic Education and Training ASAL arid and semi-arid lands CBYF County Board Youth Forum CCN Cooperating Country National CDCS Country Development Cooperation Strategy CDE County Director of Education CO Contracting Officer COP Chief of Party COR Contracting Officer’s Representative CQASO County Quality Assurance and Standards Officer CSO Curriculum Support Officer cwpm correct words per minute CYBN County Youth Bunge Network DAYO Dream Achievers Youth Organization DIM direct instructional model DQA Data Quality Assessment DQAS Directorate of Quality Assurance and Standards EARC Education Assessment Resource Center EDPCG Educational Development Partner’s Coordination Group ESQAC Education Standards and Quality Assurance Council FAF Foreign Assistance Framework FPE free public education FY fiscal year GPE Global Partnership for Education IC Instructional Coach ICT information and communication technology IR Intermediate Result KEMI Kenya Education Management Institute KEPSHA Kenya Primary School Head Teachers Association KICD Kenya Institute of Curriculum Development KISE Kenya Institute of Special Education KNEC Kenya National Examinations Council KPA Kenya Publishers Association LOE level of effort M&E monitoring and evaluation MoE Ministry of Education MSI Management Systems International N/A not applicable

Tusome Annual Report, October 1, 2016 – September 30, 2017 viii

NTT National Technical Team PREG Partnership for Resilience and Economic Growth PRIEDE Primary Education Development project (for mathematics) PRIMR Primary Math and Reading initiative (2011–2014) PTE Primary Teacher Education PTTC Primary Teacher Training College Q quarter QASO Quality Assurance and Standards Office / Officer REPO Regional Education Program Officer RTI RTI International (registered trademark and trade name of Research Triangle

Institute) SAGA Semi-Autonomous Government Agency SCDE Sub-County Director of Education SD standard deviation SEE Signed Exact English SNE special-needs education SO Strategic Objective TBD to be determined ToT training of trainers TPAD Teacher Performance Appraisal and Development TSC Teachers’ Service Commission TSC-CD TSC County Director TSC-SCD TSC Sub-County Director UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund USAID United States Agency for International Development USG United States Government VAT value-added tax VSO Voluntary Service Overseas WERK Women Educational Researchers of Kenya YIKE Youth Initiative Kenya

Tusome Annual Report, October 1, 2016 – September 30, 2017 1

1. Executive Summary 1.1 Background The USAID Tusome Early Grade Reading Activity is a Kenya Ministry of Education (MoE) program aimed at improving reading outcomes of children in Classes 1, 2, and 3 in all Kenyan public primary schools and 1,500 Alternative Provision of Basic Education and Training (APBET) institutions. The Activity is one of the two programs that emerged following the success of the Primary Math and Reading (PRIMR) Initiative, a USAID-funded research-based intervention implemented by the Kenyan MoE from August 2011 to August 2014 with technical support from RTI International. The other program is the Kenya Primary Education Development (PRIEDE) project, which is an early-grade numeracy program implemented exclusively by the Kenyan MoE under Global Partnership for Education (GPE) funding. Tusome is designed on the premise that improving literacy outcomes can be realized and sustained through a set of key elements, namely improved teacher capacity to deliver high-quality instruction; improved access to information and communication technology (ICT) to support education outcomes; increased access to learning materials at a 1:1 ratio of pupils to books; instructional support supervision of teachers for high-quality instruction; and a robust monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system that links the program with instructional practice and learning outcomes. Tusome thus utilizes approaches that ensure the provision of appropriate instructional materials in schools, continuous instructional support supervision for effective delivery of literacy instruction, continuous in-service teacher professional development, building of partnerships, and collaboration with relevant stakeholders to sustainably establish and operationalize programs aimed at improving literacy outcomes at national and county levels.

Owing to the gains from the previous implementation cycles (increased availability and use of appropriate textbooks and supplementary materials that support reading; improved methods of reading instruction delivery; and supervision and support to teachers by Curriculum Support Officers [CSOs], Instructional Coaches [ICs], and head teachers), in November 2016, the Kenyan MoE and USAID approved the expansion of the Activity to include Class 3 and add-ons: interventions in Primary Teacher Training Colleges (PTTCs); the expansion of APBET institutions from 1,000 to 1,500; and extension through the end of 2019, all toward long-term sustainability of improved reading outcomes in Kenya.

Tusome has posted some notable achievements to date. For example, the Activity has trained CSOs and ICs on instructional skills; and then through the CSOs and ICs, trained and prepared teachers and head teachers to implement Tusome’s innovative instructional methodology, based on the Direct Instructional Model (DIM). The Activity has also developed, printed, and delivered approximately four books (English and Kiswahili) to every Class 1 and 2 child in all public primary schools in the country and 1,500 APBET institutions, including course books and homework books. Beyond the classroom, Tusome has trained national, county-level, and sub-county-level education leaders to support the delivery of early-grade reading interventions in schools. Most importantly, based on the recently released Tusome external midline evaluation (Freudenberger & Davis, 2017),1 the

1 These external results were particularly valuable because the independent evaluator had nothing to gain or lose from either a positive or negative review of the Activity. Full citation: Freudenberger, E., & Davis, J. (2017). Tusome external evaluation—Midline report. Prepared for the Ministry of Education of Kenya, USAID/Kenya, and the United Kingdom Department for International Development under Contract No. AID-615-TO-16-00012. Washington, DC: Management Sciences International (MSI), a Tetra Tech company. http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PA00MS6J.pdf

http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PA00MS6J.pdf


percentages of emergent and fluent readers increased at large and statistically significant rates between the Tusome baseline (July 2015) and midline (October 2016). Figures 1 and 2 (from the midline report) show the percentages of pupil scores based on the following oral reading fluency categories: fluent reader, emergent reader, beginning reader, and zero reader or nonreader.2 While the proportion of zero or nonreaders decreased substantially, the percentage of emergent and fluent readers increased by almost the same measure. In English, for instance, the percentage of fluent readers went from 2% at baseline to 7% at midline for Class 1, and from 12% to 27% for Class 2. Similarly, the proportion of emergent readers in English increased from 10% at baseline to 23% for Class 1, and 22% to 38% for Class 2 (Freudenberger & Davis, 2017).

Figure 1: English reading performance by reader categories, at baseline and midline

Source: Freudenberger & Davis (2017), p. 3.

Similar to the results in English, performance in Kiswahili also improved between baseline and midline, almost at the same margin as in English. Figure 2 shows that about 3% of the Class 1 pupils and 12% of Class 2 pupils demonstrated fluency at midline—increases of 1% and 4% from baseline, respectively. In Kiswahili, the percentages of emergent readers increased from 12% to 32% for Class 1 and from 33% to 54% for Class 2. For all the subtasks examined by the evaluator, the effect sizes at midline ranged from 0.40 to 1.07 standard deviations (SD) for Class 2 and from 0.41 to 2.57 SD for Class 2 (Freudenberger & Davis, 2017).

The findings validated Tusome’s position as an effective literacy program. Teachers, MoE and Teachers’ Service Commission (TSC) officers, parents, and other stakeholders now have come to regard Tusome as the answer to Kenyan concerns about education quality in

2 For reference, the Kenya National Examinations Council’s (KNEC’s) “fluent” oral reading benchmarks are 65 correct words per minute (cwpm) for English and 45 cwpm for Kiswahili. “Emergent” benchmarks are 30–64 cwpm for English and 17–44 cwpm for Kiswahili. Toward the end of FY 2017, separate benchmarks that had been set earlier for Classes 1 and 2 for both languages were being revisited based on the most recent report on average pupil learning gains, and new benchmarks for Class 3 were also being established.


terms of literacy instruction. Several “success stories” from this implementation appear in Annex A of this report.

Figure 2: Kiswahili reading performance by reader categories, at baseline and midline

Source: Freudenberger & Davis (2017), p. 3.

This Annual Report is aimed at explaining the achievements of the Activity for fiscal year (FY) 2017, October 1, 2016–September 30, 2017. The report is organized to highlight key achievements (both qualitative and quantitative); constraints and opportunities; performance monitoring activities; progress on the gender and inclusion strategy; progress on links to other USAID programs; progress on links with government of Kenya agencies; progress on USAID Forward; sustainability and exit strategy; the work plan for Quarter 1 (Q1), FY 2018; financial information; and Activity administration.

1.2 Qualitative impact In the fiscal year covering 2016–2017, the Activity continued to witness improvement across its core instructional delivery areas, including lesson presentation, mastery of the DIM, use of teacher guides, and proper time management. Great support was received from the Teachers’ Service Commission County Directors (TSC-CDs), County Directors of Education (CDEs), TSC Sub-County Directors (TSC-SCDs), and Sub-County Directors of Education (SCDEs), many of whom participated in these activities. These activities continued to contribute to improved learning outcomes in schools. The key achievements during the FY under review included, among others:

• training of Kenya Publishers Association (KPA) editors on how to develop supplementary readers for Classes 1, 2, and 3;

• Term 1 and 2 training of trainers (ToT); • Term 1 and 2 training of CSOs and ICs; • Term 1 and 2 training of teachers and head teachers (both APBET and public

schools); • zonal- and cluster-level reflection meetings;


• training of the MoE’s headquarter-based officers from the Directorate of Quality Assurance and Standards (DQAS);

• nationwide training of Quality Assurance and Standards Officers (QASOs) and SCDEs);

• instructional support supervision led by CSOs and ICs with technical support from Tusome staff and the National Technical Team (NTT) members; and

• Term 3 Kenya Institute of Curriculum Development (KICD)–Tusome infusion training.3

The KICD–Tusome infusion training was especially important as part of the wider strategy of creating ownership for the sustainability of Tusome’s interventions. During the KICD–Tusome infusion training, CSOs, head teachers from both public and (non-APBET) private schools, and Class 1 and 2 teachers (also from public and private schools) piloting the new

KICD curriculum were trained.

Parents, teachers, head teachers, CSOs, ICs, SCDEs, CDEs, TSC-CDs, and TSC-SCDs, among other MoE and Semi-Autonomous Government Agency (SAGA) officials, have attested to the improvements in pupils’ literacy skills. Anecdotes shared by these categories of stakeholders suggest that Tusome has created momentum for instructional improvements within Kenyan schools.

Improvements in learning outcomes have been reported by CSOs, teachers, head teachers, CDEs, and other curriculum implementers. Commendations were even received from private schools, some of which were participating in a Tusome activity for the first time during the KICD–Tusome infusion training. One of the head teachers, speaking during the KICD–Tusome infusion training, said about the Activity:

“Introduction of Tusome in private schools and its infusion into the new curriculum is the best gift to the Kenyan child. This training came at the right time.” (A Head Teacher, Kakamega County)

Similar views were shared by representatives from other private schools. A Class 1 teacher in a private school in Uasin Gishu commented:

“We have heard of the successes brought about by Tusome in public schools. We are humbled to be part of the pilot so that we too in private schools can benefit.” (A Class 1 teacher at a private school, Uasin Gishu County)

Improvements in learning outcomes also were observed in Tusome-targeted schools (both public and APBET). Pupils’ reading levels continued to rise, especially among Class 3 pupils, some of whom were reading up to 90 correct words per minute (cwpm). When the head teacher of Nguuara Primary School, Gikondi Zone, Nyeri County, was told by a CSO during teacher support that in her school, the Class 3 reading level was averaging 88 cwpm, she let out a joyous gasp and exclaimed;

3 A joint training was carried out in Term 3 by KICD and Tusome as part of the new curriculum piloting process, to guide teachers on how Tusome methods and materials can be integrated into the new curriculum for English and Kiswahili for Classes 1, 2, and 3.

“We have had challenges in teaching languages in the new syllabus, especially to Class 1 and 2 who were used to Tusome content, which is more detailed and pupil centered, but the new curriculum is too shallow. Infusion of the new curriculum to Tusome content is the right remedy for the challenges we have been facing….” A teacher from Got Ade Primary School [a public school], Wajir County)


“Please forgive me for being a drama queen, but am extremely thrilled that my school could produce such excellence! Thank you, God, and thank you, Tusome, for the skills imparted in teachers who are very dedicated in teaching reading.”

This was reiterated by the immediate former CDE, who evidently was excited as he reported how Tusome had impacted his county and his own household.

“Even in my own house, I have a young child in Class 2 who goes to a public school and through Tusome, has learnt how to read fluently. Nowadays when I come from work, she no longer asks for toys but for story books!” (A former County Director of Education)

Tusome has focused on helping Class 3 teachers with harmonized daily lesson templates, which they can use until the new Class 3 Tusome books are ready for distribution. This assistance makes it easier for these teachers to develop their own lesson plans and to prepare their own Tusome-aligned lessons. In response to this assistance, a teacher from Kimoloi Primary, Kocholwo Zone, Elgeyo-Marakwet County, expressed the following:

“During the previous term, I had a challenge in lesson planning for Class 3 Tusome lessons, but since the much-needed Term 2 training, and the distribution of the revised lesson activity templates, lesson planning and content extraction has become much more understandable and easy for me to come up with a good lesson plan that will enable me to teach Tusome lessons to Class 3 efficiently.”

Tusome has undoubtedly contributed to early-grade reading acquisition in Kenyan public schools as well as in the targeted APBET institutions, as has been stated by various stakeholders in the Kenyan education sector. For example, the TSC-SCD in Kirinyaga County, noted the following as she attended the Term 2 CSOs’ training:

“I visited one of the Tusome classes in Maua Zone, and I couldn’t believe my ears that Class 1 pupils who had just joined from preschool were able to sound out and blend to read words, simple words. Teachers I can tell you this, [Tusome] is good.”

A head teacher from one of the schools in Marera Cluster, Kisumu APBET, had this to say:

“I am happy with Tusome program because I can visualize the improvement in teaching and in pupils. I can see that there is a great difference when I compare the pupils with how they were sometimes back during when Tusome started…I’m happy that each one of them has a book.” (Head Teacher, Marera Cluster, Kisumu APBET)

This improvement was also reiterated by a manager of an APBET school in a different town:

“When we first joined Tusome, I don’t think we knew what it was, but now I can confess this is a program that brings very quick change into the reading abilities of children. I have two parents who have removed their children from other schools which are not in Tusome and brought them here because of the quick reading ability they saw with their children in the Tusome classes. And the homework books, is a plus with our parents.” (A School Manager, Mwariki Cluster, Nakuru APBET)


Across different zones, similar positive comments were made by head teachers during their training, while they were reflecting on the midline results. For example, a head teacher from a school in Meru County noted her pupils’ improvement:

“My pupils started at 6 correct words per minute at the beginning of the year; now they can read English text at 39 correct words per minute.”

Another head teacher, from Isiolo County, had high praise for the gains Tusome had achieved within a short time. He especially noted the significance of Tusome in the provision of quality education.

“As we talk about improving the quality of education in Kenya, Tusome is the program to count. We have seen many programs since 1995…Tusome has come to address what wasn’t addressed by these other programs…Tusome is a special program making an impact across our schools.”

The head teacher also referred to the increased numbers of pupils reading at benchmark, as reflected in the Dashboard data.4 The same was reiterated by the Samburu CDE:

“Tusome is a revolutionary program in the provision of quality education in Kenya.”

Similar comments were made across different regions and counties. For instance, in Eldoret region, during the teacher training in West Pokot, the County Quality Assurance and Standards Officer (CQASO) said this about Tusome:

“There has not been a national project executed with efficiency as Tusome. Even the stakeholders and beneficiaries are happy.”

Tusome’s APBET baseline study also was completed during this reporting period. The study was meant to establish the reading levels of the newly mapped schools in the five APBET cities that began implementing the Tusome Activity in early 2017, in comparison to those that joined the program in 2015. Schools were sampled from various clusters in each of the five cities. The sampled schools were placed into one of two cohorts: those that joined Tusome in 2015 and those admitted in 2017. Anecdotes collected during this 10-day study revealed that the Activity was highly rated; highly admired; and loved by head teachers, teachers, and pupils in a majority of the schools. In all the schools visited during the baseline study, the teachers had only good things to say about how the program had enhanced the reading skills in their schools; how the pupils were excited to read the supplementary readers every day; how parents were appreciating their children becoming better readers day by day; and how the pupils enjoyed the part of the lesson when each one had a book to read.

Improvements in learning outcomes also were noted by CSOs, one of whom said:

“…. I am happy to note that in most of the schools I visit, the pupils’ reading ability has been improving [one] day after another. The teachers’ attitude toward the program is very impressive. Tusome has achieved significant milestones.” (A CSO, Kakamega County)

4 The Tusome Dashboard is a data visualization tool generated monthly to display the status of the Activity’s key performance indicators. The graphics are generated from classroom observation data collected by CSOs and ICs. Among the indicators displayed are number of classroom visits and percentage of learners reading at benchmark.


In addition, the quality of formative feedback by CSOs and ICs to teachers seems markedly improved, based on staff observations. A teacher at Swani Primary School, in Mitubiri Zone, Murang’a County, said to one of the technical team members who accompanied the CSO for classroom support:

“When you come to see us in class it feels good because we know that you will help us. Even when the CSO comes we are able to ask the questions that we have and we do better. It is easy for us now because we are able to talk directly with the CSO and where I do not teach well, she will help me.” (A Teacher, Swani Primary School, Murang’a County)

Given the CSOs’ and ICs’ improved capacities, most teachers are now managing their lessons within 30 minutes or with little deviation while adhering to the Direct Instructional Model. Head teachers also have increased their level of support to teachers, including ensuring that homework not only is assigned to pupils, but also is subsequently marked. Some head teachers even review homework books to check pupils’ progress.

Teachers are coming to realize that Tusome is the way to go if the goal is to improve the learning outcomes of Kenyan children. One of the teachers from Airport cluster, Kisumu County APBET, observed about Tusome:

“The Tusome approach offers practical solutions to the myriad problems the struggling readers have. At least I can now advise a parent of a struggling learner confidently and professionally thanks to the well-designed Tusome trainings.”

Interestingly, Tusome is also commended for contributing to enrollment and regular school attendance by the learners. As expressed by one head teacher, Tusome has contributed a great deal to learners’ school attendance and active participation during lessons:

“Tusome has greatly reduced absenteeism among my pupils and even their teachers. All pupils come back after lunch automatically because they find their school and teachers more child friendly than their home environment. I am proud that all my pupils in lower classes can now read, unlike before Tusome was introduced.” (A Head Teacher, Kisii County)

Similar stories were also reported in APBET schools. In one of the schools in Eldoret APBET, Mailinne Cluster, the school was excited to see a child who was a nonreader as recently as the beginning of Term 2, become a reader, reading at 32 cwpm in Term 3. The director of the school said:

“Tusome is a game changer to the lives of a number of our children. This has led to my school treble its enrollment in the Tusome classes compared to what we had just a year before.” (A Teacher, St. Ann’s Bright School, Mailinne Cluster)

1.3 Quantitative impact Many of the interventions during the fiscal year under review were training-based, aimed at building the capacity of curriculum implementers and other relevant stakeholders, especially the KPA, KICD, QASOs, SCDE, DQAS, CSOs, ICs, teachers, and head teachers. All these generated quantitative data (see Annexes B and C).


In Term 1, a total of 223 national trainers (139 male and 84 female); 1,064 CSOs (779 male and 285 female); 390 “star” teachers5 (94 male and 296 female); 77 ICs (42 male and 35 female); 22,308 head teachers (17,748 male and 4,560 female); and 76,330 teachers (19,967 male and 55,363 female) were trained. Of the teachers trained, 24,952 (6,511 male and 18,441 female) were teaching Class 1, 25,352 (6,466 male and 18,886 female) were teaching Class 2, and 26,026 (6,990 male and 19,036 female) were teaching Class 3.

In Term 2, a total of 188 national trainers (122 male and 66 female); 1,112 CSOs (812 male and 300 female); 77 ICs (42 male and 35 female); 42 DQAS officers (25 male and 17 female); 20,925 head teachers (16,626 male and 4,299 female); and 72,056 teachers (18,538 male and 53,518 female) were trained. Of the teachers trained, 24,256 (6,028 male and 18,228 female) were teaching Class 1, 23,852 (6,042 male and 17,810 female) were teaching Class 2, and 23,948 (6,468 male and 17,480 female) were teaching Class 3. The slight decrease in training attendance between Terms 1 and 2 was attributed to the political parties’ primary elections to nominate candidates, as well as the competing Kenya Primary School Head Teachers Association (KEPSHA) conference, which took place during the Term 2 training period. The teachers were especially affected by the political parties’ nominations, because it is a normal practice in Kenya to hire teachers to serve temporarily as “returning officers” (officers of the electoral body)6 to preside over elections. This also affected their participation in regular curriculum activities. In some cases, schools had to be closed because they were being used as polling stations.

Besides the regular teachers, there was also the training of 397 teachers and head teachers from special-needs education (SNE) schools in Term 1 (Annex D). Of these, 344 (128 male and 216 female) were teachers, and 53 (28 male and 25 female) were head teachers from schools for pupils who have low vision or hearing loss. Teachers from schools for learners who are deaf were 229 (77 male and 152 female) and those from schools for learners who are blind were 115 (51 male and 64 female).

Although Tusome did not have its own training in Term 3 due to political activities in August and September 2017, it partnered with KICD in the training initiative mentioned above called the KICD–Tusome infusion. This training was aimed at helping teachers realize how key concept areas envisioned in the new curriculum could be brought out through Tusome instructional materials. The key targets for this training were Class 1 and 2 teachers and head teachers from the piloting regular schools as well as their counterparts from the SNE schools. Of the SNE head teachers trained in Term 3, 20 (12 male and 8 female) were from schools for learners who are deaf and 5 (4 male and 1 female) were from the schools for learners who are blind. For the SNE teachers’ training, 32 (14 male and 18 female) were from the schools for learners with hearing loss and 28 (10 male and 18 female) were from the schools for learners with low vision (see Annex E). CSOs were also trained in Term 3 to facilitate effective monitoring. A total of 164 CSOs (113 male and 51 female), 185 head teachers (140 male and 45 female), 220 Class 1 teachers (36 male and 184 female), and 231 Class 2 teachers (29 male and 202 female) teachers were trained (see Annex F).

The teacher trainings paved the way for coaching and school-level instruction support through classroom observations. Classroom observation as part of coaching is one of the

5 “Star” teachers were recommended by CSOs, based on their competence, to bolster the Class 1 and 2 teacher-training teams in 2017. They were involved in the Term 1 and 2 trainings but not the Term 3 training. 6 Returning officer: An officer of the Kenyan electoral commission charged with the responsibility of conducting an election. As noted earlier, it is a common practice in Kenya to hire teachers during elections to play this role.


approaches used in Tusome to enhance adoption of the Activity and the fidelity to Tusome’s design. Observation (and observation frequency) is also one of the school-level and institutional factors identified by the Tusome midline external evaluator as a predictor of better reading outcomes. The midline evaluation results showed better performance in schools whose teachers were observed at least once per month, as compared to schools whose teachers were observed once per year. For example, in schools whose teachers were observed at least once per month, Class 1 pupils had an average oral reading fluency of 26 cwpm in English and 13 cwpm in Kiswahili. However, schools whose teachers had been observed only once per year had lower average oral reading fluencies of 19 cwpm in English and 10 cwpm in Kiswahili. Consequently, the Activity continued to strengthen its commitment to frequent coaching of teachers, CSOs, and ICs through classroom observations. In June and July 2017, Tusome was able to conduct 42,126 classroom observations through the CSOs and ICs. Similar to the recently released midline evaluation findings, assessments conducted by the CSOs and ICs (as part of their observations) consistently revealed that increasingly more pupils were reading at benchmark rates. On average, 37.5% of all the pupils assessed in July, for instance, were reading at the KNEC reading fluency benchmark in English, and 41.5% in Kiswahili (see Annex G, Table G-3).

Besides its mainstream activities, Tusome in the fiscal year under review also rolled out the Youth Fund grants implementation. These interventions commenced in July 2017 when the Activity authorized the issuance of grants to 23 out of the 24 applications submitted in December 2016. All 23 youth organizations were inducted in August and September 2017. Of the 23, 12 were later awarded grants (see Annex H, Tables H-1 and H-2).

1.4 Constraints and opportunities The Activity encountered several opportunities and challenges during FY 2017. A notable challenge was reduced attendance at some of the activities, especially for training. The heightened political activities in preparation for the general elections that happened on August 8, 2017, were to blame for the lower-than-expected attendance of Term 2 head teachers’ and teachers’ trainings, as highlighted earlier. The trainings coincided with political parties’ primaries, which relied mostly on teachers as returning officers. Consequently, training attendance dropped by approximately 5%, from 98,648 (37,725 males and 60,923 females) in Term 1 to 92,981 (35,164 males and 57,817 females) in Term 2.

There were also heavy rains in some regions that coincided with training dates and rendered roads impassable for teachers who were traveling for the training. These challenges resulted in rescheduling training dates in some zones across the country. A good example is Wajir County, where two zones (Gurar and Bute) had to reschedule their zonal teacher trainings. The same was reported for other counties, such as Mandera County (Banisa Zone).

These issues notwithstanding, the Activity still witnessed sustained uptake across the lower grades. In June, for instance, the number of classroom observations by CSOs and ICs was at 19,588, a slight increase from 19,093 in March 2017 (Annex G, Tables G-1 and G-2). Consequently, a collegial attitude could be seen developing among the teachers, to the extent that new teachers who came in as a result of transfers easily got support, and were mentored to become better teachers and to use instructional methods consistent with Tusome’s approaches. Peer learning also was being encouraged among the pupils; slow learners were quickly catching up to become fast readers. This excitement also was witnessed with the CDEs and TSC-CDs, some of whom agreed to reassign their officers to respond to Tusome’s activities while some committed resources in support of the Activity.


1.5 Quarter 1 work plan, FY 2018 Table 1 presents some of the activities scheduled for the coming quarter.

Table 1: Work plan activities scheduled for October 1–December 31, 2017

Activities Description

CSOs and ICs observe and give feedback to Class 1, 2, and 3 teachers

CSOs and ICs visit schools for classroom instructional support.

Develop PTTC material Tusome will work with the MoE and KICD to develop relevant materials for reading instruction to be used in PTTCs.

KICD reviews materials for Class 3, both Kiswahili and English

Tusome will send the Class 3 books for review and approval by KICD.

Term 1 national ToT, FY 2018 The national ToT is scheduled for late November to prepare trainers for the Term 1 round of trainings. The trainers will be drawn from the MoE, TSC, KICD, KNEC, Kenya Institute of Special Education (KISE), and Kenya Education Management Institute (KEMI). Once trained, the trainers will be expected to train the CSOs and ICs, who will in turn facilitate the teacher and head teacher trainings in a two-level cascade model.

Tusome partners with KICD and PRIEDE to train master trainers for the new curriculum rollout

The planned training will be coordinated by KICD as part preparation for the new curriculum rollout to public schools. Tusome technical team members will provide technical support and co-train together with PRIEDE and KICD. Tusome’s primary concern will be how to infuse Tusome into the new competency-based curriculum pproach. The training will help to prepare the master trainers for the subsequent level of trainings including master trainers, CSOs, and teachers, as will be decided. The training is scheduled for November 2017.

Tusome partners with KICD and PRIEDE to conduct ToT for the new curriculum rollout

Once trained, the master trainers, under the coordination of KICD, will participate as facilitators in a national ToT. As mentioned earlier, the training will be to equip the participants with skills to train the CSOs. The national ToT is scheduled for December 2017.

Tusome partners with KICD and PRIEDE to train CSOs

This training will be facilitated by the trainers who will have participated in the national ToT. These trainers will be distributed across the country to train the CSOs and star or champion teachers who will, in turn, be expected to co-facilitate teachers’ training.

2 Key Achievements (Qualitative Impact) As noted, Tusome aims to improve learning outcomes for pupils in Classes 1, 2, and 3. Improving learning outcomes depends on a key set of factors that include improved teacher capacity for effective curriculum delivery, improved teacher support through effective supervision and integration of ICT, provision of appropriate learning materials, and an effective M&E system. The activities highlighted below report on each of these key interventions and how they have been applied in the period under review.

2.1 Increased availability and use of appropriate textbooks and supplementary materials that support reading

During FY 2017, Tusome remained true to its commitment to ensure availability and use of well-designed learning and teaching materials. Throughout the fiscal year, the preoccupation was to build strong collaboration with KICD and KPA. This would ensure that relevant


materials were made available and accessible to all learners, including those with special needs, in a sustainable manner. Some of the key interventions accomplished or initiated during this reporting period are discussed below.

2.1.1 Enhance use of ICT and tablet tools As highlighted earlier, the use of ICT to support instruction is one of the key elements of Tusome. In Tusome, ICT is used by the staff, NTT, SCDEs, QASOs, CSOs, and ICs to enrich teachers’ coaching and training experience, and to monitor fidelity to Tusome implementation. This strategy of using tablets for curriculum and instructional support builds on the evidence from PRIMR on the most cost-effective way of harnessing ICT for improving learning outcomes. While the original design was limited to providing only CSOs and ICs with tablets loaded with instructional support software and lesson content, over time it became necessary to use the same resources to support other curriculum needs, including access to learning materials. Consequently, the MoE and USAID approved the use of tablets by SCDEs and QASOs in addition to CSOs and ICs.

This expansion prompted subsequent improvements to the cloud-based Tangerine® data collection software, to include the SCDEs’ and QASOs’ observation tool. A further request was received from the DQAS to also incorporate the quality index assessment tool used by QASOs in their routine school-based support. This was implemented immediately. The quality index assessment tool was revised further to respond to some challenges, namely (1) QASOs could not observe a teacher before filling in all the assessment themes; and (2) the officers ordinarily visit a school as a panel and agree on which particular theme each officer is assessing. Initially the tool did not support panel assessments. These challenges were resolved. The other general improvement was regular upgrades of the software version. The new version enabled the cloud-based observation tool to be installed on Android-based devices running Android operating system version 4.0.

The following other tools are also built into Tangerine Tutor (observation tool):

1. SNE tool – This was developed to be used by Education Assessment Resource Center (EARC) officers when they are observing teachers who are teaching pupils with special needs. The tool was specifically developed for the special-needs lessons. All tablets were later updated with SNE materials: classroom observation tool adapted for observing pupils who are blind, classroom observation tool for pupils who are deaf, teacher guides and pupil books for teachers who are sighted or blind, and teacher guides and pupil books for teachers who are deaf or hearing. This will go a long way toward making the SNE classroom observations very practical.

2. Class 3 observation tool – This is for the CSOs and ICs to use when they are observing Class 3 teachers. For 2017, the tool accommodated the lack of Tusome-aligned pupil books and teacher guides for Class 3.

3. Tusome books review tool – This tool was designed to enable CSOs and ICs to collect feedback on areas of improvement in Tusome materials. Previously the feedback would be shared with Tusome staff on slips of paper during training and classroom observations. This tool has made it possible for the CSOs and ICs to receive feedback on instructional materials (English and Kiswahili) currently in use. These are automatically uploaded alongside the CSOs’ and ICs’ classroom observations. Tusome is currently utilizing the feedback received so far to improve the Class 1 and 2 instructional materials that will be used in the 2018 school year.


4. Education Standards and Quality Assurance Council (ESQAC)/QASO tool – This is the tool that was added for use by the QASOs when they visit a school. The tool addresses the school administration issues that QASOs look for when they visit a school. The main consumer of the data is the MoE’s DQAS. The data are available on the Dashboard, which is accessible to all MoE directorates and updated monthly.

5. Tusome enrollment form – This is a tool that the CSOs and ICs often use to collect and update Tusome data on pupil enrollment and other school data during the termly training. The tool was used to update the enrollment database in Term 1. However, it did not go well, as many CSOs and ICs either did not collect these data or did not upload. This could be attributed to the many data sets that were being requested per school, which some CSOs/ICs found difficult to print using their tablets. This made the M&E team resort to paper forms instead of Tangerine-based forms in Term 2.

2.1.2 Maintain textbook pupil-to-book ratios Over the period under review, Tusome endeavored to ensure that for Class 1 and 2 pupils, both English and Kiswahili pupils’ books were provided to schools at a 1:1 ratio. This was in addition to supplementary readers and homework books (see next section), which were also provided at a 1:1 ratio. While appreciating this milestone from Tusome, a head teacher in Igoki Zone, Meru County, observed:

“Tusome has within one year been able to give all our children in Class 1 and 2 enough books whereas the government through FPE [the Free Primary Education policy] has not been able to achieve this for the last 5 years.”

2.1.3 Disseminate Class 1 and 2 materials and homework books During the quarter, Tusome supplied all public primary schools and the participating APBET institutions with homework books. The homework books were based on the Tusome Kiswahili and English pupil books for Classes 1 and 2. Teachers, head teachers, pupils, and school boards of management alike expressed their appreciation for Tusome’s contributions, especially for reducing the pupil-to-book ratio. A head teacher in Soba Zone of Nandi County, for instance, was very grateful that Tusome had ensured that all Class 1 and 2 learners had English and Kiswahili books in the ratio of 1:1. He said:

“Since Tusome started, we have had an increased enrollment because parents like the idea of the homework books provided at no cost. The teachers are also happy with the structured Tusome lessons and learners usually stay behind long after classes just to do their homework. This tells you that Tusome has had a positive impact to both teachers and learners.”

Also, on the provision of pupils’ books at a 1:1 ratio, a CSO from Marsabit County remarked:

“No one could imagine that books in lower primary could be shared at this ratio were it not for Tusome…In fact [before Tusome] it was normal to see a class of 40 sharing 4 books and this was fine.”

Table 2 summarizes the materials that were printed, packaged, and distributed to schools across the country.


Table 2: Learning materials and homework books distributed to schools

Homework books – Term 1, 2017 Quantity printed

1. English Homework Book 1 1,307,000

2. Kiswahili Homework Book 1 1,307,000

3. English Homework Book 2 1,302,000

4. Kiswahili Homework Book 2 1,302,000

5. KPA Kiswahili and English readers (15 different titles—seven for Class 1 and eight for Class 2—from five selected publishers) 420,000

6. Tusome tests (Class 1 and Class 2) – distributed to all public and APBET schools 25,291

Printing for these materials was done by three vendors. The packaging and distribution were well synchronized to ensure that all materials for each county left in one consignment and that the books were delivered to all public and APBET schools. The vendors who were engaged to distribute the materials had participated in previous material distribution exercises for Tusome and therefore had better knowledge of the delivery points and RTI requirements during delivery (for example, signing of the delivery notes by the recipients). This made them more efficient and required less supervision.

2.1.4 Revise Class 1 and 2 learning materials

The planned periodic review of Class 1 and 2 materials was put on hold early in the year as the Activity awaited clear guidance from the MoE on aligning Tusome to the new curriculum. After several consultation meetings, KICD, MoE, and Tusome agreed to use the Tusome materials in a Term 3 pilot of the new curriculum. Based on the implementing teachers’ expressed need for more direction than they had received from KICD in Term 2, KICD and the Tusome technical team developed a handbook to guide teachers on how to infuse the new KICD curriculum into the Tusome instructional materials. Following the Term 3 KICD–Tusome infusion training based on the handbook—which participants’ evaluations indicated was successful—the MoE requested that the Tusome team work on fully aligning the Tusome materials to the new curriculum. The process of aligning the Tusome instructional materials to the new curriculum got under way in September 2017 and is expected to be completed in Q2 FY 2018.

2.1.5 Develop guidelines for supplementary readers for Classes 1, 2, and 3 In its effort to build capacity within the government, Tusome in the period under review worked with the KICD and the KPA to develop a framework document for Kenya leveled readers. The process was launched with a planning workshop in November 2016 involving English and Kiswahili language experts from KICD, Tusome technical team members from MoE and RTI, and classroom teachers drawn from Nairobi and Nakuru counties. The first leveled-readers workshop was held in Nakuru, November 15–18, 2016. The objectives of the workshop were to deliberate on the need for a national leveled reading system for Kenya and to develop a framework for a national leveled reading system which the KICD team, would in turn, review with its internal language experts before advising on the continued implementation. During the workshop, significant time was devoted to discussing the existing leveled reading systems, how children learn to read, and various theories of reading and literacy. The team also conducted an in-depth review of the recently developed reading


systems in Rwanda and Tanzania as well as existing leveled reading systems used across the world.

The result of this first leveled-readers workshop was a detailed first draft of the leveled-reader framework. In the week that followed, a smaller team held a two-day workshop to fine-tune the framework. A much simpler version of the framework that accommodated both the English and Kiswahili languages was shared in preparation for a second workshop with the larger team. The second workshop was held December 8–9, 2016, in Nakuru to further fine-tune the draft leveled-readers framework. The KICD team then took the framework and planned for further review sessions with its subject panels. The framework contained detailed guidelines on how the books should be structured in order to be accessible to young readers at different levels. Conceptualizing the levels took a while, but the result provided a clear way of developing and selecting the leveled readers.

To further carry out the review of the framework, KICD requested more support in training the chairpersons of the subject panel. Consequently, on February 3, 2017, a small team of three technical staff from Tusome carried out a one-day induction workshop at KICD for the KICD technical experts heading the subject panels.

After the induction workshop, at KICD’s request, the Senior Production Manager assisted the KICD team to incorporate the corrections into a revised framework. The KICD team then presented the framework to the subject specialists, subject analysts, and their academic board, which approved the document for dissemination to the KPA members, to enable them to publish new readers tailored to the newly developed framework. The levels range from A to J for Kiswahili and for English for the readers in the framework. Table 3 provides further details about each of the defined categories.

Table 3: Characteristics of different levels of readers

Levels Characteristics Guidelines

Emergent Pupils need simple “read-alouds” to develop oral language and print awareness.

They have minimal alphabetic principle knowledge.

They pretend to read.

Text with single words helps them to match spoken words to print.

They are learning to distinguish print from pictures.

They are learning distinctive features of letters and letter naming.

They are learning left-to-right directionality.

Emergent Guidelines

A English

A Kiswahili

B English

B Kiswahili

C English

C Kiswahili

Read-alouds Read-alouds

Beginner Pupils are developing knowledge of the alphabetic principle.

They begin to develop word-recognition strategies and develop a bank of words and syllables that are recognized automatically.

They are learning to decode and find language patterns.

They need simple and repetitive structures to help to develop accuracy in word reading.

They read slowly and aloud.

Beginner Guidelines

D English

D Kiswahili

E English

E Kiswahili

F English

F Kiswahili


Levels Characteristics Guidelines

They practice left-to-right reading with one line of text before learning to manage a return sweep.

They need a larger font size and spacing to support their use of finger pointing.

They need illustrations to support the text to help with decoding and word identification (for sight words).

Stories have a single idea.

Informational text is focused.


Transitional Pupils are learning to read more fluently.

They begin to read in meaningful phrases with less disruption to flow and use more appropriate voice intonation.

They can read longer texts with a reduced reliance on pictures for word identification.

They can read more than two lines of text per page and do not need to finger-point to each word.

As they transition to using more silent reading, the focus shifts from decoding to comprehension, learning to read faster and with expression (prosody).

Simple, short chapter books are appropriate.

Transitional Guidelines

G English

G Kiswahili

H English

H Kiswahili


Intermediate Pupils have progressed to reading nearly independently.

They read a variety of genres and use reading as a tool for gaining new knowledge.

They read for a variety of purposes.

They can process subtle ideas in text and they can read more complex stories with multiple episodes, including chapters.

They do not need illustrations to understand the text.

Intermediate Guidelines

I English

I Kiswahili

J English

J Kiswahili


2.1.6 Train National Technical Team members and KPA editors on how to develop supplementary readers for Classes 1, 2, and 3

Tusome seeks to build the capacity of the local publishing market as part of its strategy to sustainably provide relevant instructional materials for literacy. The Activity has been working with KICD to help publishers respond to the growing need for supplementary readers, as more and more children learn to read with comprehension. Having leveled readers will reinforce what children have learned in Tusome, encouraging daily practice of reading skills as per their grade levels. Two-day training workshops on the Kenya leveled readers framework were held at KICD, one in February 2017 and another May 22–23, 2017. The workshops were convened by KICD in collaboration with KPA. Three members of the Tusome technical team were invited to facilitate the workshops. The trainees included a wide range of publishing professionals, among them editors and sales staff from various publishing houses.

The facilitators guided the trainees through the following broad areas to enable them to understand the criteria for leveling their readers: word choice, predictability, print, content, illustrations, and design. The facilitators also defined the characteristics of different levels of the readers found in Classes 1 through 3. These level categories are defined as emergent,


beginner, transitional, and intermediate. Within each category are “read-alouds,” which the teacher reads as the learners listen. The publishers have since developed leveled readers based on the defined criteria; at the time of reporting, the readers were undergoing evaluation at KICD to ensure compliance with guidelines for use in Kenyan schools. Tusome intends to select and subsequently procure some of these leveled readers from the publishers, for use in Tusome-supported schools in the upcoming quarter. Plans are also under way to develop other leveled readers in-house, to supplement what the publishers will make available.

2.1.7 Develop scope and sequence for Class 3, in both Kiswahili and English The development of the scope and sequence for Class 3 English and Kiswahili materials began in February 2017, with the Tusome Project Manager and Literacy Specialist—both from RTI’s home office—leading a team of Tusome technical staff and consultants to conduct an extensive literature review of early-grade language teaching for similar levels and grades. The team then proceeded to develop the scope-and-sequence documents for a workshop in Nakuru. The Tusome team was joined by KICD, which wanted to learn about the Tusome methodology and how it could be infused into the upcoming KICD curriculum for early grades.

KICD then led a follow-up workshop March 5–18, 2017, in Mombasa. A few Tusome technical team members were invited to contribute to the curriculum design process. The outcome of the Mombasa workshop was not clear and required further discussions by the leadership of Tusome, KICD, and MoE. The team subsequently advised Tusome to carry on with a scope and sequence based on the KICD designs from Mombasa. When the team embarked on this effort in April 2017, new direction was given by the MoE confirming that Tusome should work with the existing curriculum, as KICD needed to pilot the new syllabus before it could be used. The Tusome team then began reviewing the scope-and-sequence documents to enable the revision plan to progress smoothly. This ensured that common approaches were used both for English and for Kiswahili materials. The team also worked on term-based scope-and-sequence documents that organized content and skills to be taught across the terms. The team populated the weekly scope-and-sequence documents with word study, vocabulary, grammar (language pattern structure), comprehension, writing, classwork, and homework. The resulting overall scope-and-sequence document provided clear details about the themes and genres to be covered throughout the Class 3 school year.

From the termly and weekly scope-and-sequence documents, the team started detailed planning for the daily scope and sequence. The clear and consistent allocation of time in the daily timetable for a week was discussed at length to ensure clear alignment between English and Kiswahili. The planning for writing stories for the daily scope and sequence began. Planning involved writing a weekly summary document that detailed the vocabulary words, word study, language patterns, themes, and genres to be covered in a week. This document then served as a quick reference for the writing team. The scope and sequence was then reviewed to ensure correct flow, consistency, and completeness of information within key areas of KICD vocabulary, word study, text genre, comprehension strategy, extension activities, writing, grammar, classwork, and homework.

2.1.8 Develop Class 3 teaching and learning materials A writing workshop for Class 3 materials began on May 24, 2017, at the Eastmark Hotel in Nakuru. In attendance were MoE Tusome NTT members, Tusome staff, TSC head office staff, CSOs from eight Tusome regions, MoE Quality Assurance Officers, and KICD


technical experts. Facilitating the workshop was a team of Tusome technical staff, including an RTI home office technical expert.

The facilitators held brief sessions interspersed with small-group writing and plenary sessions that acted as regular check-ins to ensure that the team was in agreement and understood its tasks. The small groups consisted of two or three writers who drafted and inserted content into a predesigned template. Each team had a reviewer who checked the work and passed it to the next stage, or returned it to the team if the written pieces needed further improvement. The first drafts of the texts for each theme were written by a team of Instructional Coaches drawn from APBET clusters in Nairobi (selected because of ready access to the Nairobi office and past experience writing texts) prior to the writing workshop. Some of the newly drafted stories were used; stories that were not suited for the level in question were discarded, and the small groups wrote new replacement stories as needed. The outcome of the workshop resulted in content written for all 30 weeks. The reviewers then worked with the technical consultants on reviewing the texts and preparing the material for piloting.

2.1.9 Design materials for Class 3, in both Kiswahili and English The design of the pupil books began on May 25, 2017, and continued through several stages of review. The graphic designers, working closely with the Senior Production Manager, developed the creative look for the pupil books, including making color and font choices, on June 2. On June 9, the designers worked on the teachers’ guides layouts and font choices. By June 16, the designers had completed the layout and design of five lessons—both pupil books and teacher content for Kiswahili and English—for field testing. As a next step, the designers visited some nearby public and APBET schools to test the lesson content and the layouts and get feedback from teachers and pupils. The layouts and font selection, for both teacher and pupil books, in both languages, were very well received.

2.1.10 Develop illustrations for materials for Class 3 Illustration briefs (specifying what types of illustrations were needed) for each of the texts for the Class 3 materials were also developed during the writing workshop in Nakuru. The consultants and team leaders updated the illustration briefs further as they revised the texts. These briefs were then compiled into comprehensive illustration brief documents for sharing with the illustrators in three batches. Beginning on June 9, 2017, the illustrators were commissioned to begin work on illustrations for the one week of content that was to be used for field testing. On June 18, 2017, illustration briefs for an additional 13 weeks for Kiswahili and 13 weeks for English were given to the illustrators to begin sketching. The illustration work was completed in July 2017.

2.1.11 Edit materials for Class 3, in both Kiswahili and English Substantive editing of the Class 3 materials began soon after the writing workshop ended. This step of the process was led by the consultants, working in close collaboration with the key reviewers in the following sequence. First, the Week 3 content was edited further to prepare it for field testing. Next, the field testing activity was conducted and was finished by June 22, 2017. After the feedback results were compiled, along with agreement on changes based on the field testing. Copy editing of the English and Kiswahili Class 3 materials commenced immediately after the field testing in June 2017. The copy editing task involved a thorough review of the flow of the materials and included checking consistency of the content. The content editors reviewed to verify that facts stated in the texts were accurate


and that all genres were strictly adhered to. The teachers’ guide scripts for teaching the content were also developed at this stage to align with the content in the pupil books.

2.1.12 Pilot Class 3 instructional materials

The pilot field testing of the Class 3 Tusome instructional materials took place in 10 counties, in 10 classrooms across Kenya, in June 2017 (see Table 4). The purpose of this activity was to field-test the Class 3 learning materials with teachers and learners. For three consecutive days, both the English and the Kiswahili lessons were used by Class 3 teachers with their learners. Five of the classrooms used lessons from Day 1, Day 2, and Day 5, while the other five classrooms used Day 3, Day 4, and Day 5. This format, totaling 60 observa-tions, helped to reveal whether the materials had appropriate linkages and what needed to be modified.

Table 4: Tusome Class 3 field-test sites

County Zone Field-test school

Bomet Siongiroi Kapamban

Busia Mundika St. Peters Buriangi Primary School

Garissa Waberi Iftin Primary School

Homa Bay Nyagwethe Kumuinda Primary School

Kirinyaga Inoi Zone Kaitheri Primary School

Kitui Katulani Katulani Primary School

Nairobi APBET Kayole Divine Vision Junior School

Nairobi Karen St. Mary's Primary Karen School

Samburu Serolipi Kalama Primary School

Taita-Taveta Voi Gimba

In addition to the data from the 60 observations, after each lesson, the observers gathered feedback directly from the teacher and the learners. This included feedback on instructional activities, such as the level of support provided to the teacher, the actual content, the amount of content, the layout, the font, and the illustrations. The observational data and the feedback would feed into changes to the Class 3 materials. The Tusome technical team completed work on the Class 3 learning materials on August 3, 2017. As this report was being written, KICD was in the process of reviewing these materials. The reviews are expected to be received from KICD by early October 2017, to allow for further improvement and resubmission to KICD for approval before the materials are rolled out to Tusome-supported schools.

Steps of the field-test process The week before the field test, Tusome held a training with at least one observer from each test site, to review the Standard Operating Procedures and to train on the observation

A coach from Kayole Cluster and Tusome staff engaging with a teacher from Divine Vision Junior School, one of the APBET schools, during the piloting of Class 3

materials.

Photo credit: Tusome staff


checklist. The observation checklist corresponded to the lesson plans and had a place to note whether each step of a lesson activity was followed, as well as places to estimate the time and to add the observer’s comments. The observation checklist also had sections to capture feedback from the teachers and the learners.

Before the field test, all sites received their supplies. Each teacher received the set of lesson plans for Week 3 from the draft teacher guide. Week 3 was chosen because at this point in the school year, the level of explanation for each activity was detailed, which would be helpful with the minimal training that would be offered. Pencils and color-printed pages of the pupil book were provided to all the learners.

Each day began with a brief meeting to discuss that day’s lesson and to answer questions about the lesson plan. Then the teacher was observed using the English and Kiswahili materials. Between the two lessons, the teacher and the learners gave feedback.

Daily, following the observations, the two or three observers entered their observations into a shared database. After the field testing, the data were analyzed and summarized,7 and one observer from each site wrote a report. The purpose of the report was to briefly summarize what had happened at each field-test site and to offer any additional specific observations. The observation summary and the field reports would then inform the modifications of the materials.

The field test yielded evidence of the positive influence Tusome has had on literacy instruction and attainment. First of all, the observers noted examples of Tusome behaviors among both teachers and learners that were not explicitly mentioned in the Class 3 lesson plans. Second, head teachers and teachers were receptive to using the new materials and appreciated the effort to improve them based on actual use and feedback. Third, the observers witnessed enthusiasm for learning. The learners enjoyed having their opinions heard, they were skilled at giving feedback on the illustrations and the story content, and they reminded the adults to get the books to the classrooms. Fourth, the teachers were flexible. The Class 3 lessons had a few new activities that had not been used in Tusome Class 1 or Class 2, but the teachers welcomed them and noted that with training, they would improve their presentation.

2.1.13 Write Tusome exams The exam-writing process kicked off with a workshop held on December 28–29, 2016. During this workshop, Tusome tests were written for Classes 1 and 2, Terms 1 and 2. The team reviewed the challenges reported through feedback on the current Tusome exams (see list below), and agreed on how they would address these challenges as they developed the new exams. However, some of the obstacles were beyond the team’s control. For instance, some print vendors were taking advantage of teachers by reproducing the Tusome exams and selling them, even though the Activity provides the exams to schools free of charge.

Challenges highlighted in feedback from the field were:

1. They are too bulky

2. They are expensive to print

3. They are too simple

4. They are too difficult

7 The data summary report is available separately.


5. Some items in the exams are not covered in the curriculum

6. Exams are repeated

7. The exams should have clearer artwork

8. Pupils need more writing space to fill in answers

9. Specify the possible score against each question

10. Exams are too long

11. Some skills are over-tested

12. Make marking scheme more flexible

13. Current exams emphasize reading more than other components of literacy (such as grammar)

14. How do you test children with special needs?

15. Most printers of exams, especially in Nairobi, are printing and selling Tusome exams. This may have a downside as all Tusome material is not supposed to have a cost.

The teams worked in separate groups, one for Kiswahili and the other for English. The team leaders led the discussions and ensured the teams adhered to the agreed-upon schedules. The participants took into account the reading benchmarks (Class 1 English – 30 wpm; Class 2 English – 65 wpm); the content covered in the term (Weeks 1–10 in Term 1; Weeks 11–20 in Term 2; Weeks 21–30 in Term 3); and the need for the content to be valid and reliable. The teams rigorously reviewed and edited the exams after the workshop before signing off on them for printing.

The printing was completed before the end of December 2016 and distribution done together with the Tusome materials that were being dispatched to schools. Each CSO/IC received a printed set of exams and a compact disc containing digital versions. Each head teacher received an envelope containing printed exams for Terms 1 and 2. However, going forward, teachers were expected to develop their own exams starting with Term 3. In the Term 2 round of trainings, all teachers were trained on how to do this, to ensure that the teachers are prepared.

2.1.14 Review and improve PTTC materials The review of existing PTTC modules began with the acquisition of existing textbooks for primary teacher education and the solicitation and receipt of course notes from PTTC lecturers. The existing textbooks had been approved by KICD and are in the “Orange Book” for textbook procurement. The RTI home office also assisted in obtaining PTTC modules from Ethiopia and Indonesia to help with a comparative analysis. Brainstorming meetings had been conducted with PTTC stakeholders as part of the initial process for actualizing the planned review. One of the outputs of these meetings was the formation of an MoE–Tusome and PRIEDE Steering Committee.

The MoE–Tusome and PRIEDE Steering Committee held a stakeholders’ meeting on July 26, 2017, to deliberate on the way forward for alignment of Tusome and PRIEDE projects to PTTCs. During the meeting, a Tusome–PRIEDE Primary Teacher Education (PTE) Technical Working Group/Committee was set up to spearhead the alignment of the two programs to PTTCs. This committee was given until October 27, 2017, to deliver to the Steering Committee the requested Tusome–PRIEDE PTTC alignment modules to be used by the PTTC lecturers. The Technical Working Group held its first meeting on August 1,


2017, chaired by the Director of Teacher Education at the MoE. During this meeting, the Technical Working Group resolved to constitute subject panels of experts to analyze the English, Kiswahili, and mathematics PTE syllabi, with the view to identify the integration (or “plug-in”) points—areas of mutual interest and connection—of the Tusome and PRIEDE programs.

The subject panel of experts met at KICD on September 12–13, 2017, and came up with a document identifying integration points for Tusome and PRIEDE to be linked to the PTE syllabus. This report was presented to the Technical Working Group on September 19 at the MoE’s headquarters. The Technical Working Group adopted the report. Following the adoption of the report, the process of writing the modules began on September 27, 2017, and was expected to end by October 4.

2.1.15 Develop Class 3 teachers’ guides The Class 3 Kiswahili and English teachers’ guides for Tusome are, as per the draft submitted to KICD, designed to have 150 lesson plans each. The lesson plans contain structured contents aimed at guiding teachers in teaching Kiswahili and English. The writing of scripts for the teachers’ guides began soon after writing of the pupil books’ content was completed. The teacher scripts were carefully crafted around the content covered in the pupil books, to ensure the smooth flow of the lessons.

The writers of the teachers’ guides for Kiswahili and English took the following points into consideration:

• The instructional methodology • The number of lessons per week (per language) • The length of each lesson and the amount of time apportioned to each section of the

lesson • Content to be taught to learners • Assessments for learners • Skills to be developed • Embedding of the appropriate page from the pupil books in the teachers’ guides • The guidance to the teacher in referencing corresponding pupil book content, through

the use of distinct icons • Guidance in reducing the amount of scripting as the weeks advance and the teachers

get used to using the lessons.

2.2 Improved methods of reading instruction delivery Training of curriculum implementers and consistent instructional support to teachers are key elements to improving and sustaining reading outcomes. During the fiscal year, the following activities were accomplished. In addition, a summary of all the Term 1 trainings was completed and submitted to USAID in May,8 and a consolidated report on all of the 2017 trainings will be submitted in October.

8 Otieno, P. C. (2017). USAID Tusome Early Grade Reading Activity. Report on training activities, December 2016 – January 2017. Prepared for USAID under Contract No. AID-615-C-14-00007. Research Triangle Park, NC, USA: RTI International.


2.2.1 Special-needs education interventions Tusome remains committed to ensuring that high-quality reading interventions extend to learners in SNE. This is also in line with the letter and spirit of the Kenyan Constitution on universal and equitable provision of basic education, and the education policy on inclusion. While the term SNE in its broad sense encompasses various categories of disabilities and challenges, Tusome focuses on two categories: pupils (and teachers) who are either fully blind or fully deaf. To this end, in Term 1, Tusome rolled out SNE-supporting interventions, key among them being adapting instructional materials, redesigning the instructional approach, training teachers on improved instructional methods, and offering SNE teachers support supervision. In Term 3 (August 2017), SNE master trainers and teachers also participated in the KICD-led infusion trainings. These are discussed below.

Review, proofreading, and production of braille books This activity involved reading samples of the braille books page by page, word by word; identifying errors; suggesting corrections; and taking the books back to the designers to insert the corrections. Another round of proofreading was later conducted to confirm the corrections before mass production of the instructional materials. Through this process, typographical errors that occurred in the first versions of Class 1 pupil books in the sections on blending, as well as in the flashcards, were corrected. The activity was conducted by experts drawn from the MoE, KICD, KISE, TSC, and Kenya Institute for the Blind, backstopped by Tusome’s materials development team.

SNE classroom observation and instructional support

SNE classroom observation data for all three terms appear in Annex G, Tables G-4 through G-6. This activity for Term 1 commenced on January 22, 2017, and was conducted by the Tusome SNE coordinator, an SNE consultant from RTI’s home office, the National APBET Coordinator, and two MoE officers. Unlike in the mainstream Tusome model, in which the Activity’s technical staff support the CSOs and ICs, for SNE, teachers receive the support directly from SNE specialists. The counties covered by the SNE guidance were Bungoma, Busia, Embu, Kajiado, Kiambu, Kirinyaga, Kisii, Kisumu, Machakos, Meru, Migori, Murang’a, Nairobi, Nandi, Nyeri, Siaya, Trans Nzoia, Vihiga, and West Pokot. The two MoE officers advised teachers for one week each in Meru and Trans Nzoia counties. This was the first round of SNE classroom lesson observation and instructional support since implementation began for the Activity’s SNE component. In this round, 57 schools for deaf pupils were visited, with 116 teachers (13 males and 103 females) supported; 23 schools for blind pupils were visited and 42 teachers (2 males and 40 females) were supported. In total, 80 special schools were visited with 158 teachers supported. Based on the most current data available, this is equivalent to 45% of the total schools dedicated to learners who are deaf, and 36% of the total schools for learners who are blind.

Another round of SNE classroom observations was conducted July 9–22. It was carried out by the SNE coordinator and SNE officer (consultant). The coordinator covered two regions—Nakuru and Mombasa—particularly the counties of Baringo, Kericho, Kilifi, Kwale, Mombasa,

Learners with low or no vision from Mitoto Special School, Trans Nzoia County, keenly taking

instructions during a Tusome lesson.



and Nakuru. The SNE consultant covered one region, Nanyuki, particularly Meru and Tharaka-Nithi counties. A total of 15 schools were visited, 14 for learners who are deaf and one for learners who are blind. From these schools, 27 (2 male and 25 female) teachers were supported, with 25 (2 male and 23 female) instructing deaf pupils and two working with those who are blind.

The final round of SNE classroom observations for 2017 was conducted September 11–29, also by the SNE coordinator and the consultant. The consultant covered three schools, two for pupils who are deaf and one for pupils who are blind, in Kiambu and Nairobi counties; the SNE coordinator covered 15 schools, two for learners with low vision or blindness and 13 for learners with hearing loss or deafness, in Kisumu, Siaya, and Vihiga counties. The total number of teachers supported was 33, or six from schools for pupils who are blind and 27 from schools for pupils who are deaf. The 33 included three males and 30 females.

SNE trainings SNE master trainers’ trainings

Just as in the mainstream classrooms, the Activity seeks to improve literacy levels of the learners who are deaf or blind. Tusome recognizes that reading interventions as applied in regular schools and with carefully planned moderation, can equally work with these categories of learners. Consequently, in FY 2017, the Activity rolled out a nationwide training of SNE teachers on Tusome in Term 1; and a KICD-led training of selected SNE teachers in Term 3 related to the curriculum pilot.

Each of the teacher trainings was preceded by an SNE master trainers’ training. The SNE master trainers’ training was aimed at preparing the master trainers who would eventually train and prepare other trainers. The duration was three days in Term 1 (January) and one day in Term 3 (August). The new trainers would then train teachers on how to teach literacy lessons using the DIM, guide teachers on how to use Tusome-adapted teachers’ guides and pupils’ books during Tusome lessons, and train teachers on how to teach different areas of literacy using Tusome-adapted teacher’s guides for learners who are deaf or blind. They would also provide classroom support to teachers in special schools for these categories of learners. The Term 1 and 3 master trainings were conducted in Tusome’s Nairobi office and included SNE experts from TSC, MoE, KISE, and Tusome’s staff. During these trainings, the participants displayed a high level of content mastery and competency. For the Term 3 SNE master trainers’ training, 10 individuals (4 male and 6 female) were in attendance. SNE training of trainers

The Term 1 ToT for SNE educators took three days and was conducted in Tusome’s Nakuru office. It included 28 (10 male and 18 female) participants from different parts of the country, primarily EARC officers and selected teachers with knowledge and skills in braille and sign language. The main objective of the training was to prepare trainers to effectively train teachers on how to teach literacy lessons in Classes 1 and 2 using the Direct Instructional Model, guide teachers on how to use Tusome-adapted teachers’ guides and pupils’ books during Tusome lessons, train teachers on how to teach different areas of literacy using Tusome-adapted teachers’ guides for both the blind and deaf, and also provide classroom support to teachers in special schools and units for pupils who are blind or deaf. The participants were selected not based on counties, but rather on the existence and concentration of schools as well as their SNE areas of specialization, with a bias toward their ability to teach learners who are either blind or deaf. Consequently, counties that did not have special-needs schools for learners who are deaf or blind did not participate in Term 1.


As noted earlier, the Term 3 training was designed for educators from public primary schools with learners who are blind or deaf, from across the country, which were piloting the new KICD curriculum. The training was well received by the participants, as evidenced by the way they modeled the lessons. The level of concentration and yearning for Tusome knowledge was quite high, indicating the participants’ desire to be effective trainers. The few EARC officers who were present were trained on ICT and issued with tablets in preparation for SNE classroom observations and teacher support. Participants left confident that they could train teachers effectively. The participants considered the training to be successful (see sample workshop evaluations in text box below) and all participants said that they would be leaving well equipped with knowledge and skills regarding the Tusome methodology.

Teachers’ training for SNE implementation

The Term 1 SNE teacher training was conducted at 15 centers (nine for learners who are deaf and six for those who are blind) countrywide, with each training center having two trainers. Both categories of the training were held on January 6 and 7, 2017. This two-day training targeted head teachers and teachers from special schools and units for pupils who are deaf or blind. The objectives of the training were to equip SNE teachers with knowledge and skills in Tusome’s DIM approach to teaching literacy, to explain the use of Tusome’s adapted materials for SNE, to enlighten head teachers on ways of creating and maintaining an effective learning environment, and to show head teachers how to support their teachers for effective lesson delivery in the classroom. The content of the training was based on the five components of reading (phonological awareness, alphabetic principle, fluency,

An MoE officer modeling a lesson in Signed Exact English (SEE)

during “We do.”


Excerpts from evaluations of the Term 1 SNE master trainers’ training “It was a very good training. I have really benefited and we hope to impart the knowledge to our colleagues, fellow teachers.” (Participant in SNE training to accommodate blindness or low vision, Kajiado Central Zone, Kajiado County) “The workshop was helpful in that I gained skills on how to facilitate a lesson competently. Facilitators were well versed with the content and they delivered the lessons with a lot of mastery…Through the facilitators and RTI, I have learned that teamwork can make the impossible possible. Thank you for the opportunity to train with you.” (Participant in SNE training to accommodate deafness or hearing loss, Nakuru County) “As EARC [officer]s, we are humbled, our lost skills are being sharpened and I promise to put all my energies and efforts to make sure that my impact is felt for a child with hearing impairments. God bless Tusome abundantly. Amen.” (Participant in SNE training to accommodate deafness or hearing loss, Central Zone, Vihiga County) “Try to source for signed videos for the hearing impaired, reading tenses [guidance on signing exact English] for hearing impaired, and talking computers for the visually impaired. God bless RTI and SNE.” (Participant in SNE training to accommodate deafness or hearing loss, Nairobi County) “Excellent choice of the training venues for participants were far away from town and thus could not excuse themselves to solve their personal interests in town. In future, similar venues would be much appropriate.” (Participant in SNE training to accommodate blindness or low vision, Central Zone, Nakuru County)


vocabulary, and comprehension). A total of 397 (156 male and 241 female) head teachers and teachers were trained; of these, 269 (99 males and 170 females) were from schools serving learners who are deaf and 128 (57 males and 71 females) were from schools for pupils who are blind.

For Term 3, Tusome brought together head teachers and teachers (636 participants, 205 male and 431 female) for one day of joint KICD–Tusome infusion training, as well as reinforcement of the skills taught in Term 1. The aim of this training was to prepare trainers and equip them with knowledge and skills which they could use to effectively train SNE teachers on how to infuse the new curriculum into Tusome lessons using adapted Tusome materials. In addition, head teachers were trained to enable them to support teachers to use Tusome materials to pilot the KICD curriculum, as well as to provide informative feedback to the teachers, MoE, KICD, and Tusome leadership during the piloting period.

During the Term 1 training, the teachers expressed great interest in and satisfaction with the Tusome methodology and training strategies. They demonstrated passion for the Activity, as was evident in their levels of patience, perseverance, concentration, and participation in all the training sessions. A case in point was in Kitale School, which hosted three centers—two for learners with blindness or low vision and one for learners with deafness or hearing loss. On the first day of SNE training at this school, the school was not adequately prepared to host, even though they had confirmed their readiness well before the training date. First, the gatekeeper denied trainers access to the compound upon their arrival the day before the training day. This interfered with early preparation, and therefore training materials had to be prepared the very morning of the training; hence, the training began late. The school also failed to provide meals to the participants as per the agreed terms of engagement, from 10 o’clock through lunch to 4 o’clock tea. Thus, participants went hungry the whole day, but this did not stop them from actively participating throughout the training day. They argued that stopping would mean not completing the day’s agenda and, hence, would rob them of the opportunity to acquire the desired skills. Because of the first day’s experience, the training was relocated to a different venue the following day.

2.2.2 Training of officers from Directorate of Quality Assurance and Standards

DQAS headquarters officers were trained in two cohorts; training for the first group was conducted on June 7 and 8, and for the second group on June 15 and 16. This training for headquarters officers had been pending since February 2016, when the county-based DQAS officers had been trained, but the headquarters officers had not been able to attend this training due to other work-related engagements at the time. In all, 43 officers were trained in FY 2017, of whom 25 were male and 17 were female. The purposes of this training were to sensitize the officers on the Tusome instructional approach and to identify how the officers could best support Tusome implementation, given that they have the core role of ensuring high-quality education across the country.

The training participants expressed their appreciation for the impact that Tusome had had within a short period and shared their experiences from performing their field duties. For example, a Deputy Director of Quality Assurance and Standards, relayed these positive comments:

“Teachers in the field are saying that Tusome is working. We have witnessed cases where Tusome-trained teachers train fellow teachers within their schools on how to teach upper primary classes using the Tusome methodology.”


While opening the training of the second cohort, the Director of Quality Assurance and Standards, observed that Tusome had helped improve the pupil-to-book ratio in lower primary schools.

“Tusome, in my opinion, has done wonders. During class assessments, our officers have observed that in lower primary, the ratio of pupil-to-book is 1:1. You cannot go wrong with DQAS now involved. Our officers, who are always in the field, will endeavor to ensure that Tusome is fully supported in order to achieve even better results.”

As the second training came to an end, the participants expressed their willingness to support Tusome, while also bemoaning their belated involvement in the program. They requested Tusome to promptly provide the DQAS team with tablets to help them work more effectively.

2.2.3 Sensitization training for QASOs, SCDEs, and other government officers For their training, QASO, SCDE, MoE, TSC, and KICD participants were taken through the components of Tusome as well as usage of available material and use of the tablet applications meant for teacher support during school visits. It was important to have the QASOs, SCDEs, and other officers get involved in the support of Tusome just as much as the CSOs, and for that, they were given tablets and trained on how to effectively use them for Tusome teacher support. The main objective of the training was to sensitize the attendees on Tusome and to update QASOs and SCDEs on use of the tablets in supporting Tusome implementation. The total number of participants was 656 (516 males, 140 females). Full attendance data appear in Annex I.

2.2.4 KICD–Tusome infusion training The Term 3 KICD–Tusome infusion was a three-day training conducted in collaboration with KICD for piloting of the new curriculum for Classes 1, 2, and 3. First, a one-day sensitization was organized for the master trainers to equip them with requisite skills in readiness for the next level of the cascade. The subsequent trainees comprised CSOs, head teachers, and Class 1, 2, and 3 teachers from both public and private schools.9 Their workshops revolved around helping teachers realize how key concept areas envisioned in the new curriculum are brought out in the Tusome instruction materials. They also sought to guide teachers on how to capture these concept areas when piloting using Tusome instruction materials. The key target was the Class 1 and 2 teachers from the piloting regular schools as well as their counterparts from SNE schools. For effective monitoring, CSOs from zones with the piloting schools as well as the head teachers at such schools were trained on the same content.

As noted, the master trainers’ training marked the onset of these trainings on August 21, 2017, in RTI’s Tusome offices in Nairobi. These were then followed by the training of the CSOs and head teachers from the piloting zones and schools, respectively. A two-day on-boarding training of teachers from private schools on Tusome strategies and how to teach the lessons (August 24–25) was followed by training for teachers from the public and private piloting schools on August 26, on the same content, at 12 different venues across the country. In addition, teachers from public schools with learners who are deaf or blind were trained on August 25.

9 Because no APBET schools were among the private schools participating in the KICD curriculum piloting, no ICs were trained in Term 3.


The different categories of training are described below.

Masters trainers’ training During the master trainers’ training, the KICD senior director for curriculum began her opening remarks by passing along regards from the KICD director, whom she said was on another related activity. She underscored, however, that the director would be part of the team roving across the country in the succeeding levels of the training. She thanked the Tusome team for supporting the organization of the trainings. She expressed her confidence that as the team moved on to the CSO, head teacher, and eventually teacher trainings, the best trainers who had been chosen would be equal to the task. At the end of the day, she also officially closed the workshop by thanking the team for the good work that they had done. “We still look forward to your involvement and support till we see the end of the training,” she concluded.

The Tusome Chief of Party (COP) stated to the group that the training was a product of various consultative stakeholders’ meetings, which involved officers from the KICD, TSC, MoE, and the MoE’s Early Grade Mathematics unit, who came up with the training dates. She explained that due to the brief learning time in Term 3 and based on TSC policy guidelines on teachers not being allowed to be away from school during school hours, the training had to be done within the shortest notice. She apologized while also appreciating the officers’ flexibility and readiness to adjust their busy schedules to attend and conduct the training. In her own words, “Since Term 2, when the new curriculum implementation was first piloted by KICD, teachers had expressed challenges on how to move on since Tusome had not been infused into the new curriculum. KICD used this opportunity to address the challenges and at the same agreed to integrate Tusome into the new curriculum piloting for Term 3. Hence the training. Let’s make this a reality and success.” She concluded by urging the team to feel free to give their contribution as well as seek guidance on anything unclear.

CSOs and head teachers’ training Contrary to Tusome’s usual termly practice, in which CSOs get trained by the national trainers, and they in turn train head teachers and teachers, during the Term 3 training, CSOs and head teachers from neighboring counties were clustered together and trained at the same venue, by the same master trainers who also trained the teachers. In all, 164 CSOs (113 male and 51 female) and 185 head teachers (140 male and 45 female) were trained (Annex F).

During the training in Nakuru, one participant said,

“We have been waiting for this opportunity for too long. Our learners will now benefit from Tusome just like any other Kenyan child.”

Participants at the same venue were excited by the presence of the KICD director and the assurance that

“moving forward, Tusome and KICD would be training together since both are targeting the same teachers and learners.”

At a different venue in Bungoma County, a CSO stated:

CSOs and head teachers at Technical University of Mombasa during KICD–

Tusome infusion training.



“As CSOs, we really appreciate the idea of infusing Tusome in the new curriculum. We welcome the idea.”

Others, however, were just happy that finally they were part of KICD piloting in their zones. Commenting on this, a CSO said:

“I am glad that I am on board. During the Term 2 KICD piloting, my colleague from another zone is the one who was monitoring the KICD piloting in my zone. It was difficult for me to support the same teachers in my zone.” (A CSO, during the training at Onyalo High School, Migori County)

Head teachers also expressed their concerns that they had been supported by CSOs from other zones. It was difficult to work with officers from other zones when there were already resident CSOs. A head teacher from Migori County said:

“Tusome is finally in the new curriculum. I now request that Tusome considers training PTTC lecturers for them to train teacher trainees earnestly.”

Teacher training As noted above, before receiving their one-day training on infusion of the KICD new curriculum key concepts, teachers from private schools were taken through a two-day training (August 24–25) to onboard them and equip them with skills on conducting Tusome lessons, given that they would pilot the new curriculum using Tusome instruction materials. On August 26, together with teachers from the public primary schools piloting the new curriculum, they were trained on how to infuse the new curriculum as they teach using Tusome materials. In all, 451 teachers were trained (65 males and 386 females; see Annex F). Of these, 328 were from public schools with 37 being male and 291 female. From private schools, 123 teachers were trained with 28 being male and 95 female. From the piloting SNE schools (schools with learners who are deaf or blind), 60 teachers were trained: 24 male and 36 female. The training of the SNE teachers was conducted across the country on August 25, 2017.

During the training for the teachers from private schools, participants expressed their appreciation on various aspects of the content. One of the participants quipped:

“Contrary to what I have been doing, [the] Tusome strategy clearly marks how teachers can guide learners. I used to have challenges when in college when our lecturers would tell us to make our lessons learner-centered. They never told us how. This training has answered that question which has bogged me for a very long time.”

A teacher from Elite Academy (private school) in Busia County, while attending training in Kitale town, stated:

“I wonder why we had not been part of Tusome right from when it started. Our schools would have been part of the success depicted by the results shared in this training. I know we shall propel our results to greater heights now that we are part of Tusome.”

Separately in Malindi, a teacher from Tana River County said:

“I hope and wish we have not just been looped in Tusome for the sake of piloting. Even if that is the case, I will endeavor to remain using Tusome methodology and instructional materials to boost performance of my learners.”


2.2.5 Training of Tusome national trainers The training of national trainers is one of the key training events within Tusome’s cascade model of training. These ToTs are ordinarily conducted on a termly basis, with the aim to refresh and improve the skills of the trainers before releasing them to support the CSOs’ and ICs’ training as well as the head teachers’ and teachers training. In FY 2017, however, these trainings were conducted only in Terms 1 and 2. All levels of termly Term 3 trainings were affected by election activities that culminated in the Kenyan general elections that happened on August 8, 2017.

Following the expansion of Tusome to Class 3, the scope of the Term 1 and 2 ToT was also expanded to include Class 3 content, beside the content for Classes 1 and 2. In the absence of specific Class 3 Tusome pupils’ books and teachers’ guides, training for Class 3 teachers focused on how to derive content from the conventionally used textbooks and to teach using the Tusome methodology. Since this would require teachers who already appreciated the methodology, Tusome requested TSC to ensure that experienced Class 2 teachers (most of whom had started implementing Tusome two years prior, in Class 1) be transitioned to Class 3. Class 3 teachers with a baseline level of familiarity with the Tusome instructional approach would have to implement the methodology without the benefit of Tusome-aligned pupils’ books and teachers’ guides.

The Term 1 ToT was conducted December 5–7, 2016, at Bontana Hotel, Nakuru. In all, 223 participants were trained, including 139 male and 84 female master trainers drawn from the MoE, TSC, KISE, KEMI, and RTI International, as well as selected ICs overseen by Women Educational Researchers of Kenya (WERK). In this training, the facilitators started by first reviewing the Class 1 and 2 training content before diving into that for Class 3. During the training, participants identified and modeled the reading component activities with a high level of competency. The Nandi County QASO remarked:

“With a mathematics background, when I attended Tusome trainings for the first time, I doubted whether I would manage to train teachers on languages. Now I am a proud trainer of teachers in how to teach English and Kiswahili.”

PRIEDE (the MoE national numeracy program) sent 47 county representatives from across the country to attend the Tusome ToT, to familiarize themselves with Tusome trainings and strategies. Their participation was quite impressive as it was not easy to distinguish them from the seasoned Tusome trainees. This could be explained largely by the fact that both Tusome and PRIEDE are offshoots of the PRIMR Initiative, and they share a similar approach to instruction: the DIM. Said one of them,

“This training is like what we do in PRIEDE. It was easy for me to blend well since I realized that I only replace numeracy with literacy.”

The training on Class 3 content at all levels of the cascade was received as a good challenge by most participants. They appreciated the methodical way of guiding them on how to derive content to support their lessons, as well as the modeling of how to teach the content. However, not unlike when Tusome had been introduced to the participants for the first time, participants said that they would require more time after the training to conceptualize the content, especially given the extra step of deriving content themselves from various Class 3 course books. A Sub-County Director from Murang’a County said:

“This is my first time to attend Tusome trainings. I think I still need time to master Tusome. Class 3 training was more challenging but I hope with time and more practice, I will manage.”


A participant during the Term 1 ToT who was a lecturer from Kenyenya Teacher Training College commended the inclusion of Class 3 and the strategies to be used to teach reading in Class 3. In his own words,

“The strategies identified for teaching reading in Class 3 are focused on allowing pupils to apply skills acquired in Class 1 and 2 to further read to learn. They will open up learners’ reading world and activate their literacy levels.”

He further noted that it would be even better if more strategies were infused for using a range of instructional options with pupils with different abilities. This and other feedback obtained during the training were used to inform the Term 2 trainings.

The Term 2 training content clarified “gray areas” that remained from the initial training conducted in Term 1 of 2017 as well as from the lessons learned during classroom implementation. The Class 1 and 2 training content was tailored, as is Tusome’s common practice, around the anticipated Term 2 lesson content. Prior to the ToT, a one-day training was conducted on April 2, 2017, for the master trainers. This one-day training also resulted in an experience during the Term 1 ToT, when differences occurred in the trainers’ presentations of some of the concepts, especially for Class 3 content. This one-day training was, therefore, altered in Term 2 to ensure that all trainers attending different training groups had a common understanding and received uniform training on the content. The master trainers came from the MoE, TSC, the Tusome technical team, and other implementing partners. The one-day training was followed by a full three-day ToT held April 3–5, 2017, in Nakuru at the Bontana Hotel. A total of 188 (122 male and 66 female) participants were trained at the Term 2 ToT.

During the Term 2 ToT, reflections on the challenges previously experienced by teachers formed the major part of the three-day training content. Close attention was paid to the Term 1 implementation period, when Class 1 and 3 teachers experienced more challenges than Class 2 teachers. Class 1 teachers had new learners who had never previously been in Tusome classes, and Class 3 teachers were required to use the Tusome-provided templates to generate lessons by using books currently available in the market and written by multiple authors.

One of the highlights of the three-day ToT was the presentation of the preliminary results from the Tusome external midline evaluation by Management Systems International (MSI), the firm that had been contracted by USAID to conduct the evaluation (see Freudenberger & Davis, 2017). The impressive results elicited applause from the trainees, as they proved that all the Activity implementers indeed had been doing great work. One of the training participants, a CQASO from Tana River, expressed his enthusiasm:

“These results have catalyzed my urge to double my efforts in delivering Tusome trainings to CSOs and teachers. I will always endeavor to ensure my trainees get the best out of me in order to get even better results.”

Among other guests, this training was also attended by the former Tusome National Coordinator, who currently serves as MoE’s Director for Special-Needs Education. Her remarks included the following:

“This program is what it is because of all of us. Four years ago, most of us were not sure of what would happen to the program. However, now we are sharing impressive results. It has taken great teamwork, commitment, and sacrifice from each of us. I am greatly proud of the Tusome team. The uniqueness about Tusome is that it is a verhTOTy large program, and the impact of Tusome is felt


in every school, in every village and community in the country. We greatly appreciate USAID for funding the program and always standing with Tusome. On behalf of the Ministry, I want to appreciate what Tusome is doing since other programs are learning so much from the program. Tusome has already set the benchmark for all education activities.”

While encouraging participants from the MoE to improve on their commitment to conducting classroom observations, she urged all of them to also create time to observe and support classes with pupils who are deaf or blind. She expressed appreciation for USAID and its continued support, noting that the impact of Tusome is felt in every part of the country.

As coverage of the training content progressed, many participants noticed great improvements in addressing challenges that had been witnessed in the previous term, especially in the Class 3 and Class 1 trainings. A CQASO from West Pokot County said:

“During Term 1 training, I personally had difficulty training CSOs on Class 3 content. Together with my colleagues, we always left this content to the RTI officer at our site to facilitate. This time round, I will rush to train Class 3 content. It is well captured and very clear to us this time.”

In a different training group, an SCDE from Homa Bay County stated:

“Term 1 training was my deep end in Tusome. It was my first time to attend Tusome training. Things seemed too strange and difficult for me to fathom. The RTI team assisted me greatly. I think I will assist them greatly during the CSOs’ training as I count myself an expert in Tusome now. This training provided a lot of answers to many gray areas.”

2.2.6 Tusome lead trainers’ training of CSOs and star teachers, Terms 1 and 2 The training of CSOs is one of the Tusome’s termly trainings. As mentioned earlier, due to election activities, only Term 1 and 2 trainings were conducted. The Term 1 countrywide CSO and star teacher trainings took place December 12–14, 2016, across 34 venues; and had a high turnout of 1,454 participants (873 males and 581 females; see Annex C). The high numbers were because, in addition to the CSOs, a few specially selected head teachers and teachers, as recommended by their respective CSOs based on competence, also attended. The inclusion of these “star” teachers (see footnote 5) was meant to bolster the teacher training team, given that Class 1, 2, and 3 teachers—as well as head teachers—would be trained at the same time at the same venue (with the Class 3 teachers in a separate room). The presence of these star teachers and head teachers invigorated the CSOs’ activity levels and participation as they felt challenged to perform well, like the model teachers. The quality and consistency of the Tusome trainings ensured that most demonstrated good content mastery, especially with Class 1 and 2 training content. The first-timers, mainly newly appointed CSOs, experienced challenges at the beginning, but encouragement and inspiration from their peers, plus good facilitation, enabled them to catch up with the rest.

The CSOs’ training content for Class 3 was well received in Term 1, with several participants noting that this step was long overdue. In particular, a CSO from Embu County, Kanja Zone, stated,

“At last my prayers have been answered. I kept wondering when Tusome will ever get to Class 3. I will continue to pray that Tusome covers all classes up to Class 8.”


Some of the attendees made suggestions for improving future trainings. For example, a CSO from Mombasa County, Ziwani Zone, while appreciating the inclusion of Class 3, lamented the limited training time.

“There should have been more time. Especially to enable trainers to model teaching a complete Class 3 lesson as well as allowing us to practice teaching a complete lesson.”

The Isiolo CDE, who was present during the Isiolo, Marsabit, and Samburu CSOs’ training, commented on Tusome as follows:

“As we talk about improving the quality of education in Kenya, Tusome is the program to count on. We have seen many programs since 1995….Tusome has come to address what wasn’t addressed by all those other programs. Tusome is a special program making an impact in schools across our counties.”

His opinion was that, “Since Tusome began, there has been an increased number of pupils reading at the benchmark.” In addition, alluding to the importance of teacher support in the provision of quality education, he noted;

“I wish Tusome was there when we were in school….I wish there was someone to support our teachers then…”

A similar sentiment on the impact of Tusome was also shared by a TSC-CD from Taita-Taveta County. Commenting during the CSOs’ training for Taita-Taveta and Kilifi counties, she said:

“Tusome has done us good: Class 1 and 2 pupils are able to read and teachers in these classes deliver quality lessons.”

Similar to Term 1, the Term 2 training of the CSOs was conducted at 34 training sites across the country. At every training site, there were five trainers selected from among the MoE, TSC, SAGAs, RTI, and other Tusome implementing partners. The training took place April 10–12, 2017. This set of trainings reached 1,112 CSOs (812 male and 300 female), with the objective of empowering the CSOs to guide and support teachers and head teachers to acquire the desired skills, knowledge, and attitudes to help learners in early grades to read and comprehend. There were two training manuals, the first of which focused on equipping Class 1 and 2 teachers with requisite skills to deliver lessons following the provided teacher guides based on the Tusome approach. As had been the case with the Term 1 training, the second manual was designed to train Class 3 teachers on how to extract content from the books found in the Kenyan book market and use the content to teach Class 3 children. The CSOs were again taken through the step-by-step lesson planning procedure using the provided templates for Class 3. Through hands-on practice, they were also guided on how to use tablets effectively during classroom observations and uploading the resultant data.

As is the common practice for Tusome, headquarters- and county-based MoE and TSC officers also attended the trainings and were be given a chance to address participants. The

A Tusome ICT officer taking the Mandera, Wajir, and Garissa CSOs through a tablet

training session in Garissa town.



Nyamira County Director of Education attended the Kisii and Nyamira CSOs’ Term 2 training, where he remarked:

“I appreciate the efforts you CSOs are doing in the field. I have not had time to meet all of you but I have felt the impact of your good job in the field at my office. I attended a national meeting in Kisumu and I know the importance of working hard. The commitment you continuously show to Tusome has translated to good performance. I have had a glance of this process. I like the responses and your active participation. This is as per your trainers’ guidance.”

A related sentiment was offered by a TSC Deputy County Director for Lamu County, who said in his opening remarks:

“I have been in the education field for some time now and I have not seen a program that has brought a paradigm shift in literacy, a program that has brought great impact in our schools apart from Tusome.”

In Elgeyo-Marakwet, the TSC County Director asked the CSOs to ensure they paid attention to the high-quality training they were receiving and to be ready to cascade the same to teachers. She further stated,

“I am proud to be associated with Tusome program. It has had such great positive impact. I urge you to work even harder for better results and keep on being good ambassadors of the TSC.”

Across the board, participants observed that they had gained more knowledge, content, skills, and experiences in the course of the Term 2 training compared to the previous trainings. Most participants remarked that the Class 3 content was better explained during this training, with more guiding templates (lesson plan and activity templates) for lesson planning having been provided, a request that several participants had made in their feedback at the end of the Term 1 training. A CSO said during the training of Kisii CSOs:

“With the new lesson plan and activity templates, it is going to be easy for teachers to lesson plan. This training has also added insights that were not quite clear after the Term 1 trainings.”

During the training for the Garissa, Mandera, and Wajir CSOs, participants expressed confidence and readiness to guide teachers to prepare and deliver high-quality English and Kiswahili lessons for Classes 1, 2, and 3. A CSO from Wajir County stated:

“I am now more confident in knowing the different elements that make a Tusome Class 3 lesson and how to choose content for different activities from a given text. However, it is practically not possible to divide some stories that could be too short in three parts. I think, they can only be divided into two parts or read only once.” 10

During the Kwale and Mombasa CSOs’ training, the Kwale County Director of Education underscored the Tusome gains by saying:

“I am impressed by the midterm evaluation results. It shows that 3–5 years down the line, we will have high literacy levels across the country. I attribute this

10 Since most of the Class 3 texts in the course books found on the open market are much longer than can be taught in a single lesson, Class 3 teachers are trained to divide the texts logically into three parts that can then be taught in separate lessons.


success to your unrelenting support to teachers and the Tusome fraternity for this most resourceful program ever.”

2.2.7 CSOs’ training of Class 1, 2, and 3 teachers

The termly teacher trainings are meant to equip teachers with relevant skills for each new academic period. Continuous training of the teachers also ensures that veteran teachers become even more well-grounded in the teaching of literacy skills; and that newly recruited teachers are introduced to the methodology and other relevant Tusome elements, such as instructional support supervision. It is also a time for the teachers to share their experiences, best practices, and challenges; and to get solutions, remind themselves of what they already learned, unlearn if need be, relearn, and learn new things. All of this effort is aimed at improving literacy outcomes among early-grade learners. The teacher trainings for Terms 1 and 2 of 2017 were held at venues across the 47 counties. The training of public school teachers was supported by the CSOs (see Sections 2.2.9 through 2.2.11 for APBET IC and teacher trainings). The CSOs were paired with and supported by the star teachers.

Although some of the star teachers had observed trainings in October 2016, the January 2017 sessions marked the first time that they were fully involved as trainers. Nonetheless, the star teachers were found to be very instrumental and effective. They were able to deliver and, in some cases, were even better than some of the CSOs at training and modeling the lessons embedded in the training manual. As a result, the Activity has adopted this as its model for in-service teachers’ professional development. This is especially important in the light of the increased number of teachers and head teachers being trained since the expansion to Class 3. However, currently the star teachers are restricted to supporting the training of Class 1 and 2 teachers, where they have the opportunity to model the teaching of lessons without necessarily elaborating on the concepts, which might be a challenge to some of them.

While the training was well received by all the teachers, for Class 3, concerns were raised on how to uniformly do lesson plans, prepare schemes of work, and extract high-quality lessons from the books existing in the market. This feedback from the Term 1 teacher training prompted the Activity to change its tactics. Among the changes that happened was introducing sample lesson plans, schemes of work, and extracted lessons during the Term 2 round of trainings, with clear guidelines on how teachers can develop their own.

“The children have been used to Tusome from Class 1 and it would have been disastrous to have left it at Class 2. This will help them improve in class.” (A CQASO, Nandi County)

“Tusome program has improved a lot in learning English and Kiswahili languages in our school. It has changed us and our pupils. They are now able to read words in English and Kiswahili.” (A Teacher, Kapolesobei Primary School in Abosi Zone, Bomet County)

Class 3 teachers at Kwale County, Tsimba Tiwi Zone,

busy extracting a portion of a lesson from their books.



“The program is very useful. It should be introduced for all other subjects, not languages only.” (A Teacher, Amalo Zone in Nakuru County)

“Workshops should be conducted during the holidays to enable teachers to cover the syllabus in good time and avoid rushing syllabus coverage.” (A Teacher, Amalo Zone, Nakuru County)

“Class 3 teachers should be provided with schemes of work and lesson plans to make their work easier.” (A Teacher, Kaplelach Primary School, Abosi Zone, Bomet County)

The Term 2 round of trainings provided an opportunity for the teachers to reflect over their experiences with the DIM methodology without Tusome-aligned books. During the teacher training, participants portrayed competency in content mastery as they practiced. They mostly attributed this to the clear manner in which the concepts were explained and delivered. Consequently, content that looked difficult in Term 1 became manageable after the Term 2 training. Following the training, a teacher from Alikoba Primary School, Tabaka Zone, observed:

“Word-attack strategies came out more clearly than in the previous training. I managed to choose words for the various strategies and will comfortably do the same back in school.”

Class 3 teachers demonstrated a better understanding of choosing content and lesson planning compared to the Term 1 training in January. Referencing the activity template for the steps in each activity and making good use of the lesson plan template were highly emphasized throughout Class 3 teacher trainings. Participants appreciated being given the lesson plan templates, which they reported would go a long way toward helping them develop better lesson plans than before. It was also evident that the teachers had a better understanding of the word-attack strategies compared to the previous term. This was seen from how they were able to pick the correct strategies for the chosen words or the correct words for a picked strategy, and the way they adhered to the checklists during modeling in pairs and at plenary.

The trainings were also supported by officers from Tusome National Technical Team members drawn from the MoE, TSC, and other SAGAs (including PTTCs, KICD, and KEMI). Apart from assisting the CSOs in the actual training, members of the NTT also helped to assure quality during the training. Involvement of NTTs in all Tusome interventions is one of the ongoing efforts by the Activity to build capacity of the MoE institutions and to ensure the gains credited to Tusome are sustained. Despite their busy schedules, some of the county-based MoE and TSC officers also participated in the trainings. In opening the teacher training in Buruburu Zone in Nairobi County, the TSC County Director expressed:

“The joy of a teacher is the success of the learner. TSC is focusing on improving quality of education in Kenya and to ensure reforms are taking place. I have worked previously as a TSC Director in Kwale and have witnessed a school where Class 2 pupils were reading much better than Class 6 pupils. Thanks to Tusome for ensuring that we have fully empowered and resourced teachers in lower primary schools.”

While singling out the Tusome midline evaluation report, a teacher at Welmarer Primary School, Bura Zone, Garissa County, observed:


“I may not say exactly that these figures represent what is happening in our schools but there is big improvement in our learners’ reading ability since the inception of Tusome. I attribute this success to the collective effort from our CSO, termly teacher refresher trainings and the support from Tusome team. The follow-up support enables us to get an opportunity for clarity on areas not well captured during trainings.”

Separately, teachers in Kairuri Zone in Embu noted that Tusome needs to be scaled to preschool classes, too. This way, the program will teach learners the correct pronunciation from the start of their learning rather than waiting until they get to Class 1, where teachers have to start undoing some incorrect concepts instilled in preschool. One of the teachers stated,

“The pre-primary and private school teachers ought to be also trained in Tusome methodology to avoid the children coming to Class 1 having challenges in adjusting to a new methodology.”

While appreciating the group, partner, and plenary approach of content practice applied during the trainings and also encouraging colleagues to model, a teacher from Rib Primary School in Wajir Bor Zone of Wajir County remarked,

“I personally like this partner work and practice and modeling at plenary because it is one of the avenues I get constructive feedback from trainers and colleagues. I always volunteer to model in front and even when practicing in our groups. If a trainee models a lesson during the trainings and gets corrected, there will be minimal chances of them making the same mistakes in class. It is better to make mistakes here at the training than making mistakes in front of learners when no one is there to correct you.”

2.2.8 CSOs’ training of head teachers The design of Tusome’s training is such that the head teacher trainings are conducted concurrently with the Class 1, 2, and 3 teacher trainings across all the zones. The trainings are scheduled and conducted on the first day of each zonal training, which include head-teacher-specific content as well as part of the Class 1, 2, and 3 teachers’ training content. Head teachers are often trained primarily on book care, emerging issues on Tusome, teacher support through classroom observations, facilitation of the teachers’ zonal reflection meetings, and ways to address material shortages. The head teachers are usually matched with Class 3 teachers to acquaint them with Class 3 content, which the majority of them still considered new as of Term 2. Some head teachers are also classroom teachers and choose to join with peers in the classes they teach as appropriate.

In both Term 1 and Term 2, each training venue had three mandatory trainers, consisting of pairs of CSOs (one from the zone hosting the training, and one from a neighboring zone) plus either a star teacher or a Tusome officer from the national or county MoE or a TSC office. In addition, other Tusome and MoE officers roved from one zone to another to ensure that high-quality trainings were being conducted as planned. They would also formally open the trainings and, at times, make closing remarks. In one such instance, during head teacher and teacher trainings in Lafey and Arabia zones in Mandera, the TSC Sub-County Director advised teachers,


“Do not kill this program because of various challenges we face in the region like shortage of teachers, insecurity, drought, and nomadic lifestyle. Let’s try and make the best out of the prevailing circumstances.”

In Bungoma County, the host CSO was reported to have told the head teachers:

“Tusome is our only hope to revolutionize learning in lower classes. Let us embrace it for the benefit of our children.”

Constructive feedback focusing on how to improve on Tusome trainings and implementation was shared by the head teachers at many venues. One consistent item of feedback from the head teachers was that the timing for Tusome trainings always coincided with the school opening days. Consequently, either their attendance at the trainings or their administrative roles at their respective schools suffered. Their recommendation to train earlier or on weekends was implemented in Term 2, with some level of success, although the impact could not be fully assessed because Term 2 attendance across the board was generally affected by the political activities leading to Kenya general elections on August 8, 2017. While in Term 1 22,318 (17,758 male and 4,560 female) head teachers participated in the training across the country, in Term 2, the attendance dropped to 20,925 (16,626 male and 4,299 female).

Many head teachers expressed their improved level of support to teachers in schools. However, they also cited lack of time and a high volume of administrative work as deterrents to their dedicated support to teachers. The head teachers also appreciated their invitation to be part of the Class 3 teacher trainings. A head teacher from Githiga Zone, Kiambu County, was pleased that head teachers were grouped with Class 3 teachers:

“In Term 1, I could do nothing to support Class 3 teachers even though they kept consulting me. I understood neither what the teachers were to do nor how I could support them. This one-day training has enlightened me on how the teachers need to create lessons.”

He commented that the duration of the head teachers’ attendance at the trainings was still inadequate:

“I think head teachers need to attend trainings for all the days together with teachers in order to fully understand the lessons for better support.”

Positive sentiments were shared across the country on the great progress made by Tusome in supporting literacy outcomes.

“I have personally witnessed performance improvement in my school amongst the lower primary learners. I hence called our officer [CSO] to help us train all teachers within my school on how to use the Tusome strategy to teach other classes.” (A Head Teacher, Poro Zone, Samburu County)

2.2.9 Tusome national trainers’ training of Instructional Coaches The Term 1 training of ICs was conducted January 4–6, 2017. This was a three-day training held in the five APBET cities of Eldoret, Kisumu, Mombasa, Nakuru, and Nairobi. The ICs were trained, among other things, on how to support teachers in using the DIM to teach literacy in Classes 1 and 2; how to use the Tusome teachers’ guides and pupil books; and how to extract lesson plan content from non-Tusome materials and teach literacy to Class 3 learners using the Tusome approach. While previously the ICs would be trained at the same


time as the CSOs, in Term 1 of 2017, the ICs’ training was staggered with that of the CSOs for recruitment to be completed for ICs who would be assigned to the new APBET clusters formed after the Activity’s expansion.

As is standard for Tusome trainings, the trainers introduced each component and modeled it; participants practiced the skill with a partner; and finally, the skill was modeled by two or three volunteers, either in small groups or in plenary. The rest of the participants would take notes and later give formative feedback, as a way to reinforce correct learning of the skill. For the Term 1 training, the content covered included DIM, perky pace, review of the components of reading, English oral language development, practice of English and Kiswahili sounds, word-attack strategies, grammar, assessment, and lesson planning. Word-attack strategies and lesson planning were highly emphasized for Class 3. The new ICs, as had been expected, experienced challenges at the initial stages of the trainings. However, the plans that had been put into place to give them individualized training and pair them with veteran ICs ensured that they were rapidly brought up to speed. A new IC in Kisumu City, remarked:

“At the start of partner work, I felt like quitting as I could not tell what this ‘I do, We do, and You do’ was all about. However, my training partner encouraged me and I am now confident I will be confidently training teachers.”

While the five components of reading that are part of the core training for Classes 1 and 2 were also incorporated into the Class 3 training content, there were also a few add-ons for Class 3, which the participants found interesting and engaging. One such add-on was a “retelling the story” strategy for promoting learners’ reading comprehension. The participants were also advised on how to approach comprehension stories to cover the whole week. The long stories are supposed to be taught in sections so as to spread them across the literacy skills to be covered in a week.

“The strategy of retelling a story is a very good initiative. I strongly believe that learners will find it easy to retell the story.” (An IC, Nairobi APBET)

In Term 2, the training for Instructional Coaches took place in the APBET cities of Kisumu, Mombasa, Nakuru, and Nairobi, April 10–12, 2017. ICs from Nakuru and Eldoret were trained together in Nakuru, since the Eldoret coaches were few in number and it would not have been cost-effective to train them independently. The trainings were facilitated by the respective city managers, supported by nationally trained Instructional Coaches. Some of the coaches who attended expressed the following sentiments (some anonymously) in their post-training evaluation comments:

“I am leaving this training a very knowledgeable person who is very confident to go to my cluster to train the teachers. Kudos….” (An IC, Kisumu APBET)

“The process of dividing the story into 3 sections has been made clear.” (An IC, Eldoret APBET)

ICT trainer taking ICs through tablet practice during ICs’ training in Kisumu, Term 2, 2017.



“The workshop was meaningful. Standard 3 [Class 3] content was simplified and appreciated.” (An IC, Nakuru APBET)

“Term 2 coaches’ training was very much detailed. Initially, I had challenging areas related to Class 3 content, especially content selection, planning, and word-attack strategies. I am now more confident to teach APBET teachers to perfect their skills.” (An IC, Kisumu APBET)

“Most teachers were not aware of when to retell the story or introduce questions. Most were using the two strategies at the same time. With proper guidance now, I believe comprehension will now be enjoyable and easy to teach.” (An IC, Mombasa APBET)

“The training cleared contentious issues from the last training.” (An IC, Kisumu APBET)

The ICs were also taken through the Tusome external midline evaluation report. This was an exciting moment for most of them, learning that they were part of the success stories of Tusome. Commenting on the report, a coach from Nairobi APBET said:

“It is quite true that the results reflect the impressive gains we have observed in our schools. Children are improving every day and in turn, parents enroll kids on almost a daily basis….” (An IC, Nairobi APBET)

2.2.10 Coaches’ training of APBET teachers for Classes 1, 2, and 3 The trainings of the head teachers and teachers were held at the cluster level across the APBET cities. The training was done with the view of equipping APBET teachers with the knowledge and skills they would need for sustaining high-quality implementation of the Activity while focusing on the eventual goal of improving reading outcomes among early-grade learners in the Tusome-targeted 1,500 APBET institutions. In both Terms 1 and 2, three ICs were partnered to train at each training site. The partnering continued until all the clusters for all three ICs had received their trainings. While the host IC would be training Class 3 teachers, one of the supporting ICs would train the Class 1 and 2 teachers, and the third IC would rove between the two rooms to support either of the two trainers as needed. New concepts were introduced into the Class 3 teachers’ training content in Term 1 to help them understand how the existing KICD-approved books could be used with Tusome approach, and the content was then enhanced in Term 2 based on the trainees’ feedback (see below). Besides the DIM, Class 3 teachers were trained on how to extract content, use the provided activity templates to compose a lesson plan, and teach the lesson. Teachers with prior Tusome experience mastered how to extract Class 3 content and apply the activity templates more easily than did the new teachers. Composing a lesson plan seemed to pose challenges to many teachers initially, although they were guided by the trainers.

Many teachers expressed their readiness to be involved in Tusome activities, such as supporting the trainings and the development of instructional materials. They also urged Tusome to consider developing materials at least for Class 3, if not beyond, to ensure the great ideas taught are sustainably adopted. One teacher at Chemwochoi Zone in Nandi County said during the training,

“How I wish Tusome provided books for Class 3. My class has only 7 textbooks. This is not a problem in Class 1 and 2. Without Tusome, even Class 1 and 2 would have had a similar small number of books or even less. Tusome is the way to go.”


This recommendation has since been considered, and the Activity is currently at the advanced stages of having Class 3 Kiswahili and English books ready. Another teacher, from Kengeleni Zone in Mombasa County, said,

“Thank you so much for the training, this is my first time to attend. I am sure it has improved my teaching skills.”

Yet another said:

“I have enjoyed the training, but the word-attack strategies are nothing easy to understand. I will appreciate if training is done at school level as I didn’t grasp the idea accurately.” (A Teacher, Acts of Hope, Kisumu City APBET)

While the Term 1 training was more of an introductory training, especially to new teachers, Term 2 teacher trainings focused on reviewing the Tusome methodology and approach; learning how to develop high-quality assessments for Classes 1, 2, and 3 in English and Kiswahili; and building teachers’ knowledge and skills to deliver Tusome content competently. It was clear from several points of feedback received that the Term 2 training for Class 3 resulted in better understanding of the Tusome methodology and related concepts.

“Word-attack strategies came out more clearly than it was in the previous training. I can now comfortably teach these strategies.” (Nairobi APBET)

“Through the training, I have learned to properly lesson plan and select sections to teach in Class 3. Provision of a lesson plan template was a good idea; it is going to be very helpful.” (A Class 3 Teacher, Mombasa APBET)

“Personally, I have learnt more than I expected I would learn. I wish we were to open schools tomorrow so that I can go and teach the way have been taught; I feel so empowered.” (A Teacher, Mube-Queenrose Academy, Barak Cluster, Nairobi APBET)

2.2.11 Coaches’ training of APBET head teachers The head teachers’ trainings are aimed to empower the head teachers to support their teachers effectively and to take proper care of Tusome instructional materials in their schools. Just like in the public school trainings, for the APBET head teachers’ trainings, the head teachers are grouped together with Class 3 teachers each term. In the afternoons, the resident IC from the cluster where the training venue is located then takes the head teachers through their content, while the visiting ICs train the Class 1 and 2 teachers and the Class 3 teachers in two separate rooms.

During the Term 2 training, the head teachers were taken through other issues related to school-level and institutional factors that are necessary for improved reading outcomes. They were also given an overview of the Tusome External Evaluation—Midline Report. The head teachers were especially impressed by the gains made in reading fluency since the introduction of Tusome in 2015. A head teacher had this to say about the results:

“I strongly believe in the vision of Tusome since teachers can have an easy time teaching other subjects if the children can read with understanding.” (Kisumu APBET) “Trainings organized during holidays have given me an easy time since all my concentration is here. It is more efficient to organize trainings during closing days.” (Kisumu APBET) “With Tusome, things are becoming better and better. I find myself growing in terms of teaching every time I attend trainings. Thank you Tusome.” (Kisumu APBET) (Comments from teacher-training evaluations)


“This is a true reflection of what our teachers have been doing in class. Indeed, we only need to pull up our socks to have better results. The sky is the limit. Tusome is a miracle.” (A Head Teacher, Njiru Cluster, Nairobi APBET)

The trainers used these positive outcomes to urge more commitment from the head teachers to support their Class 1, 2, and 3 teachers. Other tools covered were the Class 3 lesson planning templates. Among the evaluations from head teachers were the following comments:

“Participatory course, very lively and enjoyable. Participants were allowed to express feelings and experiences freely.” (A Head Teacher, Kisumu APBET)

“With Tusome, we have the latest instructional materials that make teaching easier. This lesson plan comes in handy in helping teachers to develop their lessons. Not far from what they are used to. This will make it so easy for teachers to come up with the lessons both in English and Kiswahili.” (A Head Teacher, Nakuru APBET)

“There was too much to be learnt within a very short time.” (A Head Teacher, Kisumu APBET)

The APBET head teachers expressed their full embrace of Tusome, as had been illustrated by their consistent support to teachers in their respective schools. A head teacher from Dandora Cluster stressed that

“As a head teacher, I want to thank Tusome for allowing us to join the program. Even though we have not received instructional materials, we are professionally and technically empowered far beyond literacy program. Now I know why I was losing children to Tusome schools.”

2.2.12 CSOs’ and ICs’ leadership of zonal- and cluster-level reflections Reflections are termly half-day meetings coordinated by the CSOs or ICs. They are held at the zonal level for public schools, or the cluster level for APBET institutions. The meetings accord the CSOs/ICs and teachers an opportunity to reflect and learn as they celebrate successes and share challenges together. For the CSOs and ICs, it is a time of sharing best practices and collectively hammering out possible solutions to the common challenges the teachers face as they implement the Activity at the school and class levels. For the teachers, it is a time for clarifying gray areas. Depending on the magnitude of the challenge, a CSO or IC may decide to discuss the issue, model some segments of a lesson himself/herself, or prepare some teachers in advance to come forward and model how to teach various reading components. The forums also provide opportunities for star teachers to freely share their challenges and successes, which helps in mentoring struggling colleagues, especially when they realize that it is possible to master the skills over time, even if it is difficult at first. Invariably, when a teacher presents a lesson, more teachers become convinced that it is doable, which enhances the Activity’s uptake and promotes positive attitudes among the teachers.

Termly reflection meetings were conducted in most of the zones and clusters across the country, with attendance averaging approximately 80%. Most of the meetings appointed competent teachers who modeled full Class 1, 2, and 3 lessons. This helped to clear up the attending teachers’ doubts and raised their confidence levels for teaching Tusome lessons in these classes. They also deliberated on successes, challenges, and practical solutions to some of the challenges.


A total of 1,962 zonal/cluster reflection meetings were conducted in FY 2017 (see Annex J). Some of the zones or clusters that did not have reflection meetings in Term 1 were able to have them in Term 2. The number of cluster meetings declined from 726 in Q2 FY 2017 to 354 in Q3 FY 2017. In Term 2, which corresponds to Tusome’s Q3 FY 2017, most of the CSOs were heavily involved in head teacher appraisals, and hence had little time to support classroom observations and reflection meetings.). Reflection meetings were further affected by the high level of political activities that happened over quarters 3 and 4.

Some of the successes mentioned during the cluster- and zonal-level meetings were: Improved levels of reading and comprehension abilities among Class 1, 2, and 3 pupils; teachers enjoying teaching; motivated learners who enjoyed coming to school; minimized absenteeism for both teachers and learners; learner-centered lessons; improved handwriting; increased reading fluency rates; availability of enough learning materials for Classes 1 and 2; and good collaboration between teachers and the pupils. Some challenges, however, were highlighted as well. Class 3 teachers, for instance, expressed concern over the unavailability of Class 3 Tusome books, and said that some schools had only one copy of the KICD-approved books, hence forcing the teacher to copy comprehension stories onto the blackboard for the learners to read. Lack of uniformity in the books being used for teaching in Class 3 was also noted as a major challenge.

2.2.13 Progress on Youth Fund grants implementation At the beginning of July 2017 (Q4), approval was received from USAID to award grants in response to 23 of the 24 applications submitted in December 2016. Subsequently, the MoE also approved the awards to the selected youth groups, which paved way for a “grant launch.” Regional start-up induction workshops followed across four regions (Eldoret, Kisumu, Mombasa, and Nairobi) from August through the first week of September 2017. During the three-day workshops, the youth groups were taken through RTI’s grant award process, grant terms and conditions, financial management requirements, reporting requirements, and branding and marking requirements. This was aimed to ensure the youth groups understood what is expected of them before they begin implementation and also to build their capacity. This training was facilitated by a team of Tusome technical staff from RTI, mainly the Grants Manager, Senior M&E Officer, Communication Specialist, and Finance Assistants. The MoE, represented by the Tusome National Coordinator, also took the youth groups through the codes of conduct to which they are expected to adhere as they engage with the schools and government officials. The second and third days were dedicated to revising the groups’ deliverables and activities to ensure that the activities were actionable, in line with MoE’s requirements, and geared toward meeting the overall Tusome objectives. This was achieved with the support from RTI staff and MoE staff present at the respective workshops.

The workshops also saw the youth groups interact with QASOs from their respective counties and RTI regional staff. The bond was necessary for two reasons: to ensure the youth groups will get the support they need at the field level as they carry out the activities, and to ensure adequate monitoring of the youth groups by the QASOs and RTI regional

Six Class 3 learners share a single textbook because of book

shortages.



technical officers as they learn the requirements of the grants and the youth groups’ interventions under the program. A total of 66 (48 male and 18 female) staff from the youth groups participated in the workshop. The CQASOs who participated numbered 15, of whom 11 were male and 4 were female, from 15 counties. Two officials from the Tusome NTT also participated in each of the workshops (see Annex H, Table H-1) for comprehensive data on the participants).

As of the end of September, the youth groups’ final proposals and budgets were under review and preparation for the grant agreements was under way for the submissions accepted by the technical team.

2.3 Supervision support to teachers and PTTC lecturers by CQASOs, SCDEs, and Tusome staff in teaching and assessing reading

2.3.1 Support to teachers by CSOs, ICs, and head teachers

Instructional support supervision by the CSOs and ICs is one of the elements driving the notable success of Tusome. Tusome’s instructional support approach is designed to have the CSOs support public school teachers within a zone, and ICs support APBET teachers within clusters. Through regular training by Tusome, the CSOs and ICs have had their skills

built on key reading pedagogical technical areas such as phonological awareness, alphabetic principle, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension. The CSOs and ICs use these skills to support Class 1, 2, and 3 teachers in their zones and clusters respectively. Each visit consists of a lesson observation of either English or Kiswahili, during which time they fill in a teacher observation form using tablet-based tools, noting what the teacher did well and areas of improvement in each component of reading in a lesson. The CSO/IC also assesses three learners, who are randomly selected, to estimate the average class reading level. This culminates in a meeting between the teacher and the CSO/IC to reflect on the lesson. In this meeting, the feedback to the teacher is offered in a manner that is collegial and conversational. Research findings, including

the recent Tusome external midline evaluation, have consistently acknowledged the influence of teacher support on reading outcomes. The Tusome External Evaluation—Midline Report identified increased frequency of CSO and IC observations as being one of the school-level factors that influences reading outcomes during implementation at scale (Freudenberger & Davis, 2017, p. 32). Encouraged by this finding, the Activity continued to invest time and resources to ensure that CSOs and ICs were providing instructional support supervision to teachers.

Quality lesson delivery was witnessed as most teachers were using the teachers’ guides and applying the DIM appropriately. Consequently, there was progressive improvement in

A CSO for Wajir County sharing a video lesson on vocabulary with a Class 1 teacher, after a

classroom observation.



reading fluency among Class 1, 2, and 3 learners. Teachers across different counties had plenty of praise for Tusome.

“I began teaching Class 1 this year, not knowing anything but now I am much familiar with Tusome and my learners love Tusome very much. 95% of my class are fluent readers.” (A Teacher, Sikang Primary, Sikalame Zone Siaya County)

“Due to Tusome, my current Class 3 are better in reading and comprehension than the current Class 4….I also believe there are pupils in Class 5 who can’t read better than the Class 3s.” (A Head Teacher, Isiolo County)

2.3.2 Tusome staff support for CSOs and ICs Tusome’s supervision model is such that the CSOs and the ICs receive pedagogical support from members of NTT and Tusome staff, and they, in turn, support the head teachers and teachers to improve classroom instructions. Continuous and consistent support by Tusome staff and members of NTT has greatly helped the CSOs and ICs to get grounded in Tusome’s approach to teaching reading, thus increasing their chances of cascading the same level of understanding to their teachers for effective instructions delivery. The CSOs’ and ICs’ support was especially important in 2017 following the expansion to Class 3, with many new CSOs and ICs joining the program. Class 3 content was even a challenge for some CSOs and ICs who had been involved in Tusome for a while, since there were no Tusome-aligned books as yet. As indicated earlier, more support was directed to handling the Class 3 content and making good use of lesson plan templates, which were developed by Tusome to help the teachers apply Tusome’s methodology with the ordinary approved books in the market. When a new CSO in Ruruma was supported for the first time after being issued a tablet, he noted the following:

“I never knew that teacher support was this enjoyable and fulfilling. I had the tablet with me, but I didn’t know how to make use of it during teacher support. But I am now empowered and well equipped to go and support all teachers in my zone.”

The support was helpful for many CSOs who had reported having challenges in supporting teachers in extracting Class 3 lesson plan content, in choosing the appropriate word-attack strategy for the words they selected, in handling the texts when they were short, and in developing high-quality lesson plans. (As noted earlier, the challenge with short Class 3 texts is that the advice to divide the material into three parts to create three lessons collapses, and some of the teachers are not able to intuitively decide what to do.) These areas were greatly emphasized during the visits, and CSOs were advised accordingly about how to handle them.

Throughout the year under review, Tusome staff support for CSOs and ICs focused on teachers’ lesson planning, including prior and adequate preparation, at all class levels. For

Notable remarks “It is indeed great that Tusome has been able to convert our pupils to readers in this part of Kenya. Ordinarily, these lower classes, pupils that you have assessed would not have read a word, but today you, just like me, have seen how well they are reading…there is nothing that has brought [more] pride in me than the success that I have witnessed in my old age through Tusome. I just wish the government sustains this and, true enough, illiteracy will be a thing of the past.” (A CSO, Marsabit County)


example, for Classes 1 and 2, the emphasis was on adhering to all the details in the lesson script and specifically paying attention to the recommended DIM steps; whereas in Class 3, the area of focus was choosing content from the recommended textbooks and then aligning it with the activity and lesson plan templates, both during preparation and in the lesson delivery. This approach has helped most teachers gain mastery, with high-quality lessons being delivered and fluency rates improving remarkably, as was evidenced in Kamtonga Primary School in Bura Zone, Taita-Taveta County, where the assessed learners achieved an average fluency rate of 83 cwpm in Class 3 and 82 cwpm in Class 2. Teachers were, however, advised not to be satisfied with high fluency rates alone, but to assess learners individually to identify their challenges and offer extra support to address the existing gaps.

During the year most teachers became more confident in sound articulation, which helped the pupils learn the correct pronunciation of words, leading to improved reading abilities and thus improved fluency rates. Assessments conducted after lesson observations showed that the majority of the pupils’ fluency in reading had improved greatly. Teachers were increasingly allocating more time for pupils to read and use the supplementary readers, resulting in improved reading levels.

Some of the CSOs also began using the staff visit to their zones as an opportunity to visit their hard-to-reach and distant schools, which they could otherwise not support. In FY 2018, the Activity will endeavor to engage with MoE and TSC to come up with their own homegrown solutions to reaching some of these regions. A CSO from Garissa County noted the following when he was being supported by an officer from Tusome:

“Tusome is helping us reach far schools that we couldn’t have reached because there is no means of transport, and when you get public means to these schools, you may wait for three days for you to get another vehicle coming to this village. You see our region is vast. Now when you support me in such schools, the office and myself appreciate it, because in addition to these classroom observations, we do other administrative supervision and monitoring activities, like teachers’ performance appraisal and also making spot checks to other schools on the way, to see syllabus coverage and teachers’ attendance.”

2.3.3 CDEs support and monitor Tusome programs In most cases, the Tusome county MoE staff—CDEs, TSC-CDs, SCDEs—attend the CSO trainings in their respective counties and address the participants about the importance of Tusome as a foundation to improve learning outcomes. At the inception of Tusome in 2015, all CDEs and SCDEs were sensitized and provided with tablets to assist them in day-to-day support and monitoring of Tusome implementation. The Cabinet Secretary responsible for education has insisted that MoE field staff are required to produce evidence of their support and monitoring of Tusome.

In February 2017, during a Joint Review Mission for the PRIEDE early-grade mathematics program, most CDEs and TSC-CDs reported having actively participated in classroom observations and shared feedback on Tusome. Even so, the Dashboard data on CDEs’ and TSC-CDs’ Tusome classroom monitoring visits indicated no support from this cadre. This finding can, however, be attributed to their role being administrative rather than technical. They prefer having the technical officers under them—namely the MoE’s QASOs and SCDEs and TSC-SCDs (TSC)—occasionally support the CSOs. For instance, there was only one classroom support visit by an SCDE in July 2017, and 31 support visits by QASOs in June 2017 data uploaded to the Dashboard (Annex G, Tables G-2 and G-3). It also emerged that although some went on monitoring visits, they either did not use tablets (some


did not have them) or did not upload the data. Consequently, the Activity began looking to intensify its engagement with county and sub-county officers to increase their level of ownership in sustaining Tusome’s gains. Officers without tablets will also be trained and supplied with tablets as part of the FY 2018 work plan.

2.3.4 SCDEs supervise and monitor Tusome programs and upload their observation data

Only a few SCDEs have been providing in-person support to the CSOs for classroom observation since the start of the Activity. Unfortunately, the pattern continued throughout FY 2017. A few SCDEs, nevertheless, provided vehicle fuel to allow CSOs to travel to and gain access to the schools to provide teacher support. Noteworthy are the SCDEs for Habaswein of Wajir County, and Mandera North of Mandera County, who accompanied the CSO and Tusome technical staff to schools where the teachers were fearing for their lives due to a recent spate of attacks by the militant group Al-Shabaab. The SCDEs of these counties worked with the sub-county security teams, who assured the CSOs’ safety. The SCDE of Habaswein routinely engages the CSOs in his school visit plans and assigns them to Classes 1, 2, and 3 to support the teachers, as the other team conducts assessments for the rest of the classes. The CSO for Mandera North Sub-County pointed out:

“I have been visiting and supporting schools alone; the company of both the SCDE and TSC added value and trust on the part of the teachers to the program.”

The SCDEs also participated in the distribution of Tusome materials to private schools. The SCDEs’ and QASOs’ sensitization workshop, conducted recently (Q4) by Tusome, is expected to have stirred them toward greater ownership and sustainability of this intervention.

Some SCDEs are also reported to have institutionalized Tusome in their own local ways. A case in point involves an SCDE from Dhiwa Sub-County, Homa Bay County. This SCDE is one of the few who started off as one of the Tusome trainers. Somewhere along the way, he stopped being supportive. He would go to a training venue and instead of training, would read a newspaper and not stay until the end. He made a turnaround recently, however, after he was invited to preside over an Education Day in one of the schools in his sub-county. What impressed him was Tusome’s impact on children’s reading achievement. When visited recently by the Tusome COP and Kisumu Regional Education Program Officer (REPO), he joked about having been out in the cold in terms of Tusome training, which had taught him quite a lot and had further enhanced his support for Tusome activities. He quipped;

“If you give me a chance to be a trainer again, I shall train like it is the last time of my life to train.” (An SCDE, Homa Bay County)

He said that during his monthly meetings with the CSOs, he gets updates on how Tusome is doing in the sub-county. He therefore decided to develop a digital instrument which the sub-county began using to monitor Tusome activities. The tool captures the number of schools each CSO has supported in a month; achievements and challenges experienced in the month; visits he has made to schools; and fluency rates in the sub-county within the reporting month. The introduction of the tool helps him to know at a glance how the sub-county is doing on Tusome for targeted support.


2.3.5 NTT monitoring visits to schools (public, private, APBET, special needs) and PTTCs in counties

In FY 2017, there was much more participation of NTT members in classroom observations than in previous years. This engagement can be attributed to the desire to build momentum to mainstream Tusome’s interventions into MoE’s operations. The NTT members observed classrooms in regular public schools, APBET schools, and SNE schools for pupils who are deaf or blind. Most of the monitoring visits took place in February and March, as part of the efforts to recognize the level of uptake of Tusome in Class 3. Just as the Tusome technical team has done, members of the NTT were required to visit different zones, support CSOs as they conducted classroom observations, and share daily observation reports with the Tusome National Coordinator, who then would read the reports and advise on the best way forward, as appropriate. All these activities highlighted the role of the NTT members, as MoE and TSC representatives, in sustaining Tusome’s instructional support model. NTT members also participated in many other tasks, including materials development; ToT; and training of DQAS officers, QASOs/SCDEs, CSOs/ICs, teachers, and head teachers.

2.4 Improved policy environment that promotes reading skills Tusome recognizes that its activities are sensitive to existing government programs and policies. In this light, the Activity endeavors to work with the MoE and its partners in support of its various priorities and curriculum processes, including the ongoing curriculum reforms. To successfully implement and sustain the gains of Tusome, there is need for a high level of continued implementation fidelity to the provision of instruction materials and teacher support and supervision in early grades for improved reading. Efforts to achieve this are described below.

2.4.1 Private sector partnerships (supported by WERK) While some low-cost private schools have dropped out of the program due to various challenges (such as closure because of low enrollment), Tusome continued to attract interest from APBET institutions that were not initially in the program. In part because of such demand, the MoE and USAID approved the expansion that would begin to address unevenness in Tusome’s APBET coverage in some clusters. In FY 2017, the Activity expanded to 1,500 APBET institutions from 1,000 that had been in the program for the past two years. Additional ICs were also recruited.

2.4.2 Support the review of the National Book Policy A concept paper on Tusome sustainability developed in Q3 FY 2017 was reviewed and a meeting with the MoE for further engagements is scheduled for Q1 2018. The main purpose of the proposed meeting is to sensitize the MoE departments and SAGAs on their roles and responsibilities during the transition of the Tusome program from the technical support by RTI to the MoE. The concept paper has isolated long-, medium-, and short-term policy issues and concerns that need to be addressed to ensure the anticipated institutionalization of the early-grade literacy program within the Ministry’s operational structure in line with the Tusome design. This is also an attempt to alert the MoE to the urgent concern necessary for the successful progressive takeover of the program by the MoE.

The Tusome management team has picked priority activities and informally discussed them with individual departments, which have since included the activities in their work plans for 2017–2018. The Ministry has been keen to review the 1996 book policy to address the new dynamics that have emerged in terms of book development, procurement, and distribution to


schools. The 1996 book policy liberalized the book market and was actualized in 2004 with the guidelines on book development, submission, evaluation, and procurement that were developed by MoE in partnership with KPA. The provision of instructional materials has, however, been afflicted by several challenges that need to be managed.

Among the elements of Tusome was the piloting of a cost-effective instructional material strategy to inform the MoE in provision of instructional materials. The Tusome strategy has been successful in developing and distributing books to schools at a ratio of one book per pupil. The MoE technical committee has engaged Tusome to understand its strategy as well as borrow its international experience. This resulted in the MoE Cabinet Secretary pronouncing drastic changes in the book policy during the launch of the Tusome external midline evaluation results at KICD on June 14, 2017. Some of the preferred changes relate to cost, procurement, and distribution. Currently, the book policy is operationalized through the Orange Book published by KICD. The Orange Book gives publishers leeway to influence school heads on which textbooks to buy, thereby potentially compromising quality. Based on instructions given by the Cabinet Secretary, KICD is to revise the guidelines on school textbooks and to ensure that one course book is selected, to prevent marketers from taking advantage. KICD has engaged stakeholders, consulted widely to get views, and begun reviewing the book policy. Tusome endeavors to engage the relevant department and stakeholders to support the review of the proposed book policy.

2.4.3 Supporting development of policy guidelines The teacher pedagogical capacity gaps in teaching early-grade literacy established by the Tusome pilot can be traced to the teacher training curriculum. The teacher trainees cannot be assessed and examined on teaching early-grade reading because the Tusome methodology is not espoused in the Kenya PTTC curriculum. This has remained so even though the Tusome methodology of teaching early-grade literacy is backed by empirical evidence drawn from piloting in the Kenya schools, and its value was recently confirmed by the midline external evaluation. The national curriculum reform process, therefore, needs to mainstream the best practices in teaching early-grade literacy. The Ministry has hence appointed a technical team to review the national syllabus and identify Tusome integration points, as described below.

Meetings with relevant stakeholders to advise MoE on the development of PTTC policy guidelines Preparations got under way this year to develop a primary teacher training strategy to facilitate mainstreaming of Tusome in PTTCs. A technical committee began working on the PTTC strategy that will enable colleges to prepare teacher trainees to teach English and Kiswahili using Tusome methods. As explained above (Section 2.1.14), the main focus of the Technical Working Group is to identify Tusome integration points in the English and Kiswahili syllabus. It is envisioned that this process will lead to the development of teacher training modules for use in PTTCs and ensure standard teaching of the Tusome pedagogical approach to teacher trainees. This will allow the trainees to be assessed on their teaching of the lower grades.

Development of policy guidelines on early-grade literacy instruction Tusome methodologies have helped children to acquire literacy skills within a relatively short time in comparison to traditional teaching methods. For example, the midline evaluation showed large impacts within one year (2015–2016). The percentage of nonreaders in English Class 2 reduced from 38% to 12%; and the percentage of fluent readers increased from 12% to 47% within the same time. Similarly, in Kiswahili, the percentage of nonreaders


in Class 2 reduced from 43% to 19%, while fluent readers increased from 4% to 12% over the same period. This impressive impact of Tusome has created a very large pool of learners keen to read more. To address this demand, Tusome procured and distributed 61 additional titles (supplementary readers) to all public primary schools. Tusome also engaged the MoE, KICD, and KPA and developed more leveled supplementary readers (refer to Section 2.1.5), which will be distributed to schools in Q1, FY 2018. The MoE and KICD have also agreed to use Tusome English and Kiswahili materials in the national curriculum pilot schools.

2.4.4 Plan for consultative meeting Based on the government’s decision to expand Tusome to Class 3, there was a need to engage with literacy providers implementing programs in lower primary. The Ministry issued a circular letter to all stakeholders implementing early-grade literacy programs, informing them of the government’s decision that all literacy programs in Class 3 in 2017 should follow the Tusome pedagogical approach. Several other consultative meetings were held and will continue toward mainstreaming Tusome’s interventions into the early-grade education curriculum.

2.4.5 Consultations with Tusome partners Since the launch of Tusome, the Activity has continued to engage its partners and literacy actors. Tusome recognizes the role other actors play in implementing and sustaining the early-grade literacy program at scale. Tusome had several deliberations in the course of this fiscal year to strategize with other literacy actors on how to sustain the current successes that are attributed to the Activity. Tusome also engaged other partners with a view to reaching more children as well as ensuring improved learning outcomes. Tusome engaged the Educational Development Partner’s Coordination Group (EDPCG), composed of major education providers, to support the literacy initiative as they roll out their programs. Some of these actors, like WERK and Concern Worldwide, are already in active partnership with Tusome and have been key in extending the reach of the Activity to APBET institutions. World Vision Kenya, with a presence in 15 of the 47 counties; UNICEF-Kenya; and World Lutheran Federation of Churches, which supports refugee education in the Kakuma refugee camp, also are considered strategic partners that will be engaged to support the implementation of Tusome in their respective areas of operation.

2.4.6 Consultation with KNEC to set the Class 3 and update Class 1 and 2 reading benchmarks; and set Class 1 and 2 SNE learner benchmarks

The current English and Kiswahili literacy benchmarks of 65 cwpm and 45 cwpm for Class 2 were set by KNEC in consultation with DQAS in August 2012. The Tusome midline evaluation showed a large effect size in terms of fluency and reading with comprehension, and some fluent readers were reading well beyond the set benchmarks, which has created a need to review the Class 1 and 2 benchmarks. Similarly, because Tusome has been expanded to Class 3, English and Kiswahili benchmarks need to be established to monitor Class 3 learning achievements.

Tusome engaged the Directorate of Project Coordination and DQAS to organize and initiate the process of setting the benchmarks. This activity will entail collecting background information and identifying technical officers to undertake the exercise. It will be finalized in FY 2018.


2.4.7 Professional and institutional capacity building for MoE, TSC, KICD, and other relevant bodies

Tusome anticipated institutional capacity as a very essential component of the sustained program uptake and improved learning outcomes for a program at national scale. The Activity is therefore deliberately designed to improve the capacity of the Kenyan education system to sustainably improve reading outcomes.

As part of its capacity-building initiatives, the Activity in FY 2017 trained KPA on criteria for developing supplementary leveled readers (refer to Section 2.1.6). The purpose of this training was to ensure that KPA is able to develop appropriate supplementary leveled readers for use in the early grades. This initiative is part of Tusome’s wider efforts to ensure that reading materials are sustainably provided to Kenyan early-grade learners at their various levels of reading.

Other initiatives that focused on building the capacity of MoE institutions were the various trainings and other engagements. These included sensitization of KEMI staff, KISE, and the headquarters-based DQAS officers. The MoE’s headquarters-based DQAS officers were trained on the Tusome pedagogical approach, to help them appreciate its power in teaching early-grade literacy, and to enable them to mainstream the methodology during the supervision of curriculum development and implementation.

This fiscal year, Tusome also helped to review the national assessment quality assurance tool for primary schools, and isolated the minimum elements required for any individual QASO to assess a basic education institution, make a valid observation, and upload it to the Dashboard. This will ensure that as the QASOs go for their regular school visits and classroom observations, they will be in a position to monitor and support Tusome teachers.

2.5 Lessons learned Involvement of MoE and TSC county officers: The sustainability of Tusome depends on the extent to which the county-level officers are involved in the day-to-day implementation of the Activity. While these officers seemed to be actively involved during termly trainings, more still needs to be done in terms of these officers’ support for teachers in classrooms, since only a few of them sustained their enthusiasm and carried out all the classroom observations with which they had been charged.

Peer coaching and learning: Peer coaching and support among teachers has effectively improved the instructional delivery of weak or new teachers. New teachers who come in, usually as a result of transfers, are closely mentored by their colleagues, and are supported accordingly in implementing the Tusome approach, catch up very fast, adopt the system, and are able to teach Tusome lessons comfortably within a short time. In the same way, in schools where partner work and peer learning among pupils have been embraced, pupils have tended to become better readers with improved fluency because they learn from and support each other.

Frequency of training attendance and success in teaching literacy: During teacher support and lesson observations, the Tusome technical staff noted that the uptake of teachers who had attended training more than once was higher than that of teachers who had trained only once. As a result, the Tusome technical team agreed to encourage teachers to organize support systems, or “peer teaching,” anchored by experienced and previously trained teachers. Under this arrangement, the more experienced teachers would help other teachers with any challenges that might occur in their respective schools. This was witnessed in Kisumu Region, where the regional technical staff found peer teacher support


to be working and effective, especially at Nabongo Primary School, Kakamega County. A similar practice also had been reported in Vihiga County. Tusome utilizes such initiatives by these teachers to leverage the program’s efforts at both the school and zonal or cluster levels. Such teachers have been recognized and are scheduled to be employed as star teachers during the training for teachers and head teachers.

Institutionalization of Tusome by CDEs/TSC-CDs: In counties where the County Directors monitor the implementation of Tusome Program constantly, CSOs have also prioritized the classroom observation support in their daily schedules. This was observed in Lamu and Kilifi counties, where the CDE often provided vehicle fuel to the CSOs, QASOs, and SCDEs; and a vehicle to the CSOs in Lamu to reach far-flung schools.

Cluster reflection meetings: In zones where the CSOs hold regular and constructive cluster reflection meetings, teachers across the zone have gained great mastery of content, have gained confidence in lesson delivery, and are delivering better quality lessons. Their pupils’ fluency rates are seen to be improving.

Transitioning of the Activity: Even as Tusome celebrates the major milestones and gains achieved so far, the hard question remains how to successfully transition these interventions to the MoE without compromising the learning outcomes.

Continuous engagement with CDEs and TSC-CDs: Regular sharing of experiences among the county education officers has led to them increasing their commitment to support the program. This increased commitment has been evident on several occasions in which the directors have had to reassign tasks that were to be handled by CSOs to other staff, to allow them to take part in Tusome activities.

Training for Class 1 teachers: Based on the teachers’ training evaluation reports, teachers and trainers suggested that teachers from the three classes should be trained separately, noting that Class 1 teachers are disadvantaged because the Class 2 teachers dominate the activities, most already having attended at least three rounds of Tusome trainings. While this recommendation may not be plausible given the training design, the Tusome technical team will work to consider how to help Class 1 teachers get more support in trainings and through the instructional support program.

Book ratio and implementation of Tusome in Class 3: Schools with enough Class 3 course books (English and Kiswahili) experienced a better and smoother implementation of the Activity in Class 3 than those without books, or with very few. On the same note, most schools maintained a pupil-to-book ratio of 1:1 for Classes 1 and 2, which supported improved reading fluency rates.

Increasing demand for Tusome interventions in APBET institutions: In the year under review, the Activity undertook an APBET baseline study targeting schools in both new and old clusters spread across all the APBET cities: Eldoret, Kisumu, Mombasa, Nakuru, and Nairobi. The study aimed to establish the reading levels of pupils in Classes 1, 2, and 3 for the new schools before they began the implementation process. During the baseline assessment, comments to the researchers revealed that Tusome as a program was highly valued and that many additional schools wanted to join the program. Head teachers from schools that were not involved in Tusome would see the team of assessors in the neighboring schools, and would go asking how they could take part. One head teacher in Kengeleni was informed that “Tusome people” were at a neighboring school, and she literally went running to find out how her school could also benefit from the program.


3 Activity Progress (Quantitative Impact) 3.1 Summary data on trainings and classroom observations As mentioned earlier, quantitative data this fiscal year were mainly from training activities. These included trainings for KPA, KICD, QASOs, SCDEs, DQAS, CSOs, ICs, teachers, and head teachers (see Annexes B and C for training attendance data on head teachers, teachers, CSOs, and ICs).

• In Term 1, a total of 223 national trainers (139 male and 84 female); 1,064 CSOs (779 male and 285 female); 390 “star” teachers (94 male and 296 female); 77 ICs (42 male and 35 female); 22,318 head teachers (17,758 male and 4,560 female); and 76,330 teachers (19,967 male and 55,363 female) were trained. Of the teachers trained, 24,952 (6,511 male and 18,441 female) were teaching Class 1, 25,352 (6,466 male and 18,886 female) were teaching Class 2, and 26,026 (6,990 male and 19,036 female) were teaching Class 3.

• In Term 2, a total of 188 national trainers (122 male and 66 female); 1,112 CSOs (812 male and 300 female); 77 ICs (42 male and 35 female); 42 DQAS officers (25 male and 17 female); 20,925 head teachers (16,626 male and 4,299 female); and 72,056 teachers (18,538 male and 53,518 female) were trained. Of the teachers trained, 24,256 (6,028 male and 18,228 female) were teaching Class 1, 23,852 (6,042 male and 17,810 female) were teaching Class 2, and 23,948 (6,468 male and 17,480 female) were teaching Class 3.

• There was also the training of teachers and head teachers from SNE schools in Term 1. Of these, 344 (128 male and 216 female) were teachers, and 53 (28 male and 25 female) were head teachers from schools for pupils who are blind or deaf. Teachers from schools for learners who are deaf numbered 229 (77 male and 152 female) and those from schools for learners who are blind, 115 (51 male and 64 female; see Annex D).

• In Term 3, Tusome partnered in the KICD–Tusome infusion effort to train a total of 164 CSOs (113 male and 51 female), 185 head teachers (140 male and 45 female), 220 Class 1 teachers (36 male and 184 female), and 231 Class 2 teachers (29 male and 202 female; see Annex F).

Classroom observation by Tusome CSOs and ICs also continued throughout the fiscal year. In June and July 2017, Tusome was able to conduct a total of 42,126 classroom observations through the CSOs and ICs. Assessments conducted by the CSOs and ICs (as part of their observations) consistently revealed that increasingly more pupils were reading at benchmark rates. On average, 37.5% of all the pupils assessed in July, for instance, were reading at the KNEC reading fluency benchmark in English, and 41.5% in Kiswahili (see footnote 2 for Class 1 and 2 benchmarks, and Annex G, Table G-3 for July 2017 fluency data). The cumulative performance data tables are presented in Annex K.

3.2 Summary data on support by Tusome technical staff As described in Section 2.3.2, Tusome staff supported CSOs and ICs throughout the fiscal year as they undertook classroom observations, and during the feedback sessions with Class 1 and 2 teachers. As a part of these support efforts, Tusome staff were also able to get feedback on the implementation of the program from the teachers and head teachers.

The timely planning and tracking of the support visits helped the Tusome technical team to support most of the CSOs, in some cases, more than twice per school term. The support to


the CSOs, which normally focused on individual strengths, helped the team to identify the CSOs who needed more support and to plan for regular support for those identified. This resulted in CSOs who had challenges in both training and providing support to teachers improving in content mastery and confidently giving feedback explicitly using the teachers’ guides, in the case of Class 1 and 2; and using lesson plan and activity templates for Class 3. The same support was directed to newly deployed CSOs.

Table 5 shows the percentage of CSOs supported by Tusome regions. APBET regions recorded a higher percentage of support to ICs throughout the year. On average, the highest percentages of ICs were supported in Nakuru APBET and Kisumu APBET regions, with Nakuru APBET recording 100% support to ICs in seven out of the total eight months. Kisumu APBET recorded 90% support in three months out of the total eight months in which the ICs were supported.

For public schools, Mombasa region generally recorded a higher percentage of CSOs supported throughout the year on average, followed by Eldoret region. The highest percentage value for CSOs (85.6%) supported was realized in Eldoret region in June 2017, while the lowest percentage (9.5%) occurred in January 2017 in Nairobi region. This low percentage may be attributable to the fact that CSOs were also involved in other school programs during this month and hence were not always available for support.

The highest average percentage of CSOs and ICs occurred in September 2017, while the lowest percentage supported for the two groups combined was in July 2017.

Table 5: Percentage of CSOs supported, by region

Region 2016 2017 Oct Jan Feb Mar May Jun Jul Sep

Eldoret 31.8 17.4 52.7 58.2 80.6 85.6 71.1 73.1

Eldoret APBET 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0

Isiolo 19.4 38.9 41.7 63.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 61.1

Kisumu 38.6 46.7 55.9 64.7 30.5 33.1 20.6 35.3

Kisumu APBET 50.0 70.0 90.0 90.0 40.0 70.0 60.0 90.0

Machakos 26.8 14.6 41.4 36.3 12.1 43.3 44.6 35.0

Mombasa 60.0 41.5 66.2 83.1 83.1 81.5 41.5 83.1

Mombasa APBET

87.5 70.0 90.0 50.0 60.0 10.0 0.0 100.0

Nairobi 37.9 9.5 50.5 51.6 41.1 55.8 33.7 49.5

Nairobi APBET 20.8 22.6 28.3 26.4 11.3 0.0 0.0 11.3

Nakuru 34.0 21.2 35.9 34.8 23.7 38.4 27.3 33.3

Nakuru APBET 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0

Nanyuki 25.2 21.5 73.8 57.9 6.5 6.5 7.5 79.4

Wajir 17.9 53.8 48.7 82.1 79.5 87.2 56.4 64.1

Combined avg. %

39.3 37.7 62.5 64.2 47.7 50.8 25.9 65.4


3.3 Summary of support by NTT members, SCDEs, and QASOs As mentioned earlier, only a few SCDEs and QASOs supported CSOs in the year under review. Although the numbers remained low, as shown in Table 6 (data from Dashboard [for SCDEs and QASOs], and NTT members’ monitoring data), these figures represent an improvement compared to FY 2016, when most months saw zero support. This level of involvement was also true for NTT members, who increased their participation in various activities, including instructional supervision, materials development, and training. Instructional support supervision by NTT members was witnessed more in Q2, but declined in subsequent months due to their involvement in the materials development process.

Table 6: NTT and MoE official (SCDEs and QASOs) classroom support

Affiliation Q1 (2016) Q2 (2017) Q3 (2017) Q4 (2017)

Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep

NTT members

0 0 0 0 31 16 0 0 19 15 0 21

SCDEs 3 0 0 1 1 9 0 1 0 1 0 108

QASOs 1 0 0 0 85 47 0 3 9 0 0 58

The collegial and professional approach to the CSOs enhanced a seamless interaction which contributed to positive attitudes and commitment to do their best. Through the increased support, increases in the number of classroom visits were noted in most counties, with Lamu especially showing a remarkable improvement. Fluency rates also remarkably improved in schools, as reflected in the Dashboard (see Annex G).

4 Constraints and Opportunities The quarter under review evidenced both constraints and opportunities. These are discussed below.

4.1 Opportunities Involvement of the TSC County Directors in classroom observation: One of the opportunities seized upon in the year under review was the willingness of some TSC-CDs to accompany RTI staff for classroom observations. This willingness was especially noted in Nairobi, which has traditionally faced challenges with fewer CSOs providing support to teachers than in the other counties. If sustained, this arrangement will enable more effective support from the CSOs. Nairobi County’s CSOs are more often than not involved in other extracurricular activities, including supporting other education programs for a fee, especially those run by other nongovernmental organizations; hence, they have limited time for instructional support. It takes a committed TSC-CD to have the CSOs consistently support classroom observations.

Increased enrollment: Because Tusome approaches have allowed many learners to learn to read and write within a short period of time, enrollment has increased and absenteeism has decreased in most schools. After a classroom observation feedback session, one teacher, from Mobamba Primary School in Nyamira County, noted the following:


“My learners love coming to school every day, even when they are sick, you’ll see them shivering in class, and once Tusome lessons are over, they excuse themselves to go home and seek medication.”

Appointment of new CSOs for government schools: Several regions benefited from new CSO appointments. This additional staffing helped to reduce the longstanding shortages of CSOs across the country, and will ensure that teachers receive adequate support going forward. Similarly, some of the former EARC officers were appointed as CSOs-SNE. Although their scope of influence widened because they are now also in charge of sub-counties, the reassignment opened up opportunities for them to be used to support classroom observation for SNE schools, which would not have been possible in their previous role.

Existence of a pool of star teachers: Star teachers were included as supplemental trainers in the teacher training activities. Having a pool of star teachers in every region made teacher trainings more efficient.

4.2 Constraints Political activities: Especially in Term 2, election-related activities such as campaigns and political parties’ nominations also affected scheduling and training attendance at the trainings for teachers, head teachers, CSOs, and ICs. In Term 3, Tusome was not able to hold the termly trainings at all. The time was used productively, however, to sensitize SCDEs and QASOs on Tusome interventions and to carry out the KICD–Tusome infusion trainings.

Inadequate support from MoE/TSC technical team: In some counties, the CDEs and TSC-CDs were not very supportive of Tusome activities, especially classroom observations. This was especially notable in Kisumu, Wajir, and Machakos regions, where just a few SCDEs and QASOs were involved in classroom support. The Activity will continue engaging with MoE and TSC senior leaders to ensure that regional, county, and sub-county staff respond to instructional support supervision as part of their performance contractual obligations. Moreover, the roles of sub-county, county, and regional MoE and TSC staff in Tusome will also be clearly defined in the new implementation strategy to be rolled out in Year 4.

Parallel responsibilities covered by CSOs: Various government education programs only indirectly related to the literacy initiative were operating in parallel to Tusome, which led to a slowdown in Tusome’s reach in attaining the set objectives for the quarter. These were, among others, deworming campaigns, plus Teacher Performance Appraisal and Development (TPAD) and PRIEDE project trainings, which the CSOs had to attend and which therefore exerted an opportunity cost on Tusome’s coaching support. In Term 2, for instance, the PRIEDE teacher and head teacher trainings could not be conducted alongside Tusome’s because of the election-related delays; PRIEDE’s training came after the Tusome training, when the CSOs ordinarily would be involved with Tusome classroom observations. Cumulatively, approximately three weeks of the project were affected by competing activities.

CSOs generally complained that they were overwhelmed with a lot of work related to MoE and TSC responsibilities, which denied them time to fulfill their core role of supporting teachers in class. A CSO in Siaya County expressed his concerns:

“We have become clerical officers collecting data for SCDE. We are sent all over the zone to an extent that it has become very difficult to support teachers in class, [which is] something that I enjoy doing.”


Teacher understaffing: Understaffing of teachers was experienced in some schools across the country, mostly affecting the lower grades. Schools that had only unqualified teachers that were hired by the parent–teacher association and then trained on Tusome faced a great loss if these teachers left. This problem affected mostly schools in Kilifi and Kwale counties, as well as the APBET schools (which have always had a high rate of teacher turnover). Most of these teachers leave either because they have been hired by TSC as government-employed teachers or they have been given a better offer by another school, especially in the case of APBET schools.

Drought: Prolonged drought affected the quality of instruction in some counties. The situation was especially dire in migratory, pastoralist counties such as Garissa, Kajiado, Kilifi, Kwale, Mandera, Marsabit, Samburu, Turkana, Wajir, West Pokot, and some parts of Baringo. A visit by one of the Tusome staff to Emparasuai Primary School, Kajiado County, for instance, revealed that very few children were attending school. Upon asking, the head teacher mentioned that it was due to the drought. “Enrollment here has really suffered. We have gone down from 186 pupils to 93 in Term 1,” he commented. The same story was repeated at a neighboring school, Naserian Primary School, where the Senior Teacher said,

“We are losing pupils to boarding schools in this area. Because of the pastoralist culture, the parents find it more convenient to leave their children in school while they head out to look for pasture for their herds.”

Nevertheless, Niserian’s teachers had nothing but high praise for Tusome and were making every effort to ensure they remained focused on giving their learners their best. One of the teachers at the school stated:

“I wish the CSO could give us more support but we understand that it is very far for her, so what we do is we support each other. We model lessons for each other and try to correct one another’s lessons according to how we are trained. That has really helped us a lot.” (A Teacher, Niserian Primary School, Kajiado County)

Poor weather conditions: In some counties, rather than being affected by the severe drought, they were limited by heavy rainfall. The weather-related road conditions affected training attendance and instructional support supervision. Planned visits had to be rescheduled away from areas rendered inaccessible due to the rain, to be held in alternate venues.

Insecurity: Several zones were affected by inter-clan clashes between rival communities bordering Turkana, West Pokot, and Marakwet East Sub-County, of Elgeyo-Marakwet County. The zones in question included Lomelo and Kangitit in Turkana; Cheptulel and Lomut in West Pokot; and Mogil, Arror, Endo, Chesongoch, and Kaptich in Elgeyo-Marakwet. Some schools in these areas also had to be closed or moved for security reasons. As a result, there was a noticeable reduction in teacher support from the CSOs.

Lack of Class 3 materials: Whereas the Class 3 teachers began to show mastery of the Tusome approach, including the ability to extract quality content from the books available in the market, some schools had serious shortages of Class 3 English and Kiswahili learning materials. Some schools were reported to have a pupil-to-book ratio of as high as 10:1. This type of ratio represented a special challenge to the learners, considering that the 2017 Class 3 cohort transitioned from Class 2 classrooms where the pupil-to-book ratio was 1:1 because of Tusome’s inputs.


New teachers: Some of the newly trained teachers continued struggling to master the use of the Direct Instructional Model, because they did not receive adequate training as compared to those trained in the other years. The two-day trainings in Terms 1 and 2 were not sufficient to comprehensively train new teachers. Classroom support visits confirmed this point. The newly trained Tusome teachers struggled to use DIM appropriately, and to maintain a perky pace. Some were not even able to use the teachers’ guides effectively. This situation, however, led to a good opportunity for teachers who had been in the program longer to offer guidance to their new colleagues at the school level. CSOs and ICs were also given explicit instructions to ensure that more experienced teachers in the program with good mastery were closely supporting the new teachers.

Minimal support by the head teachers: Although head teachers are expected to provide instructional leadership through classroom observations in their schools, most did not yet support their teachers in this manner. Head teachers require constant reminders on the need to continuously support their teachers if the program is to be successful in their schools. In general, teachers still reported feeling neglected as far as the head teachers’ support to them was concerned. This issue occurred despite the termly trainings, whose aim is to equip head teachers to serve as instructional leaders in their respective schools. The Activity will continue engaging with TSC on modalities of entrenching this responsibility as one of the head teachers’ performance indicators.

KICD low expectations for new curriculum: Tusome’s role in support of the new curriculum development was made difficult by disagreements on the level of skills and outcomes expected for learners in Classes 1–3. This also created delays in Class 3 materials development. KICD did participate in the scope-and-sequence development for the Class 3 pupil books (refer to Section 2.1.7). Consequently, the approval required before the next steps of writing was not overly delayed as had occurred during the preliminary activities. The relationship between KICD and Tusome improved in Q4 of 2017, with KICD agreeing to infuse Tusome methods and materials in the piloting of the new curriculum.

5 Performance Monitoring Performance monitoring in Tusome entails collection of data by CSOs, ICs, and regional Tusome staff, as well as monitoring, evaluation, and research activities. While external evaluations are conducted at predetermined intervals, other routine performance monitoring activities also are conducted under Tusome. These activities are either internally or externally driven and involve collecting data to check progress on targets that measure various performance indicators.

One such activity is the Data Quality Assessment (DQA). The assessment is carried out frequently, either by USAID or internally, to establish the extent to which data generated by Tusome’s interventions can be trusted to facilitate decision making. The Activity considers data quality to be a key aspect of all stages, from the regional level to the national level, during the whole process of monitoring. Reliable, accurate, and timely data support evidence-based decision making and help to measure progress toward achieving the overall objectives and goals. DQA involves checking the data collected for the various program indicators; verifying the source documents; triangulating reported data with the data on the source documents; streamlining the processes involved in collecting, collating, and sharing data; and also ensuring that the policies that guide the data management and monitoring activities are available and followed.


The DQA in Mombasa and Kisumu regions in July 2017, led by Tusome’s Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR), Lilian Gangla, was a learning experience for the regional teams. It was an engaging effort of going through the whole data management process, streamlining, verifying reported data against source documents, ensuring that policies and M&E guiding documents were being adhered to, and ensuring that the data collected and reported would meet the required quality standards.

Part of the DQA entailed classroom observation and CSO support visits to schools in Mombasa County, where four schools were visited. In those schools, it was discovered that they had all attained a pupil-to-book ratio of 1:1 in both English and Kiswahili textbooks and that the homework books were also well maintained. The majority of the teachers delivered good-quality lessons, and support was offered where gaps were identified. The visits were appreciated in all schools visited. USAID’s eagerness to have the teachers supported in class was seen when the head teacher from Mreroni Primary School in Mikindani Zone did not allow the team to cancel despite bad weather and the terrible terrain to his school. He said he had promised the teachers that they would have visitors, and he could not imagine telling them it was not possible. The school was eventually visited and supported.

Besides the USAID-led DQA, there was also peer DQA conducted for Eldoret, Nakuru, Isiolo and Nanyuki regions during July 4–6, 2017. The peer DQA exercise was based on two DQA tools that had been used during the Kisumu and Mombasa regions’ DQAs. The first tool (USAID Data Quality Standards Checklist) was administered through a focus group discussion with different regional teams, composed of the REPO (except for Nakuru Region, where the REPO was away, since he was in Nairobi for Class 3 materials development and review), M&E Assistant, Training Specialist, and Administration Assistant. The second tool was utilized for verifying data on the selected indicators at school level. The school-level assessments also encompassed classroom observations and school-level data verification, to compare data reported by the regional teams against the school records.

The focus for this particular DQA was on three M&E Plan indicators: F 3.2.1-35 CDCS [Country Development Cooperation Strategy] 2.2.0.8, Number of learners receiving interventions at primary level with United States Government (USG) support; F 3.2.1-33, Number of textbooks and teaching/learning materials provided with USG assistance; and F 3.2.1-31, Number of teachers/educators/teaching assistants who successfully completed in-service training or received intensive coaching or mentoring with USG support. The indicators were examined along the five DQA criteria of validity, reliability, timeliness, precision, and integrity. Each of these indicators was explored separately using the adopted tools.

Other performance monitoring efforts involved routine data collection. Data of interest included names and locations of Tusome-supported public and APBET primary schools; enrollment figures for Class 1 and 2 learners; and names, locations, and training records of head teachers and Class 1, 2, and 3 teachers.

Performance monitoring was also carried out by consistent assessment of fluency rates against support visits conducted by CSOs and ICs, in an effort to step up the quality of support visits accorded to schools and teachers. Notable improvements occurred in learners’ abilities to read above the set benchmarks, understand what they read, and answer comprehensive questions with ease. Teachers who had good mastery were able to cover the lessons within the given 30 minutes, leading to improved time management. The CSOs’ and ICs’ support visits were captured via the Dashboard, which helped monitor how many support visits were done per zone as well as the oral reading fluency of learners in Classes 1, 2, and 3 in both English and Kiswahili.


6 Progress on Gender Strategy Inclusivity and gender equity are key principles against which Tusome is framed. The Activity continues to ensure that the benefits accruing from all its interventions are accessible to targeted beneficiaries without discrimination based on gender or any other predispositions.

Accordingly, during the year, the Activity continued monitoring the extent to which the benefits of its interventions were flowing to the target beneficiaries without discrimination on account of gender or any other predispositions. The M&E team ensured that all data sets were disaggregated by gender, or recognized the extent of inclusivity, or both. Data points included the training beneficiaries, disaggregated by gender. The data revealed that whereas the majority of Class 1, 2, and 3 teachers so far were female, there were more male than female teachers among the upper cadres (head teachers and above), especially among the head teachers and CSOs. Although it may not be within Tusome’s mandate to try to reverse this trend, the Activity will continue ensuring that male and female learners, teachers, head teachers, CSOs, and any other category of beneficiaries, including SNE learners, benefit equally and justly from the interventions.

In terms of inclusivity, the Activity ensured that its interventions were also targeted at children with special needs, especially children who are deaf or blind. As described in Section 2.2.1 above, separate trainings were conducted for SNE implementers, namely teachers, head teachers, and EARC officers.

The principle of gender inclusion is also applied during special studies and after classroom observation assessments by M&E staff and CSOs or ICs. Deliberate efforts were made to ensure that equal numbers of boys and girls participated in the assessments and studies. The CSOs and ICs were also instructed to ensure that both boys and girls were assessed during after classroom observation assessments. If the first to be sampled for assessment was a girl, the next had to be a boy before another girl was sampled, and vice versa.

7 Progress on Links to Other USAID Programs In addition to implementing its own activities, Tusome contributes to USAID’s broader strategic goals in Kenya by collaborating with implementers in other sectors. This section describes Tusome’s efforts in this area.

Partnership for Resilience and Economic Growth (PREG): Tusome is a member of Partnership for Resilience and Economic Growth, which provides a link to other USAID-funded programs in the eight counties in arid and semi-arid lands (ASALs), namely Garissa, Isiolo, Mandera, Marsabit, Samburu, Tana River, Turkana, and Wajir. Within the PREG counties, the Activity is represented by REPOs for Eldoret, Isiolo, and Wajir regions.

Through these regional representatives, Tusome participated in a number of PREG activities, including the counties’ joint planning workshops. These work planning sessions were aimed at strengthening current and ongoing processes and efforts by PREG partners via collaboration at the county level; developing a common understanding of the rationale for partnership and collaboration; increasing knowledge and skills to develop, manage, and strengthen the PREG partnership; and identifying new areas and interventions for actual impact through collaboration and partnerships in the respective counties. The Activity will continue participating in PREG activities in order to leverage joint efforts for better outcomes.


8 Progress on Links with Government of Kenya Agencies

Throughout the fiscal year, Tusome maintained strategic linkages with the MoE, TSC, county governments, the PRIEDE team, and other SAGAs. The Activity especially strengthened its cooperation with PRIEDE, which, similar to Tusome, implements an approach for teaching early-grade mathematics that originated with the 2011–2014 PRIMR Initiative. County PRIEDE Coordinators and the Tusome team work together during classroom observation support to CSOs and occasionally in the training of CSOs, teachers, and head teachers. Furthermore, the CDEs and the TSC-CDs, together with the SCDEs, have continuously been updated on the progress of Tusome implementation within their jurisdictions. Keeping them informed about Tusome’s activities has always been of help in their planning to support the program.

In some counties, the county-level TSC and MoE officials have also been very supportive. For example, as noted earlier, the Mandera County TSC-CD provided vehicle fuel to all the SCDEs to allow them to facilitate the CSOs’ travel. Some of the SCDEs also provided direct support by accompanying the CSOs to schools for classroom observations (refer to Section 2.3.4). The involvement of county- and national-level MoE and TSC officers also was observed across the country during the Term 1 and 2 CSO, IC, head teacher, and teacher trainings. County-level MoE and TSC leaders secured and negotiated for favorable training venues, as well as officially opening the trainings at the various sites at different subnational levels.

9 Progress on USAID FORWARD Tusome recognizes the need to build the capacity of local institutions for sustainable delivery of education services. It is against this backdrop that the Activity has been involved in capacity-building initiatives targeting local non-state actors. During FY 2017, the Activity collaborated with WERK, a local organization providing technical support to APBET institutions. Preparations were also under way to finalize issuing of grants to youth organizations in Q1 FY 2018 (see Section 2.2.13). These organizations will work with Tusome to support early-grade reading interventions in and out of school, outside the current RTI-led mandates. Twelve youth organizations had received their grants as of the end of the fiscal year. The remaining 11 grants will be issued in October 2017 (FY 2018).

The Activity also was actively involved in building the capacity of the KPA. KPA is the umbrella body for book publishers in Kenya. As described in Section 2.1.6, in FY 2017, the Activity—in collaboration with KICD—trained KPA representatives on the framework for leveled readers. This collaboration recognized the fact that the current book policy requires school materials to be developed competitively by commercial publishers, represented by KPA. The main objective of training KPA was to ensure that by the time Tusome ceases to operate in Kenya, the book industry will be capable of developing and producing appropriate leveled readers for early-grade learners.

Tusome also took part in the sensitization of KPA on the criteria for evaluating leveled readers. For this, the Activity was involved indirectly by facilitating KICD’s development of the criteria and providing back-end support. The actual training, however, was done by KICD, with occasional consultations with Tusome on areas that needed clarification. During this training, KICD and KPA agreed on timelines for developing and evaluating the leveled


readers. Tusome intends to procure a limited number of approved leveled readers and have the books distributed to schools in time for Term 1 of 2018 (see Section 2.4.3). The books will be procured directly from individual publishers as part of the efforts to build their capacity.

10 Sustainability and Exit Strategy Tusome continued to invest in building capacity of the MoE and local education institutions to design, implement, and assess programs that increase reading skills. Tusome has used the lessons learned during its two years of implementation to work with the MoE to assess and improve policies that support early-grade reading instruction. To this end, the Activity is contributing significantly to the ongoing curriculum reform process, with the view of influencing the inclusion of early-grade literacy instruction as part of the new early-grade curriculum. This joint effort will go a long way toward mainstreaming early-grade literacy interventions within the curriculum going forward. There is already strong goodwill among the literacy stakeholders—including parents—to support Tusome’s interventions. A case in point is Kanyaumbora Zone in Embu County, where the CSO was able to hold a successful reading exhibition in October 2016 with parental support. In attendance were parents, head teachers, teachers, the SCDE, and one Tusome staff member. The activity was used as a platform to sensitize the community about Tusome, with one parent commenting,

“We are happy and thank the government for remembering our children through such a program and they can now read the way we have seen.”

It is envisaged that when RTI ceases providing technical support to Tusome at the end of its contract, the MoE and its SAGAs will be in a position to manage the program effectively. For this reason, star teachers have been involved, since Term 1, in supporting teacher trainings. In April–June 2017, the star teachers who were trained in Q2 were quite a big help during the training of Class 1 and 2 teachers. The star teachers are expected to serve as a reserve group of Tusome trainers, with relevant competencies for supporting future trainings, once RTI exits. The plan is to have at least three star teachers in each zone.

The CSOs, ICs, teachers, and head teachers also were trained in how to create and moderate examinations tailored to the level of the learners and the instructional content to which they have been exposed. Tusome exams, which used to be provided by the Activity, can now be prepared and administered by schools under the leadership of CSOs or ICs. Additionally, Tusome continued to collaborate with other education stakeholders to monitor and support the Tusome program. For instance, some officials from the MoE, TSC, and NTT were engaged in training the CSOs; others trained teachers. Through this type of engagement, more MoE and TSC officers are getting better at internalizing and using the methodology.

11 Subsequent Quarter’s Work Plan The following activities are scheduled for October 1, 2017–December 31, 2017:

• Revise Class 1 and 2 materials, both Kiswahili and English. • KICD reviews materials for Class 3, both Kiswahili and English. • Write materials for PTTCs. • KICD reviews materials for PTTCs. • Print, pack, and distribute materials for Class 3 to schools.


• Tusome partners with KICD and PRIEDE to conduct ToT, master training and CSOs’ training in preparation for new curriculum rollout.

• Tusome national trainers deliver training of CSOs and ICs. • CSOs and ICs train teachers and head teachers. • Monitor the implementation of Youth Fund grant activities.

12 Financial Information 12.1 Cash Flow and Budget Details The cash flow table below (Table 7) is derived from the budget table (Table 8). The cash flow report reflects expenses and forecasts as of September 30, 2017.

Table 7: Cash flow report and financial projections (in US dollars) [REDACTED]

Quarter (Q) Quarterly outflows

Cumulative outflows

Obligated funding Net cash flow

As of Q4 FY 2017

Q1 FY 2018

Q2 FY 2018

Q3 FY 2018


Table 8: Budget details (in US dollars) [REDACTED] Total Expected Costs: [Amount redacted] Cumulative Obligated Funds: [Amount redacted] Cumulative Expenditures: [Amount redacted]

Obligation [Amount redacted]

Invoiced expenses

as of June 17, 2017

Q4 FY 2017 actual

expenditures (Jul–Sep 2017)

Q1 FY 2018 projected

expenditures (Oct–Dec 2017)


expenditures (Jan–Mar 2018)


expenditures (Apr–Jun 2018)

Program Implementation

Labor

Fringe Benefits

Services

Computer Expense

Telecommunications

Shipping & Postage

Travel (Domestic and Foreign)

Cooperating Country National (CCN) Fringe

Workshops/Training

Office Lease and Utilities

Offsite Allowance

Miscellaneous Business Expense

Insurance Expense

Equipment

Materials


Obligation [Amount redacted]

Invoiced expenses

as of June 17, 2017

Q4 FY 2017 actual

expenditures (Jul–Sep 2017)


expenditures (Oct–Dec 2017)


expenditures (Jan–Mar 2018)


expenditures (Apr–Jun 2018)

Subcontractors (WERK, VSO)

Consultants

Value-Added Tax (VAT; billed to USAID)

Tusome Youth Fund

Grants

Tusome Partnership Fund

Grants

Subcontractors (Dalberg, Worldreader)

Materials

Indirect Costs

Fixed Fee

TOTAL


Budget Notes

Fringe Benefits Q1 FY 2018 forecasted expenses includes 13th-month pay in Local National Fringe.

Services Q2 FY 2018 includes book distribution costs for Class 3 materials.

Travel, Transport, Per Diem

In-country travel costs include regional staff travel (classroom observation) and CSO transportation reimbursement for supervision, and include continued and additional coach and CSO support under the add-on activities.

Workshops / Trainings

Term 1 teacher training costs are forecasted across Q1 and Q2 FY 2018 (while trainings will take place in December, the forecast accounts for some trickling costs). Term 3 teacher training costs are not included in the forecast.

Offsite Allowances

Forecasted expatriate allowances for Deputy Chief of Party–Operations, Tim Slade. Allowances for Dr. Benjamin Piper will be billed based on the actual level of effort (LOE) % spent on Tusome. At the conclusion of each year, his billed allowances will be reviewed against actual LOE and any reconciliations made and cost adjustments submitted to USAID.

Materials Class 2 and 3 pupil books and teachers’ guides, as well as Class 3 supplementary readers, are forecasted in Q2 FY 2018.

Subcontractors Forecasted expenses include subcontractor WERK per the approved add-on budget and activities.

Grants Forecasted grants payments are for the current Youth Fund grantees.

Indirect Costs Calculated per award conditions.

Fixed Fee

Fixed fee is based on the deliverable schedule in Section F.8 of the contract. Forecasted deliverable payments for Q1 FY 2018 – Q3 FY 2018 include the following deliverables:

#2, 2017 and 2018: Distribution of textbooks and teachers’ guides for public primary schools

#4, 2017 and 2018: Distribution of supplemental materials for formal and non-formal primary schools

#5, 2016 and 2017: Print-ready versions of revised textbooks and teachers’ guides

#6, 2017: Education staff trained per training plan

#7, 2017: CSOs and coaches trained on tablet-based instructional support system

#9: Tusome youth fund grantees awarded

#10: Tusome Partnership Fund spent

#11: Capacity assessment report completed

#12: Capacity intervention report completed

12.2 New Subaward Details Total amount in the approved budget for subawards: [REDACTED].

Total amount subawarded to date: [REDACTED].

Subawards issued in Q4 FY 2017 are listed in Table 9.


Table 9: List of subawards issued to Youth Fund grantees in Q4 FY 2017

Grantee name

Subgrant award amount

(Kenyan shillings) [REDACTED]

Subgrant award amount

(US dollars) [REDACTED]

Bungoma Youth Bunge Forum

Dream Achievers Youth Organization (DAYO)

Elgeyo-Marakwet Youth Forum Association

Homa Bay County Youth Forum

Kakamega County Youth Bunge Forum

Kesho Organization

Kisii County Youth (Development) Forum

Kiunga Youth Bunge Initiative

Lamu Youth Alliance and Lamu Community Educational Trust Fund

Mandera County Board Youth Bunge Forum

Migori County Youth (Development) Forum

Mombasa County Youth Bunge

Murang’a County Youth Network

Nakuru County Youth (Bunge) Forum

Nandi County Youth Bunge Association

Siaya Youth County Forum

Trans Nzoia County Youth Bunge Forum

Tujiinue Chemalal

Uasin Gishu County Youth Bunge Network

Wajir County Board Youth Forum

West Pokot County Youth Network

Youth Initiatives Kenya (YIKE)

Total subawards issued in Q4 FY 2017:

13 Activity Administration 13.1 Personnel In terms of recruitment progress, 19 staff members were hired between October 1 and September 30, 2017. This was necessary to fill new positions occasioned by the Class 3 scale-up. Their details are laid out in Table 10.


Table 10: Tusome hires, October 1, 2016, to September 30, 2017

Staff member name (surname, first name) [REDACTED] Position Date of hire Location

Procurement Officer Oct 3, 2016 Nairobi

Driver Oct 31, 2016 Garissa

Education Program Specialist Nov 14, 2016 Isiolo

Administrative Assistant 2 Nov 21, 2016 Eldoret

Administrative Assistant 3 Nov 28, 2016 Mombasa

Senior Education Policy Specialist (moved from consultant to staff)

Dec 5, 2016 Nairobi

SNE Coordinator / Senior Education Program Coordinator

Jan 3, 2017 Kenya, Nairobi

Education Assistant Feb 6, 2017 Kenya, Nairobi

Grants and Partnership Manager Feb 13, 2017 Kenya, Nairobi

Education Assistant Mar 1, 2017 Kenya, Nakuru

Education Assistant Mar 1, 2017 Kenya, Nanyuki

Education Assistant Mar 1, 2017 Kenya, Kisumu

Education Assistant Mar 1, 2017 Kenya, Garissa

ICT Assistant Mar 1, 2017 Kenya, Garissa

Education Assistant Mar 13, 2017 Kenya, Eldoret

Education Assistant Mar 27, 2017 Kenya, Isiolo

Finance Specialist 2 Jul 3, 2017 Kenya, Nairobi

Finance Assistant Jun 27, 2017 Kenya, Nairobi

Administrative Assistant May 22, 2017 Kenya, Machakos

Table 11 lists positions are expected to be hired for the Tusome Activity in Q1, FY 2018.

Table 11: Tusome positions to be hired in Q1 FY 2018 (October 1–December 31, 2017)

Staff member name Position Date of hire Location

To be determined (TBD) Administrative Assistant TBD Kenya, Nairobi

TBD Temporary Driver TBD Kenya, Nairobi

TBD Consultancy – Tangerine Dashboard

TBD Kenya, Nairobi

13.2 Contract Modifications and Amendments The following contract modifications and amendments were issued during FY 2017:

• Mod 07, issued on August 23, 2017, provided [REDACTED] in incremental funding.


• Mod 8, issued on September 28, 2017, provided [REDACTED] in incremental funding.

14 Information for Annual Reports Only 14.1 Budget Disaggregated by County Not applicable.

14.2 Budget Disaggregated by Earmarks Not applicable.

14.3 Subawards Table 12 summarizes the status of all subawards made under the Tusome contract as of the end of September 2017.


Table 12: Status of Tusome subawards, September 30, 2017

Partner Subawardee

name Subawardee

start date Subawardee

end date

Subawardee amount (US$) [REDACTED]

Date of preaward

assessment by RTI

Date last audit conducted

Names of counties of

implementation

Subcontractor Women’s Educational Researchers of Kenya (WERK)

11/18/2014 04/30/2019 April 16, 2017 March 2017 Nairobi, Nakuru, Kisumu, and Mombasa

Subcontractor Worldreader 05/01/2015 12/31/2016 Not applicable (N/A)

March 2015 N/A – CLOSED

Subcontractor Voluntary Service Overseas (VSO)

12/26/2014 03/31/2016 N/A May 2015 N/A – CLOSED

Subcontractor Dalberg Consulting 11/15/2014 09/30/2016 N/A December 2015 N/A – CLOSED

Grantee Bungoma Youth Bunge Forum

10/3/2017 10/3/2018 November 18, 2015

April 30, 2017 Bungoma

Grantee Dream Achievers Youth Organization (DAYO)

9/20/2017 9/20/2018 November 18, 2015

April 12, 2017 Mombasa

Grantee Elgeyo-Marakwet Youth Forum Association

9/21/2017 9/21/2018 November 16, 2015

January 1, 2015 Elgeyo-Marakwet

Grantee Garissa County Youth Bunge Network

Not awarded yet N/A December 14, 2015*

Garissa

Grantee Homa Bay County Youth Forum

10/3/2017 10/3/2018 November 19, 2015

October 20, 2017 Homa Bay

Grantee Kakamega County Youth Bunge Forum

10/3/2017 10/3/2018 November 17, 2015

May 26, 2016 Kakamega

Grantee Kesho Organization 9/21/2017 9/21/2018 November 17, 2015

February 28, 2017

Kilifi


Partner Subawardee

name Subawardee


end date


Date of preaward

assessment by RTI



implementation

Grantee Kisii County Youth (Development) Forum

10/13/2017 10/13/2018 November 19, 2015

June 30, 2016 Kisii

Grantee Kiunga Youth Bunge Initiative

9/21/2017 09/21/2018 November 20, 2015*

Lamu

Grantee Lamu Youth Alliance and Lamu Community Educational Trust Fund

9/29/2017 9/29/2018 November 24, 2015

November 30, 2015

Lamu

Grantee Mandera County Board Youth Bunge Forum

10/12/2017 10/12/2018 December 16, 2015*

Mandera

Grantee Migori County Youth (Development) Forum

10/3/2017 10/3/2018 November 20, 2015

June 30, 2016 Migori

Grantee Mombasa County Youth Bunge

9/26/2017 9/26/2018 November 19, 2015

May 28, 2014 Mombasa

Grantee Murang’a County Youth Network

10/12/2017 10/12/2018 December 16, 2015

May 31, 2014 Murang’a

Grantee Nakuru County Youth (Bunge) Forum

9/21/2017 9/21/2018 November 16, 2015

March 25, 2017 Nakuru

Grantee Nandi County Youth Bunge Association

9/26/2017 9/26/2018 November 19, 2015

April 24, 2015 Nandi

Grantee Siaya Youth County Forum

10/3/2017 10/3/2018 November 17, 2015

June 16, 2015 Siaya

Grantee Trans Nzoia County Youth Bunge Forum

9/28/2017 9/28/2018 November 17, 2015

June 30, 2017 Trans Nzoia


Partner Subawardee

name Subawardee


end date


Date of preaward

assessment by RTI



implementation

Grantee Tujiinue Chemalal 9/21/2017 09/21/2018 November 16, 2015*

Uasin Gishu

Grantee Uasin Gishu County Youth Bunge Network

9/21/2017 9/21/2018 November 19, 2015

June 30, 2017 Uasin Gishu

Grantee Wajir County Board Youth Forum

9/30/2017 9/30/2018 December 16, 2015*

Wajir

Grantee West Pokot County Youth Network

9/26/2017 9/26/2018 November 17, 2015

July 13, 2017 West Pokot

Grantee Youth Initiatives Kenya

9/26/2017 9/26/2018 December 16, 2015

April 30, 2017 Nairobi

* Grantees that have not had any external audits—just preaward assessments.


14.4 List of FY 2017 Deliverables Table 13 presents the list of contractual deliverables produced by Tusome and submitted to USAID and others during the fiscal year.

Table 13: List of all deliverables produced during FY 2017

No. Deliverable

Completion / Submission

date(s) Distribution Status

1. Annual Report (Year 1) October 30, 2015;

February 22, 2016

Electronically to COR, Acting COR (ACOR)

Pending USAID approval

2. Annual Report (Year 2) November 4, 2016 Electronically to COR, Acting COR (ACOR)

Pending RTI resubmission

3. Annual Work Plan (Year 1) October 2, 2014;

October 21, 2014

Electronically to COR, Acting COR (ACOR)


4. Annual Work Plan (Year 2) December 1, 2015 Electronically to COR, ACOR, and Government of Kenya


5. Annual Work Plan (Year 3) December 1, 2016 Electronically to COR, ACOR, and Government of Kenya


6. Quarterly Report: Q1 (Oct – Dec 2015)

January 29, 2016 Electronically to COR and ACOR


7. Quarterly Report: Q2 (Jan – Mar 2016)

April 30, 2016;

March 22, 2017

Electronically to COR and ACOR


8. Quarterly Report: Q3 (Apr – Jun 2016)

July 29, 2016;

August 10, 2016;

March 22, 2017

Electronically to COR and ACOR


9. Quarterly Report: Q4 (Jul – Sep 2016)

November 4, 2016 Electronically to CO and COR

Part of annual report

10. Quarterly Report: Q1 (Oct – Dec 2016)

January 31, 2017 Electronically to CO and COR


11. Quarterly Report: Q2 (Jan – Mar 2017)

May 1, 2017;

October 31, 2017

Electronically to CO and COR


12. Quarterly Report: Q3 (Apr – Jun 2017)

July 31, 2017 Electronically to CO and COR


13. [Fee Deliverable #11] Capacity Assessment Report

February 2, 2016 Electronically to CO, COR, and ACOR


14. [Fee Deliverable #4] Distribution of supplemental materials for formal and non-formal primary schools (Class 1 and Class 2)

March 22, 2016; April 21, 2016

Electronically to CO, COR, and ACOR

Approved (12/21/2016)


No. Deliverable



15. [Fee Deliverable #6] Education staff trained as per training plan

April 4, 2016;

May 2, 2016;

September 23,2016


Approved (12/21/2016)

16. [Fee Deliverable #7] Teachers’ Advisory Centre tutors and coaches trained on tablet-based instructional support system

April 4, 2016;

April 20, 2016


Approved (12/21/2016)

17. Capacity-Building Report (non-CSO trainings)

November 4, 2016 Electronically to CO and COR

Part of annual report

18. Tablets Brochure December 2016

Hardcopies to participants

Completed

19. Term 1 2017 ToT, CSO/ Instructional Coaches Training Manual

December 2016 Hardcopies to participants

Completed

20. Term 1 2017 Teacher and Head Teacher Training Manual

January 2017 Hardcopies to participants

Completed

21. Term 1 Master Training Manual – Deaf


Completed

22. Term 1 Master Training Manual – Blind


Completed

23. Term 1 Teacher Training Manual – Deaf


Completed

24. Term 1 Teacher Training Manual – Blind


Completed

25. Leveled Readers Framework February & May 2017

Hardcopies to participants

Completed

26. Term 2 2017 ToT, CSO, Instructional Coaches Training Manual

April 2017 Hardcopies to participants

Completed

27. Term 2 2017 Teacher and Head Teacher Training Manual

April-May 2017 Hardcopies to participants

Completed

28. Term 3 2017 KICD New Curriculum Piloting Master, CSO, and Head Teacher Training Manual

August 2017 Hardcopies to participants

Completed

29. Term 3 2017 KICD New Curriculum Piloting Teacher Training Manual


Completed

30. Term 3 KICD New Curriculum Piloting Master Training Manual – Deaf


Completed

31. Term 3 KICD New Curriculum Piloting Master Training Manual – Blind


Completed

32. Term 3 KICD New Curriculum Piloting Head Teacher and Teacher Training Manual – Deaf


Completed


No. Deliverable



33. Term 3 KICD New Curriculum Piloting Teacher and Head Teacher Training Manual – Blind


Completed

34. Term 3 DQAS/SCDE Training Manual

September 2017 Hardcopies to participants

Completed

14.5 Summary of Non-USG Funding During the reporting period, Tusome leveraged $303,065 from non-USG sources (see Table 14).

Tusome worked with the KPA to procure 420,000 English and Kiswahili readers in Class 1 and 2 at heavily discounted prices. The procurement followed an earlier collaboration with the KPA, whereupon at their request, RTI Tusome staff reviewed existing English and Kiswahili readers that were available in the market and whose reading level matched that expected for Tusome Early Grade Reading Activity learners in Classes 1 and 2. The review looked at the design of the materials to determine which readers could be available as classroom readers or supplementary library readers. RTI reviewed a total of 848 titles. Following the review and selection of readers, Tusome worked with KPA to establish discounted rates for each reader. The number of individual items that could be acquired for the classroom readers for English and Kiswahili programs would depend on the leveraging discounts quoted by publishers, as well as the final KICD approval status of each reader.

Ultimately, five publishers offering 15 different titles were selected as appropriate for the Tusome program. These publishers committed to providing discounted rates of at least 50% per title. Discounted rates were compared against the standard prices quoted to KICD, which are published upon approval of the books by KICD in the Orange Book – 2016 Edition. Thus, of the 420,000 total books, Tusome essentially received 221,965 of these titles free of charge via the pricing discounts.

In December 2015, Tusome staff and RTI literacy and math specialists had met with representatives from major publishers to explain the development of the Tusome materials. One objective of the workshop was to help KPA better understand how their readers could fit within the Tusome teaching and learning materials, in preparation for the procurement of the readers that took place in the 2016 calendar year.

These efforts directly supported Sub-IR 1.1: Increased availability and use of appropriate textbooks and supplementary materials that support reading. They also laid the groundwork for the meetings with KICD and KPA in February and May 2017 that are expected to result in the creation of new, commercially produced, leveled supplementary readers (see Section 2.1.6).

Tusome is providing additional leverage to USAID through a Google grant for Tangerine Development that RTI received from Google.org. An estimated $377,215 will be provided in leverage through the purchase of 1,723 tablets and cases, originally budgeted under Tusome’s approved add-on budget. Further, in FY 2017, additional technical labor was provided by RTI’s Tangerine software development team during a “Design Sprint” held at RTI’s Nairobi offices, April 18–21, 2017. The goal of the Sprint was to redesign the tablet-based Tangerine experience in light of CSOs’ and ICs’ feedback, with the goal of facilitating more effective instructional coaching and consumption of coaching data. A second Design

http://Google.org


Sprint was to be held at RTI’s Nairobi offices October 3–5, 2017. Final accounting for the Google.org leverage will be provided in FY 2018.

Ongoing leverage activities include partnerships with Media-E and sQuid. Tusome partnered with Media-E to provide technical support to incorporate Tusome teaching approaches to literacy learning into Media-E’s KnowZone TV program. In exchange, Media-E arranges the broadcasting of the KnowZone program, allowing Tusome content to reach an estimated 2.5 million viewers. Tusome is in the process of verifying the amount of leverage provided by the Tusome-Media-E partnership. Initial estimates indicate leverage of approximately $350,000 in airtime/broadcast costs over the past two years. Final accounting for the first two years of Media-E leverage will be provided in FY 2018.

Tusome also partnered with sQuid to utilize Tusome materials on their iMlango learning platform. sQuid added the Tusome Class 1 and 2 content to the learning platform, giving approximately 150,000 pupils in approximately 205 primary schools access to these Tusome materials. Final accounting for the first year of sQuid leverage will be provided in FY 2018.

Table 14: Summary of FY 2017 leverage [REDACTED]

Name: Kenya Publishers Association (KPA)

Description of leverage: Discounted book prices on supplementary readers for Class 1 and 2 in English and Kiswahili

Description Date(s) of activity (a)

Quantity/units

(b) Value/rate per unit

[REDACTED]

(c) Amount

[REDACTED]

Classes 1 and 2 English and Kiswahili supplementary readers

September 21, 2016 – December 31, 2016

420,000

Subtotal leverage reported – KPA (Kenyan shillings)

Subtotal leverage reported – KPA (US dollars)

14.6 Type of Accounting System Used During Reporting Period QuickBooks is utilized at the international field level to capture and record transactions. The transactions are later posted to RTI’s corporate accounting system, CostPoint.

http://Google.org


Annex A: Success Stories

Tusome pupil shines despite having special needs Eburru Primary School is located on the slope of Eburru Forest. In this village, stories of women and children being attacked by water buffalos and other wild animals is the norm. At the entrance of the school, one can see the traces of fresh footsteps of wild animals and smell the pungent fumes of geothermal gases being emitted from the active volcanic activities beneath the Ol Doinyo Eburru volcanic hills. Despite all this, a Class 1 pupil with special needs is glad to have inclusive education at Eburru Primary School. Assisted by his fellow learners, the pupil wheels himself to school each morning, because he now enjoys school.

Left: A pupil with special needs during a Tusome assessment administered by the CSO for Mbaruk Zone. Right: The same pupil during the “You do” portion of a reading comprehension lesson.


On being asked why he liked Tusome lessons, the pupil assertively gave the answer in a few words: “It makes reading easier.” He went on, “My class teacher uses Tusome books to teach us. I like Tusome because it has made me become a good reader, better than I was before!” This he exclaimed with a broad smile. The class teacher noted that a good number of children, including this particular pupil, who were not able to read and understand comprehension activities had improved. Despite the fact that the pupil is a child with special needs, because of Tusome’s inclusive methodology he is able to compete with the rest of the pupils in the class. He also loves reading books and has great desire to excel in literacy and other subjects.

The class teacher confirms that the pupil likes reading in class and outside class with other children. The teacher attributes his performance on the love of Tusome books and the teaching approach, saying, “He is among the best readers in the class and also the best pupil in the class. His guardians are happy seeing him reading. They actually see the child as a blessing beyond his disability.” It is encouraging to any other parent or guardian living with a child or children with special needs, because with the Tusome teaching approach, learning to read has become easy and enjoyable. The need to hide children with special needs at home is long gone; let them come to school and learn.


Overcoming challenges through Tusome A wise person once said, “You will never reach your destination if you stop and throw stones at every dog that barks at you.” A 12-year-old Class 3 pupil at Plains View Academy in Kajulu Cluster is a living embodiment of this saying. Based on her age, she should have been in Class 6; however, she was made to go back to baby class after reaching Class 2.

This pupil grew up as an only child and was slow to develop. It took her two years to learn how to walk, and she still has challenges in speaking. She was taken to a physiotherapist at the Jaramogi Oginga Odinga Teaching and Referral Hospital in Kisumu, daily, until she was able to walk. After that, her mother released her to the outside world to play with her mates. According to her mother, the child took forever to speak, and when she eventually learned how to speak, pronunciation was a challenge. At the hospital, her mother was advised to

take her to a special school. When she did, she was asked to buy a hearing aid. The mother sought a second opinion from a local speech therapist, who advised her to keep engaging with the child daily and follow up her conversations with actions. They also recommended to the mother that she should enroll the child in school, because interaction with other children would help her learn to speak. This worked!

In her new school, her teacher involves her in very many classroom activities and always allows her to answer questions. “The pupil likes associating with children younger than her. She can read but her pronunciation is still a challenge. We are working on that,” the teacher, who is Tusome-trained, explains.

The teacher takes her time to explain sounds, and constantly checks the pupil’s progress in pronunciation.

The Tusome Instructional Coach from Kajulu Cluster noted that “The pupil has improved a great deal from Term 1 2017 when I started supporting the Class 3 teacher and assessing her. Whenever I visit the school, I assess her to determine her progress. Hers is a work in progress. She needs a lot of affirmation, love, understanding, and acceptance, but she will reach her destination.”

Left: A teacher with the pupils during an English lesson. The 12-year old Class 3 pupil is seated on the left. Right: The pupil with her mother and the head teacher when the mother came to the school to learn about the

progress of her child.


A 12-year old Class 3 pupil practicing pronunciation.



Kambi Ya Juu Integrated Unit for learners who are blind benefits from Tusome special-needs training

A lower primary teacher from the Kambi Ya Juu Integrated Unit, Isiolo County, detailed that the Tusome special-needs teacher training has led to tremendous and fulfilling experiences for both the teachers and learners at the Kambi Ya Juu unit for learners who are blind. She noted that initially it was not easy to teach the children who are blind with regular pupil books: “For example, on the pictures we could only ask the learners what they could see in their books and only the children who were able to see could answer since their books were illustrated. Also, during reading, it was hard to teach them as they were only able to listen as their colleagues read.”

Early in 2017, things changed for the better when special-needs education (SNE) was integrated into the Tusome methodology. Teachers were trained; Tusome books were adapted into braille books, as well as into large-print books ideal for those with low vision; and Tusome also ensured that the books were delivered to several schools and units. This enabled the learners to follow the lessons step by step, making it easy for the teachers to conduct the lessons without strain. The learners are able to follow, understand, and even contribute since they can read the books in braille.

Teachers who attended the Tusome SNE training said that it was successful because they gained skills in teaching which they did not have before, as a result of seeing Tusome lessons being modeled, which was a good experience for them. A teacher who is blind and is responsible for teaching learners who are blind or have low vision mentioned, “It is a new experience. This new way of teaching Kiswahili is straight to the point, the teacher is specific. Teaching English and Kiswahili is easy and enjoyable. The teaching is superb. From the training I acquired new skills and I am a better teacher.” Another teacher agreed, adding that “we acquired new skills, especially handling learners who are blind, and we got certificates in the training that are useful especially as we seek promotion at work.”

The Tusome SNE teacher training is an important training that has equipped teachers with the necessary skills that have made reading easy for children with blindness or low vision. The SNE teacher training will ensure that learners with special needs in this zone, division, county, and country do well.

Tusome Class 3 teachers shine bright Across Kenya, literacy levels in public and private schools are lower than expected. The Government of Kenya, in collaboration with the education system, aims to improve early-grade literacy outcomes through the Tusome program. This improvement is attempted through instilling better instructional practices, providing resources for teacher training, and

A teacher at Kambi Ya Juu teaching using Tusome braille books for pupils who are

blind.



developing materials to support learning. The Tusome program started with Classes 1 and 2, where its instructional methods were first employed by the Primary Math and Reading (PRIMR) Initiative. In 2017, Tusome began training Class 3 teachers using the same instruc-tional methodology. The objective was to assist teachers to use the Tusome methodology to teach literacy in Classes 1 to 3, improve teachers’ skills in how to teach early-grade literacy using direct instruction, and also enhance literacy outcomes among Class 1 to 3 pupils.

The results of the program have been seen in Bamburi Cluster among the pupils, teachers, parents, and community. A teacher at Nyemuteka Primary and Nursery School has attended Tusome teacher trainings twice since she joined the school, and she is now a “star” (model) teacher in the Bamburi Cluster. Upon interactions with the Class 2 teacher on various occasions, such as teacher classroom observations and cluster meetings, one realizes that, whether in or out of the classroom, she demonstrates the skill of teaching Tusome with confidence, determination, and willingness.

She is a dedicated educator who has committed a lot of her time in teaching the early-grade classes using the Tusome methodology. Her day begins with teaching Tusome lessons, teaching other subjects on the timetable, marking pupils’ homework, assigning homework, engaging learners in reading activities, and leading learning games. “Because of my Tusome training, I try as much as I can to find extra teaching materials for my lessons, such as cardboard manipulatives, charts, counting [items] and colored bricks, among others. Combining all of these skills has made my class active and lively,” she notes.

Despite the fact that the teacher still has two nonreaders and several slow readers in her class, she puts all efforts together with her Tusome-assigned Instructional Coach to make sure the pupils are able to read at the expected pace.

A teacher actively involving learners during a Tusome lesson.



Annex B: Numbers of Head Teachers and Teachers Trained in FY 2017, by County

Table B-1: Term 1 2017 head teacher and teacher trainings

County

Head teachers Class 1 teachers Class 2 teachers Class 3 teachers Total Class 1, 2, and 3 teachers Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total

Baringo 520 92 612 195 453 648 189 451 640 191 450 641 1,929

Bomet 541 79 620 144 527 671 146 541 687 175 518 693 2,051

Bungoma 599 174 773 198 852 1,050 198 852 1,050 217 835 1,052 3,152

Busia 353 75 428 113 451 564 118 463 581 126 468 594 1,739

Elgeyo-Marakwet

310 64 374 92 312 404 99 310 409 97 310 407 1,220

Embu 283 92 375 94 301 395 83 312 395 98 311 409 1,199

Garissa 153 9 162 84 52 136 100 51 151 100 41 141 428

Homa Bay 723 114 837 346 475 821 310 525 835 291 571 862 2,518

Isiolo 73 19 92 41 57 98 49 59 108 52 35 87 293

Kajiado 325 49 374 128 254 382 156 253 409 146 266 412 1,203

Kakamega 604 179 783 182 813 995 195 855 1,050 273 1,173 1,446 3,491

Kericho 418 78 496 97 457 554 91 485 576 138 447 585 1,715

Kiambu 275 163 438 44 531 575 31 524 555 36 537 573 1,703

Kilifi 429 89 518 202 382 584 187 396 583 222 366 588 1,755

Kirinyaga 125 60 185 46 180 226 46 200 246 42 199 241 713

Kisii 549 121 670 221 465 686 204 522 726 205 542 747 2,159

Kisumu 453 132 585 131 499 630 156 483 639 155 513 668 1,937


County


Kisumu APBET

68 84 152 12 141 153 23 128 151 32 117 149 453

Kitui 1,058 238 1,296 449 880 1,329 417 916 1,333 441 862 1,303 3,965

Kwale 295 63 358 139 284 423 148 273 421 160 270 430 1,274

Laikipia 217 62 279 97 199 296 77 211 288 76 227 303 887

Lamu 76 19 95 33 65 98 27 63 90 35 70 105 293

Machakos 637 150 787 152 738 890 194 691 885 196 692 888 2,663

Makueni 722 120 842 213 678 891 198 672 870 218 668 886 2,647

Mandera 195 7 202 162 60 222 157 95 252 173 28 201 675

Marsabit 128 19 147 88 60 148 99 56 155 110 49 159 462

Meru 469 152 621 196 631 827 196 661 857 204 637 841 2,525

Migori 464 107 571 235 397 632 222 406 628 231 419 650 1,910

Mombasa 55 39 94 2 114 116 8 108 116 4 119 123 355

Mombasa APBET

71 63 134 10 99 109 17 105 122 30 93 123 354

Murang'a 370 121 491 100 500 600 83 501 584 88 504 592 1,776

Nairobi 65 126 191 3 305 308 4 343 347 11 367 378 1,033

Nairobi APBET

267 351 618 54 614 668 93 614 707 126 587 713 2,088

Nakuru 586 165 751 162 762 924 169 777 946 189 770 959 2,829

Nakuru APBET

37 37 74 2 79 81 8 70 78 9 70 79 238

Nandi 597 100 697 156 631 787 156 631 787 184 631 815 2,389

Narok 532 79 611 229 375 604 274 383 657 274 384 658 1,919


County


Nyamira 335 55 390 132 266 398 92 317 409 91 322 413 1,220

Nyandarua 273 65 338 73 313 386 66 315 381 84 307 391 1,158

Nyeri 276 110 386 80 354 434 92 342 434 76 359 435 1,303

Samburu 139 10 149 87 71 158 79 62 141 97 66 163 462

Siaya 494 117 611 212 447 659 200 444 644 214 445 659 1,962

Taita-Taveta 154 48 202 55 163 218 48 176 224 59 174 233 675

Tana River 127 21 148 80 83 163 69 85 154 69 89 158 475

Tharaka-Nithi 330 72 402 141 282 423 115 322 437 118 306 424 1,284

Trans Nzoia 290 72 362 69 390 459 69 390 459 89 375 464 1,382

Turkana 348 38 386 205 154 359 205 154 359 194 162 356 1,074

Uasin Gishu 389 109 498 51 529 580 52 521 573 55 546 601 1,754

Uasin Gishu APBET

30 16 46 7 40 47 8 32 40 16 29 45 132

Vihiga 290 76 366 92 336 428 73 368 441 95 359 454 1,323

Wajir 171 19 190 129 50 179 124 82 206 133 63 196 581

West Pokot 460 41 501 246 290 536 246 290 536 245 288 533 1,605

Total, Term 1 17,758 4,560 22,318 6,511 18,441 24,952 6,466 18,886 25,352 6,990 19,036 26,026 76,330

Total teachers by gender, Classes 1–3: 19,967 males; 56,363 females.

Total head teachers and teachers: 98,648.


Table B-2: Term 2 2017 head teacher and teacher trainings

County Head teachers Class 1 teachers Class 2 teachers Class 3 teachers Total Class 1, 2,

and 3 teachers Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total

Baringo 470 58 528 186 455 641 197 431 628 211 413 624 1,893

Bomet 524 79 603 121 537 658 141 519 660 160 492 652 1,970

Bungoma 607 174 781 198 659 857 159 656 815 170 623 793 2,465

Busia 353 75 428 113 451 564 118 461 579 125 464 589 1,732

Elgeyo-Marakwet

317 57 374 92 312 404 99 310 409 97 310 407 1,220

Embu 263 85 348 83 292 375 81 289 370 84 293 377 1,122

Garissa 130 10 140 108 50 158 105 46 151 112 45 157 466

Homa Bay 576 106 682 315 452 767 272 500 772 255 529 784 2,323

Isiolo 58 22 80 31 57 88 41 48 89 38 36 74 251

Kajiado 308 56 364 127 270 397 145 259 404 144 242 386 1,187

Kakamega 631 149 780 144 822 966 193 826 1,019 247 901 1,148 3,133

Kericho 427 74 501 93 463 556 97 459 556 123 421 544 1,656

Kiambu 294 152 446 23 530 553 30 525 555 34 532 566 1,674

Kilifi 380 94 474 192 372 564 161 369 530 213 340 553 1,647

Kirinyaga 129 61 190 58 168 226 60 174 234 68 154 222 682

Kisii 466 103 569 209 491 700 174 546 720 190 506 696 2,116

Kisumu 394 97 491 139 439 578 161 421 582 157 423 580 1,740

Kisumu APBET

66 76 142 24 141 165 22 129 151 37 99 136 452

Kitui 971 250 1,221 378 839 1,217 370 826 1,196 382 794 1,176 3,589

Kwale 266 61 327 135 246 381 129 247 376 140 234 374 1,131

Laikipia 206 54 260 88 198 286 78 196 274 76 204 280 840




Lamu 69 14 83 30 63 93 26 69 95 30 62 92 280

Machakos 614 171 785 144 712 856 161 657 818 192 653 845 2,519

Makueni 719 120 839 170 701 871 205 647 852 210 677 887 2,610

Mandera 137 4 141 181 54 235 173 48 221 157 28 185 641

Marsabit 115 21 136 87 64 151 92 72 164 94 42 136 451

Meru 489 154 643 160 683 843 154 663 817 146 618 764 2,424

Migori 334 92 426 224 349 573 202 372 574 211 362 573 1,720

Mombasa 53 35 88 3 105 108 6 94 100 4 118 122 330

Mombasa APBET

62 49 111 11 138 149 20 114 134 34 92 126 409

Murang'a 377 112 489 106 489 595 92 482 574 91 492 583 1,752

Nairobi 76 108 184 4 313 317 3 348 351 4 369 373 1,041

Nairobi APBET

307 369 676 57 801 858 106 674 780 161 676 837 2,475

Nakuru 518 129 647 130 713 843 146 689 835 175 655 830 2,508

Nakuru APBET

30 35 65 2 89 91 8 67 75 12 68 80 246

Nandi 597 100 697 156 632 788 135 442 577 153 443 596 1,961

Narok 462 83 545 198 352 550 232 350 582 205 364 569 1,701

Nyamira 271 66 337 121 267 388 90 294 384 95 289 384 1,156

Nyandarua 266 61 327 64 310 374 63 308 371 76 301 377 1,122

Nyeri 260 99 359 50 350 400 59 337 396 55 346 401 1,197

Samburu 125 15 140 83 60 143 73 64 137 86 68 154 434

Siaya 437 70 507 190 439 629 203 440 643 193 397 590 1,862




Taita-Taveta 149 46 195 53 172 225 45 174 219 46 174 220 664

Tana River 127 22 149 74 79 153 57 82 139 67 87 154 446

Tharaka-Nithi 321 74 395 98 317 415 109 306 415 110 284 394 1,224

Trans Nzoia 290 72 362 69 390 459 69 390 459 89 375 464 1,382

Turkana 329 33 362 203 157 360 190 161 351 193 149 342 1,053

Uasin Gishu 359 93 452 44 489 533 44 489 533 39 517 556 1,622

Uasin Gishu APBET

20 30 50 3 46 49 5 40 45 13 48 61 155

Vihiga 268 76 344 75 304 379 84 345 429 91 326 417 1,225

Wajir 149 12 161 141 57 198 124 65 189 126 57 183 570

West Pokot 460 41 501 240 289 529 233 290 523 247 288 535 1,587

Total, Term 2 16,626 4,299 20,925 6,028 18,228 24,256 6,042 17,810 23,852 6,468 17,480 23,948 72,056 Total teachers by gender, Classes 1–3: 18,538 males; 53,518 females.

Total head teachers and teachers: 92,981.


Annex C: Number of CSOs, ICs, and Star Teachers Trained, by Gender and County, FY 2017

County

Term 1 2017 Term 2 2017 CSOs ICs Star teachers CSOs ICs

Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total

Baringo 35 9 44 0 0 0 5 10 15 32 12 44 0 0 0

Bomet 20 4 24 0 0 0 1 7 8 18 6 24 0 0 0

Bungoma 25 11 36 0 0 0 5 9 14 25 11 36 0 0 0

Busia 13 4 17 0 0 0 3 5 8 15 4 19 0 0 0

Elgeyo-Marakwet 21 5 26 0 0 0 4 4 8 21 5 26 0 0 0

Embu 18 2 20 0 0 0 2 5 7 16 2 18 0 0 0

Garissa 12 4 16 0 0 0 3 2 5 12 3 15 0 0 0

Homa Bay 24 8 32 0 0 0 6 13 19 31 10 41 0 0 0

Isiolo 8 0 8 0 0 0 1 1 2 6 2 8 0 0 0

Kajiado 11 6 17 0 0 0 1 2 3 11 5 16 0 0 0

Kakamega 23 14 37 0 0 0 1 13 14 24 13 37 0 0 0

Kericho 16 6 22 0 0 0 2 7 9 21 7 28 0 0 0

Kiambu 16 16 32 0 0 0 1 8 9 16 16 32 0 0 0

Kilifi 11 3 14 0 0 0 2 2 4 12 3 15 0 0 0

Kirinyaga 8 2 10 0 0 0 0 3 3 7 4 11 0 0 0

Kisii 30 12 42 0 0 0 1 14 15 30 12 42 0 0 0

Kisumu 24 10 34 0 0 0 1 11 12 21 12 33 0 0 0

Kisumu APBET 0 0 0 6 4 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 4 10

Kitui 41 6 47 0 0 0 3 12 15 42 5 47 0 0 0


County



Kwale 13 1 14 0 0 0 1 3 4 13 1 14 0 0 0

Laikipia 13 5 18 0 0 0 0 2 2 12 5 17 0 0 0

Lamu 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 1 1 5 0 5 0 0 0

Machakos 29 6 35 0 0 0 3 10 13 28 6 34 0 0 0

Makueni 28 6 34 0 0 0 1 10 11 36 8 44 0 0 0

Mandera 10 0 10 0 0 0 4 1 5 10 0 10 0 0 0

Marsabit 15 1 16 0 0 0 2 2 4 16 2 18 0 0 0

Meru 18 9 27 0 0 0 0 5 5 20 14 34 0 0 0

Migori 27 11 38 0 0 0 6 14 20 27 12 39 0 0 0

Mombasa 3 7 10 0 0 0 0 3 3 2 7 9 0 0 0

Mombasa APBET 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Murang'a 11 19 30 0 0 0 1 13 14 21 10 31 0 0 0

Nairobi 1 12 13 0 0 0 0 4 4 1 12 13 0 0 0

Nairobi APBET 0 0 0 25 25 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 23 48

Nakuru 15 8 23 0 0 0 4 11 15 17 7 24 0 0 0

Nakuru APBET 0 0 0 1 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 5

Nandi 23 4 27 0 0 0 1 9 10 26 6 32 0 0 0

Narok 25 7 32 0 0 0 2 9 11 25 7 32 0 0 0

Nyamira 17 6 23 0 0 0 1 10 11 16 6 22 0 0 0

Nyandarua 12 4 16 0 0 0 1 5 6 12 4 16 0 0 0

Nyeri 13 7 20 0 0 0 3 11 14 11 10 21 0 0 0

Samburu 9 1 10 0 0 0 2 1 3 12 1 13 0 0 0


County



Siaya 25 9 34 0 0 0 3 10 13 24 10 34 0 0 0

Taita-Taveta 9 2 11 0 0 0 1 2 3 9 2 11 0 0 0

Tana River 6 2 8 0 0 0 0 2 2 7 2 9 0 0 0

Tharaka-Nithi 17 6 23 0 0 0 2 6 8 16 8 24 0 0 0

Trans Nzoia 13 7 20 0 0 0 0 5 5 14 6 20 0 0 0

Turkana 13 3 16 0 0 0 5 2 7 14 3 17 0 0 0

Uasin Gishu 14 10 24 0 0 0 1 8 9 16 8 24 0 0 0

Uasin Gishu APBET

0 0 0 3 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 5

Vihiga 12 5 17 0 0 0 1 4 5 14 5 19 0 0 0

Wajir 11 3 14 0 0 0 2 3 5 11 4 15 0 0 0

West Pokot 17 2 19 0 0 0 5 2 7 17 2 19 0 0 0

Totals 779 285 1,064 42 35 77 94 296 390 812 300 1,112 42 35 77


Annex D: SNE Head Teacher and Teacher Trainings, Term 1, FY 2017, by County

County

Deaf Blind

Grand total Head teachers Teachers Head teachers Teachers

Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total

Baringo 2 0 2 1 5 6 0 2 2 0 3 3 13

Bomet 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 2 3

Bungoma 0 0 0 1 4 5 0 0 0 6 5 11 16

Busia 0 0 0 2 7 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 9

Elgeyo-Marakwet 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 3

Embu 0 0 0 1 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Garissa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Homa Bay 0 0 0 6 4 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 10

Isiolo 0 1 1 1 2 3 0 0 0 0 3 3 7

Kajiado 0 0 0 2 5 7 0 1 1 2 2 4 12

Kakamega 0 0 0 1 6 7 0 0 0 0 1 1 8

Kericho 1 0 1 2 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 5

Kiambu 0 1 1 0 4 4 1 0 1 0 6 6 12

Kilifi 6 2 8 3 8 11 1 0 1 1 1 2 22

Kirinyaga 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

Kisii 0 1 1 10 4 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 15

Kisumu 1 2 3 0 10 10 0 1 1 5 3 8 22

Kitui 0 1 1 0 7 7 0 0 0 3 5 8 16

Kwale 1 1 2 5 2 7 0 0 0 2 1 3 12

Laikipia 1 0 1 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Lamu 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2


County

Deaf Blind



Machakos 0 1 1 0 4 4 0 0 0 2 2 4 9

Makueni 0 0 0 2 4 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 6

Mandera 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Marsabit 0 0 0 2 1 3 0 1 1 4 0 4 8

Meru 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 3 3 5

Migori 0 0 0 12 3 15 0 0 0 2 0 2 17

Mombasa 1 0 1 0 2 2 0 1 1 0 2 2 6

Murang'a 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

Nairobi 1 1 2 3 13 16 2 0 2 2 2 4 24

Nakuru 1 1 2 1 4 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 7

Nandi 0 0 0 3 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 5

Narok 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 2 4

Nyamira 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Nyandarua 1 0 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Nyeri 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

Samburu 0 1 1 4 4 8 0 0 0 4 2 6 15

Siaya 2 1 3 1 8 9 1 0 1 4 3 7 20

Taita-Taveta 2 1 3 2 3 5 0 0 0 1 1 2 10

Tana River 1 0 1 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 4

Tharaka-Nithi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Trans Nzoia 0 0 0 2 6 8 0 0 0 4 8 12 20

Turkana 0 0 0 1 2 3 0 0 0 1 2 3 6


County

Deaf Blind



Uasin Gishu 0 0 0 1 3 4 0 0 0 0 1 1 5

Vihiga 0 2 2 0 11 11 0 0 0 1 2 3 16

Wajir 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

West Pokot 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 4 2 6 8

Totals 22 18 40 77 152 229 6 7 13 51 64 115 397 Total teachers: 344 (128 males, 216 females).

Total head teachers: 53 (28 males, 25 females).


Annex E: Term 3 2017 KICD–Tusome Infusion Training, SNE, by County

County

Deaf Blind



Baringo 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 3

Bomet 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Bungoma 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Busia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Elgeyo-Marakwet 1 0 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Embu 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Garissa 1 0 1 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Homa Bay 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Isiolo 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 3 3 6

Kajiado 1 0 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Kakamega 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Kericho 1 0 1 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Kiambu 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 4 5 6

Kilifi 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

Kirinyaga 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Kisii 1 0 1 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Kisumu 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 2

Kitui 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Kwale 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Laikipia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Lamu 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


County

Deaf Blind



Machakos 0 1 1 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Makueni 1 1 2 1 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 6

Mandera 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Marsabit 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 3

Meru 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Migori 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mombasa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 2 3

Murang'a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Nairobi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 4

Nakuru 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Nandi 1 0 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Narok 1 0 1 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Nyamira 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Nyandarua 1 0 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Nyeri 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Samburu 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Siaya 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

Taita-Taveta 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Tana River 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Tharaka-Nithi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Trans Nzoia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Turkana 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 3 4


County

Deaf Blind



Uasin Gishu 0 2 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Vihiga 1 0 1 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Wajir 0 2 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

West Pokot 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 4 3 7 8

Totals 12 8 20 14 18 32 4 1 5 10 18 28 85


Annex F: Term 3 2017 KICD–Tusome Infusion Training: CSOs, Head Teachers, and Teachers, by County, Public or Private Institution, and Gender

County CSOs

Head teachers Class 1 teachers Class 2 teachers Public Private

Total Public Private


Total M F Total M F Total M F Total M F Total M F Total M F Total M F Total

Baringo 3 1 4 2 0 2 2 0 2 4 0 3 3 0 0 0 3 0 3 3 0 2 2 5

Bomet 4 0 4 1 0 1 1 1 2 3 2 1 3 1 0 1 4 1 2 3 1 0 1 4

Bungoma 3 1 4 1 1 2 2 0 2 4 1 4 5 2 3 5 10 0 6 6 1 4 5 11

Busia 3 1 4 2 0 2 1 0 1 3 0 6 6 1 4 5 11 0 2 2 0 0 0 2

Elgeyo-Marakwet 4 0 4 2 0 2 2 0 2 4 1 3 4 0 2 2 6 0 4 4 0 2 2 6

Embu 2 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 2 4 0 2 2 0 0 0 2

Garissa 1 1 2 2 0 2 1 0 1 3 1 1 2 0 0 0 2 1 2 3 3 0 3 6

Homa Bay 2 3 5 1 2 3 1 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Isiolo 4 1 5 2 1 3 1 0 1 4 1 2 3 0 1 1 4 1 3 4 0 1 1 5

Kajiado 3 1 4 3 0 3 2 0 2 5 0 4 4 1 0 1 5 0 5 5 0 0 0 5

Kakamega 3 1 4 2 0 2 2 0 2 4 0 4 4 0 1 1 5 0 4 4 0 1 1 5

Kericho 4 0 4 2 1 3 0 1 1 4 0 5 5 0 1 1 6 0 5 5 0 1 1 6

Kiambu 2 2 4 1 1 2 0 2 2 4 0 4 4 0 2 2 6 0 3 3 0 1 1 4

Kilifi 3 1 4 1 1 2 2 0 2 4 1 2 3 0 0 0 3 1 2 3 0 2 2 5

Kirinyaga 1 3 4 1 1 2 2 0 2 4 0 3 3 0 1 1 4 0 3 3 0 1 1 4

Kisii 1 1 2 2 1 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Kisumu 1 2 3 1 2 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 3 0 2 2 5

Kitui 2 2 4 2 0 2 2 0 2 4 0 6 6 0 1 1 7 0 4 4 0 0 0 4

Kwale 2 0 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 4 1 1 2 0 0 0 2 1 1 2 0 2 2 4

Laikipia 2 2 4 2 0 2 1 2 3 5 0 4 4 0 1 1 5 0 5 5 0 2 2 7

Lamu 3 0 3 1 1 2 1 0 1 3 1 3 4 0 1 1 5 0 5 5 0 0 0 5


County CSOs





Machakos 2 1 3 1 1 2 2 0 2 4 0 3 3 0 0 0 3 0 3 3 1 1 2 5

Makueni 3 0 3 2 1 3 0 2 2 5 0 3 3 0 2 2 5 0 4 4 0 0 0 4

Mandera 2 0 2 1 0 1 1 0 1 2 1 2 3 0 0 0 3 2 0 2 1 1 2 4

Marsabit 2 1 3 3 0 3 0 0 0 3 1 4 5 0 0 0 5 2 5 7 0 0 0 7

Meru 1 3 4 2 0 2 2 0 2 4 1 4 5 0 1 1 6 0 4 4 0 2 2 6

Migori 3 0 3 2 2 4 1 0 1 5 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 2

Mombasa 2 2 4 1 1 2 2 0 2 4 0 2 2 0 1 1 3 0 3 3 0 1 1 4

Murang'a 1 1 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 2 2 2 1 3 5 0 3 3 0 1 1 4

Nairobi 1 2 3 1 1 2 2 0 2 4 0 6 6 0 1 1 7 0 2 2 0 1 1 3

Nakuru 1 3 4 1 1 2 3 0 3 5 1 4 5 0 0 0 5 0 4 4 0 2 2 6

Nandi 2 0 2 1 0 1 1 1 2 3 2 5 7 0 3 3 10 0 6 6 0 3 3 9

Narok 2 0 2 0 2 2 1 0 1 3 0 3 3 0 0 0 3 0 3 3 1 0 1 4

Nyamira 4 0 4 2 0 2 1 1 2 4 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Nyandarua 6 0 6 2 2 4 3 1 4 8 0 5 5 0 1 1 6 0 5 5 1 1 2 7

Nyeri 1 2 3 3 0 3 1 2 3 6 0 5 5 0 2 2 7 0 5 5 0 1 1 6

Samburu 4 1 5 4 1 5 2 1 3 8 2 6 8 1 1 2 10 0 6 6 1 1 2 8

Siaya 4 1 5 1 0 1 2 0 2 3 0 3 3 0 1 1 4 0 3 3 1 0 1 4

Taita-Taveta 4 0 4 2 1 3 0 1 1 4 1 3 4 0 0 0 4 0 3 3 0 2 2 5

Tana River 3 0 3 1 0 1 1 1 2 3 0 1 1 0 1 1 2 1 1 2 0 1 1 3

Tharaka-Nithi 3 2 5 1 0 1 2 1 3 4 0 2 2 0 1 1 3 0 3 3 0 0 0 3

Trans Nzoia 2 2 4 2 0 2 2 0 2 4 0 1 1 1 0 1 2 0 4 4 0 2 2 6

Turkana 1 1 2 2 0 2 1 0 1 3 1 3 4 0 1 1 5 0 3 3 1 1 2 5

Uasin Gishu 0 3 3 2 0 2 2 0 2 4 3 4 7 1 4 5 12 0 11 11 0 3 3 14

Vihiga 1 1 2 2 2 4 2 0 2 6 0 4 4 0 1 1 5 1 3 4 0 0 0 4


County CSOs





Wajir 1 2 3 1 0 1 2 0 2 3 1 3 4 0 0 0 4 1 3 4 3 1 4 8

West Pokot 4 0 4 2 0 2 2 0 2 4 1 1 2 1 1 2 4 1 3 4 0 1 1 5

Total 113 51 164 76 27 103 64 18 82 185 24 137 161 12 47 59 220 13 154 167 16 48 64 231 Total head teachers and Class 1–2 teachers: 636 (205 males, 431 females).

Total head teachers by gender: 140 males, 45 females.

Total Class 1 teachers by gender: 36 males, 184 females.

Total Class 2 teachers by gender: 29 males, 202 females.

Total public school teachers: 328 (37 males, 291 females).

Total private school teachers: 123 (28 males, 95 females).


Annex G: Classroom Observation Data Table G-1: March 2017 Dashboard11

County

Number of classroom visits

(% of target visits)

English Class 1 (cwpm and % at KNEC

benchmark)


benchmark)

English Class 3 (cwpm)

Kiswahili Class 1 (cwpm and % at KNEC

benchmark)


benchmark)

Kiswahili Class 3 (cwpm)

All 19,093 (77%) 13 (19%) 32 (26%) 64 12 (52%) 22 (22%) 40

Baringo 233 (34%) 10 (11%) 22 (13%) 56 8 (40%) 22 (10%) 36

Bomet 198 (31%) 7 (2%) 21 (1%) 31 8 (25%) 19 (3%) 33

Bungoma 451 (55%) 11 (6%) 32 (14%) 52 11 (50%) 21 (15%) 44

Busia 206 (46%) 13 (13%) 36 (13%) 62 12 (60%) 23 (23%) 44

Eldoret APBET 360 (493%) 16 (39%) 27 (27%) 77 16 (66%) 25 (26%) 36

Elgeyo-Marakwet 348 (88%) 11 (18%) 28 (13%) 56 10 (42%) 22 (15%) 31

Embu 239 (62%) 8 (1%) 24 (7%) 54 8 (20%) 16 (7%) 33

Garissa 39 (18%) 22 (13%) 43 (0%) 48 13 (39%) 18 (20%) 20

Homa Bay 875 (98%) 11 (12%) 31 (22%) 60 13 (55%) 17 (9%) 38

Isiolo 37 (33%) 8 (3%) 33 (0%) 42 20 (100%) 29 (18%) 37

Kajiado 165 (38%) 13 (18%) 30 (21%) 72 13 (46%) 21 (18%) 36

Kakamega 501 (56%) 7 (6%) 30 (17%) 50 7 (32%) 16 (11%) 30

Kericho 230 (43%) 8 (2%) 33 (16%) 52 8 (20%) 22 (6%) 29

Kiambu 663 (140%) 14 (26%) 37 (28%) 63 14 (56%) 24 (30%) 41

Kilifi 173 (31%) 12 (14%) 17 (24%) 57 17 (57%) 21 (30%) 37

11 The KNEC benchmarks for English are 30 cpwm for Class 1 and 65 cwpm for Class 2. KNEC benchmarks for Kiswahili are 17 cwpm in Class 1 and 45 cwpm in Class 2. As of late 2017, benchmarks were being considered for Class 3 and benchmarks for Classes 1 and 2 were under review to reflect the most recent aggregate learning outcome data.


County




benchmark)


benchmark)



benchmark)


benchmark)


Kirinyaga 192 (98%) 8 (0%) 21 (4%) 56 13 (52%) 19 (21%) 30

Kisii 839 (119%) 11 (8%) 27 (14%) 56 11 (42%) 22 (15%) 37

Kisumu 450 (70%) 11 (6%) 31 (13%) 69 13 (59%) 19 (13%) 42

Kisumu APBET 629 (405%) 23 (52%) 50 (64%) 75 18 (72%) 28 (40%) 47

Kitui 506 (37%) 9 (4%) 29 (12%) 62 9 (34%) 20 (16%) 40

Kwale 166 (40%) 11 (13%) 22 (25%) 51 9 (46%) 14 (21%) 33

Laikipia 202 (69%) 12 (13%) 43 (36%) 58 14 (53%) 26 (26%) 36

Lamu 100 (92%) 15 (24%) 27 (17%) 61 14 (44%) 20 (12%) 43

Machakos 534 (61%) 10 (8%) 28 (26%) 57 9 (35%) 16 (23%) 37

Makueni 363 (40%) 9 (5%) 25 (19%) 70 12 (44%) 22 (14%) 42

Mandera 115 (53%) 10 (14%) 35 (14%) 77 14 (68%) 18 (14%) 39

Marsabit 120 (69%) 8 (8%) 17 (0%) 50 10 (35%) 21 (4%) 34

Meru 162 (21%) 11 (10%) 43 (23%) 60 12 (37%) 20 (15%) 31

Migori 488 (79%) 12 (13%) 31 (29%) 70 14 (55%) 22 (23%) 50

Mombasa 176 (177%) 17 (31%) 24 (23%) 71 10 (49%) 25 (27%) 33

Mombasa APBET 580 (281%) 16 (22%) 35 (32%) 67 14 (62%) 23 (32%) 45

Murang’a 450 (89%) 13 (14%) 36 (29%) 72 9 (54%) 20 (17%) 36

Nairobi 52 (23%) 15 (10%) 36 (15%) 54 17 (65%) 31 (25%) 37

Nairobi APBET 3242 (296%) 19 (39%) 40 (47%) 77 15 (65%) 24 (38%) 44

Nakuru 215 (30%) 13 (28%) 22 (20%) 64 13 (58%) 22 (26%) 25

Nakuru APBET 455 (459%) 18 (50%) 41 (54%) 75 11 (65%) 19 (29%) 39

Nandi 246 (33%) 13 (24%) 26 (14%) 52 13 (48%) 16 (17%) 36


County




benchmark)


benchmark)



benchmark)


benchmark)


Narok 217 (33%) 10 (10%) 25 (12%) 48 10 (31%) 17 (8%) 29

Non-Tusome 432 (1004%) 19 (33%) 41 (47%) 69 17 (64%) 27 (34%) 39

Nyamira 620 (151%) 10 (11%) 27 (17%) 65 10 (52%) 18 (17%) 39

Nyandarua 404 (115%) 13 (14%) 35 (20%) 61 11 (46%) 26 (28%) 43

Nyeri 264 (67%) 10 (20%) 29 (24%) 65 14 (60%) 24 (27%) 40

Samburu 52 (30%) 9 (2%) 12 (2%) 54 3 (0%) 18 (12%) 37

Siaya 610 (92%) 12 (16%) 31 (20%) 63 11 (46%) 19 (13%) 37

Taita-Taveta 203 (94%) 15 (20%) 28 (34%) 68 15 (57%) 31 (34%) 44

Tana River 132 (80%) 9 (5%) 23 (16%) 43 9 (42%) 16 (13%) 39

Tharaka-Nithi 210 (49%) 10 (8%) 28 (24%) 59 14 (49%) 24 (20%) 41

Trans Nzoia 124 (33%) 13 (11%) 30 (14%) 56 13 (44%) 22 (14%) 41

Turkana 42 (10%) 11 (7%) 26 (4%) 46 14 (46%) 10 (0%) 27

Uasin Gishu 184 (38%) 17 (27%) 31 (17%) 65 12 (52%) 21 (23%) 44

Vihiga 379 (90%) 9 (7%) 34 (19%) 57 11 (43%) 19 (24%) 41

Wajir 127 (57%) 13 (12%) 29 (8%) 45 7 (19%) 20 (10%) 25

West Pokot 93 (15%) 11 (6%) 12 (0%) 16 9 (42%) 13 (0%) 29


Table G-2: June 2017 Dashboard

County

Number of classroom visits (% of

target visits)

English Class 1

(cwpm and % at KNEC benchmark)

English Class 2



Kiswahili Class 1


Kiswahili Class 2



No. of classroom

observations by SCDEs

No. of classroom

observations by QASOs

All 19,588 (79%) 20 (36%) 39 (39%) 59 13 (55%) 24 (29%) 52 0 (0%) 31 (0%)

Baringo 413 (61%) 13 (19%) 34 (25%) 54 10 (42%) 21 (29%) 46 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Bomet 260 (41%) 12 (7%) 29 (11%) 38 5 (7%) 19 (6%) 33 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Bungoma 507 (62%) 11 (20%) 31 (26%) 45 9 (43%) 19 (26%) 46 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Busia 240 (54%) 16 (21%) 46 (54%) 45 11 (64%) 26 (53%) 59 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Elgeyo-Marakwet

427 (108%) 23 (35%) 36 (31%) 59 12 (53%) 23 (22%) 50 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Embu 193 (50%) 11 (12%) 34 (27%) 53 10 (41%) 23 (13%) 44 0 (0%) 4 (3%)

Garissa 56 (27%) 27 (23%) 45 (34%) 57 16 (63%) 22 (25%) 61 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Homa Bay 1,057 (118%) 18 (27%) 33 (29%) 64 12 (58%) 23 (23%) 49 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Isiolo 66 (59%) 11 (10%) 40 (29%) 50 19 (50%) 30 (33%) 48 0 (0%) 2 (6%)

Kajiado 171 (39%) 23 (40%) 38 (41%) 57 12 (44%) 31 (34%) 48 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Kakamega 621 (69%) 16 (21%) 32 (28%) 45 9 (38%) 21 (20%) 42 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Kericho 276 (52%) 14 (19%) 37 (28%) 63 12 (56%) 27 (27%) 44 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Kiambu 637 (134%) 20 (40%) 42 (42%) 56 13 (64%) 26 (36%) 55 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Kilifi 118 (21%) 25 (42%) 52 (47%) 43 11 (51%) 25 (22%) 46 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Kirinyaga 205 (105%) 14 (10%) 42 (32%) 46 18 (70%) 30 (49%) 58 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Kisii 738 (105%) 18 (36%) 41 (31%) 53 11 (40%) 20 (21%) 48 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Kisumu 443 (69%) 14 (21%) 44 (44%) 55 13 (57%) 22 (29%) 48 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Kisumu APBET 688 (443%) 32 (68%) 49 (61%) 70 17 (58%) 29 (41%) 61 0 (0%) 0 (0%)


County


target visits)

English Class 1


English Class 2



Kiswahili Class 1


Kiswahili Class 2



No. of classroom


No. of classroom


Kitui 714 (52%) 16 (23%) 36 (31%) 56 12 (49%) 24 (32%) 53 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Kwale 151 (37%) 19 (30%) 27 (17%) 40 9 (33%) 23 (17%) 46 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Laikipia 259 (89%) 22 (38%) 33 (35%) 52 13 (46%) 22 (20%) 44 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Lamu 101 (93%) 22 (28%) 54 (53%) 64 15 (60%) 36 (52%) 53 0 (0%) 11 (55%)

Machakos 607 (70%) 14 (22%) 31 (31%) 52 11 (45%) 26 (28%) 49 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Makueni 381 (42%) 15 (18%) 40 (34%) 54 11 (43%) 28 (32%) 56 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Mandera 102 (47%) 20 (14%) 42 (30%) 45 13 (64%) 22 (27%) 29 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Marsabit 193 (112%) 9 (3%) 24 (8%) 43 8 (31%) 19 (5%) 35 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Meru 114 (15%) 11 (30%) 48 (30%) 48 15 (54%) 22 (12%) 41 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Migori 620 (101%) 24 (47%) 44 (45%) 63 17 (77%) 34 (50%) 62 0 (0%) 3 (3%)

Mombasa 82 (82%) 28 (48%) 60 (64%) 53 9 (51%) 24 (27%) 51 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Mombasa APBET

491 (238%) 21 (52%) 40 (38%) 72 13 (62%) 28 (45%) 61 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Murang’a 322 (64%) 21 (31%) 40 (47%) 66 12 (45%) 25 (25%) 54 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Nairobi 32 (14%) 19 (10%) 55 (55%) 58 20 (55%) 34 (33%) 39 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Nairobi APBET 2850 (260%) 30 (58%) 46 (59%) 78 17 (68%) 23 (39%) 59 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Nakuru 185 (26%) 19 (23%) 32 (25%) 43 9 (42%) 14 (14%) 34 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Nakuru APBET 443 (447%) 24 (67%) 40 (52%) 69 16 (61%) 20 (23%) 56 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Nandi 228 (30%) 18 (30%) 35 (29%) 59 12 (36%) 22 (15%) 48 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Narok 168 (25%) 16 (20%) 41 (22%) 47 11 (36%) 23 (17%) 47 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Non-Tusome 434 (1009%) 23 (57%) 37 (38%) 71 19 (68%) 29 (42%) 52 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Nyamira 704 (171%) 18 (32%) 34 (28%) 61 14 (58%) 21 (24%) 48 0 (0%) 0 (0%)


County


target visits)

English Class 1


English Class 2



Kiswahili Class 1


Kiswahili Class 2



No. of classroom


No. of classroom


Nyandarua 276 (78%) 21 (40%) 36 (42%) 58 13 (54%) 24 (22%) 47 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Nyeri 263 (67%) 18 (41%) 38 (43%) 69 12 (57%) 18 (22%) 52 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Samburu 104 (61%) 8 (5%) 30 (19%) 55 12 (33%) 19 (23%) 45 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Siaya 566 (85%) 19 (37%) 35 (39%) 58 14 (60%) 26 (27%) 56 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Taita-Taveta 181 (84%) 20 (46%) 46 (54%) 65 12 (55%) 24 (25%) 51 0 (0%) 8 (26%)

Tana River 145 (88%) 14 (15%) 31 (20%) 41 10 (28%) 16 (10%) 38 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Tharaka-Nithi 266 (63%) 21 (28%) 43 (39%) 52 14 (53%) 23 (25%) 51 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Trans Nzoia 157 (42%) 22 (24%) 50 (47%) 53 13 (50%) 29 (26%) 48 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Turkana 97 (23%) 13 (22%) 41 (20%) 56 12 (51%) 24 (16%) 42 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Uasin Gishu 279 (57%) 17 (31%) 44 (48%) 64 12 (64%) 24 (25%) 57 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Uasin Gishu APBET

443 (606%) 31 (69%) 41 (57%) 72 18 (79%) 23 (32%) 55 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Vihiga 331 (78%) 16 (21%) 26 (41%) 50 12 (54%) 22 (32%) 56 0 (0%) 3 (3%)

Wajir 110 (49%) 9 (5%) 21 (5%) 36 7 (21%) 21 (0%) 29 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

West Pokot 73 (12%) 11 (4%) 13 (7%) 30 6 (18%) 24 (24%) 37 0 (0%) 0 (0%)


Table G-3: July 2017 Dashboard

County


target visits)

English Class 1


English Class 2

(cwpm and % at KNEC

benchmark)


Kiswahili Class 1


Kiswahili Class 2



No. of classroom


No. of classroom


All 22,538 (92%) 20 (36%) 39 (39%) 59 13 (54%) 24 (29%) 51 1 (0%) 0 (0%)

Baringo 526 (78%) 12 (17%) 32 (21%) 49 9 (37%) 20 (22%) 44 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Bomet 290 (46%) 12 (7%) 31 (14%) 39 6 (14%) 19 (7%) 34 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Bungoma 676 (83%) 12 (20%) 30 (25%) 44 9 (40%) 20 (29%) 45 1 (4%) 0 (0%)

Busia 284 (64%) 15 (21%) 44 (47%) 46 12 (58%) 28 (51%) 57 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Elgeyo-Marakwet 475 (120%) 21 (34%) 36 (30%) 57 12 (51%) 22 (21%) 48 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Embu 204 (52%) 11 (12%) 35 (27%) 52 10 (41%) 23 (14%) 44 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Garissa 73 (35%) 23 (20%) 52 (41%) 62 15 (60%) 18 (19%) 58 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Homa Bay 1119 (125%) 19 (29%) 34 (30%) 64 12 (58%) 23 (23%) 48 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Isiolo 93 (83%) 10 (13%) 40 (26%) 45 16 (43%) 28 (23%) 42 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Kajiado 243 (56%) 23 (40%) 36 (39%) 61 11 (42%) 26 (31%) 48 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Kakamega 649 (72%) 17 (20%) 32 (28%) 48 9 (40%) 22 (21%) 43 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Kericho 299 (56%) 15 (19%) 37 (29%) 63 12 (55%) 28 (26%) 43 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Kiambu 748 (158%) 20 (40%) 41 (44%) 57 11 (64%) 26 (34%) 54 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Kilifi 209 (38%) 19 (36%) 46 (42%) 42 10 (46%) 24 (20%) 44 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Kirinyaga 234 (120%) 14 (14%) 40 (32%) 50 17 (72%) 29 (51%) 57 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Kisii 781 (111%) 17 (35%) 41 (32%) 52 11 (39%) 20 (20%) 48 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Kisumu 516 (80%) 15 (22%) 42 (44%) 56 13 (56%) 23 (28%) 48 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Kisumu APBET 789 (509%) 31 (65%) 47 (58%) 65 15 (53%) 27 (37%) 58 0 (0%) 0 (0%)


County


target visits)

English Class 1


English Class 2

(cwpm and % at KNEC

benchmark)


Kiswahili Class 1


Kiswahili Class 2



No. of classroom


No. of classroom


Kitui 760 (56%) 16 (22%) 36 (30%) 58 12 (52%) 24 (34%) 54 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Kwale 174 (42%) 18 (27%) 30 (18%) 41 11 (40%) 21 (15%) 46 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Laikipia 302 (104%) 26 (44%) 34 (37%) 51 12 (46%) 21 (21%) 45 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Lamu 101 (93%) 22 (28%) 54 (53%) 64 15 (60%) 36 (52%) 53 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Machakos 615 (71%) 15 (22%) 32 (31%) 52 11 (44%) 26 (28%) 49 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Makueni 429 (47%) 14 (18%) 39 (32%) 54 11 (42%) 27 (30%) 56 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Mandera 117 (54%) 19 (14%) 37 (26%) 45 13 (61%) 19 (22%) 27 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Marsabit 231 (134%) 8 (3%) 23 (8%) 43 7 (27%) 20 (6%) 33 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Meru 228 (30%) 17 (33%) 32 (41%) 49 13 (48%) 24 (15%) 41 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Migori 661 (108%) 25 (47%) 44 (46%) 62 16 (76%) 32 (48%) 62 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Mombasa 114 (115%) 31 (56%) 63 (68%) 52 13 (53%) 28 (37%) 50 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Mombasa APBET 559 (271%) 21 (53%) 39 (37%) 71 13 (61%) 28 (45%) 60 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Murang’a 488 (97%) 20 (29%) 43 (40%) 62 12 (44%) 25 (22%) 54 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Nairobi 74 (33%) 20 (20%) 55 (62%) 55 12 (66%) 25 (25%) 47 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Nairobi APBET 3119 (285%) 29 (57%) 46 (59%) 78 17 (68%) 23 (40%) 59 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Nakuru 338 (48%) 23 (46%) 36 (33%) 53 9 (49%) 22 (21%) 43 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Nakuru APBET 443 (447%) 24 (67%) 40 (52%) 69 16 (61%) 20 (23%) 56 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Nandi 332 (45%) 19 (32%) 37 (34%) 52 12 (39%) 21 (16%) 45 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Narok 200 (30%) 16 (21%) 40 (24%) 45 11 (35%) 24 (16%) 47 0 (0%) 0 (0%)


County


target visits)

English Class 1


English Class 2

(cwpm and % at KNEC

benchmark)


Kiswahili Class 1


Kiswahili Class 2



No. of classroom


No. of classroom


Non-Tusome 440 (1023%) 24 (57%) 37 (38%) 71 19 (67%) 29 (42%) 52 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Nyamira 804 (196%) 19 (33%) 34 (30%) 61 14 (58%) 21 (24%) 48 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Nyandarua 351 (100%) 21 (39%) 35 (41%) 59 12 (51%) 24 (21%) 46 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Nyeri 307 (78%) 18 (42%) 37 (41%) 66 11 (57%) 18 (21%) 51 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Samburu 105 (62%) 7 (5%) 30 (19%) 55 12 (33%) 19 (23%) 45 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Siaya 608 (91%) 19 (37%) 35 (38%) 58 14 (61%) 25 (28%) 55 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Taita-Taveta 233 (108%) 20 (48%) 43 (50%) 64 12 (54%) 24 (27%) 51 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Tana River 153 (93%) 14 (16%) 32 (20%) 42 11 (30%) 17 (11%) 39 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Tharaka-Nithi 347 (82%) 21 (28%) 37 (36%) 58 14 (58%) 24 (33%) 53 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Trans Nzoia 205 (56%) 18 (21%) 44 (42%) 47 12 (48%) 25 (27%) 42 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Turkana 97 (23%) 13 (22%) 41 (20%) 56 12 (51%) 24 (16%) 42 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Uasin Gishu 329 (68%) 18 (36%) 44 (45%) 60 11 (62%) 25 (27%) 55 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Uasin Gishu APBET 459 (628%) 32 (70%) 41 (57%) 72 18 (80%) 23 (32%) 55 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Vihiga 398 (94%) 15 (17%) 24 (37%) 52 12 (51%) 21 (29%) 52 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Wajir 124 (56%) 10 (4%) 23 (5%) 37 7 (26%) 19 (0%) 29 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

West Pokot 85 (14%) 11 (6%) 13 (5%) 33 6 (18%) 21 (20%) 38 0 (0%) 0 (0%)


Table G-4: Term 1 SNE classroom observations

Tusome region County

No. of schools Visited No. of teachers supported

Total

Blind

Deaf

Blind Deaf Male Female Total Male Female Total

Kisumu Kisii 7 1 6 0 2 2 3 9 12

Kisumu 11 5 6 1 9 10 2 10 12

Migori 6 1 5 0 2 2 1 9 10

Siaya 4 1 3 0 2 2 0 6 6

Vihiga 6 0 6 0 0 0 3 9 12

Nairobi Kajiado 6 1 5 0 2 2 0 10 10

Kiambu 3 1 2 0 2 2 0 4 4

Murang’a 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 2

Nairobi 5 2 3 1 3 4 1 5 6

Machakos Embu 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 2

Machakos 2 1 1 0 4 4 0 4 4

Eldoret Bungoma 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 6 6

Busia 5 0 5 0 0 0 1 9 10

Trans Nzoia 6 3 3 0 0 0 1 5 6

Uasin Gishu 3 0 3 0 0 0 1 5 6

West Pokot 2 2 0 0 4 4 0 0 0

Nanyuki Laikipia 4 2 2 0 4 4 0 4 4

Meru 4 2 2 0 4 4 0 4 4

Nyeri 1 1 0 2 2 0 0 0

Total 19 counties 80 23 57 2 40 42 13 103 116

Total teachers in schools for learners who are deaf or have hearing loss: 42 (2 males, 40 females).

Total teachers in schools serving learners who are blind or have low vision: 116 (13 males, 103 females)



Tusome region Counties

No. of schools visited

No. of teachers supported Blind Deaf

Total Blind Deaf Male Female Total Male Female Total

Nakuru Baringo 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 2

Kericho 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 1

Nakuru 2 0 2 0 0 0 1 3 4

Mombasa Kilifi 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 4 4

Kwale 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 4 4

Mombasa 1 1 0 2 2 0 0 0

Nanyuki Meru 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 4 4

Tharaka-Nithi

3 0 3 0 0 0 1 5 6

Totals 8 counties 15 1 14 0 2 2 2 23 25


Tusome region Counties

No. of schools visited

No. of teachers supported Blind Deaf

Total Blind Deaf Male Female Total Male Female Total

Kisumu Kisumu 5 1 4 0 2 2 0 7 7

Siaya 5 1 4 0 2 2 1 7 8

Vihiga 5 0 5 0 0 0 1 7 8

Nairobi Kiambu 1 1 0 1 1 2 0 0 0

Nairobi 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 4 4

Totals 5 counties 18 3 15 1 5 6 2 25 27


Annex H: Youth Fund Grant Interventions Table H-1: Start-up induction workshops for youth groups

Workshop

Dates and venue for the

workshop Organization Region County

Numbers of participants, by organization and gender

Total Youth groups NTT CQASOs RTI staff Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female

Nairobi regional youth group induction workshop

August 1–3, 2017 (RTI office at Westwood, Nairobi)

Murang’a County Youth Network

Nairobi Murang’a 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Youth Initiative Kenya (YIKE)

Nairobi Nairobi 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Garissa County Youth Bunge Network (CYBN)

Wajir Garissa 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Wajir County Board Youth Forum (CBYF)

Wajir Wajir 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Mandera County Board Youth Forum (CBYF)

Wajir Mandera 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

RTI Nairobi Nairobi 0 0 2 0 0 0 9 6 17

MoE Nairobi Nairobi 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2

Mombasa regional youth group induction workshop

August 22–24, 2017 (Pride Inn, Mombasa)

Kesho Organization

Mombasa Kilifi 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

Lamu Youth and Lamu Community

Mombasa Lamu 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Kiunga Youth Bunge Association

Mombasa Lamu 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3


Workshop





Dream Achievers Youth Organization (DAYO)

Mombasa Mombasa 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Mombasa County Youth Bunge

Mombasa Mombasa 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

MoE Mombasa Kilifi 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1

MoE Mombasa Lamu 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1

MoE Mombasa Mombasa 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1


RTI Mombasa Mombasa 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 3 7


Eldoret regional youth group induction workshop

August 29–30, 2017

Nandi County Youth Network

Eldoret Nandi 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

West Pokot Youth Network

Eldoret West Pokot 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Uasin Gishu County Network

Eldoret Uasin Gishu 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Elgeyo-Marakwet County Youth Network

Eldoret Elgeyo-Marakwet

2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Trans Nzoia County Network

Eldoret Trans Nzoia 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Bungoma County Youth Network

Eldoret Bungoma 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Tujiinue Chemalal Youth Group

Eldoret Uasin Gishu 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3


Workshop





Nakuru County Youth Network

Eldoret Nakuru 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

MoE Eldoret Bungoma 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1

MoE Eldoret Elgeyo-Marakwet

0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1

MoE Eldoret Nairobi 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2

MoE Eldoret Nakuru 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1

MoE Eldoret Nandi 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1

MoE Eldoret Trans Nzoia 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1

MoE Eldoret Uasin Gishu 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1

MoE Eldoret West Pokot 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1

RTI Eldoret Eldoret 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 5

RTI Eldoret Nakuru 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 2 6

RTI Eldoret Nairobi 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 5

Kisumu regional youth group induction workshop

September 5–7, 2017

Siaya County Youth Forum

Kisumu Siaya 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Homa Bay County Youth Network

Kisumu Homa Bay 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

Kisii County Youth (Development) Forum

Kisumu Kisii 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Migori County Youth Forum

Kisumu Migori 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3


Workshop





Kakamega County Youth Network

Kisumu Kakamega 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

MoE Kisumu Homa Bay 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1

MoE Kisumu Kakamega 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1

MoE Kisumu Kisii 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1

MoE Kisumu Migori 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1


MoE Kisumu Siaya 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1

RTI Kisumu Kisumu 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 2 7


Total 48 18 5 5 11 4 33 23 147


Table H-2: Grantees with grants issued

No. Name of organization County Tusome region Date issued

1 Bungoma County Youth Network Bungoma Eldoret Oct 2017

2 Elgeyo-Marakwet County Youth Network Elgeyo-Marakwet Eldoret Sep 2017

3 Garissa County Youth Bunge Network (CYBN) Garissa Wajir Oct 2017

4 Homa Bay County Youth Network Homa Bay Kisumu Oct 2017

5 Kakamega County Youth Network Kakamega Kisumu Oct 2017

6 Kesho Organization Kilifi Mombasa Sep 2017

7 Kisii County Youth (Development) Forum Kisii Kisumu Oct 2017

8 Lamu Youth and Lamu Community Lamu Mombasa Oct 2017

9 Kiunga Youth Bunge Association Lamu Mombasa Sep 2017

10 Mandera County Board Youth Forum (CBYF) Mandera Wajir Oct 2017

11 Migori County Youth Forum Migori Kisumu Oct 2017

12 Dream Achievers Youth Organization (DAYO) Mombasa Mombasa Sep 2017

13 Mombasa County Youth Bunge Network Mombasa Mombasa Sep 2017

14 Murang’a County Youth Network Murang’a Nairobi Oct 2017

15 Youth Initiatives Kenya (YIKE) Nairobi Nairobi Sep 2017

16 Nakuru County Youth Network Nakuru Nakuru Sep 2017

17 Nandi County Youth Network Nandi Eldoret Sep 2017

18 Siaya County Youth Forum Siaya Kisumu Oct 2017

19 Trans Nzoia County Network Trans Nzoia Eldoret Sep 2017

20 Uasin Gishu County Network Uasin Gishu Eldoret Sep 2017

21 Tujiinue Chemalal Youth Group Uasin Gishu Eldoret Sep 2017

22 Wajir County Board Youth Forum (CBYF) Wajir Wajir Oct 2017

23 West Pokot Youth Network West Pokot Eldoret Sep 2017


Annex I: Attendance at FY 2017 Sensitization Training for QASOs, SCDEs, and MoE/TSC/KICD Officers

County

QASOs SCDEs MoE / TSC / KICD staff Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total

Baringo 9 1 10 6 0 6 0 0 0

Bomet 4 3 7 4 0 4 0 0 0

Bungoma 11 2 13 9 1 10 0 0 0

Busia 8 1 9 3 1 4 0 0 0

Elgeyo-Marakwet 7 3 10 4 0 4 0 0 0

Embu 4 0 4 2 2 4 0 0 0

Garissa 2 0 2 3 1 4 0 0 0

Homa Bay 10 0 10 6 2 8 0 0 0

Isiolo 3 1 4 2 0 2 1 1 2

Kajiado 1 1 2 4 3 7 0 0 0

Kakamega 11 3 14 7 3 10 2 1 3

Kericho 6 3 9 5 1 6 1 0 1

Kiambu 5 3 8 9 3 12 0 0 0

Kilifi 4 2 6 2 2 4 1 0 1

Kirinyaga 2 5 7 4 0 4 0 0 0

Kisii 9 1 10 7 1 8 4 0 4

Kisumu 5 2 7 5 0 5 0 0 0

Kitui 12 1 13 12 2 14 1 2 3

Kwale 2 2 4 3 1 4 0 0 0

Laikipia 4 2 6 4 1 5 0 0 0


County


Lamu 2 0 2 2 0 2 1 1 2

Machakos 8 4 12 2 2 4 1 0 1

Makueni 11 1 12 6 2 8 0 0 0

Mandera 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Marsabit 5 0 5 6 0 6 0 0 0

Meru 6 5 11 9 2 11 0 1 1

Migori 10 1 11 5 0 5 2 0 2

Mombasa 3 2 5 3 0 3 0 2 2

Murang'a 4 5 9 6 1 7 0 0 0

Nairobi 7 10 17 5 3 8 2 4 6

Nakuru 14 0 14 8 2 10 1 0 1

Nandi 8 2 10 6 0 6 0 0 0

Narok 6 3 9 4 1 5 0 0 0

Nyamira 6 1 7 5 0 5 2 1 3

Nyandarua 8 1 9 6 0 6 0 0 0

Nyeri 7 1 8 8 1 9 0 0 0

Samburu 1 1 2 3 0 3 0 0 0

Siaya 6 1 7 5 1 6 0 1 1

Taita-Taveta 3 0 3 4 0 4 0 0 0

Tana River 2 0 2 3 0 3 0 0 0

Tharaka-Nithi 8 0 8 2 1 3 0 0 0

Trans Nzoia 6 2 8 6 1 7 0 0 0

Turkana 6 0 6 1 0 1 0 0 0


County


Uasin Gishu 5 3 8 4 2 6 0 0 0

Vihiga 6 2 8 5 0 5 0 0 0

Wajir 1 0 1 5 0 5 0 0 0

West Pokot 4 2 6 5 0 5 0 0 0

Total 272 83 355 225 43 268 19 14 33 Total for all three groups: 656 (516 males, 140 females).


Annex J: Number of Zonal/Cluster Reflection Meetings, FY 2017

County Q1 (2017) Q2 (2017) Q3 (2017) Q4 (2017)

Oct Nov Dec Total Jan Feb Mar Total Apr May Jun Total Jul Aug Sep Total

Baringo 7 0 0 7 0 8 9 17 0 0 10 10 8 0 0 8

Bomet 7 1 0 8 0 14 4 18 0 0 4 4 3 0 0 3

Bungoma 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 18 0 0 11 11 6 0 8 14

Busia 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 11 11 5 0 5 10

Eldoret APBET 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 5 5 0 0 5 5

Elgeyo-Marakwet 1 0 0 1 0 0 17 17 0 0 17 17 6 0 5 11

Embu 3 0 0 3 0 1 15 16 0 0 18 18 0 0 0 0

Garissa 5 0 0 5 0 0 3 3 0 0 6 6 0 0 0 0

Homa Bay 42 0 0 42 0 0 42 42 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 15

Isiolo 5 0 0 5 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 6 0 0 6

Kajiado 2 0 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 3

Kakamega 37 0 0 37 0 0 37 37 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 13

Kericho 8 0 0 8 0 5 6 11 0 0 7 7 0 0 0 0

Kiambu 7 3 0 10 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 5 0 4 9

Kilifi 1 0 0 1 0 2 8 10 0 0 13 13 2 0 0 2

Kirinyaga 3 0 0 3 0 4 1 5 1 0 5 6 9 0 0 9

Kisii 44 0 0 44 0 0 44 44 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 16

Kisumu 34 0 0 34 0 0 34 34 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 12

Kisumu APBET 7 0 0 7 0 0 10 10 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 4

Kitui 6 0 0 6 0 0 24 24 0 0 22 22 12 0 0 12

Kwale 1 0 0 1 0 1 9 10 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 8


County Q1 (2017) Q2 (2017) Q3 (2017) Q4 (2017)


Laikipia 8 0 0 8 0 9 7 16 0 0 6 6 5 0 0 5

Lamu 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 1 1 3 0 0 3

Machakos 5 0 0 5 0 0 18 18 0 0 14 14 14 0 0 14

Makueni 5 0 0 5 0 0 32 32 0 0 31 31 6 0 0 6

Mandera 3 0 0 3 0 0 3 3 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 0

Marsabit 7 0 0 7 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 2 3 0 0 3

Meru 15 0 0 15 0 3 2 5 0 0 9 9 10 0 0 10

Migori 39 0 0 39 0 0 39 39 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 14

Mombasa 5 0 0 5 0 1 5 6 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3

Mombasa APBET 8 0 0 8 0 0 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Murang'a 13 6 0 19 0 1 1 2 0 0 3 3 14 0 4 18

Nairobi 4 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Nairobi APBET 53 0 0 53 0 0 53 53 0 0 53 53 0 0 0 0

Nakuru 4 0 0 4 0 14 15 29 0 0 13 13 5 0 0 5

Nakuru APBET 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 5 5 0 0 0 0

Nandi 18 0 0 18 0 0 10 10 0 0 20 20 8 0 12 20

Narok 0 0 0 0 0 4 8 12 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0

Nyamira 23 0 0 23 0 0 23 23 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 8

Nyandarua 2 1 0 3 0 2 9 11 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1

Nyeri 8 0 0 8 0 5 11 16 1 0 6 7 11 0 0 11

Samburu 6 0 0 6 0 1 4 5 0 0 2 2 4 0 0 4

Siaya 34 0 0 34 0 0 34 34 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 12

Taita-Taveta 1 0 0 1 0 1 8 9 1 0 3 4 5 0 0 5


County Q1 (2017) Q2 (2017) Q3 (2017) Q4 (2017)


Tana River 2 0 0 2 0 0 5 5 0 0 3 3 3 0 0 3

Tharaka-Nithi 10 0 0 10 0 5 5 10 0 0 6 6 11 0 0 11

Trans Nzoia 1 0 0 1 0 0 4 4 0 0 8 8 4 0 6 10

Turkana 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 2 3 0 3 6

Uasin Gishu 4 0 0 4 0 0 9 9 0 0 15 15 3 0 8 11

Vihiga 18 0 0 18 0 0 18 18 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 6

Wajir 4 0 0 4 0 3 4 7 0 0 6 6 0 0 0 0

West Pokot 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 1 1

Total 520 12 0 532 0 89 637 726 3 3 348 354 288 0 62 350


Annex K: Performance Data Tables – Tusome-Wide Indicators Performance Data Table 1 – Number of learners receiving reading interventions at primary level with US Government (USG) support

Strategic Objective (SO): Reading outcomes for Class 1, 2, and 3 pupils improved

Number of learners receiving reading interventions at primary level with US Government (USG) support Indicator 2 Foreign Assistance Framework (FAF) reference: F 3.2.1-35; CDCS reference: CDCS 2.2.0.8

UNIT

Number of

primary pupils

attending Classes

1, 2, and 3

DISAGGREGATE BY: Location, event, date, and gender

Geographic Location Activity Title Date W M Subtotal

National Learners in public schools September 30 2017

1,582,702

1,653,590

3,236,292

APBET (Nairobi, Mombasa, Kisumu, Nakuru, and Uasin Gishu)

Learners in APBET schools September 30 2017

64,026

63,369

127,395

Totals 1,646,728 1,716,959 3,363,687

Number of Class 1, 2,

and 3 learners receiving

appropriate instructional

materials

Reporting Period Reporting Period Reporting Period

31-Mar-17 30-Jun-17 30-Sep-17

Target Achieved Target Achieved Target Achieved

W M W M W M W M W M W M

Sex*: Women (W),

Men (M) National 1,181,031 1,215,389 1,209,143 1,244,826 1,209,143 1,244,826 1,646,728 1,716,959 1,209,143 1,244,826 1,646,728 1,716,959 Baringo 27,954 30,557 27,954 30,557 27,954 30,557 Bomet 39,940 40,873 39,940 40,873 39,490 40,873





materials


31-Mar-17 30-Jun-17 30-Sep-17



Sex*: Women (W),

Men (M) Bungoma 98,005 96,002 98,005 96,002 98,005 96,002 Busia 52,017 51,065 52,017 51,065 52,017 51,065 Elgeyo-Marakwet 21,811 22,803 21,811 22,803 21,811 22,803

Embu 18,160 19,813 18,160 19,813 18,160 19,813 Garissa 9,121 12,821 9,121 12,821 9,121 12,821 Homa Bay 51,910 53,240 51,910 53,240 51,910 53,240 Isiolo 5,602 5,661 5,602 5,661 5,602 5,661 Kajiado 23,669 24,665 23,669 24,665 23,669 24,665 Kakamega 95,112 96,864 95,112 96,864 95,112 96,864 Kericho 35,220 36,362 35,220 36,362 35,220 36,362 Kiambu 34,284 35,669 34,284 35,669 34,284 35,669 Kilifi 48,658 50,572 48,658 50,572 48,658 50,572 Kirinyaga 12,383 12,914 12,383 12,914 12,383 12,914 Kisii 49,464 50,556 49,464 50,556 49,464 50,556 Kisumu 45,237 46,810 45,237 46,810 45,237 46,810 Kisumu APBET 6,246 6,005 6,246 6,005 6,246 6,005

Kitui 56,845 59,295 56,845 59,295 56,845 59,295 Kwale 31,949 33,520 31,949 33,520 31,949 33,520 Laikipia 14,864 15,836 14,864 15,836 14,864 15,836 Lamu 4,804 4,976 4,804 4,976 4,804 4,976 Machakos 41,474 45,214 41,474 45,214 41,474 45,214 Makueni 39,393 43,498 39,393 43,498 39,393 43,498 Mandera 13,255 21,580 13,255 21,580 13,255 21,580





materials


31-Mar-17 30-Jun-17 30-Sep-17



Sex*: Women (W),

Men (M) Marsabit 10,421 11,109 10,421 11,109 10,421 11,109 Meru 41,990 44,046 41,990 44,046 41,990 44,046 Migori 46,356 47,121 46,356 47,121 46,356 47,121 Mombasa 9,520 9,652 9,520 9,652 9,520 9,652 Mombasa APBET 6,116 6,315 6,116 6,315 6,116 6,315

Murang'a 29,964 31,964 29,964 31,964 29,964 31,964 Nairobi 28,655 28,551 28,655 28,551 28,655 28,551 Nairobi APBET 45,560 44,721 45,560 44,721 45,560 44,721

Nakuru 65,846 67,597 65,846 67,597 65,846 67,597 Nakuru APBET 3,257 3,413 3,257 3,413 3,257 3,413

Nandi 62,975 62,551 62,975 62,551 62,975 62,551 Narok 49,948 52,961 49,948 52,961 49,948 52,961 Nyamira 24,486 24,784 24,486 24,784 24,486 24,784 Nyandarua 19,822 20,937 19,822 20,937 19,822 20,937 Nyeri 17,540 17,670 17,540 17,670 17,540 17,670 Samburu 8,993 9,827 8,993 9,827 8,993 9,827 Siaya 46,379 48,274 46,379 48,274 46,379 48,274 Taita-Taveta 9,866 10,524 9,866 10,524 9,866 10,524 Tana River 10,252 10,704 10,252 10,704 10,252 10,704 Tharaka-Nithi 12,986 14,136 12,986 14,136 12,986 14,136

Trans Nzoia 46,682 46,260 46,682 46,260 46,682 46,260 Turkana 41,358 47,133 41,358 47,133 41,358 47,133





materials


31-Mar-17 30-Jun-17 30-Sep-17



Sex*: Women (W),

Men (M) Uasin Gishu 36,632 38,113 36,632 38,113 36,632 38,113 Uasin Gishu APBET 2,847 2,915 2,847 2,915 2,847 2,915

Vihiga 32,736 33,568 32,736 33,568 32,736 33,568 Wajir 11,769 16,114 11,769 16,114 11,769 16,114 West Pokot 46,845 48,828 46,845 48,828 46,845 48,828

* This does not apply for indicators that cannot be disaggregated by sex.


Performance Data Table 2 – Number of textbooks and teaching/learning materials provided with USG assistance

Intermediate Result (IR) 1: Improved supervision, support, and delivery of reading instruction to target pupils

Number of textbooks and other teaching and learning materials provided with USG assistance in English and Kiswahili IR 1.1 Indicator 3 FAF reference: F 3.2.1-33


Geographic Location Activity Title Date Number Subtotal

UNIT

Number of English

and Kiswahili textbooks and other teaching / learning material

National (Public) Pupils’ books distributed in public schools December 31 2015

2,500,158 2,500,158

Pupils’ books distributed in APBET schools December 31 2015

65,794 65,794

Total pupils’ books distributed 2,565,952 2,565,952

Teachers’ guides distributed in public schools December 31 2015

74,124 74,124

Teachers’ guides distributed in APBET schools December 31 2015

2,308 2,308

Total teachers’ guides distributed 76,432 76,432

National (Public) Pupils’ books distributed in public schools March 31 2016 4,963,776 4,963,776

APBET (Nairobi, Mombasa, Kisumu,

Nakuru, and Uasin Gishu) Pupils’ books distributed in APBET schools March 31 2016 124,876 124,876

Total pupils’ books distributed 5,088,652 5,088,652

National (Public) Supplementary readers distributed in public schools March 31 2016 1,627,907 1,627,907


Nakuru, and Uasin Gishu) Supplementary readers distributed in APBET schools

March 31 2016 62,159 62,159

Total supplementary readers distributed 1,690,066 1,690,066

National (Public) Teachers’ guides distributed in public schools March 31 2016 143,524 143,524


Number of textbooks and other teaching and learning materials provided with USG assistance in English and Kiswahili IR 1.1 Indicator 3 FAF reference: F 3.2.1-33




Nakuru, and Uasin Gishu) Teachers’ guides distributed in APBET schools March 31 2016 4,528 4,528

Total teachers’ guides distributed 148,052 148,052

National (Public) Homework books distributed in public schools June 30 2016 5,272,368 5,272,368


Nakuru, and Uasin Gishu) Homework books distributed in APBET schools June 30 2016 127,632 127,632

Total homework distributed 5,400,000 5,400,000

APBET (Uasin Gishu) Teachers’ guides distributed March 31 2017 328 328

APBET (Uasin Gishu) Pupils’ books distributed March 31 2017 8,080 8,080

National (Public) Homework books distributed in public schools March 31 2017 4,845,435 4,845,435


Nakuru, and Uasin Gishu) Homework books distributed in APBET schools March 31 2017 125,256 125,256

Total homework distributed 4,970,691 4,970,691

National (Public) Supplementary readers distributed in public schools March 31 2017 371,140 371,140


Nakuru, and Uasin Gishu) Supplementary readers distributed in APBET schools

March 31 2017 47,955 47,955

Total supplementary readers distributed 419,095 419,095

Totals 20,367,348 20,367,348


Number of English and

Kiswahili textbooks and

other teaching / learning materials

Reporting Period 30-Sep-16

Reporting Period 31-Dec-16

Reporting Period 31-Mar 17

Target Achieved Achieved Achieved Target Achieved

National 4,131,916 12,326,770 5,398,194

Baringo 241,666 96327

Bomet 320,633 141668

Bungoma 569,184 291704

Busia 301,856 150728

Elgeyo-Marakwet 147,726 70670

Embu 156,703 68022

Garissa 94,535 43598

Homa Bay 401,871 174517

Isiolo 49,767 22653

Kajiado 169,139 79787

Kakamega 639,463 260278

Kericho 258,300 122336

Kiambu 281,656 107179

Kilifi 340,685 151182

Kirinyaga 108,649 46009

Kisii 380,355 159715

Kisumu 403,192 164628

Kisumu APBET 30,952 13847

Kitui 580,036 209031

Kwale 223,430 103116

Laikipia 146,469 49009









Lamu 40,715 15731

Machakos 415,531 140114

Makueni 407,391 150778

Mandera 143,097 73291

Marsabit 84,460 43361

Meru 364,427 160311

Migori 328,353 150980

Mombasa 86,869 28384

Mombasa APBET 38,837 15938

Murang'a 226,414 99965

Nairobi 303,523 84007

Nairobi APBET 227,843 92878

Nakuru 477,592 214472

Nakuru APBET 21,563 9037

Nandi 371,431 193054

Narok 323,294 161591

Nyamira 182,053 80292

Nyandarua 149,214 62499

Nyeri 144,785 58308

Samburu 84,490 38953

Siaya 327,034 146532

Taita-Taveta 84,554 33045









Tana River 79,550 34437

Tharaka-Nithi 147,602 53799

Trans Nzoia 268,322 139954

Turkana 245,644 133804

Uasin Gishu 256,306 115040

Uasin Gishu APBET 0 23692

Vihiga 234,674 102678

Wajir 130,322 61006

West Pokot 284,613 154259


Performance Data Table 3a – Number of schools using information and communication technology (ICT) due to USG support


Number of schools supported using

tablets

Reporting Period 31-Mar-17

Reporting Period 30-Jun-2017



National 23,844 23,890 23,890 23,890 23,890 23,890

Baringo 706 706 706

Bomet 668 668 668

Bungoma 794 794 794

Busia 436 436 436

Elgeyo-Marakwet 382 382 382

Embu 384 384 384

Garissa 187 187 187

Number of schools using ICT due to USG support IR 1.1 Indicator 4 FAF reference: F 3.2.1-36

UNIT

Number of schools

supported using tablets



National (Public) No. of public schools supported using tablets September 30 2017 22,387 22,387


No. of APBET schools supported using tablets September 30 2017

1503 1503

Totals 23,890 23,890



tablets





Homa Bay 877 877 877

Isiolo 105 105 105

Kajiado 422 422 422

Kakamega 874 874 874

Kericho 542 542 542

Kiambu 456 456 456

Kilifi 531 531 531

Kirinyaga 189 189 189

Kisii 700 700 700

Kisumu 614 614 614

Kisumu APBET 171 171 171

Kitui 1371 1371 1371

Kwale 402 402 402

Laikipia 284 284 284

Lamu 103 103 103

Machakos 846 846 846

Makueni 852 852 852

Mandera 178 178 178

Marsabit 163 163 163

Meru 717 717 717

Migori 600 600 600



tablets





Mombasa 90 90 90

Mombasa APBET 178 178 178

Murang'a 507 507 507

Nairobi 195 195 195

Nairobi APBET 993 993 993

Nakuru 724 724 724

Nakuru APBET 90 90 90

Nandi 733 733 733

Narok 667 667 667

Nyamira 404 404 404

Nyandarua 347 347 347

Nyeri 386 386 386

Samburu 147 147 147

Siaya 649 649 649

Taita-Taveta 209 209 209

Tana River 162 162 162

Tharaka-Nithi 367 367 367

Trans Nzoia 358 358 358

Turkana 402 402 402

Uasin Gishu 481 481 481

Uasin Gishu APBET 71 71 71



tablets





Vihiga 389 389 389

Wajir 221 221 221

West Pokot 563 563 563


Performance Data Table 3b – Number of schools using information and communication technology (ICT) due to USG support (Schools using e-readers)


Number of schools using information and communication technology due to USG support IR 1.1 Indicator 4 FAF reference: F 3.2.1-36

UNIT

Number of schools using e-readers



National (Public) No. of public schools using e-readers September 30 2017

66 66

Totals

Number of schools using

e-readers




Target Number Achieved Number Target Number Achieved Number Target Number Achieved Number

National 66 66 66 66 66 66

Baringo 15 15 15 15 15 15

Bomet 5 5 5 5 5 5

Kajiado 5 5 5 5 5 5

Kericho 6 6 6 6 6 6

Kiambu 10 10 10 10 10 10

Murang’a 10 10 10 10 10 10

Narok 10 10 10 10 10 10

Nyandarua 5 5 5 5 5 5


Performance Data Table 4a – Number of teachers / teaching assistants who have successfully completed in-service training or received intensive coaching or mentoring with USG support (Class 1, 2, and 3 teacher training)


Number of Class 1, 2, and 3 teachers

trained




Target Achieved Target Achieved Target Achieved W M W M W M W M W M W M

Sex*: Women (W), Men

(M) National 40,577 14,147 56,666 20,099 56,666 20,099 57,143 20,320 57,143 20,320

Baringo 1,364 580 1,364 594

Bomet 1,593 466 1,593 466

Bungoma 2,548 618 2,548 618

Busia 1,387 360 1,387 360

Elgeyo-Marakwet 936 292 936 292

Embu 929 277 929 277

Number of teachers/educators/teaching assistants who successfully completed in-service training or received intensive coaching or mentoring with USG support

IR 1.2 Indicator 5 FAF reference: F 3.2.1-31; CDCS reference: CDCS 2.2.1.4

UNIT

Number of Class

1, 2, and 3 teachers trained



National (Tusome regions training sites) Training of teachers in public schools June 30 2017

53,904 19,805 3,754


Training of teachers in APBET schools June 30 2017

3,239 515 73,709

Totals 57,143 20,320 77,463



trained





Garissa 146 287 146 325

Homa Bay 1,584 953 1,584 953

Isiolo 152 143 152 143

Kajiado 775 431 775 431

Kakamega 2,854 651 2,854 651

Kericho 1,396 328 1,396 328

Kiambu 1,600 112 1,600 112

Kilifi 1,146 613 1,146 613

Kirinyaga 582 134 582 186

Kisii 1,543 631 1,543 631

Kisumu 1,506 443 1,506 457

Kisumu APBET 386 67 386 83

Kitui 2,670 1,310 2,670 1,310

Kwale 830 448 830 448

Laikipia 639 250 639 250

Lamu 199 95 199 95

Machakos 2,131 545 2,131 545

Makueni 2,028 630 2,028 630

Mandera 184 496 184 511

Marsabit 167 299 178 299

Meru 1,934 596 1964 596

Migori 1,236 694 1,236 694

Mombasa 350 33 350 33

Mombasa APBET 298 57 344 65

Murang'a 1,518 272 1,518 289



trained





Nairobi 1,019 37 1030 37

Nairobi APBET 1,815 273 2151 324

Nakuru 2,320 524 2,320 524

Nakuru APBET 219 19 224 22

Nandi 1,902 497 1,902 497

Narok 1,151 779 1,151 779

Nyamira 915 316 915 316

Nyandarua 940 224 940 224

Nyeri 1,066 251 1066 251

Samburu 200 265 200 265

Siaya 1,346 629 1,346 629

Taita-Taveta 515 163 520 163

Tana River 259 218 259 218

Tharaka-Nithi 916 376 916 376

Trans Nzoia 1,160 227 1160 227

Turkana 472 609 472 609

Uasin Gishu 1,604 159 1,604 159

Uasin Gishu APBET 101 31 134 21

Vihiga 1,067 261 1,067 261

Wajir 198 388 198 391

West Pokot 870 742 870 742



Performance Data Table 4b – Number of teachers / teaching assistants who have successfully completed in-service training or received intensive coaching or mentoring with USG support (Head teacher training)


Note: The regular Tusome head teacher training was not conducted in Term 3 2017; thus, no data appear in the “Achieved” column for 30-Sep-2017. USAID and RTI agreed that the KICD infusion training for curriculum pilot schools would supplant the standard Term 3 Tusome training.

Number of head teachers trained





Sex*: Women (W),

Men (M)

National 4,581 18,442 4,840 18,582 4,840 18,582 4,910 18,635 4,910 18,635

Baringo 92 608 92 608

Number of teachers/educators/teaching assistants who successfully completed in-service training or received intensive coaching or mentoring with USG support

IR 1.2 Indicator 5 FAF reference: F 3.2.1-31; CDCS reference: CDCS 2.2.1.4

UNIT




Tusome regions training sites Training of head teachers in public schools June 30 2017 4,313 18,132 22,445


Training of head teachers in APBET schools June 30 2017 597 503

1100

Totals

4,910 18,635

23,545







Bomet 86 579 86 579

Bungoma 187 599 187 607

Busia 83 353 83 353


Embu 92 283 92 283

Garissa 11 160 11 160

Homa Bay 119 736 119 736

Isiolo 19 80 22 80

Kajiado 54 345 56 345

Kakamega 169 702 169 702

Kericho 83 427 83 427

Kiambu 163 305 163 305

Kilifi 107 429 107 429

Kirinyaga 60 150 61 150

Kisii 121 562 121 562

Kisumu 143 480 143 480


Kitui 238 1,058 250 1,058

Kwale 65 319 65 319

Laikipia 69 221 69 221

Lamu 26 77 26 77

Machakos 150 697 171 697







Makueni 120 744 120 744

Mandera 7 205 7 205

Marsabit 19 143 21 143

Meru 157 560 157 560

Migori 124 464 124 464

Mombasa 60 100 60 100


Murang'a 121 370 121 377

Nairobi 126 79 126 79

Nairobi APBET 351 280 369 307

Nakuru 186 586 186 586


Nandi 105 597 105 597

Narok 79 566 83 566

Nyamira 70 335 70 335

Nyandarua 65 297 65 297

Nyeri 110 280 110 280

Samburu 10 139 15 139

Siaya 117 535 117 535

Taita-Taveta 48 203 48 203

Tana River 31 127 31 127








Trans Nzoia 72 293 72 293

Turkana 75 348 75 348

Uasin Gishu 109 389 109 389


Vihiga 89 290 89 290

Wajir 19 183 19 183

West Pokot 69 460 69 460



Performance Data Table 5 – Percent of Curriculum Support Officers (CSOs) supported by USG programs who meet the standard of 15 classroom observation visits per month


Proportion of CSOs who carry out 15 or more

classroom observations per month (%)




Target Proportion

Achieved Proportion

Target Proportion

Achieved Proportion

Target Proportion

Achieved Proportion

National 40.5 45.3 46

Baringo 36.7 36.7 36.7

Bomet 12.3 12.3 29

Bungoma 36.7 47.2 47.2

Busia 47.7 47.7 47.7

Elgeyo-Marakwet 53.2 61.5 61.5

Embu 42.9 42.9 42.9

Garissa 11.6 11.6 12

Percent of CSOs supported by USG programs who meet the standard of 15 classroom observation visits per month IR 1.3 Indicator 6 CDCS reference: CDCS 2.2.1.5

UNIT

Proportion of CSOs who

meet the standard 15 classroom

observations per month


Geographic Location Activity Title Date Proportion (%)

National Proportion of public schools September 30 2017

41.1


Proportion of APBET schools September 30 2017

99.1

Totals 46.0







Target Proportion

Achieved Proportion

Target Proportion

Achieved Proportion

Target Proportion

Achieved Proportion

Homa Bay 52.2 64.3 64.3

Isiolo 6.7 25.0 25.0

Kajiado 35.3 35.3 35.3

Kakamega 27.7 27.7 27.7

Kericho 30.2 30.2 30.2

Kiambu 39.3 56.3 56.3

Kilifi 33.3 33.3 50

Kirinyaga 75.9 75.9 75.9

Kisii 60.0 60.0 60.0

Kisumu 53.5 53.5 53.5

Kisumu APBET 100.0 100.0 100.0

Kitui 35.8 35.8 35.8

Kwale 40.0 40.0 40.0

Laikipia 34.1 42.1 42.1

Lamu 55.6 60.0 60.0

Machakos 29.0 39.0 39.0

Makueni 27.7 27.7 27.7

Mandera 15.4 15.4 15.4

Marsabit 22.2 37.5 37.5

Meru 13.6 13.6 13.6

Migori 59.0 59.0 59.0

Mombasa 50.0 50.0 50.0

Mombasa APBET 100.0 100.0 100.0







Target Proportion

Achieved Proportion

Target Proportion

Achieved Proportion

Target Proportion

Achieved Proportion

Murang'a 54.6 54.6 54.6

Nairobi 30.0 30.0 30.0

Nairobi APBET 95.6 95.6 95.6

Nakuru 36.4 36.4 36.4

Nakuru APBET 100.0 100.0 100.0

Nandi 35.1 35.1 35.1

Narok 18.8 18.8 18.8

Nyamira 32.1 82.6 82.6

Nyandarua 37.8 37.8 37.8

Nyeri 55.0 55.0 55.0

Samburu 22.2 25.0 25.0

Siaya 48.7 48.7 48.7

Taita-Taveta 55.2 55.2 55.2

Tana River 42.9 42.9 42.9

Tharaka-Nithi 24.6 26.1 26.1

Trans Nzoia 37.7 37.7 37.7

Turkana 8.7 8.7 8.7

Uasin Gishu 47.9 47.9 47.9

Uasin Gishu APBET Not applicable 100.0 100.0

Vihiga 37.5 44.4 44.4

Wajir 14.3 17.6 23.5

West Pokot 15.6 15.6 15.6


Performance Data Table 6a – Number of administrators and officials successfully trained with USG support (Curriculum Support Officers’ [CSOs’] and Instructional Coaches’ [ICs’] training)

Intermediate Result (IR) 2: Improved government capacity in target directorates, to sustainably improve reading outcomes

Note: The regular CSO and IC training was not conducted in Term 3 2017; thus, no data appear in the “Achieved” column for 30-Sep-2017.

Number of Curriculum

Support Officers and Instructional Coaches trained






(M)

National 385 944 389 956 389 956 396 966 396 966

Baringo 9 35 12 35

Bomet 6 20 6 20

Bungoma 15 25 15 25

Busia 4 13 4 15

Number of administrators and officials successfully trained with USG support IR 2.1 Indicator 7 FAF reference: F 3.2.1 – 03

UNIT

Number of MoE / SAGA

officials trained



National CSO training June 30 2017 358 919 1,277


Instructional coach training June 30 2017 38 47 85

Totals 396 966 1,362









(M)


Embu 2 18 2 18

Garissa 4 12 4 12

Homa Bay 13 39 13 39

Isiolo 2 12 2 12

Kajiado 8 11 8 11

Kakamega 16 28 16 28

Kericho 8 18 8 18

Kiambu 16 16 16 16

Kilifi 4 11 4 12

Kirinyaga 4 9 4 9

Kisii 15 33 15 33

Kisumu 16 25 16 25


Kitui 9 41 9 42

Kwale 3 16 3 16

Laikipia 5 14 5 14

Lamu 1 6 1 6

Machakos 8 29 8 29

Makueni 7 31 8 36









(M)

Mandera 0 13 0 13

Marsabit 3 17 3 17

Meru 17 27 17 27

Migori 11 32 12 32

Mombasa 8 4 8 4


Murang'a 19 19 19 19

Nairobi 12 2 12 2

Nairobi APBET 25 28 25 28

Nakuru 8 23 8 23


Nandi 6 29 6 29

Narok 8 25 8 25

Nyamira 6 32 6 32

Nyandarua 4 14 4 14

Nyeri 12 13 12 13

Samburu 2 11 2 12

Siaya 11 28 11 28










(M)

Tana River 2 9 2 9


Trans Nzoia 7 14 7 14

Turkana 3 14 3 14

Uasin Gishu 10 16 10 16


Vihiga 8 24 8 24

Wajir 3 13 4 13

West Pokot 2 20 2 20



Performance Data Table 6b – Number of administrators and officials successfully trained with USG support (MoE / SAGA officials in ToTs and in trainings for CSOs and ICs, TSC-SCDs, ESQAC officers, head teachers, and teachers)



UNIT


officials trained



Tusome regions training venues MoE officials in ToTs and in trainings for CSOs and ICs, TSC-SCDs, ESQAC officers, head

teachers, and teachers June 30 2016 166 382 548

MoE officials in ToTs and in trainings for CSOs and ICs, TSC-SCDs, ESQAC officers, head

teachers, and teachers

September 30 2016 168 382 550


teachers, and teachers

December 31 2016 174 383 557


teachers, and teachers March 31 2017 174 383 557


teachers, and teachers June 30 2017 181 385 566

Totals 181 385 566


Note: The regular Tusome training of government officials was not conducted in Term 3 2017; thus, no data appear in the “Achieved” column for 30-Sep-2017.


officials trained






Sex*: Women (W),

Men (M)

National 80 120 174 383 80 120 181 385 80 120

Baringo 5 6 5 6

Bomet 2 6 2 6

Bungoma 6 10 6 10

Busia 6 12 6 12

Elgeyo-Marakwet

3 8 3 8

Embu 5 4 5 4

Garissa 1 8 1 8

Homa Bay 2 10 2 10

Isiolo 2 5 3 5

Kajiado 7 8 7 8

Kakamega 5 11 5 11

Kericho 4 13 4 13

Kiambu 10 12 10 12

Kilifi 5 15 5 15

Kirinyaga 4 6 4 6

Kisii 6 9 6 9



officials trained






Kisumu 4 6 4 6

Kisumu APBET

Not applicable

Not applicable

Not applicable

Not applicable

Kitui 2 16 2 16

Kwale 4 9 4 9

Laikipia 2 5 2 5

Lamu 1 5 2 5

Machakos 3 9 3 9

Makueni 3 11 3 11

Mandera 0 9 1 9

Marsabit 1 8 1 8

Meru 7 11 7 11

Migori 1 8 1 8

Mombasa 3 4 3 4

Mombasa APBET

Not applicable

Not applicable

Not applicable

Not applicable

Murang'a 4 9 4 9

Nairobi 23 15 23 15

Nairobi APBET

Not applicable

Not applicable

Not applicable

Not applicable

Nakuru 4 8 4 8

Nakuru APBET

Not applicable

Not applicable

Not applicable

Not applicable



officials trained






Nandi 3 8 3 8

Narok 5 4 5 4

Nyamira 2 11 2 11

Nyandarua 2 8 2 8

Nyeri 4 7 4 7

Samburu 3 7 3 7

Siaya 6 3 6 3


Tana River 1 7 1 9


Trans Nzoia 2 5 2 5

Turkana 2 8 2 8

Uasin Gishu 3 6 3 6

Uasin Gishu APBET

Not Applicable

Not Applicable

Not Applicable

Not Applicable

Vihiga 1 5 2 5

Wajir 1 9 1 9

West Pokot 1 6 1 6



Performance Data Table 6c – Number of administrators and officials successfully trained with USG support (Quality Assurance and Standards Officers [QASOs] training)


Number of MoE / SAGA officials

trained

Reporting Period

31-Mar-16

Reporting Period

30-Jun-17

Reporting Period

30-Sep-17




(M)

National 68 347 68 347 68 347 17 26 68 347 111 377

Baringo 2 11 0 0 2 11

Bomet 2 7 0 0 3 7

Bungoma 4 11 0 0 4 11

Busia 2 6 0 0 2 8

Elgeyo-Marakwet 1 8 0 0 3 8

Embu 2 7 0 0 2 7


UNIT


officials trained



Tusome regions training venues QASOs officers’ training September 30 2017 111 377 488

Totals 111 377 488



trained

Reporting Period

31-Mar-16

Reporting Period

30-Jun-17

Reporting Period

30-Sep-17



Garissa 0 1 0 0 0 2

Homa Bay 0 8 0 0 0 10

Isiolo 0 3 0 0 1 3

Kajiado 0 5 0 0 1 5

Kakamega 2 17 0 0 3 17

Kericho 2 9 0 0 3 9

Kiambu 8 6 0 0 8 6

Kilifi 1 2 0 0 2 4

Kirinyaga 1 7 0 0 5 7

Kisii 1 14 0 0 1 14

Kisumu 2 10 0 0 2 10

Kisumu APBET Not applicable

Not applicable

0 0 Not Applicable

Not Applicable

Kitui 0 13 0 0 1 13

Kwale 0 4 0 0 2 4

Laikipia 1 6 0 0 2 6

Lamu 0 0 0 0 0 2

Machakos 2 8 0 0 4 8

Makueni 0 8 0 0 1 11

Mandera 0 2 0 0 0 0

Marsabit 0 2 0 0 0 5



trained

Reporting Period

31-Mar-16

Reporting Period

30-Jun-17

Reporting Period

30-Sep-17



Meru 3 14 0 0 5 14

Migori 0 11 0 0 1 11

Mombasa 1 2 0 0 2 3

Mombasa APBET Not applicable

Not applicable

0 0 Not Applicable

Not Applicable

Murang'a 3 10 0 0 5 10

Nairobi 7 12 17 25 17 25

Nairobi APBET Not applicable

Not applicable

0 0 Not Applicable

Not Applicable

Nakuru 5 16 0 0 5 16

Nakuru APBET Not applicable

Not applicable

0 0 Not Applicable

Not Applicable

Nandi 1 12 0 0 2 12

Narok 1 5 0 0 3 6

Nyamira 0 11 0 0 1 11

Nyandarua 0 9 0 0 1 9

Nyeri 1 9 0 0 1 9

Samburu 0 1 0 0 1 1

Siaya 2 8 0 0 2 8

Taita-Taveta 0 4 0 0 0 4

Tana River 0 2 0 0 0 2

Tharaka-Nithi 1 8 0 0 1 8



trained

Reporting Period

31-Mar-16

Reporting Period

30-Jun-17

Reporting Period

30-Sep-17



Trans Nzoia 2 7 0 0 2 7

Turkana 1 6 0 0 1 6

Uasin Gishu 4 10 0 0 4 10

Uasin Gishu APBET Not applicable

Not applicable

0 0 Not Applicable

Not Applicable

Vihiga 3 5 0 0 3 6

Wajir 0 1 0 0 0 1

West Pokot 0 9 0 0 2 9



Performance Data Table 6d – Number of administrators and officials successfully trained with USG support (TSC-SCD training)



trained

Reporting Period

31-Mar-16

Reporting Period

30-Jun-16

Reporting Period

30-Sep-16




(M)

National 41 117 41 117

Baringo 0 3

Bomet 1 2

Bungoma 4 3

Busia 2 3

Elgeyo-Marakwet 0 0

Embu 0 3


UNIT


officials trained



Tusome regions training venues TSC-SCD Training June 30 2016 41 117 158

Totals 41 117 158



trained

Reporting Period

31-Mar-16

Reporting Period

30-Jun-16

Reporting Period

30-Sep-16



Garissa 0 5

Homa Bay 2 1

Isiolo 0 0

Kajiado 1 3

Kakamega 3 7

Kericho 1 4

Kiambu 0 0

Kilifi 0 6

Kirinyaga 1 4

Kisii 0 0

Kisumu 1 5

Kisumu APBET Not applicable

Not applicable

Kitui 1 7

Kwale 2 1

Laikipia 2 2

Lamu 0 2

Machakos 3 2

Makueni 2 4

Mandera 0 6

Marsabit 0 0



trained

Reporting Period

31-Mar-16

Reporting Period

30-Jun-16

Reporting Period

30-Sep-16



Meru 0 0

Migori 0 4

Mombasa 0 2

Mombasa APBET Not applicable

Not applicable

Murang'a 4 4

Nairobi 0 0

Nairobi APBET Not applicable

Not applicable

Nakuru 0 0

Nakuru APBET Not applicable

Not applicable

Nandi 2 1

Narok 1 2

Nyamira 1 0

Nyandarua 0 0

Nyeri 1 4

Samburu 0 3

Siaya 0 0

Taita-Taveta 3 1

Tana River 0 3

Tharaka-Nithi 0 0



trained

Reporting Period

31-Mar-16

Reporting Period

30-Jun-16

Reporting Period

30-Sep-16



Trans Nzoia 1 2

Turkana 0 6

Uasin Gishu 2 2


Not applicable

Not applicable

Not applicable

Vihiga 0 3

Wajir 0 7

West Pokot 0 0



Performance Data Table 6e – Number of administrators and officials successfully trained with USG support (Sub-County Directors of Education [SCDE] Training)



trained

Reporting Period

31-Mar-17

Reporting Period

30-Jun-17

Reporting Period

30-Sep-17




(M)

National 43 225 43 225

Baringo 0 6

Bomet 0 4

Bungoma 1 9

Busia 1 3

Elgeyo-Marakwet 0 4

Embu 2 2


UNIT


officials trained



Tusome regions training venues SCDE Training September 30 2017

43 225 268

Totals 43 225 268



trained

Reporting Period

31-Mar-17

Reporting Period

30-Jun-17

Reporting Period

30-Sep-17



Garissa 1 3

Homa Bay 2 6

Isiolo 0 2

Kajiado 3 4

Kakamega 3 7

Kericho 1 5

Kiambu 3 9

Kilifi 2 2

Kirinyaga 0 4

Kisii 1 7

Kisumu 0 5

Kisumu APBET Not Applicable

Not Applicable

Kitui 2 12

Kwale 1 3

Laikipia 1 4

Lamu 0 2

Machakos 2 2

Makueni 2 6

Mandera 0 0

Marsabit 0 6



trained

Reporting Period

31-Mar-17

Reporting Period

30-Jun-17

Reporting Period

30-Sep-17



Meru 2 9

Migori 0 5

Mombasa 0 3

Mombasa APBET Not Applicable

Not Applicable

Murang'a 1 6

Nairobi 3 5

Nairobi APBET Not Applicable

Not Applicable

Nakuru 2 8

Nakuru APBET Not Applicable

Not Applicable

Nandi 0 6

Narok 1 4

Nyamira 0 5

Nyandarua 0 6

Nyeri 1 8

Samburu 0 3

Siaya 1 5

Taita-Taveta 0 4

Tana River 0 3

Tharaka-Nithi 1 2



trained

Reporting Period

31-Mar-17

Reporting Period

30-Jun-17

Reporting Period

30-Sep-17



Trans Nzoia 1 6

Turkana 0 1

Uasin Gishu 2 4


Not applicable

Vihiga 0 5

Wajir 0 5

West Pokot 0 5



Performance Data Table 7 – Number of target institutions that have improved capacity as a result of USG assistance


Number of target institutions that have improved capacity as a result of USG assistance IR 2.1 Indicator 8 CDCS reference: CDCS 2.2.1.6

UNIT

Number of target institu-

tions that have

improved capacity


Geographic Location Activity Title Date Subtotal

National Training of trainers September 30 2017

MoE 4

TSC 4

KICD 1

Kenya Education Management Institute

(KEMI)

1

Kenya Institute of Special Education

(KISE)

1

Totals 11


Number of target institutions that have improved

capacity

Reporting Period

31-Mar-17

Reporting Period

30-Jun-17

Reporting Period

30-Sep-2017

Target Number Achieved Number Target Number Achieved Number Target Number Achieved Number

National (MoE, TSC, and other

SAGAs)

11 11 11

MoE-DQAS 1 1 1

MoE-Directors 1 1 1

MoE-CDE 1 1 1

MoE-SCDE 1 1 1

TSC County Director

1 1 1

TSC Sub-County Director

1 1 1

TSC County Staffing Officer

1 1 1

TSC Curriculum Support Officers

1 1 1

KICD Curriculum Developers

1 1 1

KEMI 1 1 1

KISE 1 1 1

Documents

usaid kenya tusome early grade reading activity