• About us
  • GSDRC Publications
  • Research Helpdesk
  • E-Learning
  • E-Bulletin

GSDRC

Governance, social development, conflict and humanitarian knowledge services

  • Governance
    • Democracy & elections
    • Public sector management
    • Security & justice
    • Service delivery
    • State-society relations
    • Supporting economic development
  • Social Development
    • Gender
    • Inequalities & exclusion
    • Poverty & wellbeing
    • Social protection
  • Humanitarian Issues
    • Humanitarian financing
    • Humanitarian response
    • Recovery & reconstruction
    • Refugees/IDPs
    • Risk & resilience
  • Conflict
    • Conflict analysis
    • Conflict prevention
    • Conflict response
    • Conflict sensitivity
    • Impacts of conflict
    • Peacebuilding
  • Development Pressures
    • Climate change
    • Food security
    • Fragility
    • Migration & diaspora
    • Population growth
    • Urbanisation
  • Approaches
    • Complexity & systems thinking
    • Institutions & social norms
    • PEA / Thinking & working politically
    • Results-based approaches
    • Rights-based approaches
    • Theories of change
  • Aid Instruments
    • Budget support & SWAps
    • Capacity building
    • Civil society partnerships
    • Multilateral aid
    • Private sector partnerships
    • Technical assistance
  • M&E
    • M&E approaches
    • Indicators
    • Learning
Home»GSDRC Publications»Non-State Providers of Education in Fragile and Conflict-Affected States

Non-State Providers of Education in Fragile and Conflict-Affected States

Helpdesk Report
  • Seema Khan
February 2009

Question

Collect information on delivery of education services by non-state providers in fragile and conflict-affected states, highlighting any evaluations of effectiveness in terms of 1) how they contribute to supporting government policies, strategies and systems, and 2) the effectiveness of the delivery of the services. What lessons arise from these evaluations?

Summary

NSPs are generally viewed as key service providers and as more pragmatic, flexible and adaptable than state structures in fragile states. By allowing communities to identify their own priorities they are often seen as having the potential to empower communities, set up local governance structures and strengthen social accountability mechanisms. Some of they key advantages of NSPs include:

  • better access and reach to the most marginalised
  • improved quality
  • openness to lesson learning and innovation
  • an understanding of the local context and strengthening of civil society
  • the engagement of parents and communities
  • cost-efficiency
  • providing the opportunity for capacity building and scaling up.

There are also drawbacks however. As NSPs often operate outside government regulation, there is a danger that some may be providing low-quality education. In addition,they can also be disconnected from policy development in the wider sphere. Gender issues – in terms of awareness of oppressive attitudes and exploitative employment practices – are also a concern.

A key issue is the way that NSP initiatives link in with governments. Many experts argue that CBO’s should not be seen as a substitute for the state. Donors are therefore urged to support education services by aiming to address short-term education service improvements while also strengthening state capacity to enable state institutions to eventually take responsibility for service delivery in the long term.

file type icon See Full Report [PDF]

Enquirer:

  • DFID Politics and State Team

Related Content

Workplace-based Learning and Youth Employment in Africa
Literature Review
2020
Aid and non-state armed groups
Helpdesk Report
2020
Non-State Policing in Fragile Contexts
Helpdesk Report
2019
Benefits of STEM Education
Helpdesk Report
2019
birminghamids hcri

gro.crdsg@seiriuqne Feedback Disclaimer

Outputs supported by FCDO are © Crown Copyright 2021; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2021; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2021
Connect with us: facebooktwitter

Outputs supported by DFID are © DFID Crown Copyright 2021; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2021; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2021

We use cookies to remember settings and choices, and to count visitor numbers and usage trends. These cookies do not identify you personally. By using this site you indicate agreement with the use of cookies. For details, click "read more" and see "use of cookies".OkRead more