Sector Assistance Program Evaluation on Education in Uzbekistan

 
56. 
Technical assistance implementation.
The TCRs note that the implementation of TAs 
was not as effective as it could or should have been. Some consultants had to spend their 
valuable time doing tasks that were not part of their terms of reference. Some consultants failed 
to present their analysis and critique of the older system in a nuanced manner. Consequently, 
their reports did not elicit a positive response from the government, and their recommendations 
were summarily turned down. Some TAs needed a more flexible time schedule for achieving 
their objectives. In brief, the utilization of the TA was much less effective than should have been 
the case. This is despite the IED’s earlier evaluation of ADB assistance to Uzbekistan, which 
40
This has now emerged as a constraint in Uzbekistan in that the quality of teacher training does not match the 
higher quality of secondary and senior secondary schooling, especially regarding the use of ICT in teaching–
learning situations.

---

17
noted that “ADB should improve the management of the TA program and the results achieved” 
(CSP 2006, p. 15, para. 58).
57. 
Project benefit monitoring and evaluation. 
This has been traditionally a chronic 
shortcoming in many ADB projects, and Uzbekistan’s education sector is no exception. The 
PCRs note that not enough attention was devoted to establishing the benchmarks to gauge the 
progress made. No quantified indicators were used systematically for notching up the progress. 
Where this was done, or where a management information system was established, it was not 
followed up for utilization. The situation is more difficult in Uzbekistan, as many officials and 
functionaries lack the technical skills and know-how to handle quantitative analysis because 
they have had no previous exposure to an evidence-based decision-making methodology. To 
some extent, this lack of transparency and unwillingness to share data with wider stakeholders 
is reminiscent of the legacy of the past centrally planned system. This is unfortunate as it 
deprives ADB and the government of the opportunity to claim credit for achievements in the 
sector. One also cannot be sure about the sustainability of government efforts in the absence of 
reliable indicators. ADB’s results framework also cannot be fully implemented under these 
conditions. This runs counter to the 2000 country operation strategy that had clearly indicated 
the need to “adopt a result orientation with monitorable indicators linked to ADB interventions” 
(CSP 2006, p. ii).
41
Despite a significant amount of OCR and ADF assistance, it is a cause for 
concern that such an omission was allowed to persist uncorrected for nearly 12 years.
42
Such 
neglect is now beginning to seem systemic and needs to be dealt with urgently, as noted by the 
2006 CSP (Appendix 3, p. 101, para. 89[vi]): “Establishing an effective education management 
information system, along with qualified professionals, should be a key component of future 
education sector reform."
58. 
Currently, ADB is preparing a 
research and development technical assistance
(RDTA) 
which will help develop programmatic interventions in education sector with clear indicators and 
benchmarks. These risk-based programs can help in providing focused and timely support 
which is relevant and required. The RDTA will also provide resources to carry out a financial 
analysis of the sector.