We rely upon the following detailed framework to support our selection of local implementers.
Alignment and Expertise
Criteria
Alignment with Program Objectives
Description
The extent to which the partner’s mission, values, and goals align with the intended outcomes of the personalized mastery learning program.
Indicators
Clearly articulated alignment with program goals. Clear commitment to shared values. Mission statement reflects a focus on education and student success.
Criteria
Experience and Expertise
Description
The partner’s track record and experience in education, curriculum development, and program implementation.
Indicators
Successfully executed similar education projects. Experienced team members with relevant backgrounds. Record of positive impact on education outcomes.
Criteria
Knowledge of Local Context
Description
The depth of the partner’s understanding of the local education landscape, culture, language, and challenges.
Indicators
Demonstrated understanding of local education system. Insights into cultural nuances and challenges. Ability to propose context-appropriate strategies.
Capacity and Management
Criteria
Capacity for Project Management
Description
The partner’s organizational capability to manage and oversee a complex education program effectively.
Indicators
Demonstrated ability to coordinate logistics and resources. Clear project management structures. Effective administration and organization
Criteria
Pedagogical Expertise
Description
The partner’s proficiency in educational pedagogies, specifically mastery learning, and alignment with effective teaching methodologies.
Indicators
Mastery learning expertise demonstrated. Knowledge of differentiated instruction methods. Understanding of evidence-based teaching practices.
Criteria
Teacher Training and Professional Development
Description
The partner’s ability to design and deliver high-quality teacher training programs that empower educators to implement mastery learning effectively.
Indicators
Successful delivery of teacher training programs. Incorporation of pedagogical best practices. Practical strategies for differentiated instruction.
Criteria
Technology Integration
Description
The partner’s skill in integrating digital tools and platforms into education, supporting teachers and students in their use.
Indicators
Successful implementation of technology-based learning solutions. Support structures for teachers using digital tools. Capability to troubleshoot technology issues.
Collaboration and Influence
Criteria
Collaboration Approach
Description
The partner’s willingness and ability to collaborate effectively with government agencies, schools, teachers, parents, and community members.
Indicators
History of positive collaboration with multiple stakeholders. Demonstrated ability to work as part of a team. Willingness to actively engage with partners.
Criteria
Advocacy and Policy Influence
Description
The partner’s capability to advocate for educational change and influence policies, contributing to the program’s sustainability and impact.
Indicators
Examples of successful policy advocacy initiatives. Engagement with education officials and policymakers. Demonstrated understanding of policy-making processes.
Criteria
Local Reputation and Relationships
Description
The partner’s standing and established relationships within local schools, education officials, and community leaders.
Indicators
Positive references from school administrators and community members. Evidence of long-standing relationships with education stakeholders. Local community trust and engagement.
Sustainability and Growth
Criteria
Financial Sustainability
Description
The partner’s financial stability and ability to secure and manage funding for the program’s continuity and growth.
Indicators
Demonstrated ability to secure grants and funding. Financial reports showing stability and responsible management. Plans for securing long-term financial support.
Criteria
Monitoring and Evaluation
Description
The partner’s establishment of a robust monitoring and evaluation system for tracking program outcomes and impact.
Indicators
Clear monitoring and evaluation plan with defined indicators. Regular data collection and analysis. Reports on program outcomes and impact.
Criteria
Capacity and Scale
Description
The partner’s capacity to expand the program from a pilot to larger phases while maintaining effectiveness and efficiency.
Indicators
Demonstrated ability to scale similar projects. Plans for scaling the program to additional schools or regions. Capacity to manage logistical challenges during expansion.
Inclusivity and Adaptability
Criteria
Cultural Sensitivity and Inclusivity
Description
The partner’s commitment to addressing cultural diversity, equity, and inclusion, fostering an inclusive learning environment for all students.
Indicators
Incorporation of diverse perspectives in program design. Strategies to accommodate different cultural backgrounds. Inclusive practices that promote gender equality and equal access to education.
Criteria
Innovation and Adaptability
Description
The partner’s openness to innovation, adaptability to changing circumstances, and willingness to learn from experiences.
Indicators
Evidence of innovative educational approaches in past projects. Flexibility to adapt to unforeseen challenges. Willingness to implement changes based on feedback and new insights.
Criteria
Transparent Communication
Description
The partner’s maintenance of transparent and effective communication with all stakeholders, including government officials, teachers, parents, and communities.
Indicators
Commitment to transparent communication. Proactive sharing of both successes and challenges. Honest and open addressing of concerns. Trustful relationships with stakeholders.
