The Role of Local Institutions in Scaling: Evidence from the Implementation of Accelerated Education Programs in West Africa

In this blogpost, Adedeji Adeniran, Thelma Obiakor and Leslie Casely-Hayford emphasize the critical role of local institutions in the implementation of Accelerated Education Programs in West Africa.

Across development fields such as education, identifying programs and interventions that are not only effective but scalable has become a crucial area of policy and academic pursuits. Scaling helps minimise implementation failures by narrowing policy choices to those most likely to succeed and are most cost-effective. However, discussions around scaling in the education sector have often emphasised the dominant roles of donors, international NGOs, and governments— as they possess the resources to operate at scale and quickly test innovations. Most programs identified as scalable have been donor driven. There is, in fact, a subtle critique of local institutions, with the so-called “NGO effect” frequently cited as a reason why effectiveness at the pilot level often fails to translate into successful scaling. In this piece, we draw on research into the implementation of Accelerated Education Programs in West Africa (specifically Nigeria, Ghana, and Sierra Leone) to demonstrate how local institutions are pivotal to scaling efforts, even in government-led or donor-driven initiatives.

Accelerated Education Programs as a Scalable Initiative

Accelerated Education Programs (AEPs) are flexible education programs designed to provide access to basic education, focused on foundation learning often in an accelerated time frame for groups who may have missed out on, or had their education interrupted due to marginalisation, conflict, poverty, crisis, and other supply and demand factors. These groups include out-of-school children and overage children and youth (typically between the ages of 8 and 16). AEPs involve adapting curricula to compress several years of missed education into a one or two year  period, allowing learners to catch up and bridge gaps in their schooling. This adaptation focuses on foundational learning such as literacy, numeracy, and life skills, while aligning the content with national education standards to ensure learners can transition smoothly into the formal education system. By focusing on foundational skills, AEPs offer a structured pathway for learners to acquire the knowledge needed to reintegrate into formal education at their appropriate grade level or gain the skills necessary for vocational training and employment.

AEPs already operate at scale as they have reached thousands of schools and millions of children globally. In West Africa, AEPs have been implemented in various ways, tailored to specific local contexts. For instance, in Nigeria, AEPs emerged as a response to schooling disruptions caused by insurgency, while in Ghana, the lack of teachers and distance to schools in deprived areas necessitated their introduction in the mid 90’s.

Role of Local Institutions in AEP Scaling

While AEPs have demonstrated potential for scale, their successful implementation and long-term sustainability depend not only on external support but also on the active involvement of local institutions. The key roles that local institutions play in achieving the core objectives of AEPs – namely, expanding access, ensuring foundational learning, and enabling smooth reintegration into formal education – include:

1. Local institutions are the bedrock of continuity and resilience in program implementation, often serving as the “last man standing.” Political and economic dynamics frequently shift, which can disrupt program delivery. For instance, political transitions may alter government policy priorities, and donor funding may dry up, forcing international organisations to cease operations. In contrast, local institutions are deeply embedded within their communities and are compelled to sustain key aspects of interventions using local resources. A case in point is Ghana, where donor exits in areas implementing AEPs led to sharp funding cuts. Despite these challenges, local institutions devised innovative solutions to continue certain aspects of the AEP. One organisation mobilised local resources to sustain the program, while another adapted elements of AEP into other components of its community interventions. Such dedication to program fidelity is less common among donors and governments, whose implementation is often governed by contractual obligations.
2. Scaling changes the roles and visibility of local institutions. In the larger context in which scaling takes place, it is justified to place more priority on government and highly resourced institutions, like international NGOs, as implementers. This tends to shift the role of local institutions from implementers to auxiliary partners for easy community entry. Local institutions are often embedded within broader networks of NGOs when implementing education programs at scale. While this collaborative approach can strengthen delivery and reach, it can also reduce the visibility of individual actors, particularly local NGOs, even when their influence and contributions have grown significantly.  However as Kabay and DeStefano (2024) noted, implementation complexity, systemic issues, competing priorities and politics are key byproducts of scaling, requiring actors with capacity to work with multiple stakeholders and directly with beneficiaries. Local institutions can play this role more than other actors. The Nigerian AEP implementation in conflict zones involves high risks and costs which are shouldered by local institutions and this requires reliance on networks of grassroot organizations willing to continue to support AEP even in conflict affected zones.
3. Mobilising Local Resources and Building Trust: Local institutions are instrumental in mobilising resources and garnering community support for AEPs. For example, they leverage their deep understanding of local languages and cultural contexts to integrate mother tongue instruction and accommodate low-resource languages, which enhances the effectiveness of educational programs. By utilising local facilitators (often youth who have completed senior high school) and who act as instructors who are familiar with the community’s language and culture, these institutions foster a sense of ownership and accountability among learners and their families. This local engagement is crucial for establishing trust and ensuring that AEPs are tailored to meet the specific needs of the community. Moreover, local institutions often provide support in areas where governments may face limitations, such as offering education in local languages and creating a supportive learning environment. Their prior interactions with NGOs and experience in grassroots mobilisation further strengthen the implementation and sustainability of AEPs.
4. Enhancing Program Relevance and Sustainability: Local institutions are also pivotal in ensuring that AEPs are both relevant and sustainable within their specific contexts. They bring valuable insights into local educational needs, cultural practices, and socio-economic conditions, which allows for the adaptation of AEPs to address these unique challenges effectively. By engaging local educators, community leaders, and parents in the program design and implementation, these institutions help tailor educational content and delivery methods to fit the local context. This localised approach not only improves the program’s relevance but also promotes its sustainability, as community involvement increases the likelihood of continued support and integration. Furthermore, local institutions can facilitate partnerships with local businesses and organisations to secure additional resources and opportunities for learners, thereby enhancing the program’s capacity to deliver long-term benefits.
5. Facilitating Inclusive Participation and Equity: Local institutions play a crucial role in promoting inclusive participation and ensuring equity within AEPs. They have the capability to reach and engage marginalized groups that might otherwise be overlooked, such as girls, children with disabilities, or those from very remote areas. By understanding and addressing local barriers to education, such as cultural biases or logistical challenges, local institutions can implement strategies that make AEPs more accessible to all children. They can also advocate for and implement policies that ensure equitable distribution of resources and opportunities within the program. This focus on inclusivity not only helps to reduce educational disparities but also strengthens the overall impact of AEPs by ensuring that no child is left behind.

Conclusion

The effective scaling and impact of AEPs depends on a strategic approach that emphasises the critical role of local institutions such as national NGOs and local community groups and AEP committees at the community level. These institutions not only adapt AEPs to local contexts but also bridge gaps between diverse stakeholders and mobilise essential resources. Their involvement ensures that AEPs are not only implemented effectively but also sustained over time through the communities’ own resources. As we move forward, focus on the design of AEP programming which strengthens the capacity of local institutions will be key to maximising the reach and success of AEPs in Sub-Saharan Africa, ultimately fostering greater educational equity and opportunity for all.

The Authors

Adedeji Adeniran is the Director of Research at the Centre for the Study of the Economies of Africa (CSEA). Contact email: aadedeji@cseaafrica.org.

Thelma Obiakor is a Senior Research Fellow at the Centre for the Study of the Economies of Africa (CSEA). Contact email: tobiakor@cseaafrica.org.

Leslie Casely-Hayford is the Director at Associates for Change. Contact email: comdev9@yahoo.com.