Communities as agents of change: Evidence from my Village Project in Tanzania and Nepal

• In Event: Evidence-Based Education Interventions for Equity and Learning: Global Perspectives on Resources, Gender, and Early Development

Proposal

Foundational literacy and numeracy are the bedrock of human capital development, yet the global learning crisis persists: millions of children remain unable to read a sentence or solve basic arithmetic, even after years of schooling. Addressing this challenge requires approaches that remediate gaps quickly while engaging families and communities. This paper presents results from an impact evaluation of Phase 2 of the My Village program, implemented by the PAL Network in rural Tanzania and Nepal from July to December 2024.
The My Village initiative, launched in 2022, seeks to reach one million children with foundational skills support by 2027. Phase 2 focused on short, intensive learning camps based on Teaching at the Right Level (TaRL) principles: grouping children by current learning level rather than grade, and regrouping them every 10–15 days based on progress. In Tanzania, one 30-day cycle was delivered in schools before and after regular hours; in Nepal, two cycles of 60 and 45 days were run in community spaces with daily two-hour sessions. Camps included both enrolled and out-of-school children.
To evaluate the impact, we draw on baseline and endline data from over 7,000 children,. Econometric analyses employed propensity score matching (PSM) and difference-in-differences (DiD) models, complemented by descriptive analyses of proficiency trajectories. Outcomes were measured through a five-level learning index in numeracy (ranging from beginner to word problems) and literacy (from non-reader to story reading/comprehension). We also disaggregated effects by gender, age, and household wealth to assess equity dimensions.

Key Findings

Significant Learning Gains
Camps produced substantial improvements in both subjects. In Tanzania, numeracy scores rose from 69 to 91 percent correct and literacy from 72 to 94 percent among participants, compared to marginal change among controls. In Nepal, numeracy increased from 60 to 74 percent and literacy from 48 to 66 percent. Regression analysis confirmed robust effects: participation raised the probability of reaching the highest numeracy level by 29 percentage points in Tanzania and the highest literacy level by 20 points in Nepal.
Moving Children Out of the “Lowest Levels”
One of the most striking outcomes was the sharp reduction in the proportion of children stuck at the beginner stage. In Tanzania, the share of children unable to recognize numbers fell from 22 to just 4 percent among participants, while in Nepal, the share of non-readers fell from 24 to 1 percent. Gains were also visible at higher levels: in Tanzania, proficiency in advanced word problems more than tripled, from 15 to 52 percent; in Nepal, the share of children able to read a story rose from 31 to 45 percent. These shifts indicate that short-term, level-based interventions can rapidly transform children’s learning trajectories.

Equity Dimensions: Gender, Age, and Wealth
The analysis highlights important heterogeneities. In Tanzania, girls made greater literacy gains than boys, narrowing existing gender gaps. In Nepal, girls showed stronger progress in basic numeracy, while boys outperformed in advanced operations. Age effects varied across countries: in Tanzania, older children (10–13 years) advanced more in numeracy, while in Nepal, younger children (6–9 years) demonstrated the greatest progress, especially in literacy. Household wealth also mattered. In Tanzania, wealth gaps persisted in numeracy but narrowed in literacy. In Nepal, children from the poorest households made the largest overall gains—84 to 86 percent progressed by at least one level—while wealthier children stagnated more often, particularly in literacy. These patterns suggest that the camps contribute to reducing inequities, though structural disadvantages remain.

Discussion
This evaluation reinforces a growing body of global evidence that targeted instruction and accelerated learning approaches can dramatically improve foundational skills in a short time (Banerjee et al., 2010; 2017). By grouping children by level and adapting instruction dynamically, My Village created learning environments where all children, especially those furthest behind, could thrive. The program’s effectiveness across two distinct contexts underscores its adaptability. However, the findings also caution against direct cross-country comparisons, as implementation modalities differed significantly.
Beyond learning gains, the My Village model embodies a community-centered theory of change. Camps were hosted in schools or community spaces, facilitated by local teachers, and embedded within broader “Whole Village” activities including community libraries, parental engagement, and life skills sessions. This design not only built ownership but also reinforced the idea that foundational learning is a collective responsibility. Indeed, qualitative evidence suggests that parents valued the camps highly, perceiving tangible improvements in their children’s confidence and abilities.
The heterogeneity results highlight persistent structural inequities. Gender, wealth, and age continue to shape learning trajectories, even within level-based interventions. While the camps reduced some gaps—particularly for girls and the poorest—others endured, reminding us that short-term programs cannot substitute for broader systemic reforms. Nevertheless, their equity-enhancing potential is evident: by offering intensive support to the most disadvantaged, they provide an essential entry point for “leaving no child behind.”

Implications for Policy and Practice
1. Short, intensive, level-based camps deliver results. In a matter of weeks, children advanced across multiple proficiency levels.
2. Equity requires intentional targeting. Camps were particularly effective for out-of-school children and those from the poorest households.
3. Contextual adaptation is crucial. Differences in timing and modality between Tanzania and Nepal underscore the need for flexible design.
4. Integration with community systems enhances sustainability. The “Whole Village” approach reinforces learning gains beyond camp hours.
5. Future research should deepen. Midline data, cross-subject linkages, and qualitative voices of children and parents will inform refinements.

Conclusion
The My Village learning camps demonstrate how communities can act as agents of change in the fight against learning poverty. By combining targeted instruction with community ownership, the program enabled thousands of children in Tanzania and Nepal to make rapid progress in foundational literacy and numeracy. While inequalities persist, the evidence highlights a scalable, equity-enhancing model that can help move global education closer to the goal of leaving no child behind.

Authors

• Winny C Ngeno, PAL Network

• Najme Kishani, PAL Network

• Rajib Timalsina, Department of Conflict, Peace & Development Studies, Tribhuvan University

• Armando A Ali, PAL Network