Higher Education Commission : university and technical support and higher education support program

In fiscal year (FY) 2007-08, the Government of Pakistan (GOP) cut the Higher Education Commission's (HEC) budget for recurring grants to universities by 21 percent. Also, since FY 2008-09, the GOP has consistently released less money than budgeted for development grants, which support scholarships, infrastructure (e.g., buildings, laboratory equipment) and other development projects, and pay the salaries of development project staff, all of which are crucial to strengthening the ability of Pakistan's universities to meet future needs. In moves that further aggravated the weak financial situation of universities, in FY 2008-09 the GOP mandated 20 percent increases in government employees' salaries (including those of university staff), but did not increase funding levels to cover these increases. In the same year, the GOP waived tuition and fees for 7,354 internally displaced students without increasing funding to the affected universities to cover the lost tuition revenue. USAID responded to the problems posed by these financial cuts to universities by providing two separate cash transfers to HEC. The overall objective of the First Cash Transfer was to expand the availability of university and technical education to students from conflict-affected areas. The transfer was intended to contribute to the "Investing in People" objective under the U.S. Foreign Assistance Framework, especially in the areas of higher education and social assistance. The Second Cash Transfer was intended to "Increase research capacity, improve teaching techniques and laboratory facilities, and enhance the quality and applicability of academic degrees in academic disciplines related to agricultural sciences and hydrology." It also supported other disciplines which support these sectors including environmental sciences, engineering and economics. The purpose of this evaluation is to determine whether the two cash transfers have achieved expected results. The evaluation should facilitate stakeholder accountability, assess project performance (e.g. effectiveness and relevance), and generate recommendations for improving future cash transfer programs and other programming to support higher education. (Excerpt, modified)