Short Abstract

We used contribution analysis and a 9-stage reform value chain to assess how PLANE shaped seven education reforms across five Nigerian states, identifying insider-led and institution-embedded pathways that moved policies from drafting to budgeted implementation.

Description

Background & alignment to UKES themes. This study examines how an FCDO-funded programme (PLANE) influenced systemic education reforms in Nigeria and the conditions under which influence translated into adoption, budget execution and early institutionalisation—squarely addressing UKES Theme 1 (policy influence) and, through utilisation-focused design and iterative insight sharing, Theme 3 (communicating evaluation for action).

Methods. We applied contribution analysis as the primary approach, structured around a 9-stage reform value chain (from gap analysis to sustained results). Evidence combined document review and 82 key informant interviews (17 PLANE staff; 65 stakeholders, of whom 9 were women), coded in MAXQDA against a pre-specified analytical framework. Reforms spanned seven processes across federal and state levels: Teacher Recruitment/Deployment/Replacement (Jigawa, Kano), Education Quality Assurance law (Jigawa), Girls’ Education Policy (Kano), Domestication of the National Policy on Almajiri (Kaduna), UBEC/Intervention Fund law reform (federal), School Safety policy (Jigawa), and TaRL sustainability (Borno, Yobe).

Systemic pathways (what worked). Evidence shows PLANE’s influence operated through four mutually reinforcing pathways:

• Insider-led brokerage: mobilising respected government technocrats and trusted intermediaries as champions to navigate ideological sensitivities (e.g., reframing gender language to “inclusive access”), keeping opponents engaged and approvals moving.

• Multi-tier convening and coalitioning: from governor-level dialogues to Technical Working Groups and civil society coalitions (e.g., K-SAFE), enabling consensus-building and de-politicised problem-solving.

• Legal-institutional embedding with budgets: creating units, mandates and budget codes prior to full passage—e.g., a Girls’ Education Unit and NGN 402.6m 2025 allocations across MDAs in Kano—so policies did not stall at adoption.

• Peer learning and vertical alignment: brokering federal–state linkages (e.g., UBEC reform dialogue) and cross-state diffusion (e.g., Jigawa TRDR influencing Kano/national; Kaduna’s Almajiri domestication inspiring neighbours).

Results (what changed). Across cases, no supported reform regressed; several advanced multiple stages in 2025. Examples include Kano Girls’ Education Policy (stage 4→6) with early operational uptake; and Kaduna’s Almajiri domestication moving from stage 1 to a multilateral implementation platform (ROOSC). Teacher reforms were associated with tangible staffing actions (e.g., 2,400 recruits in Jigawa; >23,000 volunteer teachers absorbed in Kano, 2023–2025). These movements reflect budget execution and governance arrangements activated (stages 6–7), not just paper progress.

What didn’t work (and why). Reform pace was constrained by elite religious/political sensitivities (notably on girls’ education), political turnover, under-attention to the non-formal sector, and MEL capacity gaps that limited feedback loops—pointing to where influence needs earlier elite engagement, broader actor inclusion, and embedded MEL to sustain momentum.

Contributions to evaluative practice. Methodologically, combining contribution analysis with a staged reform rubric offered a transparent, theory-linked account of influence and decision-relevant evidence for adaptive management—translating directly into approvals, budget lines, and units within ministries.

Implications. To turn influence into durable results, evaluative practice should: (i) plan for elite-sensitivity management and multi-party continuity pre-approval; (ii) institutionalise capacity and learning platforms; and (iii) integrate policy-tracking MEL into government performance systems from the outset.