Bisma Mumtaz

My detailed comments on the proposal are given in writing on the proposal itself. Briefly, the proposal is TOO LONG, covers a LOT of IRRELEVANT past reserach, and DOES NOT COVER in sufficient detaile relevant past reserach. So it is not currently acceptable.

Bisma's revised version, submitted 20th January, has covering letter with following response to my comments:

· Policy implications are provided at page number 19 and 20 under the heading of policy recommendations.

· By generalizing the findings of different studies, policy implications relevant to different variables are given at page number 16, 17, 18 under the heading of variables to be used in the study.

· Methodology is changed at page number 11 and 13 to link the issue with economic measures.

Efficiency Analysis of Primary Education; a Non-Parametric Evaluation of Public, Private and NGO Schools

Revised proposal is much improved. HOWEVER, we need to link the EFFICIENCY calculation to some policy recommendations and some economic issues. It is not enough JUST to calculate DEA efficiency of schools. One has to show WHY this is a USEFUL exercise for economics. This part is still missing from the proposal.