“The case of a GAVI for Education.”

1– The Gates Foundation is the largest in the World

2- The Gates Foundation is focused on Human Development (Education & Health)

3- But the Foundation’s budget is disproportionately tilted to Health

4-And within Health, massively biased to vaccines through GAVI (Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization)

5-The reason is that the Foundation considers that vaccines provide:

• An immediate outcome
• Longstanding results
• The best cost-benefit intervention 

6- The World Bank is the largest development bank.

7-The World Bank has a direct relationship with every Ministry of Education on Earth

8- Early Childhood Development has three distinctive features. It provides:

• An immediate outcome
• Longstanding results
• Efficiency: there is not a better intervention than a dollar spent on newborn education

The idea is aligning The Gates Foundation and the WB through Early Childhood Development. The proposal is to make the case of “a GAVI for Education”.

The 21st century will be shaped by two words: Inequality and Adaptation. Our proposal goes to the root of these two enormous issues.

Inequality: Most attempts at tackling inequality are about trying to increase incomes. However, there is a very different approach to start confronting the issue: provide every single baby with the chance to be stimulated during its first years. If we, as humankind, are serious about providing everyone with a fair opportunity, then making ECD happen structurally is the fastest and most effective way to begin levelling the playfield.

Adaptation:One of the defining factors of the decades to come is the speed of changes. This will apply to any feature of daily life. Within the disruption environment of the future, the flexibility to adapt to new circumstances will be a crucial skill. The exciting part is that one of the main effects of ECD is to trigger lifelong curiosity. If learning is a lifetime journey, intellectual curiosity is the very best tool that we can provide to the next generation. 

There are 130 million births per year worldwide. The goal is to have the 188 countries that are members of The World Bank (developing and developed countries alike) getting involved in the program through their Education Ministry.

The aspiration is that, in the same way countries provide primary education to their population, countries could also start one period ahead, offering every new parent the proper tools needed to foster early stimulation. 

The easiest way to enhance neural synapsis is by merely using bit cards (a “bit” being a unit of information presented to the children in a picture/drawing form). 

Following Glenn Doman’s methodology (IAHP), the necessary materials to teach a newborn a) reading, b) encyclopedic knowledge and c) mathematics are just…a bunch of cards. 

But even though the stimulation process can be perceived as an easy task, this is not the case at all. The reason for that is that there is a thin line between doing things perfectly well or…boring the child.

Ideally, an impeccable bit card stimulation session should fulfill three essential requisites:

1-It needs to be done with passion. In particular, the voice used must be absolutely cheerful and refreshing.

2-It needs to be done very fast (one card per second)

3-Every session needs to provide newcontent.

To the contrary, any bit card simulation performed…

a-With a languid voice

b-A slow rate

c-Or repeating and repeating the previous content

…will result in total failure.

The reason is that a baby is a learning machine, and the absence of new content in each upcoming session, or by going too slow, will make him/her lose interest in the matter.

But in addition to tone of voice, speed and content, there is a fourth requirement that is probably the most important one: stopping the game beforethe baby wants. This is extremely important. The critical rule is to stop when the baby is having plenty of fun so that he/she will always be eager for more in a new session.

So, what’s the solution to the previous four requisites? The solution is, of course, technology. Actually, two kinds of technology:

On the one hand, for the first three requisites, the solution is a very simple, plain-vanilla technology; a software that would enable any parent in the world to engage for a few minutes with their kids and make the best of it. A software with an inspiring voice, optimal speed and an automatic new-content replenishment function. 

And on top of this, a more advanced technology (Artificial Intelligence/Eye-Tracking) will be needed to meet the fourth requirement: stopping the game before attention declines. The problem is that too often we, as parents, simply …can’t stop; we see our baby enjoying so much that we don’t want to interrupt the game. What we are proposing is precisely leveraging technology to avoid this. 

It is innovative in 3 ways:

1-In the way the approach to The Gates Foundation is formulated.

2-In the way technology is used.

3-In the way stimulation is monitored and coordinated.

1-The Gates Foundation has a massive budget. But historically, this budget has been disproportionally allocated to Health, the reason being the fulfilment of the three investment criteria mentioned above. What is new is understanding that these same criteria could also be applied to Education (rather than Health) through ECD. It is a very simple -but innovative- approach that could free up billions and billions for the Education cause.

2-There are many apps that enable toddler’s stimulation. But there has not been yet a holistic proposal that captures the essential 4 points required (voice, speed, new content, and specifically stop in the climax of the game). What is new is underscoring the importance of leveraging on technology precisely where the human being is too “weak” – an automatic stop that finishes the game at the tipping point.

3-However, technology is essential, but it is not enough. There is a human component required. Someone needs to guide the new parents in their first steps. Stimulation is very intuitive, but initial tutoring is a must. What is new is the creation of the position of “stimulation coordinators” that would act as monitors of the process (see more below). The same way there are social workers to assist in certain circumstances, there would be “social assistants/ECD team” to help during the stimulation first steps. 

As mentioned above, there are two main kinds of technologies being used in the proposal.

On the one hand, the coding of software that would tackle the first three requisites that need to be fulfilled to have an ideal stimulation session: speed in showing the bit cards, a clear and inspirational voice, and the capacity of automatically adding new content.

On the other hand, a combination of many technologies (Eye-Tracking, Artificial Intelligence, Big Data, Biomimicry, Machine Learning) that would enable to achieve the fourth requisite which is, ultimately, the golden rule: to always finish the session before the baby wants to stop; to consistently show lessmaterial than the newborn wants to look at.

The key concept to keep in mind is that the optimal result is achieved by not giving in to the baby demands of playing more and more. It is critical not allowing the toddler to establish the rules of the game.

However, the temptation to keep in playing with your baby when you are seeing him enjoying is simply too attractive for any first-time parent. This is why this combination of technologies is needed to “maintain a clear mind” and take on behalf of the parents the decision of stopping.

I am PERSUADED of the potential of the solution because…I have seen it with my own family. Please, allow me to go personal for a few lines.

I have three daughters (12, 10 and 7). When my wife was expecting the first one, I decided to read as much as possible about early education. Why? Because I thought that fatherhood would be the most important job of my life. Thus, I read scores of education books, until I came across “How to Multiply your baby’s intelligence”, by Glenn Doman. And this book -literally- changed my life. The reason was that, for the first time, everything was absolutely logical; everything made sense. You could see how short-term actions undertaken with minimal effort could lead to a monumental long-term impact. Exactly, the same effect that a vaccine.

However, it is not only about the fact that early stimulation works(which I have no doubt). It is also about creating a win-win situation for everyone. A proposal where:

1-The Gates Foundation allocates its budget in a more efficient and balanced way.

2-Education Ministries around the globe improve the starting point level of their future students.

3-Parents enjoy and feel involved in children’s education from the very beginning. 

4-And the newborns -the future generations- are much better prepared for what is about to come (both in term of neural network and learning curiosity) 

Number of people serving now: Zero.

In one year: Zero.

In five years: Potentially, hundreds of millions.

The beauty of this approach in order to achieve impact at scale is that it combines two of the most transformational partners that can be found on earth, one from the public segment and the other from the private sector.

On the one hand The World Bank, an institution with an unmatched mobilization capacity and with direct access to the Education Ministries around the globe.

And on the other hand, The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, not only the private entity involved in development with the largest financial means, but also one that has a massive convening power within the private sector. 

There are two consecutive goals:

The First Goal is to reach an agreement between The Gates Foundation and The World Bank over setting up a “GAVI for Education”. This is an ambitious target but not impossible at all. The Gates Foundation is, already, one of the main partners of the WB through many of its Trust Funds. There is already a well-ingrained communication line between the two entities. 

Thus, potential partnership conversations could kick off tomorrow.

The Second Goal is to involve local sponsors in each country. The model to follow is the Djokovic Foundation (Novak Djokovic, the #1 world tennis player). We will explain more in detail later on, but essentially the scalability could be expanded strikingly fast by identifying a “local hero” (as Djokovic in Serbia), that is a true believer in the benefits of early education and is willing to champion the concept.

In the next five years, many Djokovics could be found and added as sponsors of the project.

If the final aim is “to have a transformational impact on millions of lives”, going global and local is the way to achieve it. 

There are two barriers.

First and main barrier is the lack of awareness of the benefits of early stimulation from a massive part of the world’s population.

The exciting part, however, is that there is nothing more natural than having parents enjoy playing with their kids, while they are developing their capabilities at scale. Thus, maybe instead of facing barriers, what the proposal could trigger is having hundreds of thousands, millions of allies, in the form of fathers and mothers willing to give their best. 

The second most important barrier is having access to the final decision-makers (Mr. and Mrs. Gates) and other relevant potential sponsors so that they can consider the proposal. To be perfectly honest, capturing the attention of the Gates and other potential supporters, is one of the main reasons to participate in this contest, and the answer, as well, to the next question. 

Regarding the first barrier (lack of awareness of the benefits of early stimulation), combining The World Bank, The Gates Foundation, and Ministries of Education multiply the access capacity dramatically. 

Regarding the second barrier (access to the Gates and other relevant sponsors), the primary way to overcome the issue is gaining media repercussion with the contest.

In my personal experience, outreaching very relevant personalities can be hard but not impossible. It is about connecting a few different steps that will bring you to the final goal. But, of course, the echo reverberation of MIT Solve can be extremely helpful to pave the way.

I’m alone, but…everyone is welcome!

Well, as mentioned, I am on my own.

But I think that I have some of the most important skills (at least three crucial requisites) to move this project forward:

First, I have a strong ECD knowledge. I have been there. I have gone through it with my daughters, and I have built my own material. And what is most important: I am perfectly aware of what works and what doesn’t.

Second, I have some of the relevant contacts. A few, I know them personally already. And the others I visualize the best way to approach them.

Third, I would tend to think that I am a reasonably good “consensus builder”. I believe that I have some of the skills –patience, enthusiasm, empathy- required to execute a successful outreach. 

Lastly, allow me to finish with probably the most important reason: I wholeheartedly believe in this. I am absolutely convinced that the best thing that we, as a society, can do is to invest in the very first months of future generations.  

N/A

Imagine a medium size population in, say, Bolivia. A city like Yapacaní which has 50.000 residents. The birth ratio is 19 births/1000 population, thus about 1000 new babies bless the city every year.

Imagine that The World Bank has approached the Bolivian Ministry of Education explaining that they are planning on implementing a pilot model for early Education in newborns. Five countries have been preselected for the initial testing and Bolivia will lead the LATAM Region.

Additionally, The Gates Foundation has entrusted Microsoft to design state-of-the-art software to replicate a perfect stimulation session using the Glenn Doman principles.

A pilot team of 3 people is assigned to Yapacaní. Their role will be to act as “social assistants” in early development. 

When a new baby is born, this “social assistants” visit the parents, explain the methodology and agree to come back when the baby is, say, 3 months to kick off.

The “social assistants/ECD team” come back after 3 months and hand over a device (kind like a tablet) to the parents with a promise the device will be returned by the parents after the program.

The parents begin to do the intelligence bit cards with the device: reading, mathematics, etc. 

The method is explained and initially closely monitored by the “assistants/ECD team”, until the parents fully internalized how to use the software/tablet by themselves, and can continue the process on their own.

The funding is divided into two phases. 

The first phase is having The Gates Foundation funding the initial steps of the project (software development, AI investigation, disbursements in pilot countries, etc.), while the World Bank provides access to Governments/Education Ministries.

The second phase is, as mentioned above, identifying profiles similar to Djokovic in Serbia, that is to say local billionaires or corporates that understand the benefits of ECD and that would like to get involved.

Thus, funding should not be an issue given the scalability that can be achieved through technology. The only recurrent expense once the software is developed will be the “social assistants for early development”, and these could be comfortably funded through a combination of Gates Foundation, Local Sponsors and Ministries of Education. 

I’m applying because of a sense of purpose. 

In the preface of “How to multiply..” Glenn Doman states the following: “We have an obligation to every child in the world to tell his mother and father what we have learned”. And then he continues, “so that they may decide what they think is best for their children”.

I think that I have gifted -by a conservative estimate- more than 100 copies of “How to multiply” to family, friends and acquaintances. But now, there’s a potential opportunity to leverage this figure…by a million. The combination of technology, Gates financing power and The World Bank Group outreach capabilities, could make this dream come true. 

One of the buzz expressions of the 21st century is “making the world a better place”. Well, I have not a shred of doubt that teaching our kids the love for reading -the cherish for knowledge- is one of the best paths that we should follow if we want to achieve this better world we strive for.

Again, quoting Glenn Doman, children who are taught with love and respect result in a gentler world. Knowledge does drive us towards good. When parents give children the gift of knowledge, children are happier, kinder and more caring than children who have not been given these opportunities.

In short, we have within our reach the possibility of combining some of the most influential actors on earth to give children a unique opportunity. 

As mentioned above, the goal on top of the initial engagement with The World Bank and The Gates Foundation is to leverage locally reaching out to firms/billionaires that could be willing to champion the initiative “a la Djokovic”. But on top of this, there is a behemoth natural partner that may be involved in a later stage, LinkedIn.

When Jeff Weiner, LinkedIn’s CEO, is asked what three skills he considers should be taught in school, he always answers: One, elemental coding. Two, some basic tech-skills. And three: compassion. In fact, he has coined a marvelous term, “Leading with Compassion”.

Interestingly, when Glenn Doman published his mentioned book, he subtitled it “A gentle revolution”. Why gentle? Because he understood that babies that are early stimulated, on top of the synapsis generated, develop a very particular personality: pleasant, warm, considerate with others. In short, “gentle”.

The conclusion is that among Doman’s “Gentle Revolution” (coined in 1955) and Weiner’s “Leading with Compassion” of the 21st century, there are some strong overlaps. LinkedIn could be the partner of choice to bring up the initiative to the next level. Jeff Weiner should be involved in this.

According to the description of the AI Innovations Prize, some of the purposes of The Patrick J. McGovern Foundation and Schmidt Futures are:

1-Neuroscience research. 

2-Information Technology.

3-Improve the lives of individuals.

4-Bet early on people. 

Interestingly, our proposal encompasses all previous postulates:

1-Neuroscience research, because the methodology is precisely based on the brain exploration conducted during decadesby Glenn Doman in the IAHP regarding neurologic organization. 

2- Information Technology, because of the recognition we need to leverage technology if we want to achieve impact at scale. 

3-Improving the lives of individuals, because there is no better tool that we can give to the future generations than infuse in them the curiosity; the love for learning. To feel satisfaction when knowledge is acquired.

4-And bet early on people, because the whole idea -the “vaccination concept”- is based on the premise that the sooner, the better. The earlier the stimulation is done, the more synapsis is achieved.

The prize would be utilized in funding the required expenses to move the initiative forward. In fact, advancing in the solution could be easier than it seems. It merely requires the initial effort of connecting the main actors required to make the project happen. The key factor is to generate a initial consensus among them.

Thus, the award (if any!) would be assigned to support the cost of brokering a deal between the “pioneering” actors: The Gates Foundation, The World Bank, The Institutes for the Achievement of Human Potential and some pilot Education Ministries.

Ideally, raising a child should be a collective action. As the well-known African proverb says, “It takes a village to raise a child”. Unfortunately, the sad reality is that, in too many cases, mothers are on their own. 

Even worse, if -in addition- the child of the single mother is a daughter instead of a boy, this “lonesomeness effect” multiplies. A structural, ingrained double-whammy, still applies in too many cultures when the newborn is a female.

The good news is that this “abandonment of mothers” can be compensated by leveraging technology. Our proposal allows mothers without network access, to find a very useful ally in our project. The combination of a proper software plus the initial support of the “social assistants/ECD team” can be a very powerful driving-force during the newborn first years. 

Lastly, there is an interesting additional effect. It may sound somehow “corny” but during early stimulation two “loves” are intensely developed. First love is the love of learning, a passion that will grow exponentially throughout life and that will apply 24/7. The second love is the mother-baby relationship. In Glenn Doman’s words, “Mother and baby increase the degree of love between them”. Thus, on top of a monumental desire to learn, a very special filial connection is -additionally- generated during the process.

There are some situations in life where we want that someone else make the hard decision for us. The reason for this is that, in too many occasions, we are biased towards making an emotional decision rather than a rational one. This “behavioral issue” also happens when parents play with their 6-month old newborn: decisions become emotional instead of rational.

The good news is that we can begin to apply AI in the Education field by making technology take certain complicated decisions on our behalf.

As we speak, two of the main issues regarding early child development are the following:

a) Unfortunately, 99% of the world’s population is unaware of the benefits of early stimulation.

b) So far, technology has been applied only in certain niches; not in a holistic manner, and certainly not in the critical point of bypassing parent enthusiasm and stopping a “bit session” at the peak of the game.

Interestingly, our proposal tackles these two issues by:

a) Aligning some of the very best partners possible to bring ECD at scale; to make it happen globally.

b) Using AI in a very specific way that could create an immense added value to the process.

In short, if the social goal of Innospark Ventures is identifying AI initiatives that can have “disruptive impact for our economy and society”, our proposal could arguably be a very interesting way to do it, because it goes to the root of both concepts: impact in both the economy and society.