Sector planning approaches
Background note
Summary of
achievements
The
EFA assessment highlights the substantial education achievements in
the past decade. The Government/MoEYS has completed extensive sector
reviews and investment planning exercises [eg in 1993-5] incorporated
in the Socio-economic Development Plan and the PIP. Access
improvements include increased primary enrolment and additional
schools. Potential quality improvements include more books,
more trained teachers and re-organised exam systems. Education financing
gains incorporate teacher salary rises, substantial education aid and
increased education discretionary spending volumes, and substantial
parental contributions. Capacity building efforts at central,
provincial, district and cluster levels have been significant.
Strengths and
limitations of current approaches
The
current approach can be characterised as narrow technically focused
project development. This approach was appropriate during the relief
and early reconstruction phase in the period 1989 to 1996. It
avoided over stretching MoEYS and MoEF technical and management
capacity, limited the complexity of planning and implementation and
allowed for greater donor/NGO involvement in program management when
government institutions were weak.
However
the current approach may have significant limitations as government
prepares for a sustainable education development phase.
Projects make it problematic to secure government
ownership/leadership and tend to encourage policy fragmentation.
Sector-wide issues including sub-sectoral financial
allocations, efficiency gains associated with student progression and
transition, institutional concerns [e.g. financial management,
regulating parental contributions] and sector performance monitoring
are difficult to address. A clear basis for government/donor
partnerships is more difficult to put in place, including accessing
new donor funding modalities [e.g. sector budgetary support].
|
The
Education Sector
A sector wide approach covers all sector-wide issues that need
to be addressed |
|
Concerns
covered by a project approach
·
Rehabilitating
school/college infrastructure
·
Improved
training of teachers
·
Better
provision of instructional materials
·
Curriculum
reform
·
Sub-sectoral
policy development
·
Introducing
small-scale pilot programs
·
Short-term
salary support |
 |
Concerns
not covered by a project approach
·
Better
access to educational services
·
Improved
quality assurance of services
·
More
efficient education resource allocation and spending, including
staff deployment
·
Financing
of recurrent costs including salaries
·
Regulating
private education spending
·
Education
capacity building including |
In
summary the current focus is on accounting for inputs and activities.
There is limited incentive for refocusing on monitoring achievements
of policy outcomes and targets.
Way forward –
potential options
Government/MoEYS
is faced with broadly three options, as summarised in Annex
1 diagram:
- To
continue a narrow, technically focussed project approach
- To
selectively incorporate sub-sector links through a set of sub-sectoral
programs
- To
initiate a broader, policy focussed sector wide approach
At
the January 1999 Education Policy/Strategy meeting the government and
the major donors endorsed the need for a national education sector
policy process, incorporating the following features:
- Ownership
and leadership by the Ministry of Education
- Strong
donor support
- A
process approach, including broad national stakeholder consensus
- Preparation
of an education strategy document
- High
level professional support
Subsequently
to the CG meeting the high-level government/donor consultative group
has re-affirmed the need for sector performance assessment and forward
looking reviews across a range of areas including education and
health. Already the Health Ministry has developed an Action Plan
[March 1999] for a sector wide approach to planning and financing
health services.
It
is recognised that a clear distinction needs to be made between
preparation of a policy/strategy framework and various financing
modalities. Developing a policy/strategy framework does not imply the
absence of project aid, but may broaden the range and types of
education funding mechanisms.
Next steps
The
government/MoEYS recognises the potential advantages of option 3, but
also the potential risks. In order to move forward there needs to be
agreement on a number of key issues:
- Consensus
on how government/MoEYS can best lead the process
- Agreed
mechanisms for ensuring broad national stakeholder consultation,
including central ministries, provincial authorities and parents
- Agreed
mechanisms for government/donor consultation and negotiation on
policy and program priorities
- Design
and management of the policy process and preparation of the
strategy document, including an action plan and timeframes
An
over-riding pre-condition is assurance of donor commitment and
resources for the process.
UP |
