Ministria e Arsimit, Shkencës dhe Teknologjisë

Ministry of Education, Science and Technology

Ministarstvo Obrazovanja Nauke i Tehnologije

Projekti Mbështetje Teknike për MASHT (FBSA) Kosovë

Technical Assistance to MEST (ESPF) Kosovo Project

Draft ROADMAP

For Establishment of the Education Sector Integrated Planning System

in Kosovo

January 2015

1

Table of Contents

1. Introduction…………………………………….………………………………………………....4

2. Introducing an Integrated Planning System in the education sector in Kosovo…………..5

2.1. What IPS for Education Sector Means? ……………………………………………..5

2.2. Who will Manage IPS for Education Sector in Kosovo?........................................7

2.3. When will IPS for Education be implemented? ……………………………………...8

2.4. What is Need for Education IPS to be Successful? ………………………………...8

3. Components of the new Integrated Planning System in Education Sector ……………….9

3.1. Decision-Making and Coordination System………………………………………….9

3.2. Strategic Planning Framework for Education Sector ……………………………...11

3.3. Medium-Term Expenditure Framework/Annual Budget …………………………..15

3.4. Management of External Assistance………………………………………………...18

3.5. Integrated Monitoring …………………………………….…………………………...20

4. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED ACTIONS……………………………………………….23

5. ANNEX – IPS IMPLEMENTATION CALENDAR……………………………………………26

2

Abbreviations

APSAA Action Plan for Stabilisation and Association Agreement

BDMS Budget Development and Management System

DEICP Department of European Integration and Policy Coordination

GSC Government Coordination Secretariat

EA External Assistance

KESP Kosovo Education Strategic Plan

MEST Ministry of Education Science and Technology

IPS Integrated Planning System

MTEF Medium Term Expenditure Framework

OPM Office of the Prime Minister

PIP Public Investment Committee

SMC Strategic Management Committee

SAA Stabilisation and Association Agreement

VET Vocational Education and Training

3

1. Introduction

The proposal for an Integrated Planning System for education sector results from the Government initiative to establish an integrated planning system at the government level and after the Gaps Assessment Report on Policy Planning, Financial Management and Internal Control and the Projects implementation plan that foresees that “By the February 2015, as in the ToR, the project would provide the DEIPC with the IPS Roadmap, which would explain the proposed approach and set out the key aspects of the draft administrative instruction”.

The need for an integrated planning has been found by the Project inception report that stresses that “there is an “inflation” of planning, monitoring and reporting frameworks (above 20 various documents), which are too many and no clear hierarchy, not all of them are integrated into the MEST annual work plan and mostly developed by development partners. Besides, the current KESP does not clearly link to the higher level planning documents to which the Government of Kosovo is committed. This includes the South Easter Europe Strategy 2020 (SE2020) and the Vision for Skills, both regional level planning frameworks, other sectors planning frameworks such as youth, competitiveness, industrial policy etc” There is a need for a more coherent and streamlined planning, monitoring and information system in order to implement to the necessary reforms and respond to the international standards and requirements on the education sector.

To address this the integrated planning system foresees to integrate the core planning processes under a coordinated and consolidated single framework. This means that we recommend developing a single strategic and policy-planning framework, operationalized through a single medium term and short-term planning system, budget and work planning. The system will also include a single monitoring and reporting system within the education sector.

Under the overall government-planning framework, coordinating bodies, planning documents and implementations procedures will be the main tools as described in the following chapters of this Roadmap.

The IPS system for the education sector will follow the progress and steps on IPS Roadmap for the Government level. Several components of the system are depended on the progress and decisions of the central level, including OPM or Ministry of Finance. Several other components of IPS system will depend on the MEST’s political engagement, administrative capacity and understanding of the importance of the system.

4

2. INTRODUCING AN INTEGRATED PLANNING SYSTEM IN THE EDUCATION SECTOR IN KOSOVO

2.1. What IPS for Education Sector Means?

IPS for education sector constitutes a broad planning and monitoring framework for education sector designed to ensure that the government and MEST core policy and financial processes for the education sector function in a coherent, efficient and integrated manner. There are three core frameworks that cover all government organizations and activities:

In addition, there are four core processes that affect a wide range of government planning activities and must be fully reflected in the KESP and METF.

European Integration and other international standards for education sector Education Government Programme Public Investment External Assistance

It is worth stressing that the volume of EU integration obligations for education sector does not constitute a significant part of the agenda for the education sector. In future, it will be important to determine the linkages within IPS of some significant cross-cutting strategies, such as Vision for Skills 2020, strategies related to human rights, minority rights, gender issues etc.

5

Strategic Framework: Kosovo Education Strategic Plan (KESP) establishes the Education sectors’ strategic framework, medium term goals and objectives;

Medium-Term Expenditures Framework (MTEF), which requires MEST to develop a 3-year plan to deliver outputs to achieve its policy objectives and goals within the MEST expenditure ceiling.

Monitoring and reporting Framework, which requires establishing a single framework for monitoring and reporting in the education sector. A management information system will be the main tool for monitoring of implementation of education sector policies.

PROPOSED PLANNING ARCHITECTURE FOR EDUCATION SECTOR

6

KESP

MTEF

Action Plans & Implementation

and Delivery

Education Long-Term Planning/Goals

Medium-Term Education Strategy Crosscutting Strategies Sub-Sector Strategies Budget ceilings for the

sector

1-3 Year MTEF & Budgets

Policy Goals (KESP) Programmes Objectives

(KESP) Programme Budgets (MTEF) Expected Outputs (MTEF) Activities

Government Programme[Medium-Term Horizon]

Public Investment & External Assistance Project Proposals

Macro Crosscutting Strategies[Long & Medium Term Horizons]

EU Integration / MSA Implementation Plan

Macroeconomic Stability Regional Strategies Decentralization

Delivery Instruments

Ministry/sector work plan Monitoring and Evaluation

Reports

Action Plan Instruments

KESP Implementation Plan Legislation Plan IPA Education Sector Plan Donor Priorities Ministry/sector work Plan

Education Sector Vision Consensus-building exercise, involving all stakeholders, civil society

2.2. Who will Manage IPS for Education Sector in Kosovo?

A Strategic Management Committee led by the Minister of Education Science and Technology will be the structure on the top of IPS architecture for the education sector. The Strategic Management Committee would be responsible for policy planning in education and assure the quality and monitor the implementation the new planning system.

The programme heads will be responsible to manage the implementation of the IPS system for education through Programme -Committees based on the education sector programmes. The General Secretary will be the core position that will drive the system and a connection point for all components of the IPS for education.

7

POLITICAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE BODIESOVERSIGHT OF IPS FOR EDUCATION SECTOR

Chaired by the Prime Minister:

Ministers of Finance, European Integration, DPMs,

others.

2.3. When will IPS for Education be implemented?

Taking into consideration developments on the central level about the IPS at the National Level the IPS for education sector will occur in three stages from 2015-2018.

2.4. What is Need for Education IPS to be Successful?

The political commitment of the MEST, the quality of reform management, and the capacity of MEST staff to implement the new system are crucial basics for the successful implementation of IPS system for the education sector. This process should benefit from a full political support of the Minister whose authority should be crucial in the success of this process.

The initial step after approving this Roadmap is the creation of Strategic Management Committee (SMC) as main mechanism to oversee and guide the process, and give full political support to the process and technical/experts groups based on the education sector programmes.

It is important that the system is understood and supported by the senior management of the MEST. One of the most important tasks of the MEST will be to assess ministry capacity and design a transition process where the system’s complexity increases in direct proportion to staff capacity. Essentially, new sets of procedures have to be developed every year so that the annual guidance to departments reflects current and continuously improving procedures rather than the ultimate product, which may be five years away from realization.

8

2015: The focus will be on defining and deciding on system design, establishing structures, procedures and methodologies, capacity building of DIECP, Budget department, increase awareness about the system.

2016: In parallel with development of Education Sector Strategy the focus will be on full implementation of the IPS processes in line departments and strengthening coordination and decision-making structures, as well increasing ministry planning capacity.

2017 onward: The focus will be on the quality of implementation, with emphasis placed on strengthening accountability mechanisms and increasing ministry implementation capacity.

3. COMPONENTS OF THE NEW INTEGRATED PLANNING SYSTEM IN EDUCATION SECTOR

3.1. DECISION-MAKING AND COORDINATION SYSTEM

Problem Statement

The existing strategic planning system in the Ministry of Education Science and Technology through KESP is steps ahead compared to most of the sectors in the Government. Though many gaps exist, there is the question if the system is sufficient to provide the managerial staff with an opportunity to set the strategic direction for many policy affairs in the sector. The KESP as a sector strategy document sets a broad vision, objectives and targets. It has multiple priorities that together set an ambitious agenda but mechanisms to integrate planning systems such as medium term policy planning, short term/annual planning, budget planning and monitoring systems are missing. A functional decision-making and coordination body though already exists for KESP has not provided the expected results to connect all planning processes within the MEST or education sector.

Strategic Direction

New comprehensive decision-making and coordination structures and procedures that will cover all planning, monitoring and reporting segments will be established to ensure that the decision-makers are provided with the right information at the right point in the process to set strategic directions and make right decisions.

Recommendations for Improvements

Two levels of coordination and management structures needs to be established:

The Strategic Management Committee – the highest political and administrative level strategic and

The Programme Committees – the administrative and experts level that ensures the coordination and implementation of strategic decisions.

A Strategic Management Committee should be established and lead by the Minister of MEST. The ministry’s senior management will form the Group and assure the quality of decision-making, planning and monitor the implementation of education sector policies.

The SMC for Education will be involved in all major planning decisions before being submitted further to SPC or central government decisions, including:

setting education sector’s strategic priority objectives,

approving the education sector and the need for any cross-cutting strategies under the responsibility of the MEST , prior to submission to SPC/Government

approving education sector new policy initiatives prior to submission to the government

9

determining aggregate sector and programmes ceilings prior to submission to MoF,

finalizing and approving the MTEF/Annual Budget submission for education sector

reviewing and approving strategic issues related to public investment and external assistance for the education sector prior to submission to central level of the government.

reviewing and approving the education sectorial input to the Government’ annual work programme, prior to submission to GCS.

Monitoring of implementation of the Education Sector Strategic Framework, policy priorities, work plan, budget plan.

The Committee will be led by the Minister (or the Deputy Minister in his/her behalf); coordinated by the General Secretary and comprised by Departmental Directors/heads of programmes. Depending on the subject, other officials may be added as required. The group will create Programme Committees at the sector/programme level, such as:

Programme Committees based on programmes:

Programme committee on Planning and administration Programme committee Pre university education Programme committee on Higher Education, science and technology Programme committee on Professional Education Programme committee on Capital Investments

Programme Committees will be chaired by the programme heads and composed by officials of key institutions that participate in the respective programme. The independent agencies, education institutions and officials representing municipalities will participate in the programme committees where relevant. Programme Committees will be responsible to provide and prepare proposals on the issues as specified by the above ToRs of the Strategic Management Committee including proposing strategic framework for the programme area, priority policies, budget proposals, annual work plan, monitoring and reporting of implementation of respective strategic objectives.

Upon establishment of the Strategic Management Committee the Minister of Education will issue the decision to specify the Terms of Recerence and Composition of the SMG and other mechanisms proposed within the education sector.

3.2. STRATEGIC PLANNING FRAMEWORK FOR EDUCATION SECTOR

10

Problem Statement

The Kosovo Education Strategic Plan (2011-2016) maps the strategic planning process in the sector. The KESP marked an important development and effort towards sector-wide planning in the sector. It has by and large consolidated much of the pre-2010 planning in most of the education sub-sectors. However, it has failed to incorporate important strategic objectives on higher education, science and innovation. Other strategic documents have been developed in the years after adding to the reporting, monitoring and evaluation burden. There are about twenty different plans, which by far exceed MEST capacities to consistently report and monitor implementation progress. Some of the ensuring plans are not hierarchically linked to KESP nor integrated into the ministry’s annual work plan.

Strategic Direction

As the current KESP will expire in 2016 the MEST has to gradually prepare for moving towards the next Sector Strategy, Currently, apart from elaborating the Annual Education Sector Report, no specific preparations are undertaken vis-à-vis the new KESP. Learning from the past lessons, the next Sector Strategy shall be anchored in the sector MTEF / budget, e.g. use the financing foreseen in the MTEF / annual budget as the basis for planning objectives and outputs within the Sector, thus making the post 2016 KESP realistic planning and accountability document. For this to happen, the MEST should develop comprehensive or Sector Wide Approach in planning and analysis (including of the MTEF and budget) within the sector already in 2015. In addition the new KESP needs to include the EU integration criteria deriving from the SAA or implementation of EU criteria documents.

Education Sector Strategy Preparation Process

The Education Sector strategy will comprise the education sector long-term vision, medium term policy priorities, implementation plan, performance assessment framework and costing for implementation. The new strategy within sector objectives will reflect the EU integration obligations and criteria belonging to the MEST. European Integration agenda must be fully integrated and reflected not only in the strategy but at all levels and stages of ministry planning.

The Education Sector IPS Roadmap under the general IPS development framework is a guide to the MEST and its subsidiary institutions on the new education sector integrated planning system. It includes: the KESP comprehensive implementation assessment process, education sector strategy development process, set standards of the new sectorial document, its link with the financial sources for implementation, EU integration agenda for education sector and monitoring and implementation mechanism at the overall education sectorial level.

Education Sector Strategy Operationalization and Monitoring – focus on implementation and delivery

Two process and institutional novelties are necessary to be introduced:

11

PROCESS - Roadmap of Education Sector Strategy implementation and the Standard Operation Procedures for Education IPS

INSTITUTIONAL - Strengthening the Department for European Integration and Policy Coordination within MEST

After the Government Decision for the institutionalisation of the NDS development process the MEST minister should decide on the MEST IPS and Education Sector Strategy development process.

Roadmap of Education Sector Strategy implementation and the Standard Operation Procedures for Education IPS

The Framework for the IPS Roadmap specifies the IPS at the overall government level developed at the central level of the government as well as general standards for the IPS at sectorial level.

The sectorial level monitoring requirements will in future focus on sector level indicators and targets.

Following the NDS Implementation Roadmap, the Education Sector IPS Roadmap will be strongly suggested as a mechanism for effective education sector monitoring with a focus on implementation and delivery.

A. Strengthening the Department for European Integration and Policy Coordination within MEST

The department for European Integration and Policy Coordination will be the main coordination and management structure for the implementation of the Education Sector IPS Roadmap, its connection with the central level of the government and with the other structures within the education sector.

In implementation of the Education Sector IPS Roadmap DIECP will serve and a coordination and support body of the Strategic Management Committee and other IPS Sub Committees. DIECP should ensure incorporation of the Roadmap measures within the integrated annual work plan and produce quarterly reporting and Annual Report on Education IPS Roadmap Implementation.

The DEIPC will be supported during 2015 in preparing the job descriptions in line with the Department’s mandate and Ministry’s strategy. This will be done through the functional review of department followed by adjustments on job descriptions. Regular individual coaching sessions to ensure that the new tasks and responsibilities are fully internalized and that the staff gradually develops the competencies required will follow up the activity.

12

The rollout for the Education IPS Annual Progress reports could be planned as follows:

In 2016, the Education Sector Strategy will be prepared and approved In 2008, IPS implementation progress report will be prepared to present results on the

targets of education sector strategy

In 2017, a baseline report will be produced containing the new high-level indicators; and

In 2019 - onwards, a mid-term review of sector strategy implementation should take place and be the need some indicators could be reviewed and new once introduced.

The following chart illustrates the 2016-18 KESP development and implementation sequence.

13

Figure: KESP Milestones 2015-2018

2015

2017

2018

KESP Implementation

report

combined with Ministry Annual Reports based on IPS Roadmap

2016

SMC determines on approach and timeline to prepare new Education Sector Strategy

Determine the approach for preparation of other specific related KESP policy implementation documents.

KESP Implementation Roadmap

New KESP

1nd new KESP Progress Report

2nd new KESP Progress Report

Review targets of Education Sector Strategies in line with updated reviewed NDS and new development in the education sector (if necessary)

New KESP reviewed

2020

Recommended Actions

In 2015 MEST should draft the KESP comprehensive implementation report and approve in the SMC.

SMC determines on approach and a detained work plan to prepare the new Education Sector Strategy.

During 2016 MEST should prepare the Education Sector Strategy, including its implementation plan, assessment and performance assessment framework integrate EU integration affairs for the education in all components of the strategy.

MEST should develop a planning calendar, which integrate all planning, and monitoring processes in the education sector.

14

3.3. MEDIUM-TERM EXPENDITURE FRAMEWORK/ANNUAL BUDGET

Problem Statement

The MTEF part related to education as in other sectors still needs progress for translating Education sectoral policy priorities into operational expenditures planning framework, through the MTEF and Annual Budget. Based on the GAP assessment report of the MEST Support Project, MTEF based on current administrative structure is not appropriate to support the policy based budgeting of the Education Sector. The Budget for 2015, still needs for improvements in undertaking Sector Approach medium term planning, through Sectorial MTEF and reflected in the Budget.

Besides, the MEST also does not have a full control of the education sector financing. Significant parts of the sector money are allocated directly to the municipalities or University of Pristina without the MEST effectively controlling the allocation process. Thus, effectively only 21% of sector’s financing goes through the MEST budget direct allocation. In the MEST there is no comprehensive information / data base on modalities, such as basic performance data, regarding all these streams of financing of the sector.

Strategic Direction

The MTEF needs to be fully based on the sector strategy for education. The MTEF will need to establish methodologies and standards that apply to all planning frameworks, ranging from KESP, Education Sector Aid-memoire or future priority setting framework, as directions for annual planning for the education sector. Annual budget needs to fully follow the MTEF. Planning of the budget should be based on programmes for the entire expenditures for the programme.

Proposed Process Improvements

Improvement of the budget planning within the education sector needs to focus on the following segments:

a) Improvement of decision making related to MTEF/Annual Budget

The following changes from past practice should be implemented immediately:

There is a need to involve the political level into policy and budgeting process . The KEST has a Steering Group, which is focused only on the KESP implementation. Ministry on ad hoc basis also establishes a working group to prepare submissions for budget where minister’s political advisors also participate. Another group is established each year on the JAR preparation. Establishing the Strategic Management Committee will replace all ad hoc groups. It will be a permanent mechanism, which will discuss and approve the education sector priorities and be responsible for all decisions related to MTEF/Annual Budget.

15

The budget calendar should be significantly advanced and synchronised with other planning processes;

b) Improvement of MTEF/budget`s strategic orientation process

Development of the new KESP is expected to improve the budget planning process.

The New KESP and management and coordination mechanisms will need to improve linkages between the MTEF with the education sector strategic framework.

c) Improvement of MTEF / budget structure

a programme-based budget structure should be introduced in the education sector; this should include linking ministry MTEF expenditure ceilings to programme policy priorities, objectives, outputs, output indicators/targets, and activities, over a three years period as specified in the education sector strategy.

MEST/sectorial expenditure ceilings should be disaggregated further to programme ceilings.

adoption of a programme based budget structure will require new procedures and guidelines for MTEF/Annual Budget preparation. New procedures should be introduced based on: identifying the policy basis of programmes (statement of programme policy priorities) and developing a programme based expenditure plan;

d) Improvement of consistency between MTEF annual budget

Following the government decision on merging BDMS and PIP into an integrated budget planning software, based on new procedures and budget programme structure will facilitate the implementation of programme based budgeting for the education sector.

e) Improvement of MTEF / Budget Planning Cycle and Calendar

There is a need to develop an annual planning calendar for the education sector. The calendar will include the MTEF/annual budget preparation process, its link with priority/policy development and EU integration within the Education sector.

The Planning calendar should be aligned with the central government planning calendar on the Priority development MTEF/Budget planning.

f) Improvement and alignment of the Public Investment Project with the Priority and strategic planning process.

The MEST should implement a revitalized planning and management process for public investment (both domestic and externally funded) that aligns proposals or the education sector strategies, identifies suitable projects earlier in the planning cycle, improves appraisal quality, and increases the rate of actual vs. planned disbursement. Planning should be fully integrated within the MTEF and shift from a project-by-project to the education sector policy basis. The new system should be comprehensive, capturing all domestic or foreign-financed activities.

16

Recommended Actions

The following summarizes a set of recommended action that could be carried out over the period 2015-2017, that should affect MTEF in line with overall IPS implementation.

Review MTEF/Annual Budget calendar, in line with the Government wide level calendar

A new Budget Programmes Structure is piloted using separated budget submission form.

Integrate/harmonised the Public Investment review and prioritisation process in the new strategic planning architecture under IPS.

Public investment planning shift from a project-by-project to a sector policy basis where public investments are identified to deliver Education sector strategy policy objectives and reinforce the education strategic priorities through the MTEF / Annual Budget process.

Refine the PIP for the sector selection procedure, encouraging a proactive, early project identification and selection phase, where PI projects are submitted for review and approval in advance of MTEF/Annual Budget and external funding decisions.

Inclusion in MTEF 2017-2019 of indicative new KESP priorities; SAA implementation plan and Government Programme objectives and targets

Refine costing of new KESP, outputs for the first three years of MTEF

In line with the government guidelines MEST needs to prepare new guidelines for MTEF/Annual Budget preparation based on “programme structure”, to be introduced as of 2016 cycle.

Training/Coaching needs to be provided to Budget Department on new “programme based budget structure” and related procedures

17

3.4. MANAGEMENT OF EXTERNAL ASSISTANCE

Problem Statement

Management of the External Assistance in the education sector has been weak and faced continuous challenges. The process of decision-making for donor projects is largely ad hoc and much donor-driven. Coordination capacities of MEST have been weak while proper mechanism and tools to ensure policy and priority based decisions are still missing. It is essential that the process of planning and prioritisation of donor-funded projects be re-organised in line with the new IPS architecture.

Current Situation

Coordination of Donor Support within the Education sector is responsibility of the Department for EU integration and Policy Coordination, which actually has 9 staff members. One of them is assigned to deal with donor support. Education sector in Kosovo is supported by multiple donors and at all levels of education system (central, municipal, school) as well as in all areas of education (pre-university, university, VET etc.). In some ways, the MEST is one of the most “dense” agencies in terms of support available from various Development Partners and most probably this situation will continue in the medium term. While this is to the benefit of the sector, it also calls for the need to coordinate efforts of various stakeholders effectively.

KESP is supposed to be the main strategic framework for distribution of Development Partners’ assistance in the education sector. Besides the MTEF/Budget planning process provides little guidance on the role of foreign aid in delivering strategic or sector objectives. This gap diminishes the impact of sector strategy and the comprehensiveness of performance of expenditures.

The coordination of external assistance takes place through regular meetings of the donors and the MEST. Donor projects (and program managers) also actively interact and coordinate on bilateral basis or some donors joined up to establish the Education Sector Pooled Fund focused on MEST’s capacity development. Both are good donor coordination initiatives.

Despite such efforts, the regular practice of technical level coordination among various donor-funded projects still is not developed when it comes to the leadership of the MEST in this process. Due to capacity constraints at the DEIPC, technical level steering and coordination is left for the donors and projects themselves. However, the way forward requires a single coordination mechanism for the coordination of policy development agenda and budget and donor assistance support. It will facilitate a more education sector priority driven programming of the donor assistance to ensure that critical gaps are identified and filled in a manner where sector donors add value to Government’s efforts and without the risk of duplicating each other.

18

Strategic Direction

The MEST should strengthen institutional mechanisms and implement a revitalized system for planning and management of External Assistance that aligns donors` funding with government and education sector priorities under the education sector strategy, identifies suitable projects earlier in the planning cycle, improves appraisal quality, and increases the rate of actual vs. planned disbursement. Integration of EA funding with MTEF and Annual Budgeting should be a priority. MEST should also develop mechanisms and tools to ensure proper external assistance management.

Proposed Process Improvements

The following process improvements are proposed:

i. MEST should support DIECP to strengthen its capacities to take over donor coordination, increase ownership in planning of donor support and align their support with the education sector priority polities.

ii. SMG for Education that deals with management of the planning processes should also be responsible at strategic level to manage external assistance for the education sector.

iii. Programme Committees will deal with the coordination of the donor assistance within their area. They will initiate and review project proposals and dialogue with the donors and other contributors to the education sector.

iv. DIECP should establish a simple information gateway for all ongoing and planned technical assistance (and funds) to the education sector with a view to enhance information sharing, coordination and synergies.

v. New clear procedures for strengthening External Assistance management and decision making in education sector, following the IPS architecture.

vi. New EA management procedures that ensure that donor funded project proposals are identified and reviewed through the government’s IPS strategic planning processes and, Decisions on allocations of EA projects should follow the same “three stage review process”.

19

3.5. INTEGRATED MONITORING

Problem Statement

Despite improvements in the planning system, more planning frameworks results on the fragmentation of the monitoring and reporting system. The annual work plan as part of the Government framework and the ministry annual work plan have single monitoring frameworks. But this does not properly include the MEST capacity building plan, communication strategy and activities related to agencies. The Joint Annual review of KESP is another monitoring framework. A single work planning and monitoring system as well as permanent coordination inter-institutional mechanism is missing.

Current Situation

The Kosovo Education Strategic Plan (2011-2016) maps the strategic planning process in the sector. It introduces the essential element of Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) in the sector. The Education Management Information System (EMIS) provides the tool to collect data, report and communicate the results of the plan. The Annual Implementation Plan translates the strategy objectives into verifiable actions while the Joint Annual Review (JAR) is the platform to assess and review the progress made on action plan implementation.

Other strategic documents have been developed in the years after adding to the reporting, monitoring and evaluation burden. There are about twenty different plans, which, by far exceed MEST capacities to consistently report and monitor implementation progress. Some of the plans are not hierarchically linked to KESP nor integrated into the ministry’s annual work plan. There is no shared feeling of the KESP being the apex of the sector planning, monitoring and reporting.

At the Government level the Annual Government Work Plan serves as the main planning document and a tool for external reporting. While MEST’s Annual Action Plan is the main internal planning and document. It largely follows the structure of the Ministry, but excludes activities related to the executive agencies, which could be its main weakness, as the agencies deliver important activities for achievement of the KESP and other strategic frameworks for the education sector. Reporting of Annual work plan is done on the monthly, quarterly and annual bases.

Several other planning documents and frameworks impose more than one reporting and monitoring mechanisms. Some of these frameworks have no reporting system, e.g. MEST capacity building plan or communication plan are not harmonised with the annual work plan and do not have a monitoring and reporting frameworks. The KESP implementation annual reporting system called as Joint Annual Review is meant to provide this comprehensive monitoring and evaluation system. However, the system needs still to improve and integrate with other systems. Apart of the EMIS and other existing systems there is a need for an Integrated Management

20

policy implementation information system for the sector based on the Education sector strategic framework.

Strategic Direction

Introduction of Ministry Integrated Monitoring Plan and Annual Report

A MEST Integrated Monitoring Plan should be produced that is a single framework of all education sector activities and initiatives. The integrated Plan should identify the outputs for which the MEST leadership and Government should receive regular process reports. The integrated plan should contain key policy commitments, expected results, and budget allocations for all actions of the MEST which should be consistent with NDS Implementation Roadmap, Education Sector strategy, APSAA and the MTEF.

Second, an Annual Report should be prepared at the beginning of the upcoming year, indicating whether or not they achieved their expected results in the completed year. Annual report should include information of the results achieved during the previous year and specify challenges and obstacles. The report should also include information about budget execution and performance. The report should be presented and discussed by the Strategic Management Committee for the education sector. The outcome of last year`s performance should inform start of MTEF preparation process.

Ministry is recommended to establish a web-based management information system, which, should contain strategic objectives, medium term strategy implementation plan, annual work plan and progress reports.

The structure of the plan and report should follow KESP and the budget programme structure within the education sector and will include policy/activities that belong also outside of the MEST. The Annual work plan and the report of the MEST should be developed in the framework of preparation and monitoring of GAWP. Reporting should be part of the integrated reporting system of the Government in terms of methodology, structure, timelines etc. while plans and reports should be made public.

Proposed content of Ministry/Education sector Integrated Plan

- Minister’s message- ministry’s role in delivering national, long-term strategy- key policy goals and objectives of education sector strategy- key contributions to cross-cutting strategies- major planned outputs, output targets, and approved budget (by programme)- major European integration initiatives- major legislation initiatives- major public investment projects- major external assistance projects

21

The preparation of work plan and annual report should be coordinated by the DIECP. Quarterly meetings should be held between institutions/programme heads to review and discuss the progress and actions needed.

A reporting and monitoring methodology for the education sector needs to be developed and approved by the MEST.

Integrated planning and reporting within the education sector means developing a single plan and progress report that consist of bringing together:

Planning: Annual work Plan of the MEST/education sector Capacity building plan of MEST Communication strategy for MEST Operational plans of specific sub-sector strategies

Monitoring and Reporting: Reporting systems of all these documents. Management information systems within the education sector (EMIS, capital investment

system, professional education information system, and higher education system.

Recommended Actions

Develop a reporting and monitoring methodology for the education sector which will set the preparation methodology, common structure etc for the planning, monitoring and reporting;

Clarify roles and responsibilities for planning, monitoring and reporting within the education sector coordination with the center of the government.

An electronic web based reporting and monitoring system can be developed in the MEST. The system will include the strategic objectives, medium term plan, annual policy reforms and information for policy implementation of the strategy to be updated in the end and mid year periods.

MEST Annual Report be produced (by mid-February at the latest 2016) identifying the results achieved vs. the commitments and approved budgets set out in the Ministry Integrated Annual Report for 2015. It should inform start of MTEF preparation process. The SMG be informed about the results of monitoring for 2015. This exercise should be repeated annually.

22

4. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED ACTIONS

1. DECISION-MAKING AND COORDINATION SYSTEM

A Strategic Management Committee should be established and lead by the Minister of MEST. The ministry’s senior management will form the Group and assure the quality of decision making, planning and monitor the implementation of education sector policies.

The Committee will create Programme Committees at the sector/programme level, for

example.

Programme Committee on Planning and administration Programme Committee Pre university education Programme Committee on Higher Education, science and technology Programme Committee on Professional Education Programme Committee on Capital Investments

Upon establishment of the Strategic Management Committee the Minister of Education will issue the decision to specify the Terms of Reference and Composition of the SMG and other mechanisms proposed within the education sector.

2. STRATEGIC PLANNING FRAMEWORK FOR EDUCATION SECTOR

In 2015 MEST should draft the KESP comprehensive implementation report and approve by the SMC

SMC determines on approach and a detained work plan to prepare the new Education Sector Strategy.

During 2016 MEST should prepare the Education Sector Strategy, including its implementation plan, assessment and performance assessment framework integrate EU integration affairs for the education in all components of the strategy.

MEST should develop a planning calendar, which integrate all planning, and monitoring processes in the education sector.

3. MEDIUM-TERM EXPENDITURES FRAMEWORK / ANNUAL BUDGET

Review MTEF/Annual Budget calendar, in line with the Government wide level calendar

A new Budget Programmes Structure is piloted using separated budget submission form.

23

Integrate/harmonised the Public Investment review and prioritisation process in the new strategic planning architecture under IPS

Public investment planning shift from a project-by-project to a sector policy basis where public investments are identified to deliver Education sector strategy policy objectives and reinforce the education strategic priorities through the MTEF / Annual Budget process.

Refine the PIP for the sector selection procedure, encouraging a proactive, early project identification and selection phase, where PI projects are submitted for review and approval in advance of MTEF/Annual Budget and external funding decisions.

Inclusion in MTEF 2016-2018 of indicative new KESP priorities; APSAA and Government Programme (GP) objectives and targets

Refine costing of new KESP, outputs for the first three years of MTEF

In line with the government guidelines MEST needs to prepare new guidelines for MTEF/Annual Budget preparation based on “programme structure”, to be introduced as of 2016 cycle.

Training/Coaching needs to be provided to Budget Department on new “programme based budget structure” and related procedures

4. EXTERNAL ASSISTANCE MANAGEMENT

MEST should support DIECP to strengthen its capacities to take over donor coordination, increase ownership in planning of donor support and align their support with the education sector priority polities.

SMG for Education that deals with management of the planning processes should also be responsible at strategic level to manage external assistance for the education sector.

A sub-committee on donor assistance should be established to coordinate the external assistance, initiate and review project proposals and dialogue with the donors and other contributors to the education sector.

DIECP should establish a simple information gateway for all ongoing and planned technical assistance (and funds) to the education sector with a view to enhance information sharing, coordination and synergies.

New clear procedures for strengthening External Assistance management and decision making in education sector, following the IPS architecture.

New EA management procedures that ensure that donor funded project proposals are identified and reviewed through the government’s IPS strategic planning processes and, Decisions on allocations of EA projects should follow the same “three stage review process”.

5. INTEGRATED MONITORING AND REPORTING

24

Develop a reporting and monitoring methodology for the education sector which will set the preparation methodology, common structure etc for the planning, monitoring and reporting;

Clarify roles and responsibilities for planning, monitoring and reporting within the education sector coordination with the center of the government.

An electronic web based reporting and monitoring system can be developed in the MEST. The system will include the strategic objectives, medium term plan, annual policy reforms and information for policy implementation of the strategy to be updated in the end and mid-year periods.

MEST Annual Report be produced (by mid-February at the latest 2016) identifying the results achieved vs. the commitments and approved budgets set out in the Ministry Integrated Annual Report for 2015. It should inform start of MTEF preparation process. The SMG be informed about the results of monitoring for 2015. This exercise should be repeated annually.

25

5. ANNEX – IPS IMPLEMENTATION CALENDAR

Period Action2015:Feb.-Mar.

Finalise the IPS Roadmap for the education Sector Inform the MEST management staff on the IPS Education Sector Decide on the Annual Planning calendar. Finalise the KESP Joint Annual Review Report for 2014 and hold the JAR

Conference. Develop the education Sector Aid Memoir 2016-2018 A new Budget Programmes Structure starts being implemented for the MTEF

2016-20182015:Apr.-June

Establish the Management Strategic Committee and Programme Committees.

Develop procedures and activity plan on the drafting process of comprehensive KESP Implementation Report

Starts drafting the comprehensive KESP Implementation Report

MSC and Programme Committees prepare the budget proposals for the annual budget 2016

Develop Standards Operation Procedures for the IPS implementation in the education sector.

2015:July-Sept.

Finalise the comprehensive KESP Implementation Report

Review and finalise the Annual Budget 2016 proposals based on the MF comments.

Develop Guidelines on the Monitoring and Evaluation Framework

Develop IPS Roadmap for Education at the municipal level

Pilot IPS system in one municipality

2015:Oct.-Dec.

Develop the First integrated Annual Plan for the education sector for 2016 and approved by the SMG.

Prepare an Annual Report for 2015 and approved by the SMG

Develop guidelines and decide on the development of the new Education Sector Strategy.

2016:Jan.-June

SMC approves 2016 Integrated Planning Calendar

Start preparing the Education Sector Strategies for (as many as possible in 2016).

Develop methodologies and standards for EA project preparation and submission process (identification, feasibility and appraisal stages).

Develop standards and procedures for IPS implementation at the local level and introduce the system in municipalities.

Introduce the Management Information System for policy implementation in education sector

2016: Finalise and approve the new Education Sector Strategy.

26

June-December

Start development of the Performance Assessment Framework for the Education sector Strategy

Develop the Management Information System for policy implementation in education sector

Prepare Integrated Annual Work Plan for 2017 based on the new education Sector Strategy

2017 SMC approves 2017 Integrated Planning Calendar

MTEF and Education sector priorities developed based on the new Sector Strategy.

Prepare the Annual Progress Report on the 2016

27