Projekti Mbështetje Teknike për MASHT (FBSA) Kosovë
Ministria e Arsimit, Shkencës dhe
Teknologjisë
Ministry of Education, Science and
Technology
Technical Assistance to MEST (ESPF) Kosovo Project
Ministarstvo Obrazovanja Nauke i
Tehnologije
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
3.
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
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:

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.
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
PROPOSED PLANNING ARCHITECTURE FOR EDUCATION SECTOR
Education Sector Vision

KESP
Education Long-Term
Planning/Goals
Medium-Term Education
Strategy




Crosscutting Strategies
Sub-Sector Strategies
Budget ceilings for the
sector
Public Investment & External
Assistance Project Proposals
1-3 Year MTEF & Budgets


MTEF
Consensus-building exercise,
involving all stakeholders, civil
society



Policy Goals (KESP)
Programmes Objectives
(KESP)
Programme Budgets
(MTEF)
Expected Outputs (MTEF)
Activities
Action Plan Instruments





Macro Crosscutting Strategies
[Long & Medium Term Horizons]




EU Integration / MSA
Implementation Plan
Macroeconomic Stability
Regional Strategies
Decentralization
Government Programme
[Medium-Term Horizon]
KESP Implementation Plan
Legislation Plan
IPA Education Sector Plan
Donor Priorities
Ministry/sector work Plan
Delivery Instruments
Action Plans &
Implementation
and Delivery


Ministry/sector work plan
Monitoring and Evaluation
Reports
6
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.
POLITICAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE BODIES
OVERSIGHT OF IPS FOR EDUCATION SECTOR
Chaired by the
Prime Minister:
Ministers of
Finance, European
Integration, DPMs,
others.
Chaired by the
Minister, coordinated
by General Secretary,
with senior
Departmental
Directors (Head of
Programmes)
Chaired by heads of
Programmes and
composed by senior
officials/heads of
programmes
Strategic Planning
Committee
(decision making at
government level)
Core IPS Processes in
Education
 KESP
 European Integration
 MTEF/Budget
 Public Investment
 External Assistance
Strategic
Management
Committee
Programme
Committees
7
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.

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.
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
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 decisionmaking, 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
9

approving education sector new policy initiatives prior to submission to the government

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.
10
3.2. STRATEGIC PLANNING FRAMEWORK FOR EDUCATION SECTOR
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
11
Two process and institutional novelties are necessary to be introduced:

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
12
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.
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 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.
In 2008, IPS implementation progress report will be prepared to present results on the
targets of education sector strategy
The following chart illustrates the 2016-18 KESP development and implementation sequence.
Figure: KESP Milestones 2015-2018
KESP
Implementation
report
2015
KESP Implementation
Roadmap
 SMC determines on approach
and timeline to prepare new
Education Sector Strategy

2016
New KESP
combined with Ministry Annual
Reports based on IPS Roadmap
1nd new KESP Progress
Report
 Determine the approach for
preparation of other specific related
KESP policy implementation
documents.
2017
2nd new KESP Progress
Report
2018
New KESP
reviewed
2020
Review targets of Education Sector
Strategies in line with updated reviewed
NDS and new development in the
education sector (if necessary)
13
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
c)

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.
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

e)
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.
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 donorfunded 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
2015:
Feb.-Mar.






2015:
Apr.-June
2015:
July-Sept.
Action
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
2016-2018

Establish the Management Strategic Committee and Programme Committees.

Develop procedures and activity plan on
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.

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
the
drafting
process
of
Pilot IPS system in one municipality
2015:
Oct.-Dec.
2016:
Jan.-June

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.

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.
26
2016:
JuneDecember
2017

Introduce the Management Information System for policy implementation in
education sector

Finalise and approve the new Education Sector Strategy.

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

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