1
UNICEF REGIONAL OFFICE for CEE/CIS
Terms of Reference
Consultant/Team of Consultants/Entity
Call for Proposal
Title
Purpose
Governance, Provision and Quality of Early Childhood Education Services
at the Local Level in Countries of CEE/CIS: An analytical review
The analytical review will be guided by and attempt to respond to the following
overarching questions:
-
-
What are the key institutional reforms impacting decentralisation and early
childhood education in selected countries and what forms of accountability
and participation in decision-making do they foster? To what extent are
national and sub national governance structures accountable for equitable
service delivery?
How do decentralised education governance structures function in practice
and what is their impact on access, equity and quality of ECE?
What are the political, fiscal and administrative bottlenecks and capacity
constraints and what is their impact on the delivery of ECE services?
What are the challenges and opportunities for fostering equitable and quality
early school services at the local level?
Expected fee
Location
Senior professional
Start Date
Duration
December 01, 2015 (expected)
Approximately 60-70 days during the period December 01, 2015 to June
30, 2016.
Application
Deadline
Home base with travel to 4 country office locations (with internal travel as
required) and to Geneva Regional Office
November 20, 2015
1. INTRODUCTION
The UNICEF CEE/CIS Regional Office seeks the services of a consultant or a team of consultants to
conduct an analysis of decentralization and its impact on the provision and quality of early childhood
education (ECE) services for children in the age group 3-6 years. This will involve:
 A review of relevant decentralization legislative reforms and policy frameworks that had and
continue to have an impact on ECE systems/services in selected countries of the CEE/CIS
region (de jure situation)
 An analysis of political, administrative and fiscal decentralization with regard to ECE services
and their impact on provision and quality (de facto situation)
 Developing guidance for UNICEF to support relevant advocacy and capacity development with
respect to the governance and stewardship of the ECE sector at the central and sub-national
levels.
2
This Request for Proposal emerges from the findings and recommendations of the 2014 Multi-country
Evaluation (MCE) on Increasing Access and Equity in Early Childhood Education. The MCE covered all
UNICEF activities related to advancing Early Learning and School Readiness (ELSR) efforts for children in the
3-6 year age group and covered the period 2005 to 2012. Five countries and one territory participated in
the MCE: Armenia (Ar), Bosnia and Herzegovina (BH), the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FMa),
Kosovo (under UNSCR 1244 - Ko*), Kyrgyzstan (Kg) and Moldova (Mo). The MCE concluded that while,
“the basis of the ELSR sector has been institutionalised within governments and legislative frameworks
not only within the education sector but also in wider national priorities and strategies…issues of
decentralised implementation, coherence, equity and alignment with EU requirements will be key
challenges for the future.” One of the principal recommendations of the MCE was:
… that UNICEF strengthen its ability to navigate decentralisation and to provide sustainable capacity
development support to system institutions at national and sub-national levels. In particular, this would
involve developing stronger partnerships with line ministries in charge of decentralisation and planning,
and with sub-national levels to strengthen understanding and influence on budget allocation, disbursement
and practices.
The evidence gathered and analysed through this planned analytical review will be used to:




inform discussions regarding priority areas for improving access, equity and quality in
decentralised ECE systems across the region;
support sustainable capacity development at national and sub-national levels;
assist UNICEF country offices in reconfiguring and developing relationships with partners to
bring technical support and institutional capacity development to sub-national units, and
refine programmatic approaches that UNICEF can support to foster ECE in selected countries
2. BACKGROUND
Existing evidence on early childhood care and education indicates that children from disadvantaged
backgrounds have the most to gain from attendance in early childhood programmes and that inclusive
early childhood services can have a strong impact on equitable life chances. Disparities in school
readiness mean that some children start primary school already behind. These disparities persist and
even widen during the school years with higher risks of low performance, repeating grades and
dropping out of education.
Early Learning and School Readiness in CEE/CIS
Following the collapse of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia and the loss of social subsidies, most of the
countries and territories of the CEE/CIS region were unable to sustain early childhood services (many
of the cooperative workplaces were closed or changed ownership) and there was a crisis of transition
for early childhood education and care because of lack of funds, structure and political will. Many
kindergartens were closed, with those remaining often concentrated in urban areas and reliant on
informal payments to compensate for state under-funding and low salaries, throwing up additional
barriers to access for poor and marginalised groups. At the same time, the legacy of Soviet and
Yugoslav provision established expectations of kindergartens providing full day care and education.
As countries and territories in the region attempted to make the transition from the collapse of former
systems, this legacy has biased efforts towards the maintenance and restoration of the old
3
infrastructure of kindergartens and the use of much reduced budgets on programme models that are
unaffordable for widespread, equitable access and delivery at scale. As a result many children’s rights
to preschool education are not being met across the region.
Decentralisation in CEE/CIS
State socialism was not a uniform experience in the region, and there were differences in historical
backgrounds with respect to the extent and nature of centralisation. For example, in the Soviet Union
periods of more centralised economic management alternated with less centralised periods such as
the sovnarkhoz reforms of the late 1950s and perestroika of the late 1980s. Outside the SU, Albania
was highly centralised and Yugoslavia less so. Countries reacted differently to the transition in terms
of how and at what speed decentralisation was undertaken, depending on the political orientation,
proximity to the EU, and level of institutional development.
Decentralisation is at the very core of governance; at its heart are issues of rights (who is entitled to
what), responsibilities (who must deliver what), and accountabilities (who is held accountable, by
whom, and how). Within these governance relationships, the nature of decentralisation also largely
determines the efficiency and effectiveness of spending, defining how much is spent, who has
discretion over inputs, outputs, and outcomes, and what incentives are in place for delivery.
There are some common features of decentralisation across the region. Firstly, there is a general
antipathy towards highly centralised systems, which were historically associated with external control
over national sovereignty, the failure of the state to deliver services in the aftermath of the collapse
of the Soviet Union and Yugoslav Republic, and in many instances the ability of the centre to hold the
country together peacefully. As a result, many adopted decentralised local government structures
quite rapidly in the early 1990s, as set out by the European Charter of Local Self Government.
Decentralisation was also seen as a panacea for social problems but the collapse of government
revenue coupled with very high unemployment meant that new schemes developed crisis symptoms
requiring reform even before they could fully develop. Furthermore, these rapid moves to decentralise
took place even before well-functioning democratic governance had been established at the central
level and in environments with no prior experience in decentralised management of public services.
Some of the major challenges that are common throughout the region are:




The lack of comprehensive and consistent strategies for decentralisation;
Inadequate (or entirely absent) policy coordination mechanisms; and
Excessive fragmentation of local government structures; and
Very high levels of unfunded mandates with respect to critical aspects of child rights
realisation (especially pre-school but also primary education, social services, and in some
instances social assistance).
Local governments are still extremely weak in their capacities and their empowerment vis a vis central
government, thereby limiting their ability to negotiate strongly with the centre on responsibilities and
the sharing of revenue. Furthermore, and perhaps most importantly, some of the ‘governance basics’
are still missing, in terms of a public administration with a culture and norms supporting democratic
and effective delivery. The effective application of power-sharing principles has been slowed down by
specific obstacles, among which: (1) strong dependence on the state, (2) mistrust among agencies and
levels of government, (3) lack of political commitment, (4) fear of losing control, (5) lack of
4
comprehensive educational strategies, (6) weak management capacities, and (7) resistance to change
and to take on greater responsibility.1
The Impact of Decentralization on Early Childhood Education
Broadly understood, the decentralisation of early education systems is an example of the principle of
power sharing - both horizontally and vertically. It is the allocation of responsibility for policy-making,
oversight and delivery across different government departments and levels, and might comprise
market decentralisation when educational services are provided by the private sector alongside public
authorities. The decentralisation of early childhood education systems can act both as a threat and
as an enabler. Under frequent reforms driven by political changes, it can lead to fragmentation,
overlapping responsibilities across agencies, inconsistencies in policies and uneven implementation at
the local level. As an enabler, it brings decision-making closer to those that are being served, allows
for flexibility for local needs, promotes local development of policies and reduces bureaucracy.2 A
2006 OECD study - limited to upper-income countries, the majority of which have consolidated the
responsibility for all forms of early childhood education and care under one ministry - lists among the
positive consequences of decentralisation the integration of early childhood education and care at the
local level and greater sensitivity to local needs. 3
Historically early education has not been a “central” subject in CEE/CIS and with the transition and the
closing down of factories and enterprises, ECE suffered a huge shrinkage. It never quite recovered as
it has often fallen through the crack between national and sub-national governance structures. Based
on traditions of state-funded care, the countries and territories of the CEE/CIS region, share similar
instructional visions, but have adopted a plethora of approaches to decentralisation linked to
different starting points, differentiated rationales and meanings of reforms. This has generated a
varied picture of early childhood education provision, comprising political (devolution),
administrative (deconcentration), fiscal and market transfers of responsibilities. A variety of key ECE
functions, including goal setting, resource allocation, quality assurance and accountability are
currently situated on a continuum from local discretion to central monitoring, with important
differences between the formal situation (de jure) and its application in practice (de facto). While
the concrete legal provisions can be identified more easily, the specific application of policy
frameworks amidst complex governance structures remains more difficult to grasp, but fundamental
for addressing structural inefficiencies in a meaningful way.
Over the past decade in the CEE/CIS region, governments have been strengthening or rebuilding
national and decentralised systems for ECE with some countries, such as Moldova, achieving
significant expansion. However, coverage in many cases remains low with significant gaps in access.
Equity considerations are yet to be mainstreamed in the day-to-day practices. This will require
equitable financial mechanisms, significant strengthening of decentralised capacities, stronger and
more nuanced recognition of disaggregated marginalised groups’ needs and integrated modalities to
meet these.
All the countries covered in the MCE have implemented decentralised preschool education systems
to various extents, with compulsory provision in Mo, FMa and Kg and improved legislative provisions
and complementary services in Ar and Ko*. While financial and administrative decentralisation have
1
Radó, Péter (2010) Governing Decentralized Education Systems : Systemic change in South-Eastern Europe, Budapest:
Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative, Open Society Foundations
2UNESCO (2007) EFA Global Monitoring Report. Strong Foundations: Early childhood care and education. Paris: UNESCO
3 OECD (2006) Starting Strong II : Early Childhood Education andn Care. Paris : OECD, pp. 51-52.
5
progressed, governance and accountability for ECE have mostly not been transferred to the local
level yet.
There has been some improved budget and expenditure reporting for the sector but the complex
arrangements under decentralisation mean that many obstacles remain. Budgetary responsibility
for preschool has been decentralised (to municipalities or local authorities) in most countries of the
region. However, the plethora of mechanisms for fund transfers, ranging from block grants are made
to municipalities based on number of kindergartens (Ko,* and Mo) to allocation of per capita funding
for pre-primary children (Ar, Kg) pose many challenges to the provision, accountability and
transparency of ECE systems. Budget allocations for preschool at municipality level depend on the tax
raising power of the municipalities and their leadership and implementation capacities, creating very
uneven resourcing of the sector across local levels. This has proved problematic for the roll-out of
alternative models of preschool provision.
The administrative integration of ECE services across sectors, as well as the cross-sectoral policy
development and planning remains a challenge, partly due to limited capacity among decentralised
authorities. Whilst local governments have had opportunities to apply to a programme that would
support expansion (Kg, Ar), there is little evidence of capacities and agency at local level to translate
national goals into local interventions (Ko,* Ar, Kg, Mo). There is evidence of municipalities also lacking
capacity to experiment with different models of provision, particularly in urban areas where leaders
appear more reluctant to provide non- traditional provisions (FMa, Kg, Ar). However, where there has
been local political support and individual capacity and interest in ECE, municipalities have been
successful in leveraging resources and building strong relationships with communities around
preschools with good examples observed in a number of countries. This uneven level of
implementation and resourcing has important implications for equity and points to weaknesses at a
system level for preschool education that are part of broader government-wide decentralisation
system bottlenecks.
3. RATIONALE
UNICEF recognises access to quality ECE services as a critical contribution to overcoming disadvantage
and inequity, and has committed to increasing its focus on this area in its most recent Global Strategic
Plan for 2014-2017. Across the CEE/CIS region new impetus and emphasis has been brought to ECE
through the Call for Action: Education Equity Now! launched in 2013 by Education Ministers from 17
countries in the region. As part of a broader education agenda, this Call for Action urges governments
and their partners to accelerate progress towards ensuring that every child is learning early and
enrolling on time. UNICEF has been working in partnership with governments, donors, nongovernmental organisations and civil society organisations to support transition to sustainable, quality
ECE services, able to reach all children aged 3-6. Across the region UNICEF has focussed its
programming at a national systems level, recognising that contributions to upstream system change
and some downstream practice are the most effective routes to the progressive realisation of
children’s rights. In spite of the critical role in social policy, decentralisation has not historically been
recognised as a core area of UNICEF focus. This has been changing, however, as Country Offices are
increasingly encountering decentralisation in areas such as: school optimisation and pre-primary
education
A new strategic guidance document (under preparation/finalization) notes that: In many countries
across the region, responsibilities for ELSR service delivery have been decentralised to sub-national
administrations with the aim of bringing services closer to communities and making them more
responsive to local needs. With uneven and inadequate capacities and resources, however, many
6
decentralised authorities have struggled to deliver on their responsibilities for ELSR, increasing the risk
of inequitable growth and weak quality assurance. This is a significant bottleneck to translating
national system changes (such as new ELSR policies) to positive impacts on the lives and rights of
children. Strengthening broad processes of decentralisation, public administration and institutional
reform is essential to develop the capacities of the decentralised system. Within this it is important to
ensure that these processes are informed by considerations of quality and equity for ELSR service
delivery.
Building on the lessons and experiences from the past decade, and the recommendations of the MCE,
UNICEF is plans to bring a renewed strategic focus to its ECE programming, alert to the fact that due
cognisance must be given to the barriers and enablers with which decentralized social services are
associated.
4. OBJECTIVES
The analytical review will be guided by and attempt to respond to the following overarching questions:
a) What are the key institutional reforms impacting decentralisation and early childhood
education in selected countries and what forms of accountability and participation in decisionmaking do they foster? To what extent are national and sub national governance structures
accountable for equitable service delivery?
b) How do decentralised education governance structures function in practice and what is their
impact on access, equity and quality of ECE?
c) What are the political, fiscal and administrative bottlenecks and capacity constraints and what
is their impact on the delivery of ECE services?
d) What are the challenges and opportunities for fostering equitable and quality early school
services at the local level?
and with particular regard to functions, funds and functionaries
e) Division of responsibilities: How is responsibility for policy direction, legislation, regulation,
planning, management, revenue raising and resource allocation, coordination, quality
assurance, and monitoring and evaluation divided and shared between the national and subnational levels?
f) Financing: From which sources are the responsibilities funded (locally-collected taxes, user
fees, taxes collected by the centre but shared with local level, central grants)? How much
discretion does the decentralised agency have over spending decisions? What criteria are
used in allocating resources at the national and sub national levels, and to what extent are
these criteria responsive to equity considerations?
g) Administration: Who has control over decisions to hire, fire, and promote staff, set salary
levels and working conditions? How is responsibility for infrastructure, maintenance, and
procurement assigned?
The review will provide recommendations for UNICEF’s continued involvement in issues of access,
quality and equity in ECE at sub-national level in the target countries. It will be used to reinforce the
CEE/CIS RKLA 3/4, revise the Theory of Change to incorporate decentralized system issues, and
address the challenges of decentralisation and privatisation of early school education services.
7
5. MAIN TASKS
The consultancy will be expected to perform the following tasks:





Mapping the institutional reforms impacting the decentralised decision-making and delivery
of early childhood education services in the last decade in each of the countries studied and
their effects on different groups of vulnerable children (children with disabilities, ethnic
minorities, poor, rural residents, etc.)
Analysing the distribution between the centre and local levels of roles and responsibilities,
accountability, decision-making and quality assurance mechanisms – with regard to
governance, financing and implementation of preschool education services (provided by both
the public and private sectors).
Identify the political, fiscal, and administrative bottlenecks and capacity constraints for
equitable decentralised pre-school education systems in the selected countries
Identifying potential strategies for engagement including policy priorities for decentralised
levels based on needs assessment (with the help of country offices)
Identifying good practices for the delivery of ECE services at sub-national level both from the
region as well as from advanced economies.
6. COVERAGE
Four countries – one each from Central Asia; the Balkans; the Caucasus; and, western CIS. The
countries will be selected based on several criteria including their sub-regional representativeness and
different models of decentralization. Fieldwork/interviews will be conducted both in the centre and
in selected localities. Localities will be selected on the basis of criteria including: distance from centre;
wealth status; population; and so on.
Stakeholders that will be covered will include: officials from relevant ministries (Education; Regional
Administration; etc.); local authorities; preschool directors and educators; community leaders;
parents.
7. ISSUING OFFICE
Early Childhood Development Section, in collaboration with the Social Protection Section, UNICEF
Regional Office for CEE/CIS, Geneva
8. SUPERVISOR
The consultant(s) will report directly to the Regional Advisor, ECD, Dr. Deepa Grover.
9. QUALITY ASSURANCE
Social Protection Section and the Regional Knowledge and Leadership Area – No. 3/4,
Regional Reference Group.
10. DELIVERABLES
The Table below describes the timeframe and deliverables. The exact dates of the consultancy
assignment will be decided upon based on the availability of the consultant/s and convenience of
selected country offices. Below is an indicative time line.
8
Deliverable
Annotated Outline/Inception Report – including analytical framework (10 pages)
Country Visits x 1 (Brief Trip Report)
Country Visits x 3 (Brief Trip Reports)
First draft (40-60 pages with examples with proposed amended Theory of Change)
Final draft (60 pages)
Power Point Presentation
11. TIME LINE
60-70 days during the period 01 December, 2015 to 30 June, 2016.
12. COMBINATION OF TECHNICAL COMPETENCIES AND QUALIFICATIONS REQUIRED
FOR THIS CONSULTANCY










Advanced university degree in child development and/or social sciences
8-10 years of extensive experience of public policy and public finance.
Knowledge of governance and decentralization in relation to education systems
Knowledge and experience of research in socio-economic issues in CEE/CIS region. Field
experience in CEE/CIS countries is an asset.
Record of academic research experience and/or written publications.
Excellent written English language skills, demonstrable with samples of publications.
Knowledge of Russian or any other language in the CEE/CIS region is an asset.
Excellent drafting skills and ability to synthetize complex information and issues.
Strong analytical and conceptual thinking.
Ability to organize and plan own work following the established timeframes.
Previous experience working for UNICEF an asset
13. TRAVEL
The consultant/s will be required to travel to each of the 4 (four) selected countries for a period of 710 working days to conduct fieldwork and interviews at central and local levels. Consultant/s will be
expected to make own travel arrangements including purchase of air tickets. UNICEF will be invoiced
for travel costs at the end of each mission.
The consultant/s will also be required to travel to the Regional Office in Geneva at least once to make
a presentation of the Draft Report.


Travel and daily subsistence allowances will be as per UNICEF travel rules and regulations
UNICEF at country and regional levels will support travel and local facilitation (e.g. support for
obtaining visas, identification of translators, identification of local facilitators, key
stakeholders to be interviewed, etc.)
9

Any additional specific information regarding the time schedule, procedures, benefits, travel
arrangements and other logistical issues will be discussed with successful candidate/s.
14. EXPRESSION OF INTEREST & ESTIMATED COST OF CONSULTANCY
Together with an Expression of Interest, Curricula Vitae, UN P114, a Concept Note and Draft Plan, the
consultant/s will be required to submit a detailed estimated budget including estimated travel budget
and daily professional fee. All documents should be submitted by email to PETRONILLA MURITHI
pmurithi@unicef.org by Friday, 20 November 2015.
In the subject line of the email please state: Consultancy: ECE Decentralization
15. PAYMENT SCHEDULE
1. 30% prepayment of the total contract fee for inception report, Country Visit 1 and submission
of the report of the pilot; 50% on submission of draft report and 20% on submission of final
report.
2. UNICEF reserves the right to withhold all or a portion of payment if performance is
unsatisfactory, if work/outputs is incomplete, not delivered or for failure to meet deadlines.
Professional fees will be paid on the successful completion of specific tasks and the
satisfactory submission of deliverables.
3. All materials developed will remain the copyright of UNICEF and that UNICEF will be free to
adapt and modify them in the future.
4
P 11 form can be downloaded from http://www.unicef.org/about/employ/files/Personal_History_P11.doc