© GPE/Chantal Rigaud

Section 1

Section 4

Develop and Appraise ECE Subsector Plans

Jump to the tools

Introduction

Section 4 continues the Education Sector Plan (ESP) development process and focuses on articulating and putting together the Education Sector Plan (ESP)’s ECE components (ECE strategies, activities, indicators and targets) in the operational plan.

A note on terminology: The operational plan is also referred to as an implementation plan or action plan. As noted in MOOC Module 5 (p. 18), in countries with effective annual operational plans, there is a tendency to not have multi-year action plans. For the purposes of this toolkit, we will refer to “operational plan”, “action plan” or “multi-year action plan” interchangeably, though noting that some countries also have annual operational plans.

The operational plan puts into action the Education Sector Planning (ESP) over the medium term (generally two or three years), by specifying implementation arrangements (i.e., which entity is responsible for each activity), as well as each activity’s timing, cost and sources of financing and related outputs.

The tools in Section 4 build on the guidance provided in the IIEP-UNESCO and GPE’s Guidelines for Education Sector Plan Preparation (pages 23-27) and MOOC Module 5. The goal is to arrive at an operational, action-oriented plan to implement the ECE strategies and activities, with accountability mechanisms and understanding of implementation capacity. It also helps ensure the coherence and feasibility of the ECE components across the Education Sector Planning (ESP), operational plan and results framework, as well as alignment with broader sector-wide priorities and strategies.

As mentioned in MOOC Module 4 and Module 5, the ECE subsector may be addressed in one of two ways in the ESP:

  1. the ECE subsector is a stand-alone programme in the Education Sector Planning (ESP) (e., the ECE subsector is addressed as a distinct policy priority); or
  2. the ECE strategies and activities may be dispersed across thematic areas (such as access, quality, etc.).

In the case of (2), it may be helpful to develop a specific ECE subsector operational plan, either during or following the ESP preparation process. This will facilitate managing and monitoring the implementation of the ECE subsector’s activities in a more detailed way than may be feasible to include in whole-sector operational plans. This specific ECE subsector operational plan must be linked to and aligned with the overall sector-wide operational plan. The tools in this section are also relevant to the development of such a specific ECE subsector operational plan.

Effective implementation of the Education Sector Planning (ESP) necessitates sufficient implementation capacity across the education system, including the ECE subsector. An overall analysis of the capacity for implementing the ECE components of the ESP should be conducted, as this may result in rethinking or adjusting the Education Sector Planning (ESP) – such as revising the objectives for ECE, or including a capacity development strategy or series of activities in the Education Sector Planning (ESP) that addresses the key capacity constraints.

Figure 1. Main phases of the Education Sector Planning (ESP) development process, phases 5-7 highlighted
Figure 1. Main phases of the Education Sector Planning (ESP) development process, phases 5-7 highlighted Source: MOOC Module 5

Reminders

It is recommended to refer back to the tools in Section 3 as a starting point for Section 4. Section 3 supports and strengthens the development of the ECE components (ECE strategies, activities, indicators and targets) to be included in the operational plan.

It is useful to refer to and use tool “4.2 Checklist: ECE Implementation Feasibility and Capacity Appraisal for the ESP” as you develop the Education Sector Planning (ESP)’s ECE components (ECE strategies, activities, indicators and targets) to conduct an initial feasibility and alignment check. In this Section 4, the tool is used in the context of a final review and appraisal of the ECE components.

The tools in Section 4 may be used even if your country is not currently engaged in an Education Sector Planning (ESP) preparation process. They are relevant and applicable in the context of developing ECE operational plans in general – for example, they may be used to support the formulation of an ECE action plan for a funding/grant opportunity, or for guiding a subsector reform.

Section 4 Objectives

The overall objective is to arrive at an operational, action-oriented plan to implement the ECE strategies and activities, with accountability mechanisms and understanding of implementation capacity.

To achieve this objective, the following actions should take place:

This action will help you (or the ECE TWG stakeholders) translate the ECE components (ECE strategies, activities, indicators and targets) into an operational plan with designated timing, cost, sources of financing, related outputs and stakeholders accountable.

This action will help you check and ensure the consistency, coherence and feasibility of the ECE components across the Education Sector Planning (ESP) documents. It will also help ensure alignment with broader sector-wide priorities and strategies. The feasibility check also entails examining the different implementation factors to determine whether the education system, including the ECE subsector, has the requisite capacity to effectively implement the ECE components – this will help you consider whether adjustments to the ESP, Education Sector Planning (ESP) results framework, and operational plan are needed (for example, adjusting the ECE strategies and activities and their costs to address capacity development needs required for plan implementation).

Section 4 Tools

The tools featured in this section will help ECE TWG stakeholders arrive at an operational, action-oriented plan to implement the ECE strategies and activities, with accountability mechanisms and understanding of implementation capacity.

Cross-cutting considerations for Section 4

Through the iterative process of developing the ECE components (strategies, activities, indicators, targets and costs) of the Education Sector Planning (ESP), ECE components that are developed should be responsive to and address cross-cutting issues identified in your analysis. For example, access to quality ECE may be widespread in your country and expansion may not be identified as a priority strategy. However, if children with disabilities and children affected by displacement have not been meaningfully included in the ECE system, equity issues should be emphasized and addressed within strategies in the plan (see examples of selecting strategies in Tool 3.1 related to inclusion and crisis).

Important: When incorporating ECE components (e.g. strategies, activities, indicators, targets, and costs) in your operational plan using Tool 4.1 and Section 3 Cross-Cutting Considerations, you will be including strategies that address cross-cutting issues related to crisis, inclusion and gender. You may need to revisit and revise these components based on the data available and cross-cutting considerations outlined in Section 2 and 3.

Tool 4.2 has further “checks” or questions that will ensure your operational plan addresses cross-cutting themes as well as a rapid institutional capacity assessment to ensure you have the institutional capacity to implement your plan.

As emphasized in this toolkit, the Education Sector Plan (ESP) development process is an iterative exercise, meaning that there are various opportunities to reflect on and review how the ECE subsector is featured. The work on developing the operational plan presents such an opportunity to reflect back on whether the ECE components (ECE strategies, activities, indicators and targets) respond to your vision of quality ECE.

Consider the following when planning for and costing quality ECE:

  • Curriculum: A developmentally appropriate and pedagogically sound curriculum with an inclusive and holistic approach to learning helps enable children to reach their full potential. In particular, a play-based learning approach empowers children’s active and hands-on exploration of the world around them.
  • Teachers: Teachers are vital to provide young children with quality early learning experiences. It is therefore crucial that they are valued and well supported. This entails developing robust strategies for growing and supporting the pre-primary workforce. In the short term, greater numbers of teachers with lower initial qualifications can be hired to grow the cadre of teachers, compensating with investments in intensive continuous professional development and on-the-job mentoring. This should be coupled with a longer-term strategy for gradually upgrading teacher qualifications and retaining quality teachers.
  • Family engagement: Parents/caregivers are children’s “first educators” and have a key role as advocates for and supporters of quality ECE. Family engagement should therefore be prioritized in the Education Sector Plan (ESP). There should be a clear strategy for engaging and empowering families as active participants in their children’s development and education – both at home and in the ECE settings.
  • Quality standards: Clear quality standards for the ECE subsector should be in place, with a functional framework for regular monitoring of ECE programmes across both public and non-state/private providers. A key quality goal should be to lower the pupil-teacher-ratio to no more than 20 children per teacher.
  • Budgeting: To ensure quality, it is recommended to dedicate at least 25% of recurrent pre-primary budgets to non-salary expenditures, so that key quality investments, such as teacher training, curriculum development, teaching and learning materials and quality assurance mechanisms can be prioritized.
  • Equity: The provision of quality ECE recognizes the disparities and inequalities that exist within a country (gender, socioeconomic status, ethnicity, refugee status, disability status, etc.) and how these factors affect a child’s early education (in both access to ECE and quality of ECE). The strategies for the ECE subsector should respond to the particular needs of different groups and address disparities. Prioritizing the most vulnerable, marginalized and disadvantaged children should be the starting point.
  • Diverse models of ECE: The ECE landscape is complex, with multiple delivery mechanisms (state, non-state, religious, community-based, etc.). The length and frequency of ECE programmes also vary greatly. This complexity provides the opportunity to foster the development of flexible and innovative approaches and programmes that can complement mainstream public provision. This helps support the children who are most vulnerable to exclusion from traditional public or private programmes.
  • Transition to early primary grades: The transition from ECE to primary school is a big step for all children. A seamless and stress-free experience at this stage can influence children’s next steps in their educational and personal growth journeys. Quality transitions help ensure that that the positive impacts of early education are carried over and last through primary school and beyond. Quality transitions are those that are well-prepared and child-centered; guided by trained ECE and primary staff collaborating with one another; anchored in appropriate and aligned curricula; and connected to family and community engagement.

Common challenges related to cross-cutting themes (such as crisis, gender and inclusion) to be aware of and address when developing the operational plans:

 

Crisis-sensitive, gender equitable, and/or inclusive strategies and activities are sometimes included in initial drafts of ECE components of plans but then removed as “non-essential” strategies and activities in later drafts or deemed as “too expensive” or “too time-consuming.” If omitting these cross-cutting areas, the plan’s ability to make equitable, longer-term, long-lasting sustainable change is compromised.

Tips to Mitigate this Challenge:

  • When adjusting and revising plans, advocate for crisis, gender and inclusion strategies and activities being part of “non-negotiable” strategies and activities to maintain in plans.
  • Use the rapid capacity assessment in Tool 4.2 to identify which human and financial resources are available and needed for maintaining cross-cutting strategies and activities in plans.

 

Crisis, inclusion and gender-related strategies and activities included in plans may not have adequate targets and indicators associated or may not be adequately costed.

Tips to Mitigate this Challenge:

In addition to using Tools 2.3, 3.2, 3.3, and 4.1 to determine how to develop targets, indicators and cost strategies and activities, including cross-cutting areas:

  • Make sure inclusion, crisis and/or gender-related strategies have associated fit-for-purpose indicators and targets which are inclusive, gender-responsive, and/or crisis-sensitive.
  • Make sure that all of the “ingredients” – or parts of the overall costs – such as personnel, facilities, services, equipment, and parent/community contributions are included when developing budgets.
  • For more information and examples of “ingredients” related to gender and crisis, refer to the EiE-GenKit: A Core Resource Package on Gender in Education in Emergencies (forthcoming).

Additional Resources

Resource
Resource package

UNGEI, Education Cannot Wait, and INEE EiE-GenKit: A Core Resource Package on Gender in Education in Emergencies