TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR CONDUCTING BOTTLENECK ANALYSIS
FOR EQUITY IN THE EDUCATION SECTOR OF MONGOLIA
Individual (International) Consultancy
1. Background
Mongolia has sustained high net enrolment rates at the primary and secondary education levels currently at 99.1 per cent and 96.1 per cent respectively. However, certain groups of children are still facing challenges in having full access to quality education services. Overall, dropout rates are declining but boys still dropout of school or simply do not enroll at disproportionately high rates: among the 8-15 age group, 60 per cent of all dropouts are boys. Less than half of all children with disabilities in Mongolia (out of approximately 30,000) have access to education. Existing analyses suggest that learning outcomes have not substantially improved with large disparities between urban and rural areas. Disparities also affect Early Childhood Development (ECD) access, with attendance rate of 45 per cent in rural areas, compared to 68 per cent in the capital. The national preschool enrolment rate is 79 per cent but the enrolment rate stands at only 15 per cent for the most disadvantaged and hard-to-reach children.
In Mongolia, nine-year compulsory education (five years of primary education and four years of lower secondary education) has nearly been universalized. The transition rate from primary to secondary education was 99% in 2011 (UIS); the net enrollment ratio (NER) in primary education was 98.2% in 2012 and 99.1 % in 2014/2015, while the NER in secondary education was 89.9% in 2012 and 96.1% in 2014/2015 (MECS[1]).
Despite the significant achievements, however, challenges to address issues of disparities in education still remain. Children with disabilities, children from ethnic and linguistic minorities, monastic children (mainly boys), and children from poor families residing in remote rural areas and poor peri-urban districts are still facing challenges in having full access to quality education services.
Children with disabilities are perhaps the most disadvantaged in terms of access to education. The 2010 National Population and Housing Census, reported that only 44.4 % of children and youth aged 6 to 19 years old among the 30,132 with disabilities were enrolled in general education. Although the enrolment of children with disabilities in mainstream schools has increased, the coverage is still low and it is pointed out that children with severe disabilities living in remote rural areas do not have any education opportunities.
Survey results show that illiteracy and dropout rates are higher and students’ learning achievement is lower in Bayan-Ulgii province (with a Kazakh majority) than the national averages. Although the dropout rate has decreased over the past years, the province still occupies the biggest proportion (34.5%) of out-of-school children in the entire country for the academic year 2013/2014. Learning achievement of high school graduates from Bayan-Ulgii province in university entrance exams has always been below the national averages in the Mongolian language and subjects such as Mongolian history, social science, biology and geography that require strong Mongolian language competency.
Education of girls outpaces the education of boys. Although overall dropout rates are declining in Mongolia, boys still dropout of school at disproportionately high rates. Among the 6-14 age group, 61% of all dropouts were boys in 2013/2014. In addition, Mongolia lacks an official mechanism to monitor the education as well as other rights of over 1,300 monk boys who practice religion in temples and religious schools, and an estimated 4,000 children who practice religion at home.
Rural populations still tend to be disadvantaged. According to the 2010 MICS[2] data, the primary school completion rate was over 100%for urban children while it was 96% for rural children. NER in secondary education was 97% among urban children as opposed to 89% among rural children. For the academic year of 2013/2014, the total number of OOSC aged 6-14 was 1755 (958 never entered school and 797 dropped out of school) and 61% were boys and 68% were children from herders’ families in rural areas. There is evidence that disparities exist in quality of education provided. Qualitative studies have suggested that rural schools do not always attract well qualified teachers and reportedly there have been critical shortages of teachers qualified to teach certain subjects, such as mathematics, English and information technology.
Despite the significant progress in expanding access to primary and secondary education, the quality of education remains a major challenge. Existing analyses by donor organizations suggest that learning outcomes for Mongolian students have not substantially improved and there are large disparities between urban and rural areas.
UNICEF Mongolia Office is seeking the services on an international individual consultant to conduct a bottleneck analysis for equity in the education sector, that will inform both the Mongolian Ministry of Education, Culture and Science and the UNICEF Mongolia Office in planning and implementing specific targeted interventions for the vulnerable groups of children who have limited access to quality education services. The analysis report is also expected to include a set of recommendations that will inform the new Country Programme Document design for 2017-2021 of the UNICEF Mongolia Office as well as further necessary actions that need to be taken possibly including costing analysis needs.
The analytical process will be based on a gap analysis and an underlying causal analysis in order to understand the determinants of deprivations for disadvantaged and excluded groups.
2. Objectives, Purpose and Expected results
The objective of this consultancy is to support the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science and the UNICEF Mongolia Office in better targeting its education programmes for the vulnerable groups of children through:
(i) Preparation of a national level barriers and bottleneck analysis of the education sector in Mongolia using the UNICEF determinants analysis for equity programming framework;
(ii) Evidence-based policy options and mix of interventions relevant for an upper Middle Income Country like Mongolia to resolve bottlenecks;
(iii) Preparation of a one-pager education sector inputs to the UNICEF Mongolia Education Country Programme for 2017-2021.
3. Description of the assignment
3.1 Work assignments
Phase 1 - Preparing for the analysis: Identifying entry points and engaging stakeholders
Methods of engagement include workshops with government, with participation of high-level officials and partners at central and decentralized levels, to introduce the approach and its practical application.
Phase 2 – Conducting the barrier bottleneck analysis
Once partners are engaged, the analysis can begin. The analysis stage will involve three main steps:
Step 1: Analyse the determinants of deprivations and prioritize bottlenecks based on available data
The focus of the analysis will be on describing areas of persisting disparities and vulnerability in accessing education services in pre-school, primary, lower and upper secondary education sub-sectors. Disparities will be analyzed based on their different and intersecting nature: by gender, socio-economic status, geographic location, disability status etc. A human rights lens will be maintained in this analysis in terms of describing the profile of vulnerable rights holders whose rights to access services are being neglected. Duty bearer analysis will be undertaken in Step 2 (gap/causal analysis).
The analysis will therefore address the “what” and the “who” of the situation in terms of inequalities (disparities) and vulnerability. The “why” (gap/causal analysis) will be addressed in Step 2.
Once the determinants are clearly defined, bottlenecks can be identified through:
Identifying indicator(s) to measure the extent to which each determinant is fulfilled. Using the education example above, to assess the determinant ‘access of students to trained teachers’, the indicator ‘ratio of students to trained teachers’ could be considered. If this is low relative to the established standard, then ‘access to trained teachers’ would be bottleneck.
Reviewing available quantitative and qualitative data and information (including studies, evaluations, etc.) to identify bottlenecks. Indicator/s can then be used to track progress in addressing the bottleneck.
Potential data sources to establish baselines for determinants are MICS, DHS and other major household surveys[3], routine data from national data collection systems such as HMIS, EMIS, justice system databases, police records, sentinel site surveillance data and qualitative studies.
During this stage, it is also important to identify deprivations and inequities across sectors that affect the same groups of children, as well as main causes that are common across sectors. Causes of deprivations are often cross-sectorial (e.g. related to financial access or social norms) and can benefit from common approaches or contributions (for example, joint strategies to address social norms related to disability or provision of social protection measures to ensure access to a range of services).
Evidence-based strategies to address the bottlenecks are then identified and agreed with the government partners.
Once all data are collected, UNICEF and key partners and other stakeholders will analyze the data to identify priority bottlenecks. This analysis should keep the equity focus in mind, i.e. identifying universal bottlenecks versus those that relate to particular groups (e.g. based on gender, location, ethnicity, disability, socio-economic status, etc.).
Step 2: Identifying the causes of bottlenecks
When the most crucial bottlenecks are identified, an in-depth causality analysis should be carried out in collaboration with key local stakeholders to identify the causes of the bottlenecks. Programs will benefit from a determinant analysis only if the root causes of bottlenecks are identified and addressed. It is important to involve the duty-bearers[4] (particularly for the supply and quality determinants) and the rights holders (i.e. target population), particularly for the demand side determinants and to really drill down to root causes by asking ‘Why?’). In some instances, qualitative data gathered through Focus Group Discussions and Key Informant Interviews can be used to gain a better understanding of causes from target populations and stakeholders. This causal analysis can build on the analysis of causes of deprivations that were identified earlier, and deepen the analysis or validate it.
Setting realistic targets for bottleneck reduction and improved coverage of interventions/services will determine the expected outcome or impact and the estimated cost-effectiveness of the strategies adopted. The decision about the targets should be informed by the available evidence on the solutions identified to address the causes of bottlenecks, and on the consensus of local experts.
The bottleneck analysis is undertaken adopting an analytical framework that uses three categories of gaps determinants: the enabling environment, the supply side and the demand side.
A. Enabling Environment
This gap level refers to policies, programmes, strategies, budgets at national level. It will assess the adequacy of laws and policies, the allocation and disbursement of required resources, roles and accountability/coordination /partnership
B. Supply side
This gap level refers to the availability of essential commodities, inputs, services and their quality. It assesses the availability of essential commodities/inputs required to deliver a service, but also the physical access (services, facilities, information). Quality of service provision is also analysed, understood as adherence to required quality standards (national or international norms)
C. Demand Side
This gap level refers to financial access, social and cultural practices and beliefs. It will assess direct and indirect costs for services/practices, but also Social and Cultural Practices and Beliefs, understood as Individual/community beliefs, awareness, behaviors, practices, attitudes.
Each horizontal level of gaps determinants is necessary but singularly insufficient to inform sound programming; the three gap levels are inter-dependent and each contributes to improved coverage of interventions/services. The framework implies a vertical logicacross the categories, i.e.
o Is an enabling environment in place that supports supply of and demand for quality interventions/services?
o Are the necessary interventions/services adequately staffed and accessible to the most deprived populations?
o If the interventions/services are accessible to the most deprived populations, is there demand for them – are they acceptable, affordable and are they being used?
o Are the interventions/services of adequate quality to achieve the desired results?
This exercise will lead to the identification of key bottlenecks forming the basis for policy recommendations and mix of interventions to address the agreed bottlenecks.
Step 3: Identifying and agreeing with government partners policy options and mix of interventions to address the identified bottlenecks to significantly reduce deprivations in the targeted groups and areas, based on available evidence of ‘what works’.
Step 3 is aimed at linking agreed bottlenecks to selected policy recommendations and mix of interventions, with the aim not just to keep vulnerable populations from falling back into extreme difficulty and deprivation, but also to create an enabling environment for their continuing human development advancement in the decades to come, increasing access to quality service delivery.
Policy recommendations will have a particular focus on resilience. For the purpose of this exercise, resilience is defined as “the ability of a system, community or society exposed to hazards to resist, absorb, accommodate to and recover from the effects of a hazard in a timely and efficient manner” (United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction).
Steps 2 and 3 will be undertaken in the form of a two day workshop, facilitated by the selected consultant and follow up discussions with key government partners.
3.2 Specific outputs of the assignment
(i) A draft national level bottleneck analysis of the education sector in Mongolia using the UNICEF determinants analysis for equity programming framework by 30 November 2015. This tool will be shared/explained in detail to the selected contractor;
(ii) Draft recommendations of evidence-based policy options and mix of interventions relevant in an upper Middle Income Country like Mongolia, to address the identified bottlenecks by 30 November 2015;
(iii) From the bottleneck analysis, prepare a one page education sector inputs to the UNICEF Mongolia Country Programme for 2017-2021 by 30 November 2015;
(iv) A final report reflecting comments by UNICEF and counterparts by 15 December 2015.
4. Deliverables and Reporting requirements
· A draft workshop report including agreed bottlenecks and interventions to address bottlenecks by 30 November 2015
· A draft bottleneck analysis report by 30 November 2015
· a one page education sector inputs to the UNICEF Mongolia Country Programme for 2017-2021 by 30 November 2015
· A final bottleneck analysis report reflecting comments by UNICEF and counterparts by 15 December 2015.