ECE REGULATORY ANALYSIS_FINAL
A Rapid Review of ECE Regulatory Frameworks and
Policies for the Afghanistan Ministry of Education
March 2021
Acknowledgements
Early Childhood Education in South-Central Asia: A Rapid Review of ECE Policies/Regulatory
Frameworks for the Afghanistan Ministry of Education was prepared by Kesha Lee and Palwasha
Mirbacha under the leadership of Tsuyoshi Fukao. Amna Ansari, Saodat Bazarova, Kanupriya
Misra, Nodira Meliboeva and Mayo Shinozaki provided valuable contributions, data and
assistance for completing this report.
1
CONTENTS
Summary…………………………………………………………….3
Background………………………………………………………….7
Objectives
Report Structure
Section 1: Approach and Analytical Framework……………….10
Section 2: Methodology…………………………………….…….13
Section 3: Key Findings……………………………….………….14
Section 4: Discussion and Implications for Afghanistan………19
Section 5: Conclusions and Limitations…………………………43
Summary of Findings and Implications for Afghanistan
Section 6: Annexes………………………………………………..46
Annex 1: Concept Note
Annex 2: Methodology
Annex 3: Overview of ECE Regulatory Frameworks in Three Countries
A. India
B. Pakistan
C. Tajikistan
Annex 4: References
2
SUMMARY
Early childhood service provision is provided by a range of programs, which primarily are
administered by the education, health and social welfare sectors within a given country. Although
the overarching aim of these services is to provide high quality care and early learning to young
children and mothers, each sector brings different values, frameworks and practices to the table
which can make effective planning and service provision challenging.
The study aims for Afghanistan education policy makers to assess the regulatory approaches and
early childhood education (ECE) policies in comparator countries, looking at those countries that
represent a range of development options to inform the design of the prospective early childhood
regulatory framework in Afghanistan. Accordingly, this report presents the findings from an
investigation of the early childhood regulatory regimes of three countries – India, Pakistan and
Tajikistan. Mainly investigating the ECE regulatory framework, which is defined as the laws
and/or policies that are used to set the expected quality of ECE service delivery and outcomes, and
the systems in place to facilitate service delivery.
In this desk review the authors have attempted to provide comparative analysis of published
evidence on the legal framework, inter-sectoral coordination mechanisms and financing
mechanisms of three countries in south-central Asia. The study has identified a range of specific
and more general recommendations to inform the Ministry of Education (MOE) in Afghanistan’s
ECE policy planning process. While information relevant specifically to the comparator countries
are presented in the annex, the main report presents the following core themes/findings and
considerations for the MOE in Afghanistan:
• Governance: Central level actors, such as ministries of education, are core and critical
facilitators in ECE policy planning activities. These core actors use their decision-making
authority to maximize existing government structures and committees and build consensus
horizontally (with other ministries) and vertically (with subnational government agencies,
NGOs and the private sector). This includes providing accessible onramps for policy
planning in contexts where resources (human and capital) are limited. The ministries of
education and other central level actors (e.g., health, social welfare, national curriculum
boards) in the comparator countries examined for this report all demonstrate the importance
of aligning and integrating ECE sub-sector plans and activities with national education
plans and the formal education structure in order to establish a sustainable ECE subsector.
These plans reflect international alignment (SDG goal 4.2) but more broadly a variety of
socio-economic, educational, developmental and political contexts in which the plans were
developed.
Establishing clear governance and regulatory documents bolstered and helped define
stakeholder roles and contributed to a multifaceted vision and understanding of the
importance of ECE provision among stakeholders in the comparator countries. However,
each country’s ability to adhere to regulatory requirements was complicated by capacity
constraints, administrative burden and uneven monitoring of public and private providers.
Although ECE planning in Afghanistan is in the relatively nascent stages, this positioning
could be framed as an advantage, as the country has an opportunity to identify specific,
3
evidence-based quality standards that match the country’s capacity, potentially avoiding
some of the challenges experienced by the comparator countries. Moreover, the MOE in
Afghanistan has a unique opportunity to outline core roles and responsibilities without the
challenge of navigating deeply entrenched role identities.
In this manner, the desk review highlights opportunities for the MOE to explore
possibilities for aligning with current strategies already in process such as education sector
planning activities and/or determining the appropriate level of ECE governance by
consulting public and private providers of ECE models already time tested on the ground.
The report also highlights an opportunity for the MOE to consider designing regulations
that support minimum quality standards for ECE expansion and monitoring activities that
clearly spell out structural and process quality standards. The MOE should consider these
findings in light of its current resources. Utilizing existing programs, especially models
proven to be effective with the most vulnerable communities in Afghanistan, may provide
an initial map for the MOE to ground its ECE policy planning activities.
Key recommendation: The prospective national ECE
policy should support Afghan children’s holistic
development needs by ensuring their full physical,
mental, and social development and thus preparing
children for primary/formal schooling. In this
process, alignment with existing practices and
building on their gains is recommended way forward
and ultimately allow MOE to focus on service
delivery standards, monitoring and access to ECE
provisions in a more systemic and collaborative
manner.
• Stakeholder Coordination: The countries studied can be characterized as having
decentralized systems. Variations of national, state-level/regional and/or local level
governance have been employed to facilitate ECE provision for eligible children in each
comparator country. National level governance appears to be most prevalent in facilitating
policies, standards, codes and guidelines for sub-national and local governments to follow.
This type of framework affords subnational authorities (provincial governments, regional
education authorities and local education districts for example) more autonomy to apply
and adapt policies that are more applicable to their region/localities. On the other hand, this
framework may result in service delivery with high degrees of local and regional variation.
Still, effective ECE policy planning relies on strong central level (including the ministry of
education, other ministries such as health and nutrition, and national councils such as
national curriculum boards). Once the central level actors have been identified as the core
and critical component of ECE policy planning, outlining subsequent roles and
responsibilities for national and subnational actors involved in ECE/ECD service delivery
becomes an essential short-term priority.
4
To ensure good intersectoral policy coordination and implementation, central leadership
must present an overall vision for coordination that may be presented as a collaborative
arrangement across sectors and/or as a centralized leadership facilitating the collaborative
activities. It might also include a multisectoral body composed of high-level ministers or
deputy ministers, be organized as a technical body, or both may be created. Given the
nature of ECE for being part of the ECD it is important that alignment occurs across sectors
including health and nutrition among others. Accordingly, the lead central level ministries
in early childhood development tend to be education, health or protection (Vargas-Barón
2016). Regardless of the approach to intersectoral and stakeholder coordination, clear
national leadership related to ECE goals appears to be critical for service delivery and
creating the conditions for a robust ECD coordination mechanism in the long-term. In the
comparator countries, the ministries of education (School Education Department in the
Government of the Punjab) often served as the central leader on ECE activities.
Key recommendation: In Afghanistan, the MoE must
engage to facilitate ECE regulations and
coordination (whether vertically or horizontal) at the
national level. Regardless of the approach to
intersectional or stakeholder coordination, clear
national leadership related to ECE/ECD goals are
critical for service delivery and creating the
conditions for a robust ECD coordination mechanism
in the long-term. Ultimately, more autonomy of the
subnational authorities allow for their adaption of
the policies that are more applicable to their area of
work and also map-out approaches to local
engagement with key stakeholders like parents and
community for more comprehensive service delivery
in the local context.
• Viable Financing Mechanisms: Intentional budget planning processes were shown to be
critical in the establishment of ECE policy planning in the comparator countries. Cost-
sharing and considering other innovative (varied/diverse) financing mechanisms across,
families, communities, CBE providers and private institutions are critical components for
increasing the supply of ECE classrooms. All countries reviewed in this report had
insufficient financial outlays to fully fund the ECE subsectors. Some reports suggest that
countries should devote at least 10 percent of their total education budgets to ECE in order
to achieve SDG 4.2 by 2030.1 However, this contributes to creating many lessons that the
MOE may learn from when considering how to best establish sustainable financing for its
ECE sub-sector and target public resources to the most vulnerable children. Innovative
financing mechanisms discussed include per capital financing schemes, instituting official
cost sharing arrangements with implementing partners and/or communities to maximize
1
See, “Setting New Targets for Success: The Major lesson in pre-primary education and we can invest to improve equity and learning by 2030�? (Their World, March 2021)
5
donor financial outlays, and considering opportunities to pilot equitable family
contributions to support ECE provision. Prioritizing regulations or targeting strategies to
allocate limited ECE finances to create equitable service provision was uncovered in India
(need based funding scheme) and Tajikistan (per capita financing (PCF) scheme). A range
of social, developmental and economic criteria are used by the study countries to focus the
targeting strategies, with the most common prioritizing regulations aimed at enhancing
ECE participation for children from low-income families and children with special
educational needs or disability.
Key recommendation: Small portion of national
education budget is dedicated for ECE provisions
that are often insufficient to meet the goals and needs
in the sub-sector. However, prioritizing social,
development and economic criteria under targeting
schemes would enhance authorities ability to
prioritize children from low-income families with
disadvantage backgrounds and special education
needs.
Building on these findings, this study concludes with a discussion and policy considerations for
the case of Afghanistan and provides additional notes on the process of identifying best practices
in comparable countries and transplanting them into a different policy, regulatory social and
economic context.
6
BACKGROUND
Afghanistan, now in its decade of transition, seeks to strengthen its self-reliance and build
sustainable systems that support the nation’s efforts toward peace, recovery, growth and
productivity. One effective strategy governments employ for reducing social inequity and poverty
is to adopt early childhood care and education policies. National early childhood education (ECE)
policies and holistic early childhood development (ECD) frameworks help set the stage for quality
pre-primary services that can yield a long-term significant educational, developmental, social and
economic benefits. This rapid review investigated the ways in which south-central Asian countries
have defined their early childhood education laws and standards, in order to draw lessons for
policymakers, officials and other stakeholders in Afghanistan who are charged with developing
ECE policies that will ultimately inform the nation’s comprehensive ECD strategy.
Afghanistan, through its Education Law is committed to the provision of free and quality education
for its citizens.2 Since 2001, tremendous education progress, both in terms of improving access
and quality of education for Afghan children has been achieved. In 2017, the Afghan Government
renewed its commitment to enhance education quality and life-long opportunities for all students.
This includes the expansion of quality ECE services and the goal to increase national enrollment
in early education centers by 13 percent (NESP 2030).3 However, several challenges impede the
government’s efforts to reach its stated objectives. One key obstacle includes the dearth of national
policies that organize and mandate the provision of early childhood education and services.
Moreover, the early childhood education sub-sector is in the nascent stages in Afghanistan and
require capacity and strategic, participatory policy planning initiatives in order to realize the full
potential of a sustained and quality ECE system for all children.
The current landscape of diverse early childhood development programs across the Afghan
government, private and civil society sectors magnify the challenges of an uncoordinated system
with no unified early childhood policy, standards and/or regulations. While certain sectors may
have policies and/or programs that include young children, the country has yet to define an ECE
policy. Policies and legislation for quality ECE convey the government’s vision and commitment
and can help inform the framework for sustained implementation of ECD services. On the other
hand, the sustained absence of multisectoral ECD policies and ECE policies that promote pre-
primary education may exacerbate a fragmented system and reduce a government’s ability to
catalyze human and financial investments to support development of a pre-primary subsector
(UNESCO 2019).
Given the government’s commitment to and vision for providing equitable, inclusive and quality
ECD services and programs for all families and children living in Afghanistan, the Ministry of
Education seeks to draw lessons from the early childhood regulatory approaches of comparator
countries in south-central Asia, especially in the specific area of ECE, that will inform the
Ministry’s development of a quality ECE policy, and eventually a comprehensive ECD
framework. This includes methods to enhance coordination with various actors in the subsector
2
Article 4.2 states that “Pre-school educational level, intermediate (basic) education, secondary, technical-professional, vocational, artistic, formal Islamic education, (Thirteenth
and fourteenth grades) teachers’ training, literacy and basic practical education in the public educational
institutions are to be provided for free. The law prescribes that a public pre-primary education be provided to children free of charge under the age of seven.
3
At the time of this report, Afghanistan’s Third National Education Sector Plan (NESP III) was under development. References to NESP III may be derived from a combination of
unpublished planning documents and/or key stakeholders.
7
and opportunities for leveraging sufficient resources for the provision of quality ECE as per the
National Education Sector Plan. Designing a strong ECE regulatory framework can support the
ministry in its efforts to not only expand ECE to the country’s most vulnerable children but to
ensure that those children are receiving quality ECE services.
OBJECTIVES
The overarching purpose of this study has been to identify critical lessons and opportunities to
support the Afghan Ministry of Education as they initiate the process for the establishment of an
adequate, effective and unifying ECE regulatory framework. This study investigates and draws on
practices and lessons learned from the early childhood regulatory frameworks of neighboring
countries in South-Central Asia. Specifically, the desk review has focused on exploring SABER
ECD policy goals and levers in which Afghanistan has scope to advance, and in which the
frameworks of other, comparator countries, (India, Pakistan, and Tajikistan) present opportunities
that may inform the country’s design of quality ECE policies and standards. Through an analysis
of the aforementioned countries’ ECE regulatory frameworks, the study has endeavored to
identify and assess the extent to which ECE legal features and standards in comparator countries
might be relatable to the context in Afghanistan.
While the evidence base for this desk review has come from a few selected countries, when
juxtaposed with the case of Afghanistan, its main purpose has been to draw out findings that may
inform the participatory planning process(es) recommended to form a sustainable and quality ECE
8
REPORT STRUCTURE
This report highlights the findings from the desk review and policy planning considerations for the
MOE in Afghanistan, as they emerged from investigating the early childhood education regulatory
frameworks of three target countries: India, Pakistan, and Tajikistan. After a short introductory
section outlining background information, this report is separated into five core sections.
The first section provides an overview of the approach and analytical framework that have
informed the study. Informed by the SABER Policy Framework, it organizes the complex
discussion of early childhood regulatory frameworks into three overarching questions or policy
levers in order to uncover insights that might inform the pre-primary sector planning and
development in Afghanistan.
Section two introduces the desk review methodology and draws attention to the meta-analysis
employed to produce an analytical and descriptive synthesis of the contextual features of the
policies and mechanisms that form each target countries pre-primary sector. Sections three, four
and five, respectively, discusses the key findings, implications for Afghanistan and conclusions
derived from analyzing the comparator country frameworks in order to highlight key
considerations for the case of Afghanistan.
The main body of the report is supplemented by Section 6 – Annexes. The annexes include the
concept note that informs this desk review, additional information on the desk review
methodology, a summary of the comparator countries regulatory frameworks and finally a list of
references consulted in this report.
9
SECTION 1: APPROACH AND ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK
A starting point for this desk review, and a key component of the analytical framework, is the
Afghanistan SABER ECD Policy Paper. (Molina et al. 2017) This conceptual model has been
informed by existing research which demonstrates the importance of establishing an enabling
environment and the participatory policy planning processes that drive the creation of effective
early childhood policies and ultimately, a sustainable ECD regulatory framework.
Moreover, SABER-ECD collects, analyzes, and disseminates comparable international data on
national and subnational ECD systems including ECD policies and programs. SABER-ECD is
useful as an analytical tool for this study because it identifies strengths and areas for improvement
within the pre-primary sector, elevates international comparisons and examples for inferences, and
generates policy options to improve ECD. As noted in Figure 1 below, the SABER-ECD
framework includes three policy goals and nine associated policy levers that contribute to the
development of effective ECD policies and ultimately positive early childhood development
outcomes.
Figure 1: SABER -ECD Policy Goals and Levers
Source: What Matters Most for ECD: A Framework Paper, p18 (January 2013)
As outlined in the concept note and the Afghanistan SABER ECD Policy Paper, this desk
review centers Policy Goal 1: Establishing an Enabling Environment. SABER describes an
enabling environment as the “foundation for the design and implementation of effective ECD
policies�?. An enabling environment consist of an adequate legal and regulatory framework to
support ECD; coordination within sectors and across institutions for effective service delivery; and
sufficient fiscal resources to support policy implementation.
10
Afghanistan as described by SABER ECD is positioned in the initial, or latent stage of policy
preparedness and implementation status (SABER 2016). Coincidently, the ECE sub-sector is also
in the early stages of policy formation and fostering partnerships among stakeholders that have
precedence in the provision of early childhood education in Afghanistan. This stage presents a
vital opportunity for Afghanistan policy makers and partners to analyze the practices of countries
similar in context and geography to Afghanistan. Doing so may support Afghan ECE stakeholders
in the process of policy development, standards formation and ultimately the uniform provision of
ECE in the country by both the Ministry of Education and the private sector. Considering this,
only the policy levers related to the establishment of a pre-primary enabling environment are
examined for each comparator country included in this review. Furthermore, Policy Goal 1 (Policy
Lever 1.1 Legal Framework) or the collection of laws and regulations that affect the development
of children in a country, will be the primary driver of each comparator country analysis. Policy
Levers 1.2 (Intersectoral Coordination) and 1.3 (Finance) will be discussed to the extent that the
desk review team identified evidence for inclusion.
As a general rule, we do not attempt to discuss in detail the policies, laws or regulations that might
compromise the legal/regulatory framework of a comprehensive ECD system such as healthcare,
nutrition, social protection and/or child protection. However, because ECD is often included as a
component of the education sector and education is always included in multisectoral ECD services,
some of the aforementioned policies or laws may be mentioned in the course of discussing the
ECE components of the comparator country regulatory frameworks included within this report.
Figure 2 illustrates one model of how ECE policies are embedded in an integrated system for early
childhood care and development and highlights the types of interventions that may be connected
to policies analyzed in this paper. However, as discussed in Section 1, this report focuses primarily
on ECE or pre-primary schooling.
Finally, this report focuses on the Afghan’s Ministry of Education’s Early Childhood Education
subdivision which includes one or, in some cases, two years of formal or informal schooling prior
to grade one with the intention of preparing children for transitioning to primary school.
11
Figure 2: SABER -ECD Comprehensive ECD Framework Concept
12
SECTION 2: METHODOLOGY
This section presents a brief outline of the process followed to complete this desk study.
Additional details of the methodology can also be found in Annex 2.
The methodology followed to complete this desk review had three components: scoping, data
collection, and analysis.
The scoping phase refers to the steps taken to select countries for investigation and inclusion in
the study. The regulatory area (e.g. pre-primary subsector) was pre-defined for investigation by
the concept note that defined the conditions of this study. The selection of countries for review
was limited to LMICs in south-central Asia because of the Afghanistan government’s specific
interest in understanding the regulatory frameworks of neighboring countries. Considering the
aforementioned, the following considerations informed the selection of comparator countries
discussed in this desk study: (i) comparability of the countries to Afghanistan in terms of location
and inclusion of vulnerable populations, (ii) scope and level of detail of the information available
from the country’s early childhood regulatory framework and (iii) evidence of best-practices or
development(s) in the pre-primary subsector main features as indicated by research. The countries
selected for comparison and to identify practices that may inform the regulatory framework of
Afghanistan include India, Pakistan, and Tajikistan.
The data collection phase involved desk research to identify and review relevant documentation.
This included applicable reports and papers from government bodies and international
organizations, white papers, academic reports, grey literature, articles as well as primary
legislation and World Bank/Global Partnership for Education’s Education Sector Plans. The desk
research was supplemented by in-depth interviews and/or emails with Bank task team leaders and
consultants.
The analysis of the data collected consisted of studying each model country as a case, triangulating
the information obtained from various sources to describe the pre-primary subsector regulatory
framework and, where applicable, qualify its strengths and weaknesses. Finally, the desk review
team examined the findings emerging from each model country, in order to identify and examine
themes that may be especially relevant to the case of Afghanistan.
When interpreting the report’s findings, it is important to note that they are based on secondary
evidence from desk research, rather an on primary evidence. This limitation was partially mitigated
by the desk review team’s efforts to triangulate evidence from different sources. While this desk
study may be used to inform policy planning initiatives, ultimately early childhood policy planning
in Afghanistan should include and prioritize the contributions of community, regional and national
stakeholders (NESSE 2009). Finally, this desk study focused only on the regulatory aspects (i.e.,
making and enforcing laws and regulatory policies) of policies designed for the pre-primary
subsector. Non-regulatory aspects (i.e., plans that guide decision making, management of
resources, procurement), whether policy related, or not, may be noted in the study, although their
nature and impact were not reviewed in as much detail as regulatory aspects.
13
SECTION 3: KEY FINDINGS
Findings from this study relate the legal framework, intersectoral coordination and
financing of ECE provision in India, Pakistan and Tajikistan. In this section, we discuss
each category in turn, illustrating the findings drawn from the features of the regulatory
frameworks of the comparator countries investigated. Summaries of each comparator
country are presented in Annex 3.
Saber Policy Lever 1.1: Legal Framework
What regulatory framework and standards have been established to ensure equitable access and
ECE quality?
• Each of the comparator countries have amended original constitutional statutes and have
established Education laws to make the provision of ECD, including ECE, a right for all
children. Although not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, ECE in India is covered in
the Right to Education Act, which requires the “appropriate government�? to make
arrangements to provide free preschool education to children from 3-6 years old4.
Likewise, Pakistan does not explicitly mention ECE in its constitution. However, the
consideration of early childhood education for Pakistan’s public education sector can be
traced back to the Pakistan Educational Conference of 1947. The proceedings of this
conference established the direction for future education policies of the state and
recommended that the primary education committee be responsible for advising “the lines
on which pre-primary education may be run and to consider the part of the Central and
Provincial governments in establishing nursery schools�? for children 3-6 years of age
(Pakistan 1947).
While ECE is not covered in Tajikistan’s constitution, the succeeding Law on Education,
which guarantees the right to education for all, “regardless of nationality, race, sex,
language, religion, political beliefs, and social and material provisions�? set a formative
precedent for the country’s ECE law. Officially, the Law on Preschool Education and Care,
guarantees that all Tajik citizens have the right to ECCE services. Pre-school education is
almost exclusively the domain of the government and covers children aged 1.5-7 years in
a variety of settings including kindergartens, early learning centers and other specialized
schools.
The aforementioned is aligned with various international precedents on establishing
universal and statutory ECE systems. Likewise, the national curriculum policy documents
refer to the holistic development of children and outline the vision for early childhood care,
including the socio-cultural aims.5 The countries in this report also demonstrate a national
commitment to achieve universal coverage of ECE services, by defining standards and
4
The Right to Education is considered a fundamental right through the 86th Amendment to the Constitution (Article 21A: Right to Education) (2002). Over the
years, additional laws have been implemented, including an additional amendment (or Section 11) to include early childhood education as a right for all children until they reach
age 6.
5
India’s latest National Curriculum Framework is in development and will include a focus on Early Childhood Learning and Development.
14
guidelines such as teacher qualification, curriculum and the structure of the ECE day, in
order to achieve the commitment to the sustainable development goal on early childhood
education by 2030.
• The national policy goals of the three comparator countries are broad and include
supporting children’s holistic development by ensuring their full physical, mental and
social development; preparing children for primary/formal schooling; and to increase
preschool enrollment by strengthening inclusive education and targeting direct assistance
for low-income/resourced households. These broad goals suggest that ECE policies are
instituted in order to meet a variety of socio-economic, educational, developmental and
political contexts and to establish a shared vision and understanding among the
stakeholders.
• Two of the comparator countries (India and Pakistan) have recently undergone or are in
the process of updating/changing their ECE policies. In India, the formal education system
has been restructured to feature ECE more prominently as a foundational core of the
system. In Pakistan, the Punjab provincial government is currently finalizing its ECE
implementation plan in order to advance the aims set out in the first iteration of its
provincial early education policy. This evidence suggests that ECE policies are ‘living’
documents and exposes the dynamic/evolving nature of country contexts and the
importance attached to the development of ECE as one component of a comprehensive
ECD system.
• Regarding equity, access and inclusion the existence of ECE policies and a legal
framework were not, unsurprisingly, in and of themselves sufficient to guarantee equitable
access to ECE services, although all countries have demonstrable strides in this area. Also,
significant variation between the study countries were observed among the number of
children in the population who are from low-income families, girls, have special needs or
a disability, are from minority ethnic groups, live in urban/rural or other geographically
vulnerable spaces. In the comparator countries, these subgroups (especially girls and
children from low-income backgrounds) may form a considerable element of the out of
school population that inform the ECE implementation strategies or action plans in the
country. While all comparator countries have ECE policies/framework that include specific
aims or goals to address inequities, the outcomes associated with the policies vary and are
impacted by country specific resource constraints. For example, ECE enrollment in
Tajikistan has been stagnant for the past four years due to limited government resource
allocations, demographic growth that offset enrollment gains, and the country’s reliance
on donor funding (UNICEF 2019).
15
Saber Policy Lever 1.2: Stakeholder Coordination
How are roles for service delivery organized and what mechanisms support and facilitate smooth
stakeholder coordination?
• The countries studied can be characterized as having decentralized systems where
authority, responsibility and financial resources for providing ECE services are dispersed
among different levels of government. Variations of national, state-level/regional and/or
local level governance been employed to facilitate ECE provision for eligible children in
each context. National level governance or delegation appears to be most prevalent in
facilitating policies, standards, codes and guidelines for sub-national and local
governments to follow such as in the case of India and Tajikistan where national bodies
help facilitate and coordinate the various provincial and regional actors. 6 This type of
framework affords subnational authorities more autonomy to apply and adapt policies that
are more applicable to their region. On the other hand, this framework may result in service
delivery with high degrees of local and regional variation. In the case of Pakistan’s
administrative decentralization, where ECE provision was devolved to the
provinces/regions, the provincial governments have authority of ECE decision making,
finance and management. For example, the Government of the Punjab’s School Education
Office has overall responsibility for policy planning, program implementation and
coordination of ECE services in the province.7 While comprehensive ECD policies were
beyond the scope of this report, it is likely that the complexity in the system of governance
and management of ECE provision would be magnified by the inclusion of a
comprehensive ECD service delivery framework.
• Each of the comparator countries have varying levels of regulations in place for ECE
service delivery, with some countries (Tajikistan) appearing to have more regulations than
others. Accordingly, regulatory responsibilities are dispersed among national and
subnational bodies. The Ministry of Education was the most common agency engaged in
facilitating ECE regulations and coordination (whether vertical or horizontal) at the
national level.
• One comparator country, India, was found to have a high proportion of ECE services
provided by NGOs and the private sector. This is estimated at over 75%, however, this
study did not identify any mechanisms for regulating and or assessing these NGO and
private sector services. For all countries, even with the presence of formidable data
management systems, strong systems for monitoring compliance are nascent and some
cases considered guidelines (India) as provinces and regions have autonomy to deliver
services as they see fit. The system for monitoring regulatory compliance may also be very
6
Delegation is a more extensive form of decentralization. Through delegation central governments transfer responsibility for decision-making and administration of public
functions to semi-autonomous organizations not wholly controlled by the central government, but ultimately accountable to it. Governments delegate responsibilities when they
create public enterprises or corporations, housing authorities, transportation authorities, special service districts, semi-autonomous school districts, regional development
corporations, or special project implementation units. Usually, these organizations have a great deal of discretion in decision-making. They may be exempt from constraints on
regular civil service personnel and may be able to charge users directly for services. World Bank, 2020
7
When governments devolve functions, they transfer authority for decision-making, finance, and management to quasi-autonomous units of local government with corporate
status. Devolution usually transfers responsibilities for services to municipalities that elect their own mayors and councils, raise their own revenues, and have independent authority
to make investment decisions. In a devolved system, local governments have clear and legally recognized geographical boundaries over which they exercise authority and within
which they perform public functions. It is this type of administrative decentralization that underlies most political decentralization. World Bank, 2020
16
complex, with a wide range of national and subnational bodies with compliance
responsibility for different aspects of regulation in many of the study countries.
• While ECD is not the primary focus of this report it is important to note that despite
evidence suggesting the important role they play in the subsector, none of the countries
evaluated in this desk review had a designated coordinating body or anchor institution
responsible for facilitating smooth coordination among the various entities engaged in
global ECD services. This finding reflects the consensus in the literature that coordinating
the pre-primary sub-sector is a challenging and often a politicized endeavor as several
ministries such as education, health, nutrition, sanitation, protection, justice, planning,
finance, gender, rural development and interior would need to work collaboratively at
various stages to ensure high quality pre-primary provision. To ensure good intersectoral
policy coordination and implementation, central leaders must provide an overall vision for
service delivery including setting researched-based program standards and define the other
norms that will compose the sector. This leadership may be presented as a collaborative
arrangement across sectors and/or as a centralized leadership facilitating the collaborative
activities. It might also include a multisectoral body composed of high-level ministers or
deputy ministers, be organized as a technical body, or both may be created. Accordingly,
the lead central level ministries in early childhood development tend to be education,
health or protection (Vargas-Barón 2016). Regardless of the approach to intersectoral and
stakeholder coordination, clear national leadership related to ECE/ECD goals appears to
be critical for service delivery and creating the conditions for a robust ECD coordination
mechanism in the long-term.
• While the importance of parents/family were often detailed in the policy frameworks of the
comparator countries it was not clear from this review in which ways families/parents were
actually involved and/or public information about ECE/ECD was available. Specifically,
legal and policy documents rarely explain the step-by-step action plans associated with
engaging parents and communities in the pre-primary subsector (Countdown to 2030).
Saber Policy Lever 1.3: Financing
What level of public finance and other mechanisms or resources are used to fund ECE services?
• All countries studied allocated a small proportion of their total education budget to ECE
provision and in general demonstrated funding outlays that were insufficient to meet the
proclaimed policy and/or ECE enrollment goals, including Sustainable Development Goal
(SDG) 4.2. Public ECE funding as a percentage of the total education budget in, India and
Tajikistan was approximately, 2.7% and 6.3%, respectively (Rathish Balakrishnan, Aarti
Mohan, Anita Kumar and Kaliaden, Abhineet Singh Malhotra, Poorvaja Prakash, Centre
2017; World Bank 2019). In the case of the Government of the Punjab in Pakistan, a
financial commitment for ECE has been difficult to achieve in the province because the
current ECE policy does not have an approved implementation strategy (“Punjab Education
17
Sector Plan�? 2019). (Rathish Balakrishnan, Aarti Mohan, Anita Kumar and Kaliaden,
Abhineet Singh Malhotra, Poorvaja Prakash, Centre 2017; World Bank 2019)
• Prioritizing regulations or targeting strategies to allocate limited ECE finances to create
equitable service provision was uncovered in at least two countries. Evidence of need
based funding schemes were seen in India (vulnerable states and territories received an
increased share of funding) and Tajikistan’s per capita financing (PCF) scheme. A range
of social, developmental and economic criteria are used by the study countries to focus the
targeting strategies, with the most common prioritizing regulations aimed at enhancing
ECE participation for children from low-income families and children with special
educational needs or disability. All countries participated in donor financed initiatives but
the engagement from the private sector varied from many active foundation and corporate
sponsors (India) to few or no corporate engagements (Tajikistan).
18
SECTION 4: DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATIONS FOR ECE POLICY
PLANNING IN AFGHANISTAN
This investigation of early childhood regulatory frameworks in south-central Asian countries
has yielded a number of findings that may inform the ongoing design of the pre-primary
subsector in Afghanistan. This section outlines three questions and the policy considerations
that the Ministry of Education may consider in its ongoing ECE policy planning activities. It
concludes with a brief discussion on the limitations of transferring lessons from one country
context to another.
Afghanistan is signatory to the international laws that prioritize children’s well-being, right to
education and social protection including the United Convention of the Rights of the Child.
Accordingly, it recognizes the right of all children in national laws including the Constitution and
the National Education Law. The MOE, as education leader and national education policy maker,
has an opportunity to lead the country’s early childhood education priorities. This important
endeavor is fundamental to the MOE’s overall mandate of ensuring quality and accessible
education provision for all children in the country. Engaging and holding accountable national and
sub-national actors in ECE service delivery is of critical importance. Within this model of
accountability is the critical task of coordinating adequate governance, ECE stakeholder
engagement and integrating the provision of quality ECE services under the larger umbrella of the
education sector and Early Childhood Development at large. The MOE’s current focus on
developing the National Education Sector Plan 2030 (NESP 2030)8 presents an opportunity for the
MOE to establish its role as the national sectoral lead for ECE and assert the importance of the
subsector by instituting strategic steps focused on ECE regulation and accountability within the
country.
1. Ensuring Adequate Regulations and Governance: What regulatory framework and
standards were established to ensure equitable access and quality in the selected model
countries? What could be actionable advice for Afghanistan?
This report identifies several considerations that the Ministry of Education in Afghanistan might
contemplate as it embarks on near-term ECE planning activities. The extant literature suggests that
designing regulation and accountability for ECE can nurture improvements in service delivery and
subsequently, improved outcomes for children. Developing a comprehensive regulatory
framework, standards for service delivery and efficient systems to manage data, assess quality,
and monitor services are typically associated with higher quality and more effective targeting and
deployment of resources to see improved outcomes, especially for vulnerable populations
(Taguma, Litjens, and Makowiecki 2012).
Regulatory mechanisms are intentional interventions by the state in pursuit of a specific societal
outcome that may not be achievable through normal market-based mechanisms (OECD 2010). The
mechanisms and tools accessible to governments are diverse and may include legislation, licenses,
certifications, regulations, guidelines, norms or community monitoring bodies which collectively
create a network or complex framework for which society will be held accountable. In the case of
8
At the time of this report, Afghanistan’s National Education Sector Plan 2030 was under development. References to National Education Sector Plan 2030 have been derived
from a combination of unpublished planning documents and/or key stakeholders.
19
ECE, regulatory frameworks and mechanisms typically protect the health and safety of children
but also extend to curriculum and other learning and welfare norms deemed important by
governments and society.
The central level actors in this desk review play a critical role in setting ECE policy and strategy.
All three countries, (India, Pakistan and Tajikistan) have regulatory frameworks that clearly
outline the actors, standards and to some extent the curriculum and programs that drive their
approach to quality ECE (and/or ECD policies in the case of India’s ICDS program and
Tajikistan’s holistic ECCE approach). In general, the central level actors (Ministry of Education
and Science (Tajikistan) or Ministry of Women and Children (India) set the early childhood policy
and strategy while subnational actors and local authorities are responsible for implementation and
ensuring service delivery according to the centrally adopted policies.
India
The Indian framework is supported by the National Education Policy (NEP 2020), a holistic policy
that focuses on quality ECE and the healthy development and care of children in the country.
Characteristic features of its governance include:
- Central government (MOE) involvement in facilitating the overall priorities of the
framework
- ECE and ECCE priorities are divided among the Ministry of Education and Ministry of
Woman and Child, respectively
- No stand-alone Early Childhood Education Ministry or Department
- Integration of one year of ECE into the broader system of primary education9
While education is considered a fundamental right in India, Most ECE laws and regulations are
not binding and considered “guidelines�?. This appears to honor the autonomy of states to make
appropriate decisions for its citizens. However, the historical lack of enforcement of the laws and
guidelines surrounding ECE/ECD in the country makes the regulatory framework vulnerable (and
children within the system vulnerable) to state-by-state interpretation of laws, policies and
standards.
Despite the existence of multiple service provisions and the longevity of the flagship ECD program
in India, reliable data about the actual number of children attending the ICDS program is elusive.
Additionally, despite the robust list of laws and policies making up the Indian regulatory
framework, enrollment data and regulations for NGO and privately run ECE centers, of which
nearly 75% of the countries children are estimated to be enrolled, are largely unregulated.
India’s NEP 2020 is progressive, especially in its efforts to expand quality and its inclusion of ECE
as a component of the formal education system. However, at the time of this writing, the policy
9
NEP 2020 establishes a new academic structure and envisions expanding and strengthening the existing ECEE/ICDS infrastructure by professionalizing educators and making
improving accountability across the regulatory system. Notably, the Ministry of Education (MOE) and the Ministry of Women and Child Development (MWCD) must now
collaborate on a ‘bridge’ or transition year to prepare children 5-6 years to transition from the Anganwandi centers to primary school. NEP 2020 also lays out specific intention and
a charge to create separate strategies for socio-economically disadvantaged groups including gender identities, socio-cultural identities, geographical identities, disabilities and
other social economic conditions.
20
gives little guidance on the issue of monitoring and quality assurance. The enormity of India’s
school system (approximately 260 million students total) and the country’s geographic and socio-
cultural and linguistic diversity might compound its ability to build a robust data collection,
monitoring and accountability system for not only ECCE but its entire education sector.10
The National Commission for the Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR), operating under the
Ministry of Woman and Child Development (MWCD), has traditionally been responsible for
ensuring child safety and welfare and investigating complaints made by parents at all school levels,
including for ECE. The NCPCR works with its state counterparts, the State Commission for the
Protection of Child Rights (SCPCR) to create guidelines for schools based on the country’s ECE
policy. The updated policy was not available at the time of this report, it will be drafted by the
National Council of Education Research and Training (NCERT) and prioritize numeracy, early
reading, writing and play-based learning.
In previous policies, the government outlined minimum standards and guidelines for quality,
including guidelines that govern the establishment of schools, staff requirements, safety protocols,
health/nutrition, and curriculum formulation to be enforced “across public, private and non-
governmental service providers�?. Monitoring and Supervision duties were to be allocated to the
National ECCE Council, an autonomous entity within the MWCD charged with setting quality
standards and monitoring the related activities and outcomes (National ECCE Policy 2013).
However, it does not appear that this entity was ever funded and/or established as it does not appear
on the MWCD website or in subsequent documents analyzed in this review.
The NEP 2020 suggests that a State School Standards Authority will be responsible for setting
minimum common standards and require an online self-disclosure by all public and private
schools, to include ECE.
In summary, the regulation of the ECCE provision in India is centralized, with central government
authorities setting the overall structure while the state level actors ensure that laws, policies and
programs are in line with the mandates/guidelines prescribed by the national government.
Furthermore, this system ensures buy-in from states and is bolstered by the Ministry of State. The
Ministry of State serves as an intermediary body between the central government and state and
union territories. Although the enforcement aspect of this regulatory framework could be
strengthened, it ensures that the subnational actors have a vocal presence at the national level and
does outline minimum structural and quality standards by which all public and private schools
should be governed. The Indian regulatory framework is summarized in Table 1.
10
Except for Higher Education where it appears that the Higher Education Commission of India (HECI) will be established as a single umbrella body managing the governance
and regulation of various issues in higher education, this includes having the power to penalize institutions that do not conform to norms and standards. Public and private higher
education institutions will be governed by the same set of standards and norms.
21
Table 1: Overview of the regulatory framework for ECE provision in India
India11
Constitutional Authority Right to Education Act, Article 45 which states that the appropriate government is responsible for providing early
childhood education and care for all children age 3-6 years old.12
Policy National Education Policy (2020) sets the objective to provide every child aged 3-6 years old with access to free, safe,
high quality, developmentally appropriate care and education by 2025.
Regulators Ministry of Education (MOE): Main organizing body of education policy. Collaborates with MWCD on the design and
regulation of ECE transition year for children 5-6 years old.
Ministry of Woman and Child Development (MWCD): Creates and enforces rules regulations and laws around women
and child development. Wrote the Early Childhood Education and Care Policy and the Right to Education Act
National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR): Responsible for the implementation of the laws formed
by various government bodies.
State Commissions for Protection of Child Rights (SCPCR): Ensures that laws, policies and programs are in line with
child rights at the state level.
Examples of Issues Regulated - Establishment of Preschools
- Laws governing the roles of teachers/caregivers
- Laws on safety
- Laws against physical and mental harassment of children
- Laws on health
- Laws on ECE curriculum
- Laws on parent rights
Examples of Regulatory Tools -National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR)
-Authorization as regulation including
registration/certification processes with district-level officers who confirm the safety of new and established schools and
monitors the implementation of norms and standards
-Required qualifications for teachers (minimum guidelines authorized by the Government of India) and caregivers (requires
certification by a recognized training board
-Parent Teacher Associations and parent lobbying groups
-Complaint process to SCPCR
-Minimum standards and guidelines governing various aspects of early childhood education and care
Source:(Ministry of Women and Child Development 2013; Subramanian 2019; “India (IND) - Demographics, Health & Infant Mortality - UNICEF DATA�? 2018)
Pakistan (The Government of the Punjab)
Pakistan’s national government retains coordinating responsibility for the area governments and
curriculum standards development. However, the provincial governments have overall
responsibility for setting the ECE strategy and roles for service delivery that are distributed among
local authorities. Thus, in the case of the Government of the Punjab, the regulatory framework is
primarily composed of provincial level actors with sole authority for the ECE systems.
Characteristic features of its governance include:
- Ministry of Federal Education and Training (Central Level) involvement only in
facilitating coordination across provinces and facilitating national curriculum decisions
- School Education Department (Provincial Level) responsible for overall policy planning,
program implementation and coordination
- No stand-alone Early Childhood Education Ministry or Department at the central or
provincial levels
- Limited monitoring of private sector ECE and new ECE classrooms
11
NEP 2020 establishes a new academic structure and envisions expanding and strengthening the existing ICDS infrastructure by professionalizing educators and improving
accountability across the regulatory system. Notably, the Ministry of Education (MOE) and the Ministry of Women and Child Development (MWCD) must now collaborate on a
‘bridge’ or transition year to prepare children 5-6 years to transition from the Anganwandi centers (early childhood education and care) to primary school (ECE classes). NEP 2020
also lays out a specific intention to create separate strategies for socio-economically disadvantaged groups including gender identities, socio-cultural identities, geographical
identities, disabilities and other social economic conditions.
12
ECE was included as a constitutional provision only recently, in 2016, through the RTE Act, Article 45. The forerunner policy was the National Early Childhood Care and
Education Policy (2013) was enacted to address quality issues with ICDS, promote holistic learning for children under 6 and standardize the quality of ECE provision. Laws
governing staff, safety, curriculum and parent rights were instituted.
22
The devolution of education from central authority to the provinces created a unique opportunity
for the Government of the Punjab to strengthen ECE in the province such that it meets the needs
of its large and diverse population. However, information about the effectiveness of its regulatory
framework at this stage was difficult to uncover. For one, the provinces ongoing pilot activities to
expand ECE classrooms are still in process and currently impacted by the worldwide COVID-19
pandemic.
As of this writing, the Government of the Punjab had completed the implementation of
12,000 ECEC classrooms out of the 53,000 in Punjab. In fact, according to the latest data for
Punjab, 90% of children enrolled in Grade 1 have attended a pre-primary class in by 2018. Today
in Punjab, ECE classes are held in approximately 12,500 schools, enrolling 100,000 pre-primary
students (UNICEF, Punjab 2017, 2019). Nevertheless, what is evident is, and in spite of nascent
monitoring activities, the province has established a regulatory framework that outlines minimum
standards and guidelines (structural and process quality) for ECE provision that may inform the
Afghan MOE’s approach to regulatory design. As outlined in the education policy, these standards
are organized into six quality areas including the physical environment, teacher qualifications and
professional development, educational programs process quality, parental and community
engagement, health and nutrition and transition to primary school (Punjab 2017).
Punjab already has a highly functioning monitoring system for its primary education sector and is
adapting the framework to support the monitoring and quality assurance of its first ECE
classrooms. The monitoring system includes Area Education Officers who conduct spot visits at
schools. The Area Education Officers monitor teacher practices and classroom quality according
to the standards. The School Education Department (SED) is responsible for ongoing development
of the monitoring system and collaborating with the Program Monitoring and Implementation
Unit (PMIU) to ensure proper data collection and analysis. The data collected is used by the SED
to verify whether schools are “meeting the minimum quality standards, identify implementation
gaps, and adjust policies and programs�? (Punjab ECE Policy 2017).
In summary, the regulation of the ECE provision in Pakistan rests with the provincial
governments. In the case of the Government of the Punjab, the government has established clear
roles and responsibilities for ECE policy coordination, service delivery and quality assurance.
Regarding monitoring and quality, the government has leveraged mechanisms already in place for
the primary sector and future inquiries are required to determine the effectiveness of these
mechanisms for the ECE subsector in the country. The regulatory framework is summarized in
Table 2.
23
Table 2: Overview of the regulatory framework for ECE provision in the Punjab Province
Pakistan – The Government of the Punjab
Constitutional Authority Article 25-A of the Constitution reads that, “The State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of
the age five to sixteen years in such a manner as may be determined by law�?.13
Policy National Education Policy (NEP 2009)14 was the first government document to formalize ECE for children 3 to 5 years
old and acknowledge the pre-primary sub-sector. At the same time ECE is established as a national priority and early
learning standards are developed, education is devolved from central authority and becomes the responsibility of the
provincial governments.
National Education Policy (NEP 2017) espouses “to expand, strengthen and promote, universal, comprehensive Early
Childhood Education, with an objective to ensure holistic development of children (age four to five years old) and
prepare them for formal schooling�?.
Punjab Compulsory and Free Education Act (2014) officially extended the constitutional entitlement of Article 25-
A (on the Right to Education) to 3-16 years old and set the stage for the Provincial Early Childhood Education Policy
(2017).
Regulators Ministry of Federal Education and Professional Training: Overall responsible for coordinating provincial and area
education offices
National Curriculum Council (NCC): Responsible for coordinating curriculum and standards development across
provinces and areas
School Education Department (SED): Responsible for provincial policy planning, program implementation and
coordination
Quaid-e-Azam Academy for Educational Development (QAED): Coordinates with SED on program implementation,
develops materials for and trains teachers and caregivers. Leads ECE scale-up efforts
Punjab Education Foundation (PEF): Collaborates with QAED on all teacher/caregiver training and supports SED
improving access by engaging partnered private schools for the provision of ECE
Punjab Curriculum and Textbook Board (PCTB): Collaborates with QAED and leads on developing appropriate
classroom learning materials
Program Monitoring and Implementation Unit (PMIU): Leads monitoring, data analysis and feedback
Department of Health: Coordinates with SED to ensure staff receive training on best practices for children’s health and
nutrition
District Governments: Supports PMIU with data collection, coordinates with QAED on teacher training
Examples of Issues Regulated -Program Implementation and Coordination
-Establishment of ECE Classrooms
-Teacher Qualifications and Professional Support for ECE classrooms
-Development of Teaching and Learning Materials
-Training for ECE teachers and staff
Examples of Regulatory Tools -Quality standards for ECE classrooms
-Infrastructure requirements
-Monthly reporting on ECE activities to District Education Officers
-Monitoring and feedback loops between schools, education officers and the district governments
-District-wide reports on ECE quality
-Guidelines for promoting children’s health and nutrition
-School Councils that involve community and parents in education decisions
-Information campaigns for parents and guidelines for parental engagement
Source:(Khan 2017; Malik and Naveed n.d.; Zaidi et al. 2018; Government of the Punjab 2017)
13
Although not explicitly mention in the Constitution, the consideration of early childhood education for Pakistan’s public education sector can be traced back to the Pakistan
Education conference of 1947. The proceedings of this conference established the direction for future education policies of the state and recommended that the primary education
committee be responsible for advising “the lines on which pre-primary education may be run and to consider the part of the Central and Provincial governments in establishing
nursery schools�? for children three to six years of age (Pakistan 1947).
14
The current policy, National Education Plan 2017, espouses “to expand, strengthen and promote universal, comprehensive Early Childhood Education, with an objective to
ensure holistic development of children and prepare them for formal schooling.�? The overarching goal of NEP 2017 is to provide free and compulsory quality pre-primary
education for children age four to five years old and institute holistic development opportunities for children age three to four years by 2030. Additional policy targets for ECE
includes defining the quality standards for improved services and infrastructure, teacher professional training and development, community level awareness campaigns, technology
promotion and the advocation for a separate budget for ECE financing (Education 2018).
24
Tajikistan
In Tajikistan, the Ministry of Education and Science (MoES) and Ministry of Health and Social
Protection (MoHSP) work together at the central level to develop holistic preschool education and
care at the central level. They also coordinate respective regional and local authorities.
Characteristic features of its governance include:
- MoES develops and implements state policy and strategy, sets priorities
- No stand-alone Early Childhood Ministry or Department
- A robust set of actors and regulatory documents that define the standards, laws and norms
Tajikistan, similar to India and Pakistan, has established a regulatory framework that outlines
minimum standards and guidelines for quality ECE provision that may inform the Afghan MOE’s
approach to regulatory design. The standards are prescribed in the State Standard for Preschool
Education (2014) and the Early Child Learning and Development Standards (ELDS 2010) and
includes school construction standards and norms for infrastructure, hygiene, nutrition and the
daily routine in Tajikistan preschools. The standards, which are mandatory for public and private
preschools in the country, also outline quality standards for staff and teachers, teacher child ratios,
professional development and ECE program process (World Bank 2019).
Similar to India most early childhood education and care laws and regulations are not binding and
considered “guidelines�?. For example, in the case of facilities and infrastructure, reports show that
many public institutions do not comply with established standards and continue to operate in spite
of the stated infrastructure standards. Private facilities are also responsible to the regulatory
provisions and standards, however similar to the public institutions they continue to operate in
defiance of the regulatory protocols. These examples suggest that the regulatory requirements in
Tajikistan are administratively burdensome and/or the country lacks the capacity to ensure that
public and private ECE programs are meeting the required standards. Furthermore, the current
standards might actually be undermining the government’s goals to expand the supply of ECE
centers.
Not surprisingly, monitoring in such a complex system is challenging. The MoES and MoHSP are
responsible for overall policy monitoring, while monitoring the implementation of service delivery
(and adherence to the stated laws, standards and/or guidelines) is the responsibility of sub-national
actors including the Local Education District officials and Regional Education Departments.
However, monitoring, data collection and analytical capacities are inconsistent and often
insufficient to truly evaluate for compliance with the various standards and laws outlined in the
regulatory framework. This challenge is compounded by the fact that the country has no
multisectoral strategy or ECD anchor institution. This results in a number of challenges, for
example some ECD regulatory documents are approved by a single ministry without critical input
from other national and/or subnational stakeholders. As a result, regulatory tools may not be
standardized, even though the regulatory framework requires the coordination of multiple actors.
One of the primarily regulatory tools/documents, the ELDs is considered to be “complex and
ambition�? and as a result, few specialists are available to monitor adherence to standards (World
Bank 2019).
25
In summary, the regulation of the ECE/ECD provision in Tajikistan is highly regulated and
governed by several actors, with strong direction from the MoES at the central level. Because
adherence to the state regulations is not consistently monitored and governance is challenged by
inefficiencies in the multi-layered system, significant variation at the subnational and local levels
occurs among public and private providers of ECE provision. The regulatory framework for
Tajikistan is summarized in Table 3.
Table 3: Overview of the regulatory framework for ECE provision in Tajikistan
Tajikistan
Constitutional Acts Education is a fundamental right in Tajikistan as expressed in Article 41 of the Constitution which asserts that
everyone has the right to a basic general education (age 7-16 years) and that education should be provided free
of charge in state educational establishments. While ECE is not covered in the constitution, the succeeding Law
on Education (2013), which guarantees the right to education for all, “regardless of nationality, race, sex,
language, religion, political beliefs, and social and material provisions�? set a formative precedent for the
country’s ECE law. Officially, the Law on Preschool Education and Care (2013), guarantees that all Tajik citizens
have the right to ECCE services.
Policy The National Development Strategy (NDS) 2016-2030: Outlines ECD priorities and enhances preschool
education by setting a goal to increase preschool enrollment to 50% by 2030, strengthen provision for inclusive
education, and provide direct assistance for low-income households.
The National Education Development Strategy (NEDS) 2021-2030: Underscores the 2030 preschool
enrolment goal by outlining specific targets for increasing accessing to quality early learning services for children
1.5t to 6 years of age, facilities, preschool finance reform, ECE teacher professional development, and
establishing a quality assurance and monitoring mechanisms for ECE/ECD services.
Regulators Ministry of Education and Science (MoES): Overall responsibility for ECE services and coordination.
Republic Training and Methodological Center (RTMC) and the Academy of Education: Develop methods
and guides for preschool teachers
State Agency for Supervision in the Sphere of Education (SASSE) conducts licensing, attestation, and
accreditation for all preschool institutions.
Ministry of Health and Social Protection (MoHSP): Responsible for approving nutrition, sleeping and
sanitation norms in preschool facilities
Agency on Construction an Architecture: Establishes construction standards for preschools
City and District level authorities (Regional Education Departments, Local Education Departments in
collaboration with MoES): Implement preschool policy and ensure local preschool provision, following the
centrally adopted state norms and regulations.
Examples of Issues Regulated -Laws and Regulations related to child development
-Laws and Regulations related to parent’s ability to support child development
-Laws and Regulations related to social protection
-Norms for parental fees
-Design norms and sanitary and hygienic requirements for all preschools
-Mandatory Curriculum
Examples of Regulatory Tools -State Standard for Preschool Education (2014)
-Early Child Learning and Development Standards (ELDS 2010)
-Monitoring and assessment procedures and instruments
-Local and central education authorities (MoES, SASSE)
-Instrument for preschool facility and services assessment
-Preschool EMIS
Source:(Global Partnership for Education 2020; UNICEF Tajikistan Country Office 2019; World Bank 2019)
26
All three countries in this desk review demonstrated a general recognition and acceptance of the
international standards and composite policies associated with children’s right to education and
social protection such as the United Convention of the Rights of the Child. Additionally, many of
the policy documents reviewed for this report reflected the underlying values of social cohesion,
equity, and other cultural or religions values as important components of a rounded system of
education.
What was less discernible from the review of regulatory frameworks and policy documents was
how the policy aspirations established by the national governments were practically realized.
Among the policy items reviewed, there was limited evidence on ensuring adherence to
regulations. Likewise, monitoring the effectiveness and progress towards ECE policies and
standards appeared to be inconstantly applied in the model countries.
Accordingly, the MOE in Afghanistan can take heed from the comparator countries and use this
important stage to identify realistic and research-based regulations that support the expansion of
quality ECE service provision. This includes drawing clear lines of responsibilities for all
stakeholders in the delivery of early learning services in the country. Considerations that may
inform the MOE’s strategy to develop an adequate governance framework for quality ECE are:
1.1 Determine the level of regulatory touch necessary to assist Afghanistan’s pre-primary
subsector to thrive. The model countries demonstrated the importance of setting laws,
policies and standards that govern the wellbeing and baseline education requirements for
ECE/ECD provision.
A regulatory approach such as that demonstrated by India and Tajikistan requires a degree
of coordination between stakeholders as well as human, technical and financial resources
to monitor the goals and of the system. Similarly, the Government of the Punjab’s
framework follows suit by outlining minimal laws and standards that dictate ECE provision
along research-based quality standards.
In each case, it appears that the model country governments instituted a heavier touch in
terms of creating robust policy, regulations and standards/guidelines for ECE/ECD
provision. In the case of India, this regulatory framework has not appeared to stifle private
competition. Accordingly, approximately 75% of the country’s eligible preschool
population is estimated to be enrolled in private schools. This is likely due in part to the
sheer size of the sector and the inability to allocate sufficient financial and human resources
to the regulatory tasks. While its plausible that the loose regulatory guidelines in India
advantage private sector providers, this inefficiency has been shown to create
administrative burdens in the country’s ICDS program preventing vulnerable populations
from accessing services (Haque et al. 2013; Ambast, Gaur, and Sangai 2017). In Tajikistan
private providers make up less than 4% of the country’s ECE school ecosystem. This
review could not point directly to the country’s regulatory framework as the sole source of
the low private sector engagement in ECE and some researchers suggest that robust,
heavier touch regulation does not necessarily stifle private sector innovation. Ultimately
the relationship between regulation and allowing for innovation and flexibility may depend
27
greatly on country context (Blind 2016). In Pakistan’s Punjab, province, private providers
make up nearly 50% of the current ECE market. As the provincial government’s ECE
policy is relatively nascent, it is difficult to make any strong assessments on how its current
regulatory framework impacts NGO and private sector providers.
Due to a variety of resource and technical constraints, each country demonstrates
limitations when it comes to practically monitoring and/or enforcing the regulatory laws
and/or guidelines. However, one potential takeaway for the MOE is that uniform standards
contribute to making the rules and regulations for ECE provision more transparent for
providers and parents. These standards might also help by directly communicating that
preschool expansion in and of itself is not sufficient and that quality (of infrastructure and
curriculum, for example) matters in addition to the overall well-being of children.
The quality of regulations in place, and the extent to which they are research-based is also
informative. All comparator countries demonstrated a minimum level of ECE provision,
especially as it relates to structural quality. Minimum regulatory standards such as staff
child ratios, group size, staff professional development, curriculum and the physical
environment are strongly supported by research and can guarantee the health and safety of
children in ECE environments. Some structural quality standards such as the use of an
education program and inclusion of professional development activities for teachers, have
been shown to show strong associations with process quality (Bertram and Pascal 2016).
The Government of the Punjab in Pakistan and Tajikistan specifically outline process
quality standards as critical in their policy and regulatory documents. In the case of Punjab,
the government outlines the quality standards and identifies the use of tools that might be
used to support monitoring and quality assurance in its ECE policy document.15 Tajikistan
outlines the overall process requirements in its Standard Standards for Preschool Education
(2014) document. Process quality was less discernible in India where policy and regulatory
documents and tools for the new ECE classes are developing. However, historically,
governance of its large public school system has been a challenge in India and data
collection, monitoring and accountability systems (whether for structural or process
quality) have been inadequate (Haque et al. 2013).
One assertive action toward establishing the ECE policy planning process, might include
initiating a policy review in order to identify the content areas, gaps, standards and
guidelines and future requirements of an ECE policy in Afghanistan. This review should
be evidence-based and include practical issues like taking into account the government’s
capacity and ability to engage national and sub-national actors in the regulatory process.
The undertaking for the MOE is to consider what regulatory framework (and the degree of
touch that) supports its current goals to institutionalize an ECE policy, improve access and
quality and increase the supply of high quality ECE centers. The MOE should consider
giving priority to a decision-making team of experts who are especially tasked with
considering how a specific regulatory approach and its supporting activities might operate
15
The Punjab ECE Policy outlines Measuring Early Learning Quality & Outcomes (MELQO) as one tool for measuring its quality outcomes. The Government of the Punjab has
also explored piloting the forthcoming ECE version of Teach.
28
in Afghanistan, not in isolation, but as an element that might ultimately inform its goal to
create a quality ECE framework (and ultimately a comprehensive ECD framework).
1.2 Solidify the core roles to develop and implement national policy and strategy, set
priorities for developing preschool education and care and approving standards for
quality ECE service delivery. Specifically, in each of the model countries, the ministries
of education (or School Education Department in the case of Punjab) played central role in
the governance and regulatory framework for ECE (and holistic ECD) policies. The MOE
could use the National Education Sector Planning (2030) development process as an
opportunity to clearly delineate its role and function in the ECE sub-sector. This should
include explicit activities that identify and/or confirm the national and subnational actor’s
responsible for developing and ultimately implementing ECE requirements in the country.
Clearly defined roles and priorities would subsequently support the development of
accountability and coordinating mechanisms that allow the MOE to 1) ensure that
education sector planning activities are coherent with the country’s existing ECE programs
and 2) facilitate the systemic adaption of quality ECE service provision over time.
1.3 Consider aligning and integrating the ECE sub-sector plans and activities with the
education sector plans and formal education structure. Both India and Pakistan, at the
time of this review had recently, or planned in the near future, significant changes to their
ECE policy. ECE policies are dynamic, and the findings illustrate the importance assigned
to ECE within the study countries’ educational systems. Each government’s move to align
ECE service delivery with the formal education system is indicative of the overall
sentiment in the literature to strengthen ECE service delivery, including governance,
curriculum and teaching in order to achieve better outcomes for the transition from pre-
primary to basic education.
This is especially reflected in India’s move to include one year of ECE in the formal K-12
system and primary schools, in turn affirming the country’s commitment to strengthen
governance and systemic coherence between the ICDS scheme, ECE and the first year of
primary school. In Pakistan, the Government of the Punjab established over 5000 ECE
classrooms, of which approximately half meet the standards adopted in its 2017 ECE
policy, to formalize ECE in the public sector by aligning provision with primary schools.
The traditional Katchi (pre-primary) classes in the public sector remain as a familiarization
stage for younger siblings of older children and is similar to the example of UNICEF and
Nai Qala whose Community Based Education (CBE) model in rural areas also allowed for
younger siblings to attend classes with older siblings. Still, in both the India and Pakistan
examples, alignment with the former education system is nascent, and an outgrowth of
previously established early learning efforts. Another potential benefit of aligning with the
formal education structure is the ability to take advantage of already established monitoring
and quality assurance mechanisms used in the primary education sector. Maintaining and
assuring ECE quality in Afghanistan while expanding service provision is essential. The
example of the Government of the Punjab suggests that including at least the last year of
ECE with the formal education structure might also help support a country’s quality goals
and at the very least create the conditions for adequate monitoring and quality assurance.
29
Finally, an additional pathway for increasing quality ECE service provision is to increase
the coherence between the instructional methods of ECE and the early primary grades. By
physically aligning ECE with the formal education system, India and Pakistan are also
creating the conditions, among others, that allow ECE teachers to learn from basic
education teachers and support parents/communities with learning about the importance of
ECE.
1.4 Consult existing CBEs and private providers of ECE in order to inform the country’s
ECE regulatory framework. One viable option for the MOE’s early stages of ECE policy
planning and strengthening its governance model would be to consider pathways to adapt
and/or adopt existing early childhood education services and activities into the MOE
system. For example, the CBE provider model provides one pathway by which the MOE
might consider leveraging local gains and momentum in its pursuit to develop a sustainable
ECE policy and set of standards. Interestingly, some partners in Afghanistan have self-
subscribed to CBE policies and standards when establishing new ECE classes and
providing early childhood services in rural communities. This suggests that community
stakeholders find value in the CBE model and may be more willing to support such a model
if integrated into national planning and used to inform the country’s regulatory framework.
ECE teachers and staff often have first-hand experience of how well rules and standards
work and could provide more practical feedback on the design of a regulatory approach
that leverages the combined resources of the central government, subnational actors and
parents/community members.
The MOE has a critical opportunity to investigate the suitability of CBEs and other service
delivery mechanisms to support initial policy planning and to provide a foundation for
establishing minimum regulatory guidelines that focus on the wellbeing of children and
stimulate the market for ECE service provision. This approach might also assist in further
defining the core roles and responsibilities of the MOE and its sub-national agencies.
Likewise, it might provide a suitable option in the face of ongoing resource constraints and
conflict recovery within the country.
1.5 Leverage ECE policy planning as a cross-cutting policy issue in order to strengthen
the regulatory framework. The MOE’s ECE policy planning activities provide an
opportunity for ECE to be integrated into ongoing/larger-scale national policy agendas in
Afghanistan, including, as noted previously, the National Education Sector Plan (2030).
National policy planning aimed at eradicating severe poverty and/or supporting internally
displaced communities may also provide feasible pathways by which to incorporate ECE
policy planning. Additionally, the MOE may consider efforts focused on economic
planning, especially those aimed at increasing women’s productivity or entry into the
workforce as viable opportunities to expand its scope for ECE policy planning.16 Finally,
as the MOE advances its ECE policy planning activities, existing policies, agreements or
cross-sectoral arrangements that address children, women or families should be analyzed
for alignment and efficiencies across the inter-sectoral and budget planning processes.
16
Also see Establishing Viable Financial Mechanisms.
30
1.6 Engage communities and parents as key stakeholders in the education of young
children to improve governance. Parent and community engagement is a key element in
the operating models used by development partners when establishing quality ECE
services. There are two-fold benefits to this approach. This first is that parents and
communities are directly involved in their children’s education and share the responsibility
with the government on making sure children are prepared for school. Second this
arrangement provides cost benefits as parents and communities provide in-kind
contributions to ensure that their children have access to early learning. Ultimately, the
evidence suggests that approaches that originate at the national level may be limited in their
ability to involve parents and local leaders if such initiatives are not also supported by
comprehensive, ground-up initiatives including local engagement and monitoring of
service delivery (Vargas-Barón n.d.; Haque et al. 2013; Vargas-Barón and Diehl 2018).
Smaller scale, local initiatives in which community members share control over the process
or are otherwise able to meaningfully participate in that process, show significant potential
for success (Vargas-Barón 2016; Unicef 2019, and Matas 2018). For example, the
collaboration with Citizen Charter program and its established community-based
development model for the provision of general education provides a strong exemplar for
how parents and communities contribute in-kind support and resources for education
service delivery at the national level in Afghanistan (The World Bank 2020). This example
might serve as a strong model by which to strengthen parental and key stakeholder
engagement in ECE in the country. Evidence from the model countries policy documents
suggest that parent and community councils, parent teacher associations (PTAs) and
mechanisms for reporting issues and practical informational or marketing campaigns (such
as those that inform parents on child development and the impact of actions directed toward
children) might be instituted to encourage on the ground feedback loops from parents to
subnational and central government stakeholders (Khan 2017; UNICEF Tajikistan Country
Office 2019) Considering that creating the policy documents take time, the MOE might
consider exploring the possibility of co-creating low-cost informational campaigns that
target families with children in the home, especially those not enrolled in ECE.17
2. Supporting Stakeholder Coordination: How do line ministries, private sectors and NGOs
assume different roles for service delivery in the selected model countries? What kind of
mechanisms (including regulatory) facilitates smooth intersectoral coordination in the
selected model countries? What could be actionable advice for Afghanistan?
Early childhood services include a variety of programs, which primarily are administered by the
education, health and social welfare sectors. While the primary aim of these services is to provide
quality services to children and families, each sector has its own set of principles, values,
frameworks, professional cultures and practices. In order to avoid uneven quality of services, and
ensure that ECE, health, nutrition, security, safety, and appropriate caregiving are available to the
children and families, it is important to ensure that services are well coordinated and aligned across
sectors and stakeholders. This is informed by researched that suggests that stakeholder and
intersectoral coordination can yield positive effects for children, parents and the early childhood
workforce. This continuum of coordinated care builds on the ideas of progressive universalism
17
See World Bank, “Supporting the youngest learners and their families in the COVID-19 (Coronavirus) response, April 16, 2020
31
which is considered an effective approach for addressing inequalities and improving equity as
efforts can be targeted to the children and families with the greatest need. (World Health
Organization et al., 2018) Moreover, stakeholder coordination includes horizontal alignment or
multisectoral coordination focused on building strong cooperative and formal relationships among
ministries and vertical alignment or coordination that includes community level ECE development
(NGOs, private sector and family/communities), local education offices, district/provincial
education authorities and national level actors.
The case studies analyzed present a variety of approaches to intersectoral action to improve access
to ECE and ECD services. Consistent with the extant literature, those approaches have depended
on the nature of the pre-primary service being addressed (rather ECE or comprehensive ECD
services) and the social, economic and political context of the country (Rentzou et al.
2019).Therefore, objective setting and context are crucial elements in identifying approaches to
sector coordination. In essence, a successful intersectoral action requires the sharing of power. The
creation of new entities, committees, or other bodies to formalize and institutionalize power
sharing maybe helpful. Given a commitment to expand high quality ECE services, the
development of intersectoral strategies occurred with greater ease in government cultures that had
a tradition of diverse sectors working cooperatively (Haque et al. 2013).
This desk review shows that there is clearly no ‘one size fits all’ model for intersectoral
engagement, and that models change over time, as understandings of pre-primary education as a
component of the overall Education sector and as intersectoral partnerships evolve. General
conclusions that might inform the MOE’s policy planning activities and approach to designing its
intersectoral strategy are suggested below.
2.1 Clearly delineate responsibilities for intersectoral actors within MOE and across the
sub-sectors. While it may be immature and/or politically challenging to designate an
anchor institution to help facilitate the horizontal coordination of service provision in the
short-term, identifying and outlining roles and responsibilities for national and subnational
actors involved in ECE/ECD service delivery is of upmost importance. As the MOE
embarks on its ECE policy planning activities and building of a nascent pre-primary sector,
it will need to ensure that responsibilities at various levels of government are transparent
and have appropriate accountability mechanisms. Strong governance, accountability and
implementation capacity will be a critical foundational step to supporting the MOE’s
ability to leverage technical and coordinating expertise, whether via internal or external
stakeholders.
As the MOE builds capacity within the ministry, these efforts should inform its cross-
sectoral efforts to engage health, social protection and other ministries that will
collectively contribute to comprehensive ECD services in the country. This possibility
includes adapting existing mechanisms created and instituted by implementing partners
and working from the grassroots up to incorporate systemic improvements, build trust and
a communications protocol. It may also provide an opportunity to strengthen stakeholder
coordination by piloting community-based pre-primary schooling together with those
implementing partners that have reputable experiences in the field. On the other hand, this
approach might also increase the MOE’s ability to leverage policy level operations by
32
establishing norms and standards for uniform development of the sub-sector. Finally, the
MOE, might consider engaging and seeding policy design recommendations from key
partners like UNICEF, the Aga Khan Foundation, and Save the Children who have
implemented CBE’s with success and who have shared guidelines and policies with other
stakeholders working to establish CBEs in mostly rural communities (Foundation 2021;
Save the Children 2020; United Nations 2016).
Clearly delineating responsibilities for intersectoral actors is not without challenges. In the
comparator countries, the sheer complexity of government worked against the
development of successful strategies. Two examples of this issue were India and Tajikistan.
The Indian case study demonstrated that its 45-year-old comprehensive Integrated Child
Development Scheme (ICDS) requires a multi-layered approach to engage and coordinate
preschool education and supplementary nutrition and health education for children and
mothers at the national and subnational levels. The program, however, is run in a very top-
down fashion, and can be plagued accordingly by administrative inefficiencies.
Additionally, the community workers charged with delivering both ECE and nutritional
services at the local level are hired by the government, without significant local input. This
arrangement misses an opportunity to engage localities and villages more substantially in
the monitoring of ICDS activities and in turn improve community buy-in and support of
government pre-primary expansion efforts(Pant and Ambast 2020; Singh and Mukherjee
2016).
While Tajikistan has a robust set of regulatory documents and a governance framework
that define standards for and delivery of ECE/ECD services by its many actors in the
country, the inter-sectoral and cross-sectoral coordination is challenged. For example,
some regulatory documents may be approved under auspices of only the education ministry
but require the involvement of health and social protection, resulting in efficiencies in
service delivery. On the other hand, vertical coordination within the country’s education
sector is hampered, primarily because service provision is decentralized to local authorities
who finance and provide all local social services and have limited incentive to be
accountable to the central level actors. The country has a robust EMIS system and data
collection but monitoring of service provision is weak due to insufficient administrative
capacity and a structure that does not maximize local and community stakeholder
engagement (World Bank 2019).
2.2 Utilize existing mechanisms to establish/strengthen frameworks for intersectoral
action. For example, the MOE might consider utilizing the NESP Steering Committee
and/or thematic areas in order to support the beginning stages of ECE policy planning. This
suggestion follows the NESP mandate to build upon existing structures in order to establish
holistic coordinating bodies over the long-term. Specifically, and while the MOE may take
lead on ECE policy planning, this process can be used as a catalyst to undertake
consultation and consensus building exercises with ECD stakeholders that will need to be
replicated as the sub-sector evolves. For example, in the Punjab Province the School
Education Division collaborates with the Department of Health to ensure that teachers and
staff receive baseline training on child nutrition and health. This engagement is focused
and specific and allows the government entities to build trust and create a working
framework that might support the provinces future efforts to establish a coordinating body
33
or mechanisms for comprehensive ECD. In the meantime, however, the provinces utilize
existing structures to meet near term goals.
If amenable, the MOE may also consider national legislation or other regulatory documents
to support key stakeholder engagement and role delineation in the short-term. For example,
at the central level, Pakistan’s National Education Policy (2017-2025) includes a detailed
list of national, provincial and area government actors and their roles in service provision
and delivery. At the provincial level, the Government of the Punjab’s ECE Policy details
institutional roles and responsibilities. Designating a coordinating body or anchor
institution to coordinate smooth facilitation of comprehensive ECD service delivery should
be a long-term goal. In the interim, however, the MOE’s ECE policy planning activities
should focus on utilizing existing mechanisms while maintaining a degree of flexibility to
include the advisory of representatives from other sectors in which decision making would
impact or should be shared. Doing so might allow the MOE to begin laying the groundwork
for the more involved coordination that will be required when the country is ready to
coordinate the various sectors engaged in ECD services.
2.3 Develop specific regulations/guidelines for private sector and CBE engagement. ECE
regulations and policy planning should aim to bolster alternative pathways for service
provision. In Afghanistan, private schools provide early childhood education at least one
year before enrollment into first grade. It is important that the MOE recognize this valuable
contribution by the private sector and provide the necessary supports and guidance to
private providers of ECE. The countries reviewed in this report demonstrate that public
and donor financing alone is insufficient for most countries committed to expanding access
to high quality ECE services. The MOE could leverage current agreements with non-state
actors, including NGOs managing CBEs, to create a set of comprehensive guidelines that
outline the entry points for private investment and a strategy for aligning those funds to
target the country’s most vulnerable children. These specific regulations could create the
onramps necessary to stimulate more private provision of ECE services in the near and
mid-term.
In terms of coordinating ECE service deliver with the private sector, and similar to the case
in Afghanistan, the study demonstrated that the countries reviewed had limited to no
coordinating mechanisms to coordinate service delivery. Private sector ECE provision in
India is estimated to enroll over 75% of young children in India and in the 6-year period of
2010-2016 enrolled more than 6 times the increase in government funded ICDS programs.
However, these private schools, most in urban settings, are highly unregulated by the
government (Ambast, Gaur, and Sangai 2017). In Tajikistan, where private providers make
up less than 4% of the ECE service delivery ecosystem, the government has a robust set of
regulatory documents establishing the norms for building new schools, specific standards
for care and norms for fees. However, monitoring of these schools is nascent and reflects
the highly decentralized structure of the school system (World Bank 2019).
Like the model country examples, urban private schools in Afghanistan often include a
pre-primary education component that is highly unregulated across the MOE and Ministry
of Labor and Social Affairs. The lessons from this desk review suggest on one hand, an
34
opportunity for the MOE to take advantage of its current policy planning state to establish
minimum guidelines, standards and an adequate monitoring system that captures the
services provided by the private sector and holds the private sector actors accountable for
the welfare of young children. For example, India’s Right to Education act includes
structural quality standards for private schools, including minimum norms for buildings,
teacher qualifications, teacher-child ratios and curriculum standards. It also requires that
private schools not serving minority groups reserve 25% of available seats for marginalized
children and provide free education for these children until class 8.18 Implementation of
these regulations is controlled at the state level and, unsurprisingly, varies in degree of
enforcement (Ambast, Gaur, and Sangai 2017). Still, India’s robust private sector ECE
provision suggests that minimum regulations have not greatly restricted private sector
engagement in the country. To this end the MOE might consider bolstering minimum
guidelines and standards with a monitoring and quality assurance system that not only
focuses on structural quality but also process quality as noted in the previous section
explaining the Government of the Punjab’s regulatory system. The Punjab ECE structural
and process quality standards are applicable to both the public and private sector. Process
quality refers to the components of ECE that are related to the learning activities and
interactions between teachers and children and has been shown to be more directly linked
to child development outcomes then structural quality components, although both are
essential in the ECE sector.
The trade-offs of a minimally versus highly regulated ECE sub-sector vary by country
context and the constraints imposed by a country’s political structure and institutio nal
tradition. The four policy goals and framework outlined by SABER – Engaging the Private
Sector 1. Encouraging provider innovation; 2. Holding schools accountable; 3.
Empowering all parents, children and communities and 4. Promoting diversity of supply –
may help the MOE create an effective service delivery system that encourages, rather than
limit, private sector coordination of ECE in Afghanistan (Baum, Lewis, and Patrinos 2013).
3. Establishing Viable Financial Mechanisms for Service Delivery: How have the selected
model countries overcome their financial constraints? What could be actionable advice
for Afghanistan?
One of the major barriers to establishing (or scaling up) sustainable ECE policies is financing. Pre-
primary education and the broader set of ECD services may be financed through public or private
sources or a combination of the two. However, financial planning is also one of the weakest areas
in early childhood policy planning (van der Gaag and Putcha 2015). Countries studied in this
review allocated a small proportion of their total education budget to ECE/ECD provision and in
general demonstrated funding outlays that were insufficient to meet the policy (equity and/or
access) goals established in their regulatory, policy and implementation documents. Accordingly,
at the time of this desk review, all three countries, India, Pakistan, and Tajikistan had financial
mechanisms in place that would not allow them to meet the Sustainable Development Goal 4.219.
Annually, India spends approximately USD 51.5 billion on education, or 2.7% of its GDP.
Accordingly, because of the magnitude of the ICDS program, the Central government is also the
18
India (2010), Right to Education Act, 12, 19, 23, 29
19
4.2 By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys have access to quality early childhood development, care and pre-primary education so that they are ready for primary education
35
largest funder of ECE in India. Allocating nearly USD 280 million20 for the 2019-2020 fiscal year,
or approximately ~$200 per child (UNICEF 2019). While ECE is one of the six pillars of the
ICDS framework, it does not have its own budget line and is instead absorbed into the scheme’s
nutrition programming (“Budget Brief 2019-20: Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) |
Centre for Policy Research�? n.d.).
The government of Pakistan has increased its overall spending on education in recent years.
However, resource allocations to education as a proportion of GDP remain at approximately 2%,
far below the government’s target of 4%. Education receives a fragment of federal and provincial
budgets each year. For 2020-21, the federal government has allocated Rs. 83.3 billion (~USD 520
million) for Education Affairs and Services, of which Rs. 2.931 billion (~USD 18.2 million) is
reserved for pre-primary and primary education activities (Asian Development Bank n.d.).
Resource availability at the federal level determines the number of resources the provincial
governments have at their disposal. Due to the devolution of education planning and financing to
provinces, the federal government has instituted a needs-based formula for resource distribution,
in order to increasing financing to the least developed provinces. In the case of the Punjab, the
country’s largest province, the ECE policy does not currently have an approved implementation
strategy and without which a financial commitment for ECE has been difficult to achieve in the
province (“Punjab Education Sector Plan�? 2019).
Public financing for ECE in Tajikistan was 5.6% or about USD 22 million of the total education
budget in 2017 and overall insufficient to meet the country’s goals of attaining 50% preschool
enrollment by 2030. While total education expenditures in Tajikistan have increased from 4.4% to
6.1% of GDP during the 2010-2017 period, ECE spending has remained relatively low (Global
Partnership for Education 2020).
Some reports suggest that countries should devote at least 10% of their total education budgets to
ECE in order to achieve SDG 4.2 by 2030.21 Table 4 summarizes ECE spending in the comparator
countries as a % of GDP and the total education budget.
Table 4: Summary of ECE Public Spending as % of GDP and Total Education Budget
% of Total Education Budget
Total spent on education in USD
Total spent Total Amount spent on ECE in
on education USD
as a % of
GDP
India $51,500,000,000 2.7 $139,500,00022 2.7
Pakistan $520,000,000 2.0 $18,200,00023 3.5
Tajikistan ~$410,000,00024 6.1 $22,000,000 5.6
Policies and the resulting implementation strategies are only as effective as the financial resources
available to carry out service delivery.
20
Rs. 19, 834 crore total allocation for ICDS services in fiscal year 2019-2020
21
See, “Setting New Targets for Success: The Major lesson in pre-primary education and we can invest to improve equity and learning by 2030�? (Their World, March 2021)
22
Specific financing for ECE is unclear as it has historically been absorbed into the country’s ICDS scheme nutrition financing . Calculated as 2.7% of total education spending.
23
Includes primary education
24
3,581.11 in TJS millions
36
Afghanistan is not unique it its endeavor to adequately and fully fund its pre-primary sector. A key
bottleneck to the establishment and expansion of ECE service provision, worldwide and in
Afghanistan, is the limited availability of public funds in the face of competing needs and this
discrepancy is further amplified by the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic. In the years of
transformation and reduced foreign aid to the country, the Afghan government must reassess its
expenditures for more sustainable public spending and reprioritize based on current and prevailing
realities (The World Bank 2018).
Limitations such as the availability of comparable data and the various country contexts and/or
GDPs, make it difficult to make explicit recommendations regarding spending and effective
financing arrangements. What works in one context, may not be applicable in another, even if
similarly situated. Although comparator countries, and globally few countries, have yet to establish
fiscal mechanisms that truly allow for universal access to ECE, this study nevertheless revealed
several strategies that might inform the MOE’s fiscal planning activities.
3.1 Reinforce domestic financing in ECE by developing intentional budget planning
priorities, even in the absence of sustained public financing, and draw on spending by
development partners with established portfolios in the sub-sector. Intentional planning
and budget processes that clearly identify the current funding needs/gaps and projections for
future help establish critical informational benchmarks that plainly identify the current funding
needs/gaps and projections for future years. The MOE currently holds a powerful ability to
design its budget planning for pre-primary services using best practices that could a) strengthen
its near and long-term planning for ECE service provision and b) establish an organized and
strong precedent for collaborating across ministries. This would require close collaboration
with current stakeholders, mainly because they have off-budget spending that could be mapped
as contributions to the overall national policy for early childhood education. Furthermore, even
in the absence of sustained public financing for ECE service delivery, and variable donor
contributions to Afghanistan’s education sector, the MOE might consider bolstering its ECE
policy planning process to include specific and measurable benchmarks for the allocation of
current expenditures and projections for long-term needs in the pre-primary subsector.
Importantly, with ongoing collection, analyzing and monitoring of expenditures and other data,
the MOE will have the ability to model various ECE policy scenarios and explore the
relationships between program cost, program quality and increasing equitable access to
vulnerable populations. This will also allow partners and funders to strategize their funding
outlays should they want to engage in the early childhood education sub-sector.
An ECE policy and implementation plan will allow for the harmonization and mainstreaming
of existing operations and contribute to the overall long-term sustainable development of the
country. The above recommendation is reinforced by the findings of this desk review and
insights gleaned from countries with current funding shortfalls for ECE provision.
In fact, all three countries reviewed in this study have insufficient budget outlays to reach
universal access in pre-primary education and in some cases have insufficient data for the pre-
primary sector to create accurate simulations to drive critical policy decisions. For example, in
the case of India’s ICDS scheme, which couples ECE provision with nutrition and maternal
care, the current budget allocations project enrolled beneficiaries but not the number of target
37
beneficiaries. This arrangement results in relative shortfalls each year and no clear pathway to
help the country achieve universal pre-primary access. It is critical to assess costs per
beneficiary and per community in relation to policy goals through the use of data and research
to incorporate not only fiscal expenditures but also in-kind costs and other resources the MOE
may access via its various donor relationships and from community/parental contributions. It
remains to be seen how India’s decision to move one year of ECE services under the formal
education system with shared accountability across the Ministry of Women and Children and
its Ministry of Education will impact its planning for ECE service provision.
The countries studied are funded mainly from public-sector budgets and they all receive
international support from development agencies. It appears that for sustained ECE service
delivery, dedicated, non-transferable, public financing is essential. When funding was
fungible, such as in Punjab, the provincial government’s first ECE pilot (intended to be scaled-
up) was paused.
3.2 Strengthen equitable funding modalities. A range of social, developmental and economic
criteria are used by the study countries to focus their targeting strategies, with the most
common prioritizing regulations aimed at enhancing ECE participation for children from low-
income families and children with special educational needs or disabilities. The need-based
funding schemes seen in India and Tajikistan (per-capital financing scheme) has helped to
facilitate each country’s ability to target financing to resource constrained states or specific
demographics including girls, rural and other vulnerable populations.
For example, following the success of per capita financing (PCF) in its other education sectors.
Tajikistan conducted a PCF pilot for preschools in 2015 with the aim of eliminating ECE
funding inequities and affording preschools the autonomy to apply funds more efficiently to
meet on the ground needs. The pilot succeeded in creating a transparent and standardized
preschool budget planning process and expanding preschools autonomy to use fund
allocations. Despite the pilot’s success the government has opted not to adopt PCF for
preschools nationwide until it can simulate a model based on national norms (as opposed to
regional) and evaluate the potential impact on inter-budgetary relations. Tajikistan’s relatively
high population of 3-6-year-old children disconnected from ECE services and high proportion
of children living in rural areas (73.8%) makes the success of this PCF pilot particularly
noteworthy for the situation in Afghanistan. To address its current challenges of equitable
distribution of resources to vulnerable provinces the MOE may draw lessons from Tajikistan’s
PCF pilot. Notably, Tajikistan’s success was driven by an intentionally designed and
transparent system (World Bank 2019).
In this regard, the MOE might consider reevaluating its current system to allow for systematic
funding allocations to provinces. Creating established procedures that outline a clear strategy
for allocating resources could be a pivotal first step. This outline would include an adequate
reporting mechanism that would hold the relevant stakeholders accountable for data collection
and reporting to ensure that financing is reaching the target populations. The resulting data
could be used to strengthen the EMIS system and protocols for overall ECE data collection
and ongoing financial forecasting.
38
3.3 Solidify cost sharing arrangements that strengthen existing community-based education
providers, encourage PPPs and address supply limitations. Accordingly, and as noted
previously in this report, the MOE might consider additional opportunities to leverage existing
CBE providers, especially those with relative success in reaching girls and children living in
rural settings, to help bolster ECE service delivery financial resources while expanding access.
During its current stage of transition, instituting cooperative institutional agreements with
CBEs may provide a viable platform for the government to expand access, strengthen ECE
service delivery oversight and mechanisms, and mitigate shortages in public financing for ECE
in the short and near term. One possibility for addressing the ECE supply limitations is to
mainstream private sector provision of early childhood education in the education system.
Currently, the majority of private schools provide early childhood education programs, yet
they remain disconnected from public sector acknowledgement, including support and
oversight.25 At this fundamental stage of ECE sub-sector development, the MOE might
consider committing to acknowledging private sector delivery of ECE and collecting periodic
data from private schools such as ECE enrolment and other demographic data. This could lay
the groundwork for a more sustainable reporting and monitoring system in the future and
support the MOE’s progress toward achieving ECE policy planning objectives. The MOE
might also consider providing strategic support to private providers who enroll children
designated by the government as vulnerable in return for rebates, vouchers and/or tax
reductions. Finally, the MOE could identify exemplar CBE programs and partners and
supplement those models that don’t include early learning with ECE classes. This arrangement
not only provides a viable cost-sharing model with NGO and CBE providers but also helps
support the MOE’s plans to capture data and create reporting and monitoring mechanisms for
CBEs and other private providers of ECE in the country (Aga Khan Foundation 2021; Save
the Children 2020; United Nations 2016; Nai Qala 2019).
Accordingly, the general approach by Tajikistan to expand PPPs as one viable mechanism for
expanding ECE service delivery in contexts where government capacity to provide pre-primary
services is limited provides another informative example for the case of Afghanistan. This
example may inform the MOE’s planning as it considers how to address ECE supply
constraints in the country.
In the case of Tajikistan, preschool education is not compulsory and is covered almost
exclusively by the government with private providers making up less than 4% of ECE
institutions in the country. The MOE in Tajikistan instituted a plan to expand private provision
of ECE by adding approximately 40 institutions in 2014 to over 1000 in 2020 (World Bank
2019; Global Partnership for Education 2020). While expanding access to ECE provision is
growing in the country it lags far behind the government’s projections with the most recent
data suggesting that only 89 additional private schools had been established in 2017. Still, the
country experienced an increase in ECE enrollments by 2.2%. The increase in coverage is
partly attributed to the government’s policy strategy to expand various models of pre-school
provision including CBEs, ECE centers, private kindergartens and family-based kindergartens.
Notably, the enrollment in ECE centers increased by over 500% from 2011 in 2016.
Importantly, these ECE centers serve mostly rural populations and are supported by
development partners, local governments and communities. Although more investigation is
25
MOE provincial and district level officials (MOE ECE Unit), field knowledge, Afghanistan, 2018-2020
39
needed to identify the impediments to Tajikistan’s private provider growth in its ECE
subsector, its ambitious plan to expand access via diversifying service delivery
models/providers offers a viable learning opportunity for Afghanistan (World Bank 2019).
The limited studies on PPPs for early childhood provision suggest that instances when the
public-sector provides financing for privately operated schools the dual achievements of high
quality ECE and efficient use of budget can be obtained. However, there are multiple cost-
sharing possibilities. The MOE might consider instituting privately or donor financed/publicly
provided arrangements or expanding its current CBE network but with MOE oversight and
capacity building arrangements. Regardless of the degree of regulation, the MOE should
consider embarking on ECE policy and fiscal planning exercises that incorporate detailed and
clear guidance on the role CBEs and other private actors will play in delivering ECE services
in Afghanistan in the short and near term and establish specific benchmarks of accountability
(Foundation 2021; Save the Children 2020; United Nations 2016).
The case of Tajikistan illustrates that such detailed planning and accountability measures, even
if actual benchmark data is lower than planned, might yield significant growth in a country’s
ability to expand ECE access to target populations. This detailed guidance and legislation on
the role of non-state actors might also include entry requirements for non-state actors, minimal
laws on tuition fees and school operations and monitoring and evaluation guidance that
contribute to the framework for strengthening Afghanistan’s enabling environment for pre-
primary provision and on-boarding non-state ECE providers in the long-term. However, as
suggested in the previous section on private sector engagement, Tajikistan’s robust regulatory
environment may actively discourage rather than stimulate private sector growth in the ECE
sector.
3.4 Leverage existing strategies across sectors to encourage evolving private sector
understanding of ECE. Evidence from India’s robust landscape of private and social impact
funders suggest that a lack of knowledge about ECE and child development serve as barriers
to funding and as such most focus funding in ECE on infrastructure and supplies with limited
funding directed at capacity building or systems strengthening. The MOE could consider
opportunities to align its ECE policy planning with the country’s Country Partnership Strategy.
For example, Strategic Pillar 2 (improved environment for PPPs) and the outcome indicators
related to increasing the percentage of employed women in agriculture and access to and use
of social services among target populations may provide viable pathways for the MOE to begin
laying the groundwork for communicating the vital importance ECE plays in achieving the
aforementioned goals and inclusive growth in the country. Practically, this could take the form
of informational pamphlets or a short on-boarding on ECE principles for private sector actors.
In the short and near term, this may focus attention on attracting private investment to help
Afghanistan’s pre-primary subsector develop the necessary technical and coordinating
capacities. Long term, such an approach might support evidence-based strategies such as
promoting ECE provision through employer sponsored cost sharing arrangements.
3.5 Consider a strategic introduction of parent/family, particularly community
contributions, to support quality ECE service provision. Experience in other countries and
research supports the importance of parental and community engagement in early childhood
40
development of young children (Vargas-Barón n.d.). Currently in Afghanistan, CBE providers
share the cost of ECE services with parents and local community members. This is most
commonly observed in cases where the families/the community provides a physical space that
meets the CBE providers requirements for an early learning classroom (Aga Khan Foundation
2021; Save the Children 2020; United Nations 2016; Nai Qala 2019). The family/community
is responsible for the upkeep and maintenance of the space and the CBE provider provides
training of a CBE teacher and supplies. This cost sharing exemplar demonstrates the
effectiveness of parent/community engagement and helps elevate public awareness of ECE
provision in the community. Development partners share costs with families and community
members, while communities play a critical role in ensuring the safety and education of their
children (by choosing the learning space and helping to select the teacher and assistant). This
example provides another accessible opportunity for the MOE to leverage already existing
models established by CBE providers to expand access to ECE while simultaneously
improving public awareness, interest in and demand for early learning services.26 The MOE
might also consider quantifying these in-kind contributions by parents and families to
adequately reflect the monetary value and cost-savings ultimately experienced by CBEs/early
education providers in the country. This also serves to ensure that budget planning reflects the
true cost of providing ECE in communities.
3.6 Consider possibilities for introducing small fees to support quality ECE provision in the
country. In Tajikistan, for example, the proportion of parent fees associated with kindergarten
classes27 expanded by over nearly 90% from 2015 to 2018. Initially, parental fees were set by
each district and could vary monthly from $2.65-$6.35. These parent contributions are mostly
used to provide school meals to children and help to ensure that nutritional standards can be
met. In 2016, the central government approved a resolution regulating parent fees and instituted
a system that calculated a parent’s contribution based on affordability coefficients assigned to
the districts. Parents living in predominately rural, mountainous areas which include districts
that also receive state subsidies payed a coefficient of 1.0.(TJS 50 or ~USD 4.40/month) and
the lowest monthly contribution. On the other hand, those living in the mostly urban centers,
with developed infrastructure paid a coefficient of 2.0 (TJS 100 or ~USD $8.80/month). This
regulation by Tajikistan’s central government helped bring transparency and consolidate
parent fees while instating parameters to ensure that families living in target areas (rural,
mountainous areas) were responsible for a smaller share of fees proportionate to their relative
ability to pay. Despite the government efforts to control parental fees, in some cases
kindergartens reported a reduction in the number of children because of parent’s inability to
pay fees furthering exacerbating the countries low enrollment rates (World Bank 2019).
With caution, the MOE may draw lessons from Tajikistan. For one, the introduction of an
equitable indicator which takes into consideration taxes, social and other mandatory payments
in the provinces demonstrates one possibility for gradually introducing parental fees on an
equitable scale. Second, the government passed a resolution which allowed for a mechanism
26
Structural and political strategies can be important tools to increase the demand for pre-primary services. Examples of demand side strategies include implementing ECE policies
and legislation, collaborating with private sector, NGOs, CBEs in the provision of pre-primary education; subsidies and childcare voucher schemes, government establishing and
monitoring quality standards, decentralizing of decisions concerning early childhood education and instituting a communications and advocacy strategy to create nationwide
awareness of ECE issues among religious and traditional leaders. Additionally, overcoming cultural and contextual constraints have been proven to increase demand in ECE.
Activities include, integrating ECE issues into community-level development planning, establishing and strengthening PTAS/governing bodies, implementing parent education
programs by public health workers, and utilizing local resources and indigenous knowledge in ECE/ECD service delivery (Shaeffer 2015).
27
Kindergarten (KG) programs target all children aged 3 to 7 years and provide early care, feeding, and preschool education. KG is regulated by the Ministry of Education and
Science in Tajikistan and serve approximately 30,000 children.
41
of national regulation in an otherwise decentralized system of service delivery. Finally, due to
this, the indicators related to parental contributions for kindergartens are reviewed annually
along with the budget planning process.28 Conceptually, this annual review affords the
government an opportunity to monitor the resolution and ensure that the prescribed coefficients
remain equitable. The MOE might consider developing and/or expanding equity profiles of its
provinces for this purpose and consulting administrative divisions to test the feasibility of
implementing a regulated parent/family fee for ECE.
SECTION 5: CONCLUSION AND LIMITATIONS
The premise of this desk review has been to investigate the ECE regulatory frameworks in different
countries with a view to draw lessons for Afghanistan’s ECE policy planning activities. Drawing
lessons from the statutes, policies and acts that compose a legal framework have been considered
important mechanisms through which countries learn from each other and evolve their own legal,
policy and regulatory frameworks. Yet, the extant literature and studies on creating an enabling
environment for the ECE subsector suggest that such transfers of knowledge are far from a
straightforward process and that countries should closely examine and carefully design the
application of lessons learned elsewhere to match the country’s capacity and other socio-cultural
factors (Vargas-Barón, Book, and Pence 2005; GPE 2019).
The approach adopted in this study was distinguished by its primary focus on the ECE
policies/regulatory framework of the comparator countries in order to draw specific findings that
might be most useful for the Afghanistan’s Ministry of Education’s policy planning process. One
theme that emerged is the extent to which the comparator countries set specific goals and aims by
which to ground their ECE policies and governance approaches. These goals reflect international
alignment (SDG goal 4.2) but more broadly a variety of socio-economic, educational,
developmental and political contexts in which they were developed. Establishing minimally viable
governance and regulatory documents appeared to bolster and help define stakeholder roles and
contributed to a multifaceted vision and understanding of the importance of ECE provision among
stakeholders in the comparator countries. Determining the degree of regulation and governance of
ECE, however, will require an intentional planning process that takes into the considerations the
unique context in Afghanistan. Although ECE planning in Afghanistan is relatively in the nascent
stages, this positioning also provides the MOE with an opportunity to strategically learn from and
potentially avoid some of the challenges of its regional neighbors. Considering opportunities to
28
Tajikistan has at least 11 different types of institutions providing early education and early care in the country. Most children enrolled in preschools are attending kindergarten:
Kindergartens (KG) with 29, 498 children, Nursery-KG with 60, 489 children, and Early Learning Centers with 43, 666 children. All are regulated by the Ministry of Education.
Kindergartens in Tajikistan enroll children aged 3 to 7 years old and provide services such as care, feeding, early development and pre-school education. Nursery-KG’s enroll
children aged 1.5 to 7 years old and provide the same services as Kindergartens. Early Learning Centers enroll children aged 4 to 7 years old and provide preschool education.
Parent fees make up more than one-third of preschool funding in Tajikistan. (Global Partnership for Education 2020)
42
leverage existing networks, such engaging CBEs and the private sector in the regulation
conversation and utilizing the NESP steering committee to pilot intersectoral coordination may
provide accessible pathways for the ministry to meet its short-term planning goals.
The second theme to emerge was that the MOE played a central role in ECE policy planning
activities, as none of the model countries had a designated ECE department. The countries studied
can be characterized as having decentralized systems. Variations of national, state-level/regional
and/or local level governance have been employed to facilitate ECE provision for eligible children
in each comparator country. National level governance appears to be most prevalent in facilitating
policies, standards, codes and guidelines for sub-national and local governments to follow. This
type of framework affords subnational authorities more autonomy to apply and adapt policies that
are more applicable to their region. On the other hand, this framework may result in service
delivery with high degrees of local and regional variation. Still, effective ECE policy planning
relies on strong central level governance and, accordingly, once the central level actor(s) have been
identified as the core and critical component of ECE policy planning, outlining subsequent roles
and responsibilities for national and subnational actors involved in ECE service delivery becomes
an essential short-term priority. The MOE should consider these findings in light of its current
resources.
Despite the extant literature suggesting the important role played by anchor institutions in the
subsector, neither of the countries with holistic ECD policies (i.e., India and Tajikistan) had a
designated coordinating body responsible for synchronization among the various entities engaged
in ECD provision. This speaks to the challenging aspects of organizational development to achieve
common goals. Once actors begin assuming roles in the subsector the challenge of coordination
becomes increasingly more difficult. Instituting early on, a holistic and participatory approach to
policy planning is critical as regulatory tools and policy levers interact with other elements,
agencies and/or entities in the local environment. Accordingly, identifying an anchor institution
early in the planning and resource allocation process is a core function of an effective pre-primary
subsector (GPE 2019) but as the case studies demonstrate a challenging endeavor. For
Afghanistan, this finding is critical and magnifies the importance of framing its current nascent
stage of ECE development as a strength and necessitates the importance of leveraging existing
mechanisms in order to build the capacities necessary to develop a sustainable anchor institution
in the future. Indeed, the MOE might find success with scaffolding coordinating mechanisms early
in the policy planning process and utilizing existing structures such as the NESP Steering
Committee to support engaging critical stakeholders such as communities, NGO implementing
partners and the private sector in the short term. Ultimately, the stakeholder coordination strategy
the MOE adopts at this stage of ECE policy planning will inform and support its ability to
contribute and develop a comprehensive ECD framework in the future.
Finally, financing the pre-primary subsector remains an area in which the three countries included
in this study project considerable room to grow in order to meet their self-determined access, equity
and SDG goals. Intentional planning, modeling and forecasting are essential steps to creating a
framework for enabling sustained financing for ECE service provision and ultimately, a robust
ECD system. Likewise, the development of viable ECE policy in Afghanistan will require
intentional planning and a perspective that considers innovative funding modalities. Perhaps, the
most critical takeaway from this report is that the Afghanistan MOE has, at its disposal, a number
43
of pathways it might access in order to take formative steps toward building a viable ECE plan.
Building upon existing frameworks, whether they be steering committees, CBEs and implementing
partner best practices, or crosscutting policy issues for example, may ultimately help the MOE
create feasible cost sharing arrangements and allocate human resources efficiently across policy
priorities. Additionally, proactively weighing governance decisions, supported by robust research,
on the ideal level of regulation that both protects the well-being of children and encourages private
sector engagement is an essential opportunity for the government to proactively explore.
This cross-national desk review demonstrates that, while some areas of ECE policy and pre-
primary subsector planning appear to be very similar in the comparator countries, others vary, both
within and between countries, with government ECE policy often supporting regional and local
variations in service delivery for young children. It is also clear that there is no generally applicable
approach to ECE policy development. Countries have a range of policy options at their disposal to
help them meet international commitments (SDG goals) and country specific cultural and societal
objectives that support high quality ECE for all children. Depending on each country’s context,
there are different frameworks to be considered. Nevertheless, the distinct set of regulatory
frameworks in the three study countries are presented in this desk review and provide an initial
overview of how select south-central Asia countries have approached ECE regulation and
standards, intersectoral coordination and financing.
This desk review was carried out to examine ECE regulatory frameworks in south-central Asia in
order to provide an overview of select countries and explore considerations that might contribute
to the ECE policy planning process for the Ministry of Education in Afghanistan. Future editions
to this report might be expanded by including a more detailed investigation into the full set of
policies that compromise the early childhood subsectors in each country. Additionally, process or
procedural reports, to the extent publicly available, that provide a country case analysis of
ECE/ECD subsector planning would be especially beneficial in providing additional context and
framing the challenges associated with governance, drafting policy, coordinating across sectors
and allocating appropriate financial outlays for the multi-year, complex planning process that the
pre-primary subsector requires. With more time, in depth interviews with key country informants,
would enhance the depth of understanding of each country case and identify other potential areas
of adaptability for the MOE in Afghanistan. Moreover, the urgencies associated with Covid-19
pandemic made it especially difficult to consistently engage relevant stakeholders.
It is important to contemplate how the ECE regulatory framework (laws, policies, standards and
guidelines) operates in its country of origin, not in isolation, but as a component of a larger system
or network of interconnected ECD laws, policies, standards and/or provisions woven into a specific
cultural and socio-economic context. The focus of this report was to draw attention to the specific
policy instruments that define ECE in the comparator countries. However, Afghanistan is in a
unique position of accelerating its development, improving security and transitioning from fragile
to stable. Establishing an early childhood subsector must include participatory policy planning
processes that are informed by best practices and international cases/research but are localized to
the context in Afghanistan and take into consideration the ongoing developments within the MOE
and across the country’s other development initiatives.
44
SECTION 6: ANNEXES
ANNEX 1 – Concept Note
Concept Note
Comparative Analysis of ECE Regulatory Frameworks
for
the Afghan Ministry of Education
Background:
For the ECE provision in Afghanistan, establishing an enabling environment is the
foundation in providing the means to design and implement policies, delivery services and
monitor outcomes. For instance, through the enabling environment, the government of Afghanistan can
support non-government bodies in service delivery, set incentives and policies that encourage private
investment, support uptake for the marginalized and disadvantaged populations, promote effective and
quality service delivery, ensure adequate financing and institutional capacity and finally effect the extent to
which services and resources are devolved from national to sub-national levels. To this end, developing an
adequate legal and regulatory framework to support ECE provision, coordination within the sub-sector and
across institutions is necessary to ensure effective service delivery and the availability of adequate fiscal
resources for the support of the ECE provision. Furthermore, a solid regulatory framework in
ECE subsector will form cornerstone for a strong ECD system in the country – pivotal for holistic
development of young children.
The legal and regulatory framework of an ECE system comprises of all the laws and regulations
which can affect the holistic development needs for the young children and promotes enrollment in
preprimary school. The ultimate aim of a high functioning ECE system, delivering tangible
outcomes, is to enable the policymakers and decision-makers to ensure that all age appropriate
children have the opportunity to reach their full potential, lends hands in school readiness and
healthfulness of the young children across the nation. Investments in children’s early learning have been
proven to promote school readiness and better education outcomes. I Indicated by various credible pieces of
research, participation in quality ECE programs is linked to improved attention and learning outcomes, as
well as higher completion rates and school attainment levels’ Studies also show that
increasing preprimary school enrollment has the potential to yield significant benefits to education
systems in the country as young children grow older in terms of their productivity and learning outcomes.
Afghanistan lacks the legal framework, financing mechanisms and inter-sectoral coordination in the
preprimary education sector – which in turn is also not mandatory in the education system of the
country. According to SABER-ECD Country Report for Afghanistan (2017), the status of SABER-ECD
Policy Goals are all categorized as latent, which is still the initial stage of ECE policy preparedness and
implementation status.iii The Education Law, Article 4.2, states that preprimary education must be provided
free of charge to children under age seven in public schools yet MOE itself lacking the policy mandating
ECE provision mechanism, resource and capacity needs for the task. This study aims
to delve into a comparative study of different and yet relevant ECE regulatory frameworks in
countries similar to context of Afghanistan to present alternative models for establishing a robust regulatory
framework for ECE and thus lent support to the immediate priority of MOE in ECE policy development
process around its key objectives of access, capacity and coordination in the sub-
sector and ultimately enabling sector-wide collaboration and harmonization in service delivery that
promotes young children’s learning and their preparedness for transition into the primary school. This
45
exercise will enable the decision-makers in MOE to learn from model countries’ regulatory framework in
ECE and how different stakeholders’ engagement is improved by effective and clear laws and regulations
in the ECE sub-sector between multiple stakeholders, resource scarcity, competing demands and
challenges similar to context of Afghanistan.
Purpose and Objective:
The study aims to review and analyze regional or international examples of standards and models of
the regulatory framework for preschool, childcare and childminding services. The objective of this
study is to lend hand in establishment of Afghan legal framework in ECE sector to enhance service delivery
in three main areas of access to quality ECE, capacity building and coordination and advocacy for ECE
provision and uptake. The findings of the study are expected to guide the MoE pre-primary unit in
MOE to feasible policy actions and steps to take, by highlighting where and how to start strengthening an
enabling environment for ECE policy implementation and ensuring its quality. To this end, a sample of
countries would be identified for this study based on specific criteria mutually agreed with the key
stakeholders of ECE/ECD in Afghanistan. The sample of countries will be studied for overview of their
ECE/ECD institutional layout, the standards in place, laws and regulations that are enforced, the relevant
authorities and assessment regime, intersectoral coordination, financial management, and practices that are
innovative for equitable access and quality can be source of learning in context of Afghanistan.
As a long-term goal, this study will pave the path for MOE and its partners to establish a solid
regulatory framework to guidance all stakeholders in service delivery of preprimary school. More
immediately, the outcomes of the study will enable MOE and its relevant partners to calibrate in the
process of ECE Policy development process, as it’s a cornerstone of institutionalization process of
preprimary education in Afghanistan.
Scope of the study:
Explore candidate model countries where their effort shows successful achievements especially in
establishing an ECD enabling environment with quality and access assurance. The big question for MOE
is what are effective approaches to reach the target group in current context and what regulatory standards
and framework and mechanisms and engagement with development partners will enable MOE to reach this
target and subsequent targets in the future. What approaches and second the kind of policies and bylaws
that would need to be developed to enable MOE to reach these targets. For this purpose, a sample
of maximum 5 countries would be identified for this study based on specific criteria mutually agreed with
the direct and key stakeholders. The sample of countries will be studied for overview of their ECE/ECD
institutional layout, the standards in place, laws and regulations that are enforced, the relevant authorities
and assessment regime, and practices that are innovative and can be source of learning in context of
Afghanistan.
Model countries of successfully establishing an ECE/ECD enabling environment will be assessed based on
following criteria (i.e. questions);
• Regulatory Framework:
o What kind of regulatory framework and standards were established to ensure
equitable access and quality in selected model countries?
o Where are the gaps between the practices of Afghanistan and of these
countries? What could be actionable advice for Afghanistan?
• Intersectoral Coordination:
o How line ministries, private sectors and NGOs takes different role for service
delivery in the selected model countries. What kind of mechanism (including any
46
regulatory framework) facilitates smooth intersectoral coordination in the selected
model countries?
o Where are the gaps between the selected model countries and Afghanistan? What
could be actionable advice for Afghanistan?
Additional questions if client is interested to explore;
• Finance:
o How the selected model countries overcome their financial constrains for ECD
budget both in public and private?
o If the ECD financing model of the selected countries seems far from what
Afghanistan could take away, the Task Team will seek any other good country
cases which would fit better in Afghanistan context?
• Quality and Equitable Access:
o How the selected model countries ensure quality and equitable access for ECD
programs, through any key factors and practices such as standards, monitoring and
evaluation, or anything else?
• Any key lessons in mid/long term process and steps to take
o Not only taking lessons from a snapshot of current status of the selected model
countries, the Task Team would like to take any effective lessons in mid/long term
process. Since ECD subsector usually have resource limitation in HR and budget, the
study will identify successful mid/long term transitional process and lessons,
to make evidence-based guidance on how the Afghanistan MoE better prioritize
short/mid/long term ECD policy actions?
Methodology:
In principal, this study will be a desk-based literature review conducted by the task team, with support
from relevant teams in Health, Social Protection, and the ECD thematic group members in LEG and more
importantly MOE itself. The task team will communicate closely with key stakeholders (relevant NGOs,
MOLSA, UNICEF to only name few) when and if necessary. A report will be produced as deliverable of
this study and will be put forward for internal team’s review.
47
ANNEX 2 – Methodology
This annex presents the methodology followed to meet the study’s objectives, including a
discussion of the challenges identified and how they have been addressed.
Approach to selecting countries and regions for further investigation
The scope of the identification of comparable countries was limited to LMICs, namely those in
south-central Asia. Three considerations informed the desk review team’s choices of comparator
countries:
• evidence of advancement from the country in establishing a pre-primary subsector. This
was based on both qualitative assessments and quantitative indicators:
• scope and level of detail of the information available on the country’s pre-primary
regulatory framework; and
• comparability of the country with Afghanistan and recommendation from the team’s
leadership. This involved considering the broad features and goals of the Afghanistan’s
government and those of the presumptive comparator countries.
Framework for the systematic documentation of pre-primary regulatory frameworks
The regulatory frameworks of the model countries examined in this study were systematically
described using categories drawn from the SABER ECD Policy Framework for an establishing an
enabling environment. More specifically, to the extent possible, all frameworks were described
using the following categories:
• Legal/Statutory Framework
• Intersectoral Coordination
• Finance
The information for documenting the regulatory frameworks was collected from publicly available
reports, articles as well as primary legislation, the list of which is referenced at the end of this
report. In addition to desk research, select interviews were conducted with World Bank team
leaders and consultants. The aim of these semi-structured interviews was to address any gaps from
the desk research as well as gain additional insights into the strengths and weaknesses of the
frameworks investigated and uncover a better understanding of the operational aspects of each
country’s legal framework for ECD.
Approach to examining the regulatory frameworks for applicability to Afghanistan
Once each model country’s pre-primary regulatory framework had been fully documented, they
were reviewed individually with a view to qualify and draw out the factors (e.g. standards,
practices and/or mechanisms) that might inform the establishment of an enabling environment for
ECE provision in Afghanistan. This assessment relied largely on triangulation of the evidence
collected by the team and, when available, expert commentary.
48
After an investigation of each comparator country, the desk review team conducted an analysis
across the different countries considered in order to examine the features and extracted key
findings that might inform ECE policy and framework development in Afghanistan. This approach
followed broadly the principles of comparative analysis across a limited number of cases (also
known as ‘small-N’ comparisons, or structured, focused comparisons) (George and Bennett 2005).
49
ANNEX 3 - ECE Regulatory Frameworks in Three Countries
The analysis of the laws and policies took into the account the greater political, social and cultural
contexts in which they were developed. In general, because country contexts vary, we have
attempted to apply an approach that is context relevant, responsive and flexible (UNICEF 2020).
The purpose of this section is to provide a situational understanding of the various frameworks and
offer a nuanced discussion of the findings in relation to the social, cultural and political
environment in which the policies were developed. Each country study, begins with a short country
profile, including a reference list of policy items that have informed the analysis. Each narrative
has been compiled by drawing upon a range of sources: evidence from the included policy
documents, secondary literature and relevant empirical literature to provide a more critical
discussion of the policy levers and evolution of ECE/ECD in each country. Framed by the research
questions and the SABER-ECD framework for establishing an enabling environment, the country
profiles contain three main sections:
1. Saber Policy Lever 1.1: Legal Framework What regulatory frameworks and/or standards have been
established to ensure equitable access and early childhood quality?
2. Saber Policy Lever 1.2: Intersectoral Coordination How are the roles for service delivery organized and
what mechanisms support and facilitate smooth intersectoral coordination?
3. Saber Policy Lever 1.3: Financing What level of public finance and other financial mechanisms are used to
fund ECD services?
Each country profile then concludes with reflections on the policy features with references to some
of the strengths and challenges salient to pre-primary sectoral development in the country.
Summary Information on Model Countries
Understanding that establishing an enabling environment for effective ECE policy implementation
at the national level is rooted in collaborative efforts, it is pertinent to consider the development
contexts of the five countries investigated in this study. The table below summarizes how the
comparator countries rank in terms of the Human Development Index (HDI), a composite
statistical indicator related to life expectancy, expected and mean years of schooling and poverty
levels (UNHDR 2019).
Table 5: Summary of Comparator Country Key Statistics
50
SABER Policy
Goal 1: Expected
Establishing an HDI Ranking Life Expectancy years of Mean Years of Population
Enabling (out of 189 at Birth schooling Schooling below poverty
Environment countries) line (%)
(Level of
Development)
South Asia - - 69.7 11.8 6.5
Afghanistan29 Latent 170 64.5 10.1 3.9 54.5
India30 - 129 69.4 12.3 6.5 22.0
Pakistan31 - 152 67.1 11.8 6.5 24.3
Tajikistan32 Emerging 125 70.9 11.4 10.7 27.4
Source: UNESCO, SABER Afghanistan Country Report, SABER Tajikistan Country Report
INDIA
Country Profile
The Republic of India is a vast country comprising 29 states and seven union territories with
diverse socio-cultural contexts. Education is organized under a federal structure where the Central
government and the 29 States share responsibility for planning and implementation of national
priorities like education. Of the country’s 1.3 billion people, approximately 160 million are under
the age of six years old.(Asian Development Bank n.d.)Early childhood education in India is
generally defined as the care and education from birth to eight years. It includes early stimulation
and home-based programs (0-3years), ECE programs (3-6years), and early primary education
programs (6-8years) (UNICEF 2018).
Education is a fundamental right in India and is free and compulsory for all children between the
ages of six and fourteen years old. This fundamental right is established in Article 21-A of the
constitution which reads that, “The State shall provide free and compulsory education to all
children of the age five to fourteen years in such a manner as may be determined by law�? (Ministry
of Women and Child Development 2013).
Although not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, ECE is covered in the Right to Education
Act, which requires the “appropriate government�? to make arrangements to provide free preschool
education to children from 3-6 years old33. The consideration of early childhood education for
India’s public education sector can be traced back to the National Policy for Children, which
detailed the country’s commitment to “provide adequate services to children, both before and after
birth and through the period of growth, to ensure their full physical, mental and social
development�? (India 1974).
In accordance with these policy aims, India launched the Integrated Child Development Scheme
(ICDS), which has become the world’s largest comprehensive early childhood program for
vulnerable young children (World Bank 2012). ICDS is organized around six pillars and includes
29
Asian Development Bank. Afghanistan. Poverty Data
30
UNDP. India. Human Development Report 2019
31
Asian Development Bank. Pakistan. Poverty Data
32
Asian Development Bank. Tajikistan. Poverty Data
33
The Right to Education is considered a fundamental right through the 86th Amendment to the Constitution (Article 21A: Right to Education) (2002). Over the
years, additional laws have been implemented, including an additional amendment (or Section 11) to include early childhood education as a right for all children until they reach
age 6.
51
a network of more than 1.3 million Anganwandi centers dispersed among India’s 29 states and
regions. Each Anganwandi center includes a nurse midwife who provides health services to
mothers, an Accredited Social Health Activist (ASHA) who provides public and reproductive
health counseling and an Anganwandi worker (AWW), who among other duties, is responsible for
delivering the ICDS preschool curriculum which aims to “promote early simulation and play-based
experiential and child-friendly provision for early childhood education and all around
development�? (Singh and Mukherjee 2016).
Recent policy developments, and the Central government’s goal to establish equitable and
universal access to ECE, have contributed to the expansion of the ECE aims of the Anganwandi
centers and a new coordinating mechanism between the Ministry of Education and Ministry of
Women and Child Development (Rathish Balakrishnan, Aarti Mohan, Anita Kumar and Kaliaden,
Abhineet Singh Malhotra, Poorvaja Prakash, Centre 2017).
Saber Policy Lever 1.1: Legal Framework
What regulatory framework and standards have been established to ensure equitable access and
ECEC quality?
The review revealed a number of key national policies introduced by the Indian government over
the past several decades that illustrate the government’s commitment to ECE and constitutes the
country’s ECE policy framework. The policy instruments include:
1. National Policy for Children (1974)
2. Right to Education Act (RTE 2012)
3. National Early Childhood Care and Education Policy (2013)
4. Right to Education Act, Article 45 (RTE 2016)
5. National Education Policy (2020)
India’s approach to early childhood care and education focuses on care, health, nutrition, education
and play-based learned for children aged 0-6 years. This system of pre-primary education is
anchored by the Anganwandis, or health care centers, and Balwadis, informal pre-schools for low-
income communities, that serve as the provide care and learning to young children and their
mothers.
The Right to Education Act (RTE) made education a fundamental right for children between the
ages of 6-14 years in India. This act prescribes the specific duties for government, teachers, schools
and parents, in addition to specific laws regarding student-teacher ratio and child discipline. RTE
does not address children under 6 years of age but was the precursor policy document that helped
lay the foundation for ECE as a right.
In the interim, the National Policy on Early Childhood Care and Education (2013) was enacted
with a specific charge to address quality issues within ICDS, promote holistic learning for children
under age 6 and standardize the quality of ECE provision within the scheme with the support and
engagement of the local communities. Laws governing staff, safety, curriculum, and parent rights
were instituted. This policy’s design intent was to ensure that all children have access to preschool
52
education and care and specifically set its sights on universalizing the provision of ECCE in India
by making improvements to the ICDS program. For example, half day Anganwadi Centers were
extended to include a special bridge year to help prepare children 5-6 years for the transition into
primary school.
ECE was included as a constitutional provision only recently, in 2016, through the RTE Act,
Article 45 which states that the appropriate government is responsible for providing early
childhood education and care for all children age 3-6 years old.34
35
The current National Education Policy (2020) continues the Central governments mission to
provide an equitable and high-quality by setting an objective to provide every child in the ages of
3-6 with access to free, safe, high quality, developmentally appropriate care and education by 2025.
To accomplish the aforementioned, NEP 2020 establishes a new academic structure and envisions
expanding and strengthening the existing ECEE/ICDS infrastructure by professionalizing
educators and making improving accountability across the regulatory system. Notably, the
Ministry of Education (MOE) and the Ministry of Women and Child Development (MWCD) must
now collaborate on a ‘bridge’ or transition year to prepare children 5-6 years to transition from the
Anganwandi centers to primary school. NEP 2020 also lays out specific intention and a charge to
create separate strategies for socio-economically disadvantaged groups including gender identities,
socio-cultural identities, geographical identities, disabilities and other social economic conditions.
Figure 3 below depicts how NEP 2020 incorporates ECE is a fundamental and necessary
foundational component of the education system in India.
34
RTE 2016, Article 45: “With a view to prepare children above the age of three years for elementary education and to provide e arly childhood
care and education for all children until they complete the age of six years, the appropriate Government shall make necessary arrangement for
providing free pre-school education for such children.�?
35
Gender identities include girls and transgender individuals; Socio-cultural identities include scheduled Castes, Schedule Tribes and other
minorities; Geographic identities include children from villages and rural small towns; Disabilities include children with learning and physical
disabilities and; Socio-economic conditions include migrant communities, children living in vulnerable conditions (low-income households,
victims of child trafficking and orphans).
53
Figure 3: National Education Policy 2020 Curricular and Pedgogical Structure
Source: India: “Status and Vision for ECE�? (2020)
Saber Policy Lever 1.2: Intersectoral Coordination
How are roles for service delivery organized and what mechanisms support and facilitate smooth
intersectoral coordination?
In India, service delivery of the ICDS program (children 0-6 years) has traditionally fallen under auspices
of the Ministry of Women and Child Development (MWCD). While, on the other hand, education for
children 6-18-years has fallen under the auspices of the Ministry of Education. However, since the
reorganization of pre-primary education to include children from 3-8 years, the MWCD and MOE will now
collaborate on one year of early childhood education service delivery. Table 2 summarizes the key entities
responsible for coordinating early childhood education in the country.
54
Table 6: Select Entities Involved in ECE/ECD service delivery in India
Entity Coordinating Responsibility
Ministry of Women and Child MWCD creates and enforces rules,
Development (MWCD) regulations and laws about women and
children in India. The National ECCE policy
and Rights to Education were drafted by
MWCD.
National Government 36 Main organizing body of education
Ministry of Education (MOE)
responsible for the National Education Policy
and collaborating with MWCD on the design
Responsible for managing ICDS, allocating funds
and regulation of ECE transition year for
to states and serves as the highest monitoring body
children 5-6 years.
National Commission for Protection of A unit of the MWCD responsible for the
Child Rights (NCPCR) creation and implementation of laws that
protect children. Activities include research
on children rights and investigating
violations.
National Council of Educational Liaises with the States and union territories
Research and Training through a network of field offices.
States Ministry Assists state governments, liaises and
represents states and union territories at the
national level.
Central Advisory Board of Education Advises the Central and State governments on
(CABE) education, reviews education policy
implementation by Central and State
Governments, and facilitates and advises on
the coordination between Central and State
governments, Union Territories and non-
governmental organizations.
Follow guidelines established by NCERT but
States and Union Territories
maintains flexibility to institute strategies that
support the specific aims of maintaining and
State Council for Educational Research
Responsible for implementing ICDS, issuing improving the standard of education in the
and Training (SCERT)
guidelines, disbursing funds to districts and state. Coordinates programs of funders such
monitoring and report data to the MWCD as UNICEF and corporate/philanthropic
contributions.
State Commissions for Protection of Coordinates with the NCPCR and maintains
Childs Rights (SCPCR) laws and policies in the state that protect the
rights of children.
District Governments Directorate of Education Leads operations (schools)
Responsible for implementing ICDS, collecting
progress data, and disbursing funds and payments Front line workers: Anganwandi Responsible for delivery of quality early
to village and cluster level Workers, ASHA, teachers, social education and care to children on the ground.
workers, volunteers
Source:(Singh and Mukherjee 2016)
Saber Policy Lever 1.3: Financing
What level of public finance and other mechanisms or resources are used to fund ECD services?
Annually, India spends approximately USD 51.5 billion on education, or 2.7% of its GDP.
Accordingly, because of the magnitude of the ICDS program, the Central government is also the
largest funder of ECE in India. Allocating nearly USD 280 million dollars37 for the 2019-2020
fiscal year, or approximately ~$200 per child (UNICEF 2019). While ECE is one of the six pillars
of the ICDS framework, it does not have its own budget line and is instead absorbed into the
36
Formerly the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD)
37
Rs. 19, 834 crore total allocation for ICDS services in fiscal year 2019-2020
55
scheme’s nutrition programming (“Budget Brief 2019-20: Integrated Child Development Services
(ICDS) | Centre for Policy Research�? n.d.).
In order to allocate resources for and implement ICDS, the Central government employs a cost-
sharing scheme with states. For example, the costs of the Supplementary Nutrition pillar of ICDS
is equally shared by the Central government and state governments, each contributing 50% of
costs. For other pillars, the Central government typically shoulders 60% of the costs while States
are responsible for the remaining 40%. However, in the case of vulnerable or fiscally weak States,
regional and/or local governments without a legislature the Central government assumes anywhere
between 90-100% of the ICDS scheme (Rathish Balakrishnan, Aarti Mohan, Anita Kumar and
Kaliaden, Abhineet Singh Malhotra, Poorvaja Prakash, Centre 2017). However, it should be noted
that budgeting for ICDS is allocated based on the number of beneficiaries rather than the number
of target beneficiaries, resulting in an inadequate allocation of resources to truly reach the target
population.
In terms of development financial institutions, the World Bank is one of the largest funders of ECE
in India, most recently allocating over $150million dollars to the ICDS program over a decade
long project period that is set to close in August 2022(World Bank 2012) 38. Other development
financial institutions supporting the ICDS program in India include the UK Department for
International Development (DFID), UNICEF, Swedish International Development Cooperation
Agency (SIDA), the World Food Program, and the Norwegian Agency for Development
(NORAD) (Rathish Balakrishnan, Aarti Mohan, Anita Kumar and Kaliaden, Abhineet Singh
Malhotra, Poorvaja Prakash, Centre 2017)(Rathish Balakrishnan, Aarti Mohan, Anita Kumar and
Kaliaden, Abhineet Singh Malhotra, Poorvaja Prakash, Centre 2017)(Rathish Balakrishnan, Aarti
Mohan, Anita Kumar and Kaliaden, Abhineet Singh Malhotra, Poorvaja Prakash, Centre
2017)(Rathish Balakrishnan, Aarti Mohan, Anita Kumar and Kaliaden, Abhineet Singh Malhotra,
Poorvaja Prakash, Centre 2017)(Rathish Balakrishnan, Aarti Mohan, Anita Kumar and Kaliaden,
Abhineet Singh Malhotra, Poorvaja Prakash, Centre 2017).
India has a diverse portfolio of private investment, foundations and funders to its early childhood
services. This funding source is characterized by a mix of corporate, global and family foundation
investments into a range of specific projects/ECE schools/programs, direct support to
Anganwandis and/or research.
The following table summarizes a list of example funding resources employed across the ECE
landscape in India.39
38
World Bank: India: ICDS Systems Strengthening & Nutrition Improvement Program (ISSNIP)
39
This table represents an example of funding sources across the vast scheme of potential funders. It is not exhaustive and not intended to be a suggestive example.
56
Table 7: Overiew of public finance and other mechanisms funding ECE in India
Funder Class Entity Types of Funding Mechanism
Government Central Government, State Governments Total approximate annual spending on
and Union Territories Education is 2.7% of GDP or USD 51.5
Billion
Development Financial Institutions World Bank, UNICEF, DFID Loan, Grants
Corporate, Foundation and Philanthropic Mahindra & Mahindra Group, Global
Contributions Fund for Children, Bill and Melinda
Gates Foundation, Kaizen Private Equity
Grants and Equity
Source: Funding Education with Impact, A guide for Social Investment in India (August 2017)
Framework Takeaways
This section has presented an overview of the Indian Government’s approach to Early Childhood
Education. India runs the world’s largest government sponsored early education and care program
(ICDS) in the world which oversees the needs of millions of children living in vulnerable and
disadvantaged environments. The national policies discussed demonstrate the government’s
commitment to establishing a roadmap to universal access to quality early education. Additional
ideas reflective of the Indian policy context for early childhood education include:
• Education is the responsibility of the Central and State/Union Territory governments and
while there are specific entities designated to support the coordination of early childhood
education, the country’s framework does not include a stand-alone Early Childhood
Education Ministry or Department. Accordingly, ECE is not held to a single standard and
varies by state.
a. While education is considered a fundamental right in India, most ECE laws and
regulations are not binding and are considered “guidelines�? honoring the autonomy
of states to make appropriate decisions for its citizens. However, this lack of
enforcement and an agency focused on overall makes the framework vulnerable
(and children within the system vulnerable) to state-by-state interpretations of laws,
policies and standards.
b. India has an estimated population of 158.7 million children in the 0-6-year-old age
category and approximately and serves over 40 million in the ICDS scheme.
57
• Despite the existence of multiple service provisions and the longevity of the ICDS
program, reliable available data about the actual number of children attending the existing
ECCE provisions and the break-ups as per the delivery of services and by child
vulnerabilities is somewhat difficult to quantify. The remaining percentages are covered
by private sector (majority) and NGO sector (limited coverage), for which enrollment data
and regulations are not provided. It is estimated that 75% of young children are in private
ECE centers that are self-funded by parents.
PAKISTAN
Country Profile
The Islamic Republic of Pakistan one of the most densely populated countries in the world with
over two hundred million people. Of the country’s estimated 80 million children, approximately
27 million are under the age of five years old (Asian Development Bank n.d.; Nurturing-Care.org
n.d.). Education is a fundamental right in Pakistan and is free and compulsory for all children
between the ages of five and sixteen years old. This fundamental right is established in Article 25
A of the constitution which reads that, “The State shall provide free and compulsory education to
all children of the age five to sixteen years in such a manner as may be determined by law�?
(Pakistan 1947).
Although not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, the consideration of early childhood
education for Pakistan’s public education sector can be traced backed to the Pakistan Educational
Conference of 1947. The proceedings of this conference established the direction for future
education policies of the state and recommended that the primary education committee be
responsible for advising “the lines on which pre-primary education may be run and to consider the
part of the Central and Provincial governments in establishing nursery schools�? for children three
to six years of age (Pakistan 1947).
Aligned with the principles set out in the first education conference, mention of early childhood
education has been a component of national policies, over the subsequent decades. Previously,
pre-primary education existed in Pakistan under such names as “Katchi Class�? or “un-admitted�?
children. Katchi is an umbrella term used to describe schooling before grade one including, for
example, nursery and/or kindergarten programs in Pakistan where children were allowed to attend
school without standardized provisions (e.g. facilities, curriculum, teacher training) for proper
early childhood education (Malik and Rose, n.d.).
Moreover, the majority of Pakistani children enter school at the age of five and ECE for children
between the ages of three and four has historically been given little attention where limited public
provision has been supplemented by private institutions mostly in the country’s more affluent
urban areas. According to the Pakistani government, approximately one third of children between
the ages of three and four are currently participating in early childhood education (Durrani et al.
2017; GPE 2018).
58
Pakistan has ratified and/or cosigned international conventions which require nations to take
actions to protect children’s rights including healthcare, education and social protection. The
federal and provincial governments have made efforts to increase ECE participation rates with
ECE policies and implementation plans (Khan 2017).
Saber Policy Lever 1.1: Legal Framework
What regulatory framework and standards have been established to ensure equitable access and
ECE quality?
The review revealed a number of key national policies introduced by the Pakistan government over
the past several decades that illustrate the government’s commitment to ECE. The policy
documents include:
1. The National Education Policy (NEP 1998-2010)
2. Education Sector Reforms Action Plan (2002)
3. Financing of Education in the Public Sector (2007)
4. National Education Policy (NEP 2009)
5. National Plan of Action (NPA 2013-2016)
6. National Education Policy (NEP 2017)
The National Education Policy (1998-2010) set the stage for the expansion and integration of
Katchi Class into the formal primary school system, therefore extending primary education from
five to six years. In this policy, ECE was included as one of three priority areas to achieve the
country’s Education for All goals. Accordingly, this policy paved the way for the introduction of
the country’s first ECE National Curriculum and the Education Sector Reforms Action plan in
2002 which established specific goals and the opportunity to pilot several ECE programs.
This policy evolved to the National Education Policy (NEP 2009). The NEP 2009 was the first
government document to formalize ECE and acknowledge the pre-primary subsector in Pakistan
by establishing the age group for pre-primary education at three to five years. At the same time
that ECE is established as a national policy priority and early learning standards are developed,
education is devolved from central authority and becomes the responsibility of the provincial
governments (Khan 2017).
The current policy, National Education Plan 2017, espouses “to expand, strengthen and promote
universal, comprehensive Early Childhood Education, with an objective to ensure holistic
development of children and prepare them for formal schooling.�? The overarching goal of NEP
2017 is to provide free and compulsory quality pre-primary education for children age four to five
years old and institute holistic development opportunities for children age three to four years by
2030. Additional policy targets for ECE includes defining the quality standards for improved
services and infrastructure, teacher professional training and development, community level
awareness campaigns, technology promotion and the advocation for a separate budget for ECE
financing (Education 2018).
59
The NEP 2017 policy targets are underscored by Pakistan’s commitment to the Sustainable
Development Goals and the Incheon Declaration which prescribes that cosigners commit to
achieving quality early childhood education and care and at least one year of quality pre-primary
education for all children, respectively by 2030. The current National Education Policy integrates
the aims of the SDG agenda with provincial priorities.
An Example Provincial Approach to Early Childhood Education: Punjab
The Punjab province has an estimated population of approximately 110-120 million people and is
Pakistan’s largest province by population. Accordingly, there are 7.4 million children ages three
to five in Punjab but only 37% are enrolled in and attend preschool (BOS 2017).
Following devolution, all provinces and areas in Pakistan have developed individual Education
Sector Plans which include implementation plans focused on achieving the SDG-4 targets.
Accordingly, Punjab established The Punjab Compulsory and Free Education Act in 2014. This
act officially extended the constitutional entitlement of Article 25-A (on the Right to Education)
from 3-16 years (instead of the constitutions mandated free compulsory education for all children
of 5-16 years) and set the stage for the Provincial Early Childhood Education Policy (Punjab 2017).
This policy aims to strengthen and institutionalize early learning in Punjab and includes clear
standards for equitable and quality ECE provisions for all children. The aims of this policy are to
(i) establish a vision that preserves the fundamental importance of early childhood education for
children ages three to five in Punjab; ii) Define a comprehensive province-wide early childhood
education program; iii) Identify the relevant institutions and their roles and responsibilities for the
provision of early childhood education services; and iv) Define quality standards for the provision
of early childhood education and the corresponding quality assurance mechanisms. Explicitly, the
policy has as a vision that all children ages three to five living in Punjab should achieve their
cognitive, linguistic, socioemotional and physical potential, and have a successful transition to
primary school (ECEC Policy 2017). This is relevant given that one of the biggest issues of ECE in
Pakistan was that around 43% of children enrolled in preschool didn’t transition to first grade or
delayed their entry for one or more years (MICS/BOS, 2014). A quality ECE experience then
could help the retention of students into higher grades (Malik 2011).
The 2017 ECE policy is applicable and mandatory to all public ECE programs in Punjab and
also serves as a guiding tool for the private programs, although it is not mandatory for this
sector. The policy strategy has two levels: The level 1 strategy for children ages three to five,
supports the establishment of ECEC classrooms in all schools by 2020, replacing the traditional
Katchi class. The Level 2 strategy for children ages six to eight is intended to facilitate the
transition from a play-based learning approach in ECE to a book-based learning in grades 1-
3. As of today, the Government has completed the implementation of 12,000 ECEC classrooms
out of the 53,000 in Punjab. In fact, according to the latest MICS/BOS data for Punjab (2017-
2018), 90% of children enrolled in Grade 1 have attended a pre-primary class the previous
year. Today in Punjab, ECE classes are held in approximately 12,500 schools, enrolling 100,000
pre-primary students (UNICEF, Punjab 2017, 2019).
Saber Policy Lever 1.2: Intersectoral Coordination
60
How are roles for service delivery organized and what mechanisms support and facilitate smooth
intersectoral coordination?
The ECE implementation framework for service delivery in Pakistan relies on a federal-inter-
provincial process that involves providing provinces with the autonomy to develop and implement
ECE strategies and plans.
At the national level, the Ministry of Federal Education and Professional Training is responsible
for ensuring coordination among the provincial and area education offices. The National
Curriculum Council (NCC) coordinates the curriculum and standards developments across
provinces and areas. This includes the curriculum for pre-primary education such as the most
recently released One Nation, One Curriculum which establishes the key learning areas,
competencies and expected learning outcomes for ECE in Pakistan.
At the provincial and area level, the entities responsible for the establishment, implementation and
monitoring of ECE policies and standards vary by the local government. In Punjab, for example,
the government has established clear roles and responsibilities for ECE policy coordination and
service delivery. Figure 2 below summarizes the responsible authorities at the national level and
how one province, the Government of the Punjab, organizes roles and responsibilities for policy
planning, teacher education, classroom development, curriculum development, monitoring/quality
assurance, and community engagement.
Table 8: Select Entities Involved in ECE/ECD service delivery in Pakistan
Entity Coordinating Responsibility
Ministry of Federal Education and Overall responsible for coordinating
Professional Training provincial and area education offices
National Curriculum Council Overall responsibility for curriculum and
National Government
standards development
School Education Department (SED) Overall responsibility for policy planning,
program implementation and coordination
Quaid-e-Azam Academy for Coordinates with SED on program
Educational Development (QAED) implementation, leads scale-up of ECE by
developing materials for and, ultimately
training teachers and caregivers.
Program Monitoring and Program monitoring, data analysis and
Implementation Unit (PMIU) feedback
Provincial Example:
Punjab Education Foundation (PEF) Collaborates with QAED on all teacher and
caregiver training activities
(The Government of the Punjab) Punjab Curriculum and Textbook Board Collaborates with QAED and leads on
(PCTB) developing appropriate classroom learning
materials
Coordinates with SED to ensure that School
Health and Nutrition Supervisors receive
ECD training and that teacher training
Department of Health
includes best practices for health and nutrition
District Governments Various Offices Leads school coordination and supports
PMIU with data collection
Head Teacher Coordinates with QAED on teacher training
Source:(Khan 2017; Malik and Naveed n.d.; Zaidi et al. 2018)
61
In the case of Punjab, it is important to note that a detailed implementation strategy is under development
and subsequently an understanding of how the policy instrument drafted in 2017 will contribute to ECE
reform efforts have yet to be fully realized. In the interim, the PMIU and QAED are leading various
activities to further ECE improvement in the province. The coordination between multiple departments and
school levels, and the task of scaling-up to the entire province are complex challenges that will influence
the ultimate success of the provinces inaugural ECE policy. (“Punjab Education Sector Plan�? 2019)
Saber Policy Lever 1.3: Financing
What level of public finance and other mechanisms or resources are used to fund ECD services?
In general, there are two types of funding for early childhood education in Pakistan: government
financing and donor financing. The government of Pakistan has increased its overall spending on
education in recent years. However, resource allocations to education as a proportion of GDP
remain at approximately 2% far below the government’s target of 4%. Education receives a
fragment of federal and provincial budgets each year. For 2020-21, the federal government has
allocated Rs. 83.3 billion for Education Affairs and Services, of which Rs. 2.931 billion is reserved
for pre-primary and primary education activities. (Asian Development Bank n.d.)
Resource availability at the federal level determines the number of resources the provincial
governments have at their disposal. Due to the devolution of education planning and financing to
provinces, the federal government has instituted a needs-based formula for resource distribution,
in order to increasing financing to the least developed provinces. However, as noted in the previous
section the ECE policy does not currently have an approved implementation strategy and without
which a financial commitment for ECE has been difficult to achieve in the province. (“Punjab
Education Sector Plan�? 2019)
Framework Takeaways
There are several features of Pakistan’s policy context relating to early childhood education. The
ratified national policies reviewed in this study demonstrate clear political ambition on the part of
the Pakistan government to promote the advancement of society through the promotion of early
childhood education. The inclusion of linkages with gender issues and social equality indicates the
government’s commitment to strengthen civil society and its social fabric. However, despite the
government’s policy intentions, a key challenge is the implementation and execution of early
childhood plans and the realization of the policy goals. For example, nearly three years after the
release of Punjab’s ECE policy and pilot programs, an implementation plan has yet to be released.
Issues of access, quality and inequitable distribution of early childhood education and care
provision remain prevalent across the country (Pakistan 2017, Punjab 2019). Additional takeaways
include:
1. Participation and retention of children in education – children who are vulnerable and
living in poverty continue to face discrimination in access as well as quality, particularly
given the disparities between state or public and private education provisions. Education
and early childhood education remain inequitably distributed among various income
groups and regions in the country. The National Education Policy Review Team (2007)
62
noted that the issue of equity runs through the entire education system and has serious
implications for sustainable and equitable development in the country (National Education
Policy Review Team 2007). Pakistan is listed as one of the countries where ‘Universal
access to primary schooling is likely to remain elusive’ (UNESCO 2014, p.57) A more
recent international report by UNESCO indicated that the country is still a long way from
achieving universal education with less than 3% expenditure of GNP on education
(UNESCO 2014). There are also national- level reports which indicate that access to
education for school age children remains inadequate, with literacy and participation rates
below those in other South Asian countries with similar level of economic development
(Pakistan 2002).
2. Prioritizing of early childhood education - In a queue of policy priorities, early childhood
education often followed on primary education and adult literacy, with emerging
government attention and investment. ‘Studies in 1995 and 1997-8 revealed that one third
of primary school children in government schools are sitting in a pre-primary class called
‘Katchi’ which needs to be recognized as an Early Childhood Education (ECE) learning
group. It is only very recent that the provincial EMIS offices have begun to record the
registered children in Katchi classes. There are still considerable number of children below
age 5 who are not being registered at schools, but they attend schools with their siblings
(Pakistan 2002).
3. Strategic lessons from learned from the implementation of ECE in Punjab since the
introduction of the ECE policy in 2017 suggest that adequate policy is necessary to provide
a vision and framework for productive and sustainable scale of ECE. Additionally, before
piloting and scaling, it is essential to have an established regulatory framework instituted.
TAJIKISTAN
Country Profile
Education is a fundamental right in Tajikistan as expressed in Article 41 of the Constitution which
asserts that everyone has the right to a basic general education (age 7-16 years) and that education
should be provided free of charge in state educational establishments. While ECE is not covered
in the constitution, the succeeding Law on Education, which guarantees the right to education for
all, “regardless of nationality, race, sex, language, religion, political beliefs, and social and material
provisions�? set a formative precedent for the country’s ECE law. Officially, the Law on Preschool
Education and Care, guarantees that all Tajik citizens have the right to ECCE services.
Pre-school education is almost exclusively the domain of the government and covers children aged
1.5-7 years in a variety of settings including Kindergartens, early learning centers and other
specialized schools. Early Learning Centers (which focus on preschool education for children 4-7
63
years), Nursery Kindergartens (1.5 to 6 years) and kindergartens (3-7 years) , which focus on
preschool education (ELCs) and care, nutrition and early development (KGs) enroll the majority
of children in public pre-school programs. On the other hand, private providers, make up less than
4% of the country’s ECE ecosystem (UNICEF Tajikistan Country Office 2019; World Bank 2019).
Tajikistan’s has a population of over 9.3 million people and is expanding by over 2.2 percent each
year. Consequently, the country has one of the fastest growing populations globally with 0-6-year-
old population of approximately 17%. However, according to recently estimates, Tajikistan’s
preschool enrollment rate for children aged 3-6 years is only 12.4%, a number disproportionally
lower than the actual population of eligible children and among the lowest for any country in the
region (Tajikistan, NEDS 2030).
Demographic trends and the growth of the young population has created a large demand for
education, especially early childhood. The government has established an early childhood
education a national priority and aims to increase pre-school enrollment rate for children aged 3-6
years old from 12.4% to 50% by 2030 (Tajikistan 2030).
Saber Policy Lever 1.1: Legal Framework
What regulatory framework and standards have been established to ensure equitable access and
ECEC quality?
The following are illustrative policy instruments and strategies that indicate the Tajikistan’s
government’s commitment to ECE provision:
1. The Law on Education (2013)
2. The Law on Preschool Education and Care (2013)
3. National Development Strategy (NDS 2016-2030)
4. National Strategy for Education Development (NSED 2012-2020)
As noted in the country profile, the 2013 Law on Education laid out the core principles by which
the state’s education policy will be delivered. This overarching framework establishes the
reference point for service delivery and governance.
The Law on Preschool Education and Care espoused on the aforementioned law by specifically
laying out the legal, institutional and social frameworks for the provision of preschool education
and care in Tajikistan. This legislation also lists the various types of preschool educational
institutions that are allowed in the country and demonstrates the government’s commitment to
64
ensuring that all children, including ensuring that vulnerable children have access to early learning
and care provisions (Tajikistan 2013). 40
Intervening standards such as the State Standard for Preschool Education (2014) and the Early
Learning and Development Standards (2010) detail a comprehensive set of ECE learning and
developmental expectations, curriculum and instructional guidelines appropriate for young
children.
The National Development Strategy (NDS) 2016-2030 and the National Education Development
Strategy (NEDS) 2021-2030, provides the umbrella policy framework by which reforms in the
ECE subsector are to be governed. NDS outlines ECD priorities that foster ECD and enhance
preschool education by setting a goal to increase preschool enrollment to 50% by 2030, strengthen
provision for inclusive education, and provide direct assistance for low-income households.
NEDS is currently in its final draft and underscores the 2030 preschool enrolment goal by laying
out specific targets for increasing access to quality early learning services for children 1.5 to six
years of age, facility improvements, preschool finance reform, ECE teacher professional
development and establishing a quality assurance and monitoring mechanism for ECE/ECD
services (Tajikistan 2030).
The aforementioned ECE policies and education strategies are bolstered by a bevy of regulations
and codes that regulate ECD and affirm the government’s commitment to inclusive and equitable
access. Table 5 provides an example of other laws, policies and codes that contribute to the
overarching framework of ECE/ECD governance in Tajikistan.
40
Article 7. Types of preschool educational institutions establishes in the Republic of Tajikistan the following types of preschool educational institutions: day nursery - for children
up to 3 years; day nursery - kindergarten - for children of 1 year and 6 months up to 7 years; kindergarten - for children from 3 to 7 years; kindergarten - elementary school - for
children from 3 to 10 years; orphanage - for children from 2 months to 7 years; boarding school (preschool group) - for children 1 up to 7 years; special boarding school (preschool
group) - for children from 6 to 7 years; educational institution with groups (classes) of preschool preparation - for children from 5 to 7 years; the centers of development of children
- for children from 3 to 7 years; family kindergarten - for children up to 7 years; kindergarten of rehabilitation type - preschool educational institution for children from 2 to 8 years
needing physical treatment or mental development, treatment and rehabilitation; orphanage of residential type - preschool educational institution where content is provided,
education, training and social assistance to children - to orphans and children without parental support of preschool and school age, at the expense of the state; baby home
residential – for children 0 to 4 years with disabilities or those who have been abandoned; residential/half day facilities for children with disabilities age 4 to 17 years; daycare
center -for children with disabilities aged 6 to 14 years and private centers for children aged 3 to 7 years.
65
Table 9: Select Laws, Policies and Codes Regulating ECE/ECD in Tajikistan
Entity Coordinating Responsibility
The child protection provisions in this law are strong with respect
to the child’s right to life, to grow up in a family with parents, to
receive special service if they have a disability, to be eligible for
free services and education and to be protected from abuse and use
of drugs. The code guarantees access to social protection for
The Family Code of Tajikistan (2017) orphaned and disabled children.
Endorsed in 1998 and amended in 2006, this code guarantees
maternity leave, protection from pregnancy-related employment
discrimination, and breaks for breastfeeding upon return to work.
This code is applicable to women working in the formal sector. All
children in the country who have birth certificates are eligible to
receive social allowances (50 Tajik somoni per month in 2017) up
Labor Code of Tajikistan (2006) until they are 1.5 years old. Women can also receive leave without
pay until the child turns three years.
This law regulates the responsibility of parents for child-rearing
Law on parents’ responsibility on and education, including giving the child a decent name, having
the child registered in a civil registration office, and supporting
upbringing of children and their child’s health, physical, cognitive and socioemotional
Laws and Regulations Related to Child education (2011): development.
Development
This code includes some general clauses on maternal and child
health (guarantees the child’s right to healthy physical, cognitive,
41
spiritual, moral, and social development), and there is an effort
underway to ensure that the code includes more details to address
National Health Code (2017): the needs of young children.
This strategy is currently being developed and will replace the
National Health Strategy for Tajikistan National Health Strategy of the Republic of Tajikistan for the
period 2010-2020 (endorsed in 2010). The current draft
2020-2030 emphasizes strengthening integrated primary health care (PHC)
services, enhancing early identification and interventions.
The BBP regulates entitlement for a variety of free / discounted
services at primary and secondary levels of the health system. The
eligible groups represent large segments of the population. At the
The State Guaranteed Package of Health PHC level, the BBP covers services for children under one-year-
old, delivery in the hospital, antenatal care, immunizations,
Services (Basic Benefits Package – BBP) emergency care, and care for Acute Respiratory Infection and
diarrhea according to the Integrated Management of Child Illness
guidelines etc.
The 2016 resolution has standardized fees for services provided by
state kindergartens by articulating the eligibility regulations
Laws and Regulations related to Parent’s Government Resolution on payments for guiding payment, an acceptable range of fees and payment
methods. In 2018, the fee varied from TJS 50 to TJS 100 per child
Ability to Support Child Development children in state preschool institutions per month depending on the district (poor, not poor).
(2016):
Law of the Republic of Tajikistan on This law specifies that vulnerable children and young people,
pregnant women, elderly persons and disabled persons should
Social Services (2008): have priority in the provision of social welfare services.
This law stipulates the rights and freedoms of the child, including,
inter alia, right to life, freedom, inviolability, personality, health
Law on the Child Rights Protection care, dwelling, education, rest, protection of rights of the child in
(2015): special educational institutions; protection of orphaned children
and children without parental care; protection of rights of the
disabled children.
Laws and Regulations Related to Social This concept note mandates cross-sectoral services and support for
Protection children with special needs. It has contributed to the creation of
favorable conditions for children with disabilities in kindergartens
and schools. For example, school infrastructure has begun to
National Concept Note on Inclusive incorporate design that is more conducive for children with
Education for 2011-2015 and for 2016- physical disabilities, teachers have been trained in inclusive
pedagogy, and specialized kindergartens have been established for
2020 children with disabilities.
Source:(World Bank 2019; Global Partnership for Education 2020)
41
Maternal health protection, underlined in article 45, states that: The State should provide appropriate condition for maternal health, social and material support of motherhood;
pregnant women should get the social support within state approved benefits; a child right to health under article 46 guarantees child’s right to healthy physical, cognitive, spiritual,
moral and social development.
66
Saber Policy Lever 1.2: Intersectoral Coordination
How are roles for service delivery organized and what mechanisms support and facilitate smooth
intersectoral coordination?
Coordination of ECE and ECD service provision in Tajikistan is managed by several government
bodies with the Ministry of Education and Ministry of Health and Social Protection acting as
primary leads. The MOE takes lead on provision of education and care services for children 1.5 to
six years old. While the MoHSP leads on issues related to the provision of health, nutrition and
social protection for the duration of a mother’s pregnancy and the child’s early childhood
trajectory. (Strategy et al. 2012)
Table 10: Select Entities Involved in ECE/ECD service delivery in Tajikistan
Entity Coordinating Responsibility
Ministry of Education (MOE) Supports the provision of early learning/ECE
services for children from 1.5 to six years old.
Includes agencies responsible for licensing of
ECE/ECD centers, materials and curriculum
development.
National Government Ministry of Health and Social Protection Main organizing body responsible for health,
(MoHSP) nutrition, and social protection services
during pregnancy, childbirth, postpartum, and
in early childhood. Approves norms related to
feeding, sleeping and sanitary conditions in
preschools.
Collaborates with the national government
line ministries, appoints heads of public
institutions (education, social protection and
Local and Regional Authorities Local Government Authorities
preschool institutions). Local authorities
finance much of ECE and ensure delivery of
all service provision locally.
Other Stakeholders Development partners, international and Supports the relevant local/national
local NGOs, private foundations and government with financing, program
community organizations evaluation and strategic consulting (data
analysis, development of policy documents)
Source: Early Childhood Development in Tajikistan: A Rapid Review (2019)
Regarding external funding and coordination, Tajikistan’s Development Coordination Council
(DCC) is well established and ensures that development partners work collaboratively with the
government. The DCC includes representatives from Tajikistan’s various sectors/government
agencies, including education (Global Partnership for Education 2020).
While a mechanism for donor coordination is established, Tajikistan does not have a specific
coordinating agency charged with facilitating the various actors (e.g. Finance, Health, Education,
Agriculture, Labor) across its ECE subsector. Efforts to establish such an agency have been in play
since 2005 and include the establishment of several entities with the potential to serve as a
coordinating body – The National Child Rights Commission (2008), The National Council on
67
Health and Social Protection, The National Council on Education and the Multisectoral
Coordinating Council – to no avail. Yet, the government continues to move toward finalizing a
National Early Childhood Development Council (NECDC) which may serve the aforementioned
purpose by guiding the development of ECD policies, including ECE and establishing strategic
ECD goals that align with the government’s 2030 development objectives (Global Partnership for
Education 2020; UNICEF Tajikistan Country Office 2019).
Saber Policy Lever 1.3: Financing
What level of public finance and other mechanisms or resources are used to fund ECD services?
Public financing for ECE in Tajikistan was only 5.6% of the total education budget in 2017 and
overall insufficient to meet the country’s goals of attaining 50% preschool enrollment by 2030.
While total education expenditures in Tajikistan have increased 4.4 to 6.1 percent of GDP during
the 2010-2017 period, ECE spending has remained relatively low. By some accords parents are
increasingly shouldering ECE fees. For example, the contribution, or percentage of fees that
parents in Tajikistan paid for ECE services increased from 19 percent to 34 percent from 2015 to
2019. These fees, which were unregulated until 2016, are primarily used to provide preschool
meals (Bassett, Kurbanov, Haddad). The following table summarizes the budget breakdown of key
education budget categories:
Figure 4: Overview of Education and ECE Expenditures in Tajikistan 2017-2018
Source: (Global Partnership for Education 2020)
Pre-primary education in the country is financed entirely through local budgets. This decentralized
financing mechanism affords service providers and schools more autonomy to make and
implement decisions that reflect their most salient ECE concerns. However, the centralized
education sector proposes some challenges for the country’s decentralized fiscal approach. For
example, local governments are more susceptible to delayed financial transfers from the central
government in times of economic slowdown or political occurrences. Preschools in Tajikistan also
have the ability to generate additional financing by providing optional fee-based services such as
art, music and/or other special developmentally appropriate classes. However, the fees collected
68
in such instances are subject to and must be used according to the regulations and standards set out
by the Ministry of Education and Ministry of Finance (World Bank 2019).
Finally, following success of per capita financing (PCF) in its other education sectors. Tajikistan
conducted a PCF pilot for preschools in 2015 with the aim of eliminating ECE funding inequities
and affording preschools the autonomy to apply funds more efficiently to meet on the ground
needs. The pilot succeeded in creating a transparent and standardized preschool budget planning
process and expanding preschools autonomy to use fund allocations. Despite the pilot’s success
the government has opted not to adopt PCF for preschools nationwide until it can simulate a model
based on national norms (as opposed to regional) and evaluate the potential impact on inter-
budgetary relations (Bassett, Kurbanov, Haddad).
Framework Takeaways
The Tajikistan government is committed to enabling high quality ECE service delivery as
demonstrated by its various laws, policies and standards/codes that emphasize holistic preschool
education. The regulatory instruments in Tajikistan outline core principles for ECE and ECD
service delivery in the country, including the standards by which services should be conducted.
However, despite the robustness of laws, policies and standards/codes in Tajikistan the country
does not have a comprehensive regulatory framework with a specific set of child outcomes or
priorities. Accordingly, the coordinating mechanisms across the various entities engaged in service
delivery and policy development might be strengthened especially as it relates to data collection,
analysis, planning and quality monitoring in the ECE subsector. Additional takeaways include:
- Tajikistan’s policy creates room for a number of specialized schools for children
with disabilities, on one hand ensuring that appropriate provisions are available for
vulnerable children. On the other hand, the presence of such schools means that
children with and without disabilities are disconnected from and, may lack access
to inclusive education, thereby furthering inequities. Also, girl’s enrollment in
preschool accounts for only about 45% of ECE enrollments. Equitable access to
preschool education is also impeded by inadequate financing and fees that are
unaffordable by many parents in the country. Over 86% of children 3-6 years of
age are not receiving ECE services. (UNICEF 2019)
- ECE financing in the country is not sufficient to attain the government’s 2030
preschool enrollment goal of 50%. However, the relative success of the PCF pilot
in 2017 suggest that some cost savings and a more equitable financing may be
possible if the funding modalities were revised. At present, private investment in
preschools is nascent in the Tajikistan ECE subsector. The disproportionate cost of
school fees serves as a barrier that prevent vulnerable children and children living
in low-income/resourced environments out of the ECE subsector. According to
UNICEF approximately 86% of children 3-6 years of age lack access to ECE
services in Tajikistan.
69
ANNEX 4– REFERENCES
Summary of Policy Instruments
Annotation Policy Instrument
INDIA
India (2010) Government of India. The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act.
April 2010.
India (2013) Government of India. Ministry of Women and Child Development. National Early
Childhood Care and Education - Resolution No. 6-3/2009-ECCE. September 27, 2013.
India (2013) National ECCE Framework Final. Ministry of Women and Child Development
India (?) Umbrella Integrated Child Development Schemes (ICDS)
India 2020 National Education Policy 2020
PAKISTAN
Pakistan (1989) Minister for Education. State of Pakistan [1989] The National Education Policy 1998-
2010.
Pakistan (2002) Government of Pakistan. Ministry of Education [2002] The Road Ahead. Education
Sector Reforms Action Plan 2001-02-2005-06.
Pakistan (2007) Ministry of Education. Policy; Planning Wing Government of Pakistan [2007]
Financing of Education in the Public Sector.
Pakistan (2009) Government of Pakistan. Ministry of Education [2009] National Education Policy
2009.
Pakistan (2010) International Labor Organization [2010] Decent Country Work Program 2010-15.
Pakistan (2013) Ministry of Education, Trainings, Standards in Higher Education [2013] National Plan
of Action 2013-2016. Achieving Universal Primary Education in Pakistan. MDG
Acceleration Framework.
Pakistan (2017) Ministry of Education. State of Pakistan. The National Education Policy 2017
Punjab (2017) Provincial Early Childhood Education Policy
Punjab (2019) Punjab Education Sector Plan
TAJIKISTAN
Tajikistan (2004) Law of the Republic of Tajikistan “On Education�?
Tajikistan (2012) Law of the Republic of Tajikistan “On Additional Education�?
Tajikistan (2011) Law of the Republic of Tajikistan “On Parental Responsibilities in Children’s Care and
Education�?
Tajikistan (2013) Law of the Republic of Tajikistan “On Protection of the Rights of the Child�?
Tajikistan (2021-2030) National Education Development Strategy of Tajikistan 2021-2030
Tajikistan (2016-2030) National Development Strategy
70
Other References
Ambast, Shruti, Akriti Gaur, and Ajey Sangai. 2017. “Regulation of Private Schools in India.�?
Center for Legal Policy, 54. https://vidhilegalpolicy.in/wp-
content/uploads/2019/05/ReportonRegulationofPrivateSchools_Final.pdf.
Asian Development Bank. n.d. “Poverty: Pakistan | Asian Development Bank.�? Accessed October
22, 2020. https://www.adb.org/countries/pakistan/poverty.
Baum, D.R., L. Lewis, and H.A. Patrinos. 2013. “Engaging the Private Sector: What Policies
Matter? A Framework Paper.�? SABER Working Paper Series.
Bertram, Tony, and Chris Pascal. 2016. “Early Childhood Policies and Systems in Eight
Countries.�? Early Childhood Policies and Systems in Eight Countries.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39847-1.
Blind, Knut. 2016. “The Impact of Regulation on Innovation.�? Handbook of Innovation Policy
Impact, no. 12: 450–82. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781784711856.00022.
“Budget Brief 2019-20: Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) | Centre for Policy
Research.�? n.d. Accessed October 25, 2020.
https://www.cprindia.org/research/reports/budget-brief-2019-20-integrated-child-
development-services-icds.
Durrani, N, A Halai, L Kadiwal, S K Rajput, M Novelli, and Y Sayed. 2017. “Education and Social
Cohesion in Pakistan.�? Unicef, no. February 2020.
https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.13886.89922.
Early, Punjab, and Childhood Education. 2017. “Punjab ECE Policy.�?
Education, Ministry of. 2018. Ministry of Education National Pre-Primary Education Policy
Standard Guidelines 2018. Kenya.
Foundation, Aga Khan. 2021. “Early CHildhood Development.�? 2021.
https://www.akdn.org/where-we-work/central-asia/afghanistan/early-childhood-
development-afghanistan.
Gaag, Jacques van der, and Vidya Putcha. 2015. “Investing in Early Childhood Develo pment:
What Is Being Spent, And What Does It Cost?�? Brookings Global Working Paper Series.
http://search.proquest.com.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/docview/1787808048?accountid=14
543%0Ahttp://hy8fy9jj4b.search.serialssolutions.com/directLink?&atitle=Investing+in+Ear
ly+Childhood+Development%3A+What+is+Being+Spent%2C+And+What+Does+it+Cost
%3F&autho.
Global Partnership for Education. 2020. “Tajikistan Education Sector Analysis.�?
https://www.globalpartnership.org/content/education-sector-analysis-2019-tajikistan.
Government of the Punjab, School Education Department. 2017. “PROVINCIAL EARLY
CHILDHOOD EDUCATION ( ECE ) POLICY School Education Department Programme
Monitoring and Implementation Unit ( PMIU ) Punjab Education Sector Reform Program (
PESRP ).�?
Haque, M. N., S. Nasrin, M. N. Yesmin, and M. H. A. Biswas. 2013. “Universal Pre -Primary
Education: A Comparative Study.�? American Journal of Educational Research 1 (1): 31–36.
https://doi.org/10.12691/education-1-1-7.
“India (IND) - Demographics, Health & Infant Mortality - UNICEF DATA.�? 2018. Unicef Data
Sheets. 2018. https://data.unicef.org/country/ind/.
Khan, M I. 2017. “Education Policy Provisions and Objectives.�? A Review of Pakistani Education
Policies Italian Journal of Sociology of Education 9 (2): 104–25.
71
https://doi.org/10.14658/pupj-ijse-2017-2-6.
Malik, Rabea, and Arif Naveed. n.d. “Financing Education in Pakistan: The Impact of Public
Expenditure and Aid on Educational Outcomes.�? Accessed October 25, 2020.
www.educ.cam.ac.uk/RECOUP.
Malik, Rabea, and Pauline Rose. n.d. “EDUCATION FOR DEVELOPMENT Country Case Study
for the Oslo Summit on Education for Development FINANCING EDUCATION IN
PAKISTAN OPPORTUNITIES FOR ACTION ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.�?
Ministry of Women and Child Development, Government of India. 2013. “National Early
Childhood Care and Education (ECCE) Curriculum Framework,�? 1–74.
http://wcd.nic.in/sites/default/files/national_ecce_curr_framework_final_03022014
%282%29.pdf.
Molina, Ezequiel, Iva Trako, Anahita Hosseini Matin, Eema Masood, and Mariana Viollaz. 2017.
“The Learning Crisis in Afghanistan,�? 1–226.
Nai Qala. 2019. “2019 Nai Qala Annual Report.�? 2019. http://www.nai-qala.org.
NESSE. 2009. ECE: Key Lessons from Research for Policy Makers. Early Childhood Education
and Care. http://www.nesse.fr/nesse/activities/reports%0AFor.
Nurturing-Care.org. n.d. “Countdown to 2030 Early Childhood Education in Pakistan.�? Accessed
January 25, 2020. https://nurturing-care.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Pakistan.pdf.
Pakistan, Government of. 1947. “Proceedings of the Pakistan Educational Conference, Held at
Karachi from 27th November to 1st December 1947. (Book, 1948) [WorldCat.Org].�?
https://www.worldcat.org/title/proceedings-of-the-pakistan-educational-conference-held-at-
karachi-from-27th-november-to-1st-december-1947/oclc/30767817.
Pant, Happy, and Shruti Ambast. 2020. “Even as India’s Malnutrition Levels Remain High, Budget
2020 Decreases Allocation for Schemes by 19%.�? Indiaspend.Com. 2020.
https://www.indiaspend.com/while-malnutrition-rages-nutrition-related-schemes-get-19-
less-funding/.
“Punjab Education Sector Plan.�? 2019.
Rathish Balakrishnan, Aarti Mohan, Anita Kumar, Ritu George, and Sattva Knowledge Kaliaden,
Abhineet Singh Malhotra, Poorvaja Prakash, Centre. 2017. “FUNDING EDUCATION
WITH IMPACT A GUIDE FOR SOCIAL INVESTMENT IN INDIA.�? www.avpn.asia.
Rentzou, Konstantina, Mihaela Ionescu, Philine Zimmerli, Jacobs Foundation, and Cristiana Boca.
2019. “Inter-Sectoral Coordination in Early Childhood Systems : The Primokiz Approach,�?
63–67.
Save the Children. 2020. “Afghanistan Country Annual Report 2019,�? 1–14.
https://resourcecentre.savethechildren.net/node/17790/pdf/save_the_children_afghanistan_a
nnual_report_2019.pdf.
Shaeffer, Sheldon. 2015. “The Demand for and the Provision of Early Childhood Services Since
2000: Policies and Strategies.�? UNESCO.
Singh, Renu, and Protap Mukherjee. 2016. “Education Trajectories: From Early Childhood to
Early Adulthood in India Country Report Education Trajectories: From Early Childhood to
Early Adulthood in India.�?
Strategy, National, National Development Strategy, The National, Education Development,
Millennium Development Goals, and The National Strategy. 2012. “National Strategy of
Education Development of the Republic of Tajikistan till 2020.�? Approved by Decree of the
Government of the Republic of Tajikistan June 30, 2012, №334, 1–42.
Subramanian, Samyukta. 2019. “India’s Policy on Early Childhood Education: Lessons for a
72
Gender-Transformative Early Childhood in India,�? no. October.
www.brookings.edu/echidna-global-scholars-program.
“Summative Evaluation of GPE’s Country-Level Support to Education.�? 2018.
www.universalia.com.
Taguma, Miho, Ineke Litjens, and Kelly Makowiecki. 2012. Quality Matters in Early Childhood
Education and Care; New Zealand 2012. www.oecd.org/publishing/corrigenda.
The World Bank. 2018. “Afghanistan to 2030.�? 2018.
http://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/156881533220723730/pdf/129161-WP-
P157288-Afghanistan-to-2030-PUBLIC.pdf.
———. 2020. “Afghanistan’s Citizens’ Charter Program: Empowering Communities for Better
Services.�? 2020. https://www.worldbank.org/en/results/2020/10/20/afghanistans-citizens-
charter-program-empowering-communities-for-better-services.
UNESCO, IIEP. 2019. “Mainstreaming Early Childhood Education into Education Sector
Planning: The Rationale for Investing in Pre-Primary,�? 34.
UNICEF Tajikistan Country Office. 2019. “Early Childhood Education in Tajikis tan; Fact Sheet
(July 2019.�? Early Childhood Education in Asia and the Pacific, no. July: 95–133.
Unicef, Un, and Matas. 2018. Prioritizing Quality Early Childhood Education GLOBAL REPORT
A WORLD READY TO LEARN.
United Nations. 2016. “Education and Healthcare at Risk,�? no. April.
https://unama.unmissions.org/sites/default/files/education_and_healthcare_at_risk.pdf.
Vargas-Barón, Emily. n.d. “Planning Policies for Early Childhood Development: Guidelines for
Action.�? Accessed October 20, 2020. http://www.unicef.com.
———. 2016. “Policy Planning for Early Childhood Care and Education: 2000–2014.�? Prospects
46 (1): 15–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-016-9377-2.
Vargas-Barón, Emily, The Book, and Alan Pence. 2005. “Planning Policies for Early Childhood
Development: Guidelines for Action; 2005.�? http://www.unicef.com.
Vargas-Barón, Emily, and Kristel Diehl. 2018. “Early Childhood Diplomacy: Policy Planning for
Early Childhood Development.�? Childhood Education 94 (3): 73–79.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00094056.2018.1475719.
World Bank. 2012. “India: ICDS Systems Strengthening & Nutrition Improvement Program
(ISSNIP).�? Project Publication. 2012. http://www.worldbank.org/projects/P121731/icds-
systems-strengthening-nutrition-improvement-program-issnip?lang=en.
———. 2019. “Tajikistan Early Childhood Education and Care Sector Analysis: A Focused
Review of Preschool Education in Tajikistan.�? World Bank Group. Vol. 29.
Zaidi, Shehla, Zulfiqar Bhutta, Syed Shahzad Hussain, and Kumanan Rasanathan. 2018.
“Multisector Governance for Nutrition and Early Childhood Development: Overlapping
Agendas and Differing Progress in Pakistan.�? BMJ Global Health 3 (Suppl 4): 678.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2017-000678.
73