Education indicators report

Exploring higher education indicators Tia Loukkola, Helene Peterbauer, Anna Gover May 2020 This publication is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial CC BY-NC This information may be freely used and copied for non-commercial purposes, provided that the source is acknowledged ( European University Association) European University Association asbl Avenue de l’Yser 24 Rue du Rhône 114 1040 Brussels Case postale 3174 Belgium 1211 Geneva 3, Switzerland +32 (0) 230 55 44 +41 22 552 02 96 www.eua.eu · info@eua.eu Table of Content Acknowledgements Introduction Goals and methodology 2.Mapping education indicators External quality assurance Rankings9 Funding mechanisms 11 3.Measuring learning, teaching and education Quality of learning: Learning outcomes Quality of teaching  Quality of education  14 15 16 The challenge of measuring educational performance Ensuring the fitness-for-purpose of an indicator The proxy problem  The contextualisation of an indicator 20 21 22 Lessons learnt and conclusions Annex 1: Survey to quality assurance agencies Annex 2: Quality assurance agencies responding to the survey Annex 3: Higher education systems covered by the performance-based funding survey References Acknowledgements First and foremost, we wish to thank Anna Gover, who worked at EUA as Programme Manager until February 2020 and who co-authored this report We also wish to thank the respondents to the two surveys carried out to collect information for this report: the national rectors’ conferences and external quality assurance agencies Thanks are due also to the ENQA secretariat for their assistance in disseminating the quality assurance agency survey to their members Special thanks go to our EUA colleagues Enora Bennetot Pruvot, Thomas Estermann and Veronika Kupriyanova for their contribution on funding mechanisms The corresponding data presented in this report is based on their work on financial sustainability Finally, we are grateful for insights provided by Andrée Sursock and members of the EUA Learning & Teaching Steering Committee Tia Loukkola Director, Institutional Development Unit Helene Peterbauer Policy & Project Officer, Institutional Development Unit C.vT.Bg.Jy.Lj.Tai lieu Luan vT.Bg.Jy.Lj van Luan an.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an Introduction There is a valid demand among higher education institutions and their stakeholders for an evidencebased, data-driven analysis of higher education and its performance Internally, institutions need such an analysis to underpin decision-making and strategic development Externally, stakeholders need hard data on institutions’ performance to be assured of their quality or value for money Therefore, several high-profile tools rely on quantitative and qualitative indicators These tools include rankings, funding formulae and other system steering mechanisms, such as teaching excellence frameworks and performance contracts, as well as initiatives to measure and compare achieved learning outcomes In addition, a recent study indicates that quality assurance agencies encounter mounting expectations to give indicators more prominence in their processes (Gover and Loukkola, 2018, p 16) Attempts to measure the performance and added value of higher education through indicators are not a new phenomenon, and neither is criticism of their methodological soundness and adequacy Research on teaching excellence dating back to the late 20th century already cautioned against an oversimplified use of indicators as a measure of quality in higher education It noted that summative evaluations and quantitative indicators had become preferred elements of quality control and led to a focus on easily quantifiable goals of higher education, despite the downsides associated with such an approach (see, e.g de Weert, 1990, p 64, which in turn refers to previous publications on the same topic) The challenge with using indicators is indeed two-fold On the one hand, such an approach relies on an implicit agreement on what needs to be measured However, stakeholder groups have different perspectives on the purposes of higher education and, consequently, on what constitutes quality education (ESG 2015, p 7; Gover and Loukkola, 2018, pp 6-7) On the other hand, even when a specific purpose is defined and agreed on, there is a general lack of appropriate indicators for measuring educational quality, resulting in a reliance on proxy1 measures that are often over-simplified and taken out of context GOALS AND METHODOLOGY This report aims to provide informed input to the debate about the use and validity of indicators currently applied to measure the quality, performance or effectiveness of higher education It does so by examining three external tools that use indicators and have an impact on higher education institutions: external quality assurance, funding formulae and rankings In addition, some selected international and national initiatives following the same objective are mentioned in the report Rankings were included in the study in full awareness of their fundamental difference from the other two tools While external quality assurance and funding mechanisms are part of system steering with a direct effect on the The term “proxy” is used in this report following the definition established by McCormick, 2017, i.e as “measures that are used to represent an unobserved phenomenon” (p 206) Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhd.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj.dtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn.Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn C.vT.Bg.Jy.Lj.Tai lieu Luan vT.Bg.Jy.Lj van Luan an.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an functioning of an institution, the role of rankings is based on their influence on institutional reputation The list of tools covered is not meant to be exhaustive but serves to contribute to the broader debate Moreover, the report does not cover indicators used internally by higher education institutions since this would require a differently designed analysis This report covers indicators related to education in the broad sense, encompassing learning and teaching, but also the overall learning experience and environment This broader perspective serves, on the one hand, to facilitate an understanding of the wider context in which learning and teaching take place On the other hand, it reflects the reality that many of the indicators used in the tools examined are, strictly speaking, connected to education rather than specifically to learning and teaching The report is based on different sources of information: a survey among quality assurance agencies to map which indicators related to learning and teaching they use and how they use them; desk research to identify education indicators used by the most prominent global rankings and teaching excellence frameworks, or similar initiatives; a survey among the European University Association’s (EUA) collective full members (national rectors’ conferences)2 to update the existing knowledge-base on funding allocation mechanisms and indicators used at system level The following sections will i) provide an overview of the education-related indicators used by the abovementioned tools; ii) present common and diverging focal points with regard to types of indicators used; and iii) discuss challenges associated with the various ways in which indicators are currently used For further information on EUA’s membership, see https://eua.eu/about/member-directory.html Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhd.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj.dtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn.Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn C.vT.Bg.Jy.Lj.Tai lieu Luan vT.Bg.Jy.Lj van Luan an.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an Exploring higher education indicators Mapping education indicators This section provides information on the scope and methodology used to examine each of the thrtools covered in this report: external quality assurance, international university rankings and national or system-level funding mechanisms It also provides an overview of the indicators linked to education used in these tools EXTERNAL QUALITY ASSURANCE Since 2005, the Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area (ESG) have provided the framework for external and internal quality assurance of institutions’ education provision However, the ESG “are not standards for quality, nor they prescribe how the quality assurance processes are implemented” (ESG, 2015, p 6) In accordance with this, a diversity of approaches for both internal and external quality assurance is valued and encouraged In order to gather information on the use of indicators by external quality assurance agencies, a survey was carried out in autumn 2019 among full and affiliate member agencies of the European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA).3 The survey asked whether the agency used indicators, and if so: which ones, how they are used, and where the data comes from (see annex for the full survey) Twenty-four completed responses were received (see annex 2), from agencies with their headquarters in 16 different countries (this includes five agencies based in Spain and several others that regularly operate beyond the country where their headquarters are based) As of December 2019, 16 of the responding agencies were registered on the European Quality Assurance Register for Higher Education (EQAR) Four agencies reported that they carry out external quality assurance only at programme level, two carry it out only at institution level, and 18 operate at both levels As such, the sample of quality assurance agencies is small and not fully representative of the European Higher Education Area, but it nonetheless provides some examples of whether and how indicators are being used Four of the responding agencies stated that indicators are not used at all in their external quality assurance processes.4 The responding agencies that use indicators mention a variety of purposes, with the most frequently cited being to make a judgment of compliance against minimum standards (nine agencies) and to provide contextual information for the reviewers (eight agencies) Other uses include benchmarking, testing the institutional information system and to make a judgment against the ESG.5 In several cases, agencies use indicators for a combination of purposes The survey was sent to 96 agencies For further information on ENQA’s membership, see https://enqa.eu/index.php/enqa-agencies/ Whether the reason why (some of) the agencies that did not respond to the survey was because they not use indicators, or whether there were other reasons for not responding, cannot be determined It should be noted, however, that the ESG not contain or prescribe any indicators Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhd.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj.dtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn.Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn C.vT.Bg.Jy.Lj.Tai lieu Luan vT.Bg.Jy.Lj van Luan an.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an In terms of the source and type of information collected, 65% of the agencies that use indicators ask institutions to provide data according to a specific list or template In most cases, this correlates with the agencies that use the data for assessing whether the institution meets certain threshold standards Fifty percent of agencies allow institutions to decide for themselves on the format and content of the data that they provide Twenty-five percent of agencies draw their information from a national database or other system and 10% use another source, such as other publicly available information Several agencies get their data in various formats and from multiple sources Table lists the indicators related to education used by the responding quality assurance agencies.6 The most commonly used indicators are those related to students and staff (including numbers, profiles and ratios), and drop-out rates Student satisfaction is also frequently mentioned, though it is not always clear how this is measured and translated into an indicator Table - Education indicators used by quality assurance agencies Type of indicator No of agencies (out of 16 that provided information on indicators they use) Staff numbers 11 Drop-out rates 10 Student numbers Student-staff ratio Student satisfaction Admission and enrolment data Graduation rate ECTS data/efficiency Time to graduation Graduate employment rate Student mobility Staff mobility Staff publications Funding data Teaching hours Student support Size, facilities and resources Academic achievement/grades Sixteen agencies provided further details of the indicators that they use This is a non-exhaustive list showing indicators used by two or more agencies The list presents the authors’ interpretations of the data provided by responding agencies, including those that not ask for a specific list of indicators, but which gave examples of the sort of indicators that are generally provided to them Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhd.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj.dtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn.Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn C.vT.Bg.Jy.Lj.Tai lieu Luan vT.Bg.Jy.Lj van Luan an.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an Exploring higher education indicators No agency reported that indicators alone would be used as the basis for external quality assurance outcomes Instead, they formed one element used to inform the work of peer review panels and complement a site visit to the institution This is in line with the agreed approach to external quality assurance in the European Higher Education Area (ESG Standards 2.3 and 2.4) It is also clear that the diversity of approaches to external quality assurance (e.g programme or institutional level) combined with the principle of institutional responsibility for the quality of education provision and the diversity of institutional and programme profiles make it challenging for agencies to use a single standard set of indicators.7 RANKINGS Global university rankings are a phenomenon of the 21st century influencing the way higher education institutions are perceived, and how they react to these perceptions They have been referred to as a wake-up call (Hazelkorn et al., 2014, p 50), due to some institutions’ positioning falling short of expectations In time, the proliferation of rankings has also resulted in enhanced awareness among institutions on matters of accountability, transparency and quality (cf Hazelkorn et al., 2014 and Loukkola, 2017, p 111) For the purposes of this report, eight rankings were examined The selection drew inspiration from the International Ranking Expert Group (IREG) Inventory of International Rankings.8 Specifically, this report covers global rankings that use at least one indicator deemed to be related to education by either the ranking producers or the authors of this report In addition, the Times Higher Education (THE) Europe Teaching Rankings were included due to the relevance of its specific focus Other specialised rankings, such as subject-specific rankings or those related to a particular category of higher education institution, were excluded to allow for a synopsis of comparable indicators A list of the rankings, examined together with the main types of relevant indicators that they use, is presented in Table The analysis was conducted solely on the basis of information publicly available on the ranking producers’ website.9 The considerable differences that can exist even within regions with strong internal cultural ties and frequent exchange and collaboration in the higher education sector, such as the Nordic countries, have been exemplified in a 2019 report by the Danish Accreditation Institution (AI) entitled ‘Calculating quality: An overview of indicators used in external quality assurance of higher education in the Nordics’ See http://ireg-observatory.org/en_old/inventory-international-rankings/ranking-profile The information about indicators used in international university rankings referred to in this report comes from the rankings’ respective websites, all of which are referenced in the bibliography Ranking providers often adapt their methodology slightly from year to year, usually changing the weighting of specific indicators, whereas the amount and type of indicators is rarely changed This report uses the published methodologies for 2018 and 2019 or, where available, 2020, while also drawing on supplementary information from previous years Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhd.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj.dtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn.Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn C.vT.Bg.Jy.Lj.Tai lieu Luan vT.Bg.Jy.Lj van Luan an.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an Table - Education indicators used in international university rankings10 Type of indicator Student surveys U-Multirank ARWU QS World University Rankings THE World University Rankings THE Europe Teaching Rankings l l l l Reputation surveys Employer surveys CWUR Emerging/ Trendence Global Round University Ranking l l l Graduate employment l Student progression l Student and staff numbers l l l l l Internationalisation statistics l l l l l International elements in programmes l Gender balance concerning staff and students l Contact with work environment l Others l l l l l l l As can be seen from the table, there are only a limited number of indicators linked, even tenuously, to the quality of education This lack of reliable indicators capturing the educational mission and performance of institutions has long been recognised (Rauhvargers, 2011, 2013) and may partly explain why most rankings primarily focus on research productivity, even if they not explicitly present themselves as research rankings As with the quality assurance agencies, among the most common types of data are those related to student and staff numbers Statistics relating to internationalisation also feature prominently and cover a variety of aspects such as the provision of foreign-language programmes, proportion of international staff and/or students, and mobility The analysis shows that U-Multirank and the THE Europe Teaching Rankings are those which make the most use of indicators linked to education, which is consistent with the declared focus of these two tools In addition, it is worth noting that almost every ranking makes use of at least one type of survey, with reputation surveys being the most common despite criticism of their validity and impact Beyond this, the analysis indicates that most rankings still see research excellence as a proxy for overall quality Despite this, some rankings claim to address prospective students as their target group, even though it can be questioned to what extent prospective students would base their choice of an 10 The titles given to each type of indicator are summative and constitute compromises reflecting the sum of indicators of a particular type across all tools covered by this study They may therefore not precisely reflect each specific indicator used by each individual ranking (see for example the section about the indicator type “Graduate employment” below) Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhd.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj.dtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn.Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn 10 C.vT.Bg.Jy.Lj.Tai lieu Luan vT.Bg.Jy.Lj van Luan an.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an Enabling Mechanism (EM) EM #3 Investments in basic education provide learners with the ideal learning environment Performance Indicators Description Proportion of schools and community learning centers (CLCs) achieving ideal ratio on: -Classroom -Teachers -Learning resources and learning materials (LRs and LMs) -Seats -Science and Math equipment -Multimedia package Frequency of Data Reporting Proportion of schools with ideal ratio Annual refers to the number of schools with ideal ratio on the requirements for classroom, teachers, LRs/LMs, seats, Science and Math equipment, multimedia package over the total number of DepEd schools Ideal ratio for classroom, teachers, LRs/LMs, seats, Science and Math equipment, multimedia package shall be based on the planning standards set by the Department Proportion of schools with: -Connection to electricity -Connection to internet -Water and Sanitation (WatSan) facility - Water source Proportion of schools with: Disaggregation - Governance level (national, region, division, school) - Level of education: Elementary, Secondary, Kindergarten; Grade 16; Grade 7-10; Grade 11-12 - Sector (Public and Private Schools) Accountable Office Tier CO: Physical facilities Division (classroom); Planning Service (teachers); BLR (textbooks); Procurement Office (Seats, Science and Math Equipment); ICTS (ICT package/eclassroom) Percentage of schools (elementary and secondary) with -connection to electricity -connection to internet -WatSan facility -Water source over the total number of schools in that level Annual - Governance level CO: ICTS (internet); (national, region, Physical facilities division, school) (electricity) - Level of education: Elementary, Secondary, Kindergarten; Grade 16; Grade 7-10; Grade 11-12 To be developed To be developed To be developed To be determined -functional library -faculty’s/teachers room 18 Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhd.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj.dtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn.Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn C.vT.Bg.Jy.Lj.Tai lieu Luan vT.Bg.Jy.Lj van Luan an.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an Enabling Mechanism (EM) Performance Indicators Description Proportion of SDOs achieving ideal interquartile ratio (IQR) *on teacher deployment Frequency of Data Reporting IQR is a measure of inequality in the Annual distribution of teachers It compares pupils/students with the most favorable teacher-student ratios with groups of students whose schools have the most unfavorable teacherstudent ratios Disaggregation Accountable Office Tier - Governance level (national, region, division, school) - Level of education (Kinder; G1-G6, G7G10, G11-G12) CO: PS A national IQR in both elementary and secondary education greater than indicates that the most favored pupils/students have teacher ratios twice better than the least favored EM #4: Improve and modernize internal systems and processes for a responsive and efficient financial resource management Client satisfactory rating To be developed of DepEd offices’ respective stakeholders (internal & external) To be developed To be developed CO: PS RO: QAD SDO: SGOD EM #5: Key stakeholders actively collaborate to serve learners better Percentage increase of To be developed financial contribution of development partners (i.e., international and local partners) To be developed To be developed CO: Finance Service, PMS, and EPS 19 Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhd.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj.dtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn.Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn C.vT.Bg.Jy.Lj.Tai lieu Luan vT.Bg.Jy.Lj van Luan an.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an Enabling Mechanism (EM) EM #6: Public and private education operate under a dynamic and responsive complementarity framework Performance Indicators Description Frequency of Data Reporting Disaggregation Accountable Office Tier Proportion of schools with functional School Governing Council (SGC) To be developed To be developed To be developed CO: BHROD Proportion of eligible private schools receiving government assistance Government assistance refers to the To be developed Government Assistance to Students and Teachers in Private Education or GASTPE The GASTPE program includes the -Education Service Contracting (ESC) -Teachers’ Salary Subsidy (TSS) -Senior High School Voucher Program (SHS VP) -In-Service Training (INSET) Research To be developed CO: Private Education Office To be developed CO: Private Education Office Description of computation: To be developed Proportion of teachers in private schools receiving teacher subsidy Teachers’ Salary Subsidy (TSS) is a To be developed GASTPE program wherein an annual salary subsidy is given to licensed teachers in ESC-participating JHSs These teachers are called TSS recipients Description of computation: To be developed 20 Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhd.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj.dtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn.Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn C.vT.Bg.Jy.Lj.Tai lieu Luan vT.Bg.Jy.Lj van Luan an.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an Enabling Mechanism (EM) Performance Indicators Description Frequency of Data Reporting Percentage of Recognition comes after the To be developed recognized schools or establishment of a private schools with recognition educational institution Recognition presumes an existing school and refers to the authorization granted by the Department for the school to conduct educational programs or operations The grant of recognition for schools shall be based on its satisfactory operation during the school year, without any deficiencies in instruction, administration and/or management and on full compliance with the prescribed requirements of the course 15 Disaggregation To be developed Accountable Office Tier CO: Private Education Office Description of computation: To be developed 15 DepEd Order No 88, s 2010 2010 Revised Manual of Regulations for Private Schools in Basic Education Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhd.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj.dtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn.Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn 21 C.vT.Bg.Jy.Lj.Tai lieu Luan vT.Bg.Jy.Lj van Luan an.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an The above-mentioned indicators are agency level indicators that reflect our global and national commitments as well as DepEd’s strategic directions All operating units shall ensure that their plans, programs, and policies contribute towards the attainment of these indicators In the conduct of their M&E, each governance level shall ensure the alignment of their performance indicators with the agency level indicators The overall lead of each M&E system, namely the Secretary, Regional Directors, School Division Superintendents, and School Heads shall decide on which performance indicators should be added in their respective M&E plans as discussed in section VIII (Roles and Responsibilities of Offices) of this policy VI Monitoring and Evaluation Mechanisms The BEMEF shall guide the conduct of M&E in DepEd To identify the appropriate M&E mechanisms, tools, and approaches to use, it is important to have a clear understanding of the difference between monitoring and evaluation, and the different types of M&E being conducted at each stage of programs, projects, and major activities implementation Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) are processes that both refer to the measurement of the performance of an organization, a program, a project, or an individual These are complementary yet distinct processes depending on the purpose, focus, and approach used when they are conducted The activities involved in monitoring and evaluation are often intertwined, but clear distinctions exist between the two Monitoring 16 explains the efficiency and effectiveness of operations while evaluation provides information on the benefits achieved Results of monitoring provide bases for critical management decisions such as resource allocation or realignment, target setting, remedial/corrective actions or strategy development On the other hand, evaluation results provide valuable lessons and insights that can be used by managers in crafting strategic decisions for the future such as in designing organizational changes or future programs and/or projects Types of M&E The types of monitoring and evaluation that shall be used by DepEd operating units across governance levels are described as follows: Monitoring This is a systematic and objective assessment of an on-going implementation of plans, programs, projects, and major activities It aims to steer implementation as efficiently as possible based on empirical facts determined through verifiable assessment process, systematic observation and documentation This also determines any adjustment of plans and activities needed to achieve the committed targets Monitoring may be done on a weekly, monthly, or quarterly basis depending on the M&E Plan All DepEd operating units shall conduct monitoring of their respective programs, projects, and major activities This may require M&E tools for the data collection and the concerned operating unit shall be responsible for developing relevant and appropriate tools to assess the implementation of its programs, projects, and major activities Monitoring results immediately inform the program, project, and activity implementers in the necessary adjustments in their plans so they can achieve their target outputs and outcomes Results 16 Amerasinghe, Nihal (2015) Design, Appraisal, and Management of Sustainable Development Projects Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhd.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj.dtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn.Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn 22 C.vT.Bg.Jy.Lj.Tai lieu Luan vT.Bg.Jy.Lj van Luan an.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an primarily focus on operational concerns that affect the implementation of programs or projects which may include a need for additional funding support, adjustments in logistical arrangements, and other-related concerns The Program Management Information System (PMIS) 17 is one of the mechanisms in doing monitoring in DepEd and currently the official source of data on programs, projects and activities (PPAs) from planning to implementation It aims to support the effective and efficient management of plans and programs; increase transparency of plans and programs at all levels of governance; provides a platform that encourages a more careful and systematic preparation of plans and utilization of budget; aids in policy formulation and decision making; and enforce standards for planning and plan implementation DepEd obtains timely information about the performance of programs, projects, and major activities and allows it to provide timely response to bottlenecks, constraints, and challenges affecting the delivery of basic education services In support of monitoring and evaluation, PIR is established as the reporting platform of DepEd operating units at all governance levels The PIR is conducted on a quarterly basis to report the accomplishments of outputs in terms of efficiency, and corresponding utilization of the budget Through this mechanism, a separate guideline shall be provided on the conduct of PIR Process Evaluation Determines the effectiveness and efficiency of the implementation processes and systems This could be conducted at any phase of the plan implementation and could be combined with other types of monitoring Through this evaluation, issues and challenges in program, project, and activity deliveries can be addressed Results Evaluation This is an evaluation approach that focuses on measuring the realization of results It seeks to assess the outcomes and changes brought about by program or project interventions Findings from this type of evaluation are used as the baseline situation for the next planning cycle All DepEd operating units across governance levels shall conduct process evaluation However, the conduct of outcome and impact evaluations of programs, projects, and major activities shall be done by internal and external parties across governance levels not involved in the implementation of particular plans and programs M&E Plan In operationalizing the conduct of M&E, all operating units are required to develop M&E Plans for their respective education plans, programs, and policies The M&E Plan is a document that provides guidance on the purpose and process of conducting monitoring and evaluation of any programs, policies, projects, office mandates, and activities The M&E plan contains four (4) core M&E processes that are critical in conducting the M&E: (1) establishment of scope and purpose of M&E, (2) data collection and management, (3) data analysis, and (4) M&E results reporting, dissemination, and utilization The development of tools for data collection/requirements shall be guided by the M&E Plan to be established per program, policy, and plan Operations manual shall be issued to discuss the details and procedures on how to develop 17 DepEd Order No 11, s 2021 Guidelines on the operationalization of Program Management Information System (PMIS) Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhd.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj.dtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn.Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn 23 C.vT.Bg.Jy.Lj.Tai lieu Luan vT.Bg.Jy.Lj van Luan an.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an The M&E plan that captures the four core processes VII Monitoring and Evaluation System per Governance Level The M&E system shall serve as an integrating mechanism across governance levels and within operating units of the Department This shall provide the DepEd’s decision-makers with evidence-based information on the applicability and feasibility of formulation and implementation of policies, programs, projects, and major activities in the Department The vertical integration of the M&E system across governance levels is the systematic alignment of development and implementation of basic education plans, policies, programs, projects, major activities, and M&E processes from national to region, region to school division, and school division to school level and vice versa It allows the national, regional, school division, and school levels to make adjustments in the quality of their strategic basic education plans including technical, human resource, and administrative services Likewise, the horizontal integration of the M&E system within governance levels shall align the development and implementation processes of basic education plans, policies, programs, projects, major activities, and M&E processes among operating units in a particular governance level i.e national, regional, school division, and school BEMEF shall enable each office to come up with a more holistic and integrated analysis of their entire governance situation To make the M&E system functional, all DepEd operating units across governance levels shall conduct the M&E of their respective basic education plans, policies, programs, projects, and major activities in accordance to BEMEF and corresponding standards To guide the Department in operationalizing the BEMEF, the M&E structure and system of each governance level are described in the succeeding sections A National M&E System The national M&E system shall orchestrate and define the scope of the entire DepEd M&E System This includes continuous review and enhancement of performance indicators to ensure that the needs of learners are addressed The national M&E system shall: a Establish a results-based M&E at all levels; b Provide the mechanism for the horizontal integration of bureaus, services and other operating units at the national level; c Ensure vertical integration of the M&E systems in the region, school division, and school; d Define the processes for validating outcomes and accomplishments This includes design of M&E work processes, identification of the information needs of internal and external stakeholders, report requirements, and process for collecting and capturing data and information; e Ensure the integration of M&E results in development policies, programs and plans, preparation of the agency’s financial requirements and distribution of resources; f Facilitate exchange of information, practices, insights, lessons and issues between and among operating units and external stakeholders; g Facilitate the implementation of third party evaluation of DepEd programs and projects; h Link M&E results to the organizational and individual performance; and 24 Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhd.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj.dtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn.Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn C.vT.Bg.Jy.Lj.Tai lieu Luan vT.Bg.Jy.Lj van Luan an.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an i Ensure that BEMEF is supportive of the achievement of DepEd goals and outcomes B Regional M&E System The regional M&E system shall ensure the effective, efficient, and inclusive implementation of all education policies & programs and the achievement of desired outcomes The regional M&E system shall provide the regional policy makers and implementers with timely and appropriate feedback on the implementation of DepEd policies, programs, and delivery systems The regional M&E system shall: a Establish a results-based M&E at the regional level; b Ensure the horizontal integration of M&E activities of the different operating units in the region; c Strengthen vertical integration to link M&E systems between region, school division and school; d Ensure that M&E standards and processes are implemented at the regional level; e Evaluate the impact, effectiveness, and efficiency of education policies and programs in the region; f Facilitate exchange of information, practices, insights, lessons and issues between and among operating units and external stakeholders; g Provide feedback to CO on the regional M&E results particularly on issues with implications for national policies and programs; h Ensure the integration of M&E results in developing local programs and plans, and customizing national education strategies and policies; and i Link M&E results to the organizational and individual performance C Schools Division M&E System The Schools Division M&E System focuses on determining effectiveness and inclusiveness of schools in providing basic education services The system shall serve as a mechanism for reflection on the SDO’s capacity to provide timely and needs-based basic education support services to schools The feedback shall allow the SDO to provide technical assistance and capacity building support to creating and sustaining effective and inclusive schools that are relevant and responsive Through the M&E system, targeted technical support to schools in the areas of curriculum delivery and assessment, training of teachers, teaching and learning process, learning environment, partnerships and stakeholders support, and school leadership shall be regularly provided The SDO M&E system shall: a Establish a results-based M&E at the school division level; b Strengthen the link of M&E systems between SDO and schools; c Ensure the integration of M&E initiatives of SDO operating units; d Monitor the effective and efficient implementation of education policies and programs; e Ensure that M&E standards and processes are implemented at the SDO and school levels; f Facilitate exchange of information, practices, insights, lessons and issues between and among operating units and external stakeholders; g Provide feedback to RO on the SDO M&E results; 25 Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhd.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj.dtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn.Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn C.vT.Bg.Jy.Lj.Tai lieu Luan vT.Bg.Jy.Lj van Luan an.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an h Ensure the integration of M&E results in developing local education plans and programs, and in implementing national education policies and systems both at the SDO and school levels; i Provide M&E technical support and capacity building intervention to schools; and j Link M&E results to the organizational and individual performance D School M&E System The school M&E system shall make the teaching and learning process more learner-centered and school-based management more effective and inclusive This system shall promote the culture of self-assessment and self-improvement among schools to transform into responsive and nimble organizations It is a key support system which shall allow the school heads to create and sustain a school environment that empowers teachers to collaborate in fostering an effective and inclusive school The school M&E system shall provide the platform for shared governance which is a critical component in developing, implementing, and sustaining effective inclusive schools The school M&E system shall provide school heads, teachers, non-teaching staff, and communities with critical insights, lessons, and timely information on the performance of all learners, their needs, as well as barriers preventing active participation in the teaching and learning process The school M&E system shall: a Ensure the periodic conduct of M&E in all school operations and processes in accordance with existing standards; b Track operational bottlenecks and issues to update, calibrate, and differentiate response every school year and regularly examine and customize teaching strategies; c Formalize interface between and among school head, teachers, and non-teaching staff to discuss operational issues and challenges; d Facilitate participation of learners, communities, and other key stakeholders in the exchange of information, practices, insights, lessons and issues; e Maintain records of M&E results and integrate such in the preparation of SIP, OPCRF, and other school projects and programs; f Report to the SDO the M&E results for appropriate technical support; and g Link M&E results to the organizational and individual performance VIII Roles and Responsibilities of Offices All DepEd operating units and personnel have the responsibility to perform M&E in accordance with established standards and partake in the operations of M&E systems at this level To ensure that DepEd’s M&E systems are functional and able to achieve its objectives, each M&E system has the following lead, process owners, and responsible offices: Table M&E system and the corresponding lead, process owner, and responsible offices M&E System National Overall Lead Secretary Process Owner Planning Service Responsible Offices All operating units 26 Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhd.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj.dtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn.Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn C.vT.Bg.Jy.Lj.Tai lieu Luan vT.Bg.Jy.Lj van Luan an.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an Regional Regional Director Quality Assurance Division All operating units School Division Schools Division Superintendent School Governance and Operations Division All operating units School School Head School Head All personnel and stakeholders in the school National M&E System The Secretary shall be the overall lead of the Department’s national M&E system As the official with the overall authority and supervisory responsibility of the operations of the Department, he/she shall have the accountability and responsibility to ensure that information generated from the national M&E system are used to: (1) formulate national educational policies, plans, standards, programs, projects, and major activities; and, (2) assess national learning outcomes He/she shall: a Lead the institutionalization of the basic education national M&E system; b Provide decisions and directions on national education issues and matters arising from various M&E activities such as national PIRs, stakeholders’ forum, inter-agency meetings, among others; c Communicate education concerns to other national offices and other development partners during meetings, fora, or conferences; d Approve educational policies and program recommendations from internal and external stakeholders based on evidences presented such as completed researches, national statistics, among others; and, e Determine additional performance indicators and other adjustments in the national M&E plan as necessary The Planning Service (PS) as the process owner of the national M&E system shall: a Oversee and manage the conduct of M&E of all central office operating units and ensure that they are adhering to established standards; b Review and provide input to the M&E plan of DepEd offices c Maintain a national database facility to ensure that data and information gathered from M&E activities are properly managed; d Consolidate and analyze M&E reports from central and regional operating units for the preparation of national reports to be disseminated to internal and external stakeholders; e Lead the conduct of quarterly Program Implementation Review (PIR) among central and regional operating units to track physical and financial accomplishments and assess the progress implementation of plans, programs, projects, and major activities; f Oversee and provide assistance in the conduct of evaluations on DepEd’s programs, projects, and major activities; and, g Provide technical assistance and capacity building support to central and regional operating units on the management and conduct of M&E within their respective M&E systems All the operating units in the national M&E system shall: a Establish a results-based M&E within their respective offices; 27 Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhd.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj.dtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn.Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn C.vT.Bg.Jy.Lj.Tai lieu Luan vT.Bg.Jy.Lj van Luan an.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an b Adhere to the established M&E standards in performing M&E activities and processes; c Partake in strengthening the horizontal integration in the national M&E system by engaging other central operating units during planning, policy development, program designing, and M&E; d Develop M&E plan for their respective education plans, programs, and policies e Provide feedback, insights, lessons, and other issues gathered from their respective M&E activities to relevant central operating units; f Participate in national M&E initiatives such as PIRs, periodic reporting of accomplishments of plans, programs, projects, and major activities submission of O/IPCRF, among others; and, g Apply M&E results in improving office and individual performance Regional M&E System The regional director shall be the overall lead of the regional M&E system He/she shall have the authority, accountability, and responsibility to ensure that information generated from the regional M&E system are used to: (1) develop regional basic education plans, standards, programs, projects, and major activities; (2) customize national education strategies and policies; and, (3) assess regional learning outcomes He/she shall: a Lead the institutionalization of the basic education regional M&E system; b Provide decisions and directions on regional education issues and matters arising from various M&E activities such as regional PIRs, stakeholders’ forum, inter-agency meetings, among others; c Communicate regional education concerns to the central office, other agencies, and other development partners during meetings, fora, or conferences; d Approve program recommendations from internal and external stakeholders based on evidences presented such as completed researches, national statistics, among others; and, e Determine additional performance indicators and other adjustments in the regional M&E plan as necessary The Quality Assurance Division (QAD) as the main process owner of the regional M&E system shall: a Oversee and manage the conduct of M&E of all regional operating units and ensure that they are adhering to established standards; b Review and provide input to the M&E plan of DepEd offices c Consolidate and analyze M&E reports from regional and schools’ division operating units for the preparation of regional reports to be disseminated to internal and external stakeholders; d Maintain a regional database which contains data and information gathered from regional M&E activities that can be easily accessed, managed, and updated; e Lead the conduct of quarterly Program Implementation Review (PIR) among regional and school division operating units to track physical and financial accomplishments and assess the progress implementation of plans, programs, projects, and major activities; f Oversee and provide assistance in the conduct of evaluations on regional programs, projects, and major activities; and, g Provide technical assistance and capacity building support to regional and school division operating units on the management and conduct of M&E within their respective M&E systems All the operating units in the regional M&E system shall: Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhd.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj.dtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn.Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn 28 C.vT.Bg.Jy.Lj.Tai lieu Luan vT.Bg.Jy.Lj van Luan an.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an a Establish a results-based M&E within their respective offices; b Adhere to the established M&E standards in performing M&E activities and processes; c Partake in strengthening the horizontal integration in the regional M&E system by engaging other regional operating units during planning, customizing of national policy, program designing and implementation, and M&E; d Develop M&E plan for their respective education plans, programs and policy implementation e Provide feedback, insights, lessons, and other issues gathered from their respective M&E activities to relevant central and regional operating units; f Participate in regional M&E initiatives such as PIRs, periodic reporting of accomplishments of plans, programs, projects, and major activities, and submission of O/IPCRF, among others; and, g Apply M&E results in improving office and individual performance School Division M&E System The school division superintendent shall be the overall lead of the school division M&E system He/she shall have the authority, accountability, and responsibility to ensure that information generated from the school division M&E system are used to: (1) develop and implement division education development plans and programs; and, (2) implement national education policies and systems at the SDO and school He/she shall: a Lead the institutionalization of the basic education school division M&E system; b Provide decisions and directions on school division education issues and matters arising from various M&E activities such as school division PIRs, stakeholders’ forum, inter-agency meetings, among others; c Communicate school division education concerns to the regional office during meetings, fora, or conferences; and, d Determine additional performance indicators and other adjustments in the school division M&E plan as necessary The Schools Governance and Operations Division (SGOD) as the process owner of the school division M&E system shall: a Oversee and manage the conduct of M&E of all division operating units and schools, and ensure that they are adhering to established standards; b Review and provide inputs to the M&E plan of DepEd offices c Consolidate and analyze M&E reports from school division operating units and schools for the preparation of school division reports to be disseminated to internal and external stakeholders; d Maintain a school division database which contains data and information gathered from school division M&E activities that can be easily accessed, managed, and updated; e Lead the conduct of quarterly Program Implementation Review (PIR) among school division operating units and schools to track physical and financial accomplishments and assess the progress implementation of plans, programs, projects, and major activities; and f Provide technical assistance and capacity building support to division and school operating units on the management and conduct of M&E within their respective M&E systems All the operating units in the school division M&E system shall: a Establish a result-based M&E within their respective offices; 29 Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhd.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj.dtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn.Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn C.vT.Bg.Jy.Lj.Tai lieu Luan vT.Bg.Jy.Lj van Luan an.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an b Adhere to the established M&E standards in performing M&E activities and processes; c Partake in strengthening the horizontal integration in the school division M&E system by engaging other school division operating units during development of local education plans and programs, implementation of national education policies and systems, and M&E; d Develop M&E plan for their respective education plans, programs, and policy implementation; e Provide feedback, insights, lessons, and other issues gathered from their respective M&E activities to relevant regional and school division operating units; f Participate in school division M&E initiatives such as PIRs, periodic reporting of accomplishments of plans, programs, projects, and major activities, and submission of O/IPCRF, among others; and, g Apply M&E results in improving office and individual performance School M&E System The school head shall be the overall lead and process owner of the school M&E system He/she shall have the authority, accountability, and responsibility for ensuring that information generated from the school M&E system is used in the development and implementation of plans, programs, projects, and major activities to make the school more effective and inclusive He/she shall: a Lead the institutionalization of the school M&E system; b Provide decisions and directions on school issues and matters arising from various M&E activities such as school PIRs, stakeholders’ forum, inter-agency meetings, among others; c Communicate school concerns to the school division office during meetings, fora, or conferences; d Oversee the conduct of M&E activities in the school and ensure that these are according to established standards; e Engage different stakeholders in the conduct of school M&E activities such as the members of the School Planning Team (SPT), School Governance Council (SGC), among others; f Conduct quarterly Program Implementation Review (PIR) in the school to track physical and financial accomplishments and assess the progress of implementation of plans, programs, projects, and major activities; g Maintain records of M&E results and integrate such in the preparation of SIP/AIP, OPCRF, and other school programs, projects, and major activities; h Develop M&E plan for their respective School improvement plan; i Prepare school M&E reports for dissemination to internal and external stakeholders such as the School Report Card (SRC), Transparency Board, Learning Action Cells (LAC), among others; and, f Determine additional performance indicators and other adjustments in the school M&E plan as necessary School personnel and other stakeholders shall: a Conduct school M&E activities in accordance with established M&E standards; b Discuss operational issues and challenges between and among school head, fellow teachers, and non-teaching staff; c Provide feedback, insights, lessons, and other issues gathered from their respective M&E activities to relevant school operating units, community members, and other key stakeholders through dissemination of SRC, conduct of LAC sessions, and preparation of Transparency Board; 30 Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhd.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj.dtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn.Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn C.vT.Bg.Jy.Lj.Tai lieu Luan vT.Bg.Jy.Lj van Luan an.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an d Participate in school M&E initiatives such as PIRs, periodic reporting of accomplishments of programs, projects, and major activities, submission of O/IPCRF, among others; and, e Apply M&E results in improving teaching-learning strategies and individual performance IX Monitoring and Evaluation Planning Service - Policy Research and Development (PRD) Division shall continuously gather feedback on the implementation of this policy from all concerned internal and external stakeholders It shall conduct a periodic policy review to further enhance its relevance to the priorities and thrusts of the agency The QAD in the RO, SGOD in the SDOs, and the school heads shall ensure compliance to this policy They shall provide feedback for the continuous improvement of the policy XI Effectivity and Transitory Provision All existing Orders, Memoranda, and other related issuances inconsistent with this policy are hereby repealed, rescinded, or modified accordingly This policy shall take effect upon fifteen (15) days after its publication in the DepEd website and the Official Gazette or a newspaper of general circulation It shall be also registered with the Office of the National Administrative Register (ONAR) To support the implementation of this policy, a Monitoring & Evaluation Manual of Operations shall be developed and issued to provide a more detailed discussion on the M&E processes and mechanisms of the BEMEF X References Amerasinghe, Nihal (2015) “Design, Appraisal, and Management of Sustainable Development Projects” Manila: Asian Institute of Management DepEd Order No 88, s 2010 2010 Revised Manual of Regulations for Private Schools in Basic Education DepEd Order No 02, s 2015 Guidelines on the Establishment and Implementation of the Results-Based Performance Management System (RPMS) in the Department of Education DepEd Order No 44, s 2015 Guidelines on the Enhanced School Improvement Planning (SIP) Process and the School Report Card (SRC) DepEd Order No 52, s 2015 New Organizational Structures of the Central, Regional, and SDOs of the Department of Education DepEd Order No 52, s 2016 Data Collection of Basic Education Statistics in the Learner Information System and Enhanced Basic Education Information System for Beginning of School Year 2016-2017 DepEd Order No 11, s 2021 Guidelines on the operationalization of Program Management Information System (PMIS) 31 Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhd.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj.dtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn.Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn C.vT.Bg.Jy.Lj.Tai lieu Luan vT.Bg.Jy.Lj van Luan an.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an.Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhd.vT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.LjvT.Bg.Jy.Lj.dtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn.Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn.bkc19134.hmu.edu.vn