Quality in ECCE: Taking Implementation to Scale

Pia Rebello Britto

New Delhi, 27 September 2013

National Conference – Early Learning: Status & Way Forward

Overview

Part 1

Quality

Overview

Part 1

Quality

National ECCE Policy

Overview

Part 1

Quality

National ECCE Policy

Plan of ActionPart 2

Overview

Part 3

Part 1

Quality

National ECCE Policy

Plan of ActionGovernance

Part 2

PART 1: URGENCY OF QUALITY

Urgency of Quality

“Learning Crises”:

•Access – Education for All, Goal 1,

UNESCO

Urgency of Quality

Urgency of Quality: An Issue of Equity

Urgency of Quality

•Quality is the critical ingredient linked with early childhood outcomes– Programs of sufficient quality have the potential to increase cognitive and

socio-emotional skills in the long term

•Without a commitment to quality – program, setting and system characteristics associated with effectiveness and greater gains in child health, learning and behavior -- intended gains for children’s prospects as future citizens may be lost

Conceptualizing Quality ECD

Britto, Yoshikawa, Boller (2011)

Principles of the Framework

•Is a dynamic, flexible and adaptable construct that contours itself across cultures, settings, time, and types of intervention

•Is multi-dimensional and requires articulation beyond interactional (responsiveness and reciprocity) aspects to include accountability, ownership, alignment with program goals and management of systems

1. Alignment with Community & Societal Values

•Establishing the meaning and understanding of quality is linked with values (Dahlberg, Moss & Pence, 2007).– Misalignment – values of global ECD may clash with local values and result in

misguided implementations of ECD programs - E.g., language of instruction

•Early Learning and Development Standards (Britto & Kagan, 2010)– Individual country domains through content validation with communities

•Intrinsic versus instrumental value of ECD – CRC; Economic investment; Life Cycle Approach

2. Interactions & Communication•Adult to Child

– Responsiveness, scaffolding, cooperation, supportive and stimulating– Learning and teaching interactions– Service providers should have knowledge of the community in which they work

•Adult to Adult – Supportive, Reciprocal and encourage participation (Myers, 2010; Paulsell, et

al., 2010)– Abide by professional code of conduct and ethics (e.g., Respect for families)

•Agencies – Collaboration across sectors – purpose, content & frequency (Stansbery, 2010)– Network characteristics as density, multiplicity of modes of communication or

resources offered, and contact across isolated networks (Burt, 2001)

3. Leadership & Management•Prioritization of resources for ECD, responsiveness to recipients

issues – E.g., children with disabilities

•Quality of leadership – Global Guidelines on Quality (ACEI, 2006)•Responsiveness to local staffing issues & communities

– Recruiting appropriate service staff for marginalized, vulnerable and excluded groups

•Capacity to grow and scale up programs and professional development

•Monitor local delivery channels

4. Physical & Spatial Characteristics•Conducive for learning

– Individual space for belongings, indoor and outdoor equipment, washable and easy to clean

•Safe and sustainable environments– Protected from risks from ecological degradation, toxic substances, roads, non-

smoking– Use of natural resources (Iltus & Hard, 1995)– Disaster preparedness

•Biophilic Features– Bringing nature into the learning environment (Kellert, 2012; Cerezo, Britto,

Reyes & Zonderman, forthcoming)•System level: where the training of the service providers occurs;

distance between training centers and services

5. Resource & Distribution•Structural Resources

– Staff to child ratio•Human Capital Resources

– Capacity in practice: skills, ability, knowledge (Hommel, 2013)– Capacity in knowledge – policy planning, training, monitoring, measurement &

evaluation (Hommel, 2013)– Experience & educational qualifications

•Content Resources– Curriculum & Materials

• Culturally responsive; flexible – Holistic approach

• Growth, health, development, nutrition, disease management & control

Why is quality the last piece?– Conceptualizations of quality in more country and

cultural contexts need to be clarified and defined • The single term “quality” may suggest a uniform,

measurable standard where none exists (Dahlberg, et. al., 2007).

– Quality is often seen as a luxury given its perceived cost– Lack of measurement and assessment tools

• few resources, and limited capacity to conduct program evaluation and measure program quality (Myers, 2006)

– Limited capacity to support quality improvements (Pence, 2008)

Whose Definition of Quality? •Quality can be understood and expressed in a variety of ways

(Frameworks Institute, 2007)

•Multiple sources of funding for ECD services which influence the concept of quality– Donor-driver focus on quality it could child outcomes only– Theme-based funding – which is sectoral primarily and less intersectoral or

holistic

Developing a Quality Framework

•Conceptual Framework– Defining quality using a participatory approach

•Implementation Framework– Services & Systems to which it will be applied

•Measurement Framework – Uses for results

Conceptual Framework•Begin the process with a dialogue on values and principles to define

quality•Include a wide range of perspectives

– E.g., family, program developer, service provider, trainer, and broader private or public auspice

•Consider acceptable language– E.g., “effectiveness factors,” which are more specific and link program

characteristics explicitly to improved child outcomes (National Forum on Early Childhood Programs and Evaluation, 2007).

•Dimensions of quality that are important for the context, service and systems

•Approach: prevention, intervention, curative?

Implementation Framework•Map the services and systems to which the framework will be applied

– What are the ECD services– Which sector and stakeholders are implementing programs

•Do current quality constructs exist– E.g., standards, curriculum, implementation regulations

•Develop a plan for ease of implementation– The framework should match the ability to implement it – human capacity,

resources, training systems– Private, public, community – Implementable and sustainable through the country

•Dialogue with implementer to promote ownership of the framework for the specific services and systems

Measurement & Evaluation Framework

•What aspects of quality will be measured and using what instruments– Adaptions for widely used international tools (e.g., ECERS)– Locally developed instruments

•Monitoring – Index and indicators– Integrated continuum of services (Biersteker & Kvalsvig, 2007)

•Evaluation– Process and outcomes

•Uses– Improve program– Inform professional development and training

PART 2: FROM ASPIRATION TO ACTION - POLICY TO PLAN OF ACTION

What is a Plan of Action?•The road map to achieve the policy vision•The plan of action consists of the details to accompany the

ECD policy – The policy is an overarching statement – It typically does not include the detailed articulation of

targets, indicators or particulars of program design etc. • The PoA is developed AFTER THE POLICY in order to spell

out the details of how the goals and objectives of the policy will be achieved

•A feasibility study is important in designing an implementable PoA

ECD Plan of Action Framework

Britto, P.R., & van Ravens, J. (2008)

CHARACTERISTICS OF ECD PLAN OF ACTION

SUSTAINABLE•Socially sustainable

– Owned and easily implementable by parents, communities, and civil society.

•Politically sustainable– Low risk that the provision is jeopardized once a new

coalition takes power•Financially sustainable

– Funding is secured, even if it has to rely changes in funding sources over time or during unforeseen situations

•Capacity sustainability – Technical capacity in the country to implement the

policy

Component1: Vision & GoalsGoals are aligned with the objectives of the policy can be stated at different levels:

One criteria of success of ECD policies is alignment with other national goals. (e.g.: aligning ECD goals with national Education goals, or national MDG targets)

Component 2: Strategies & ActivitiesHow will the goals & objectives be achieved?

Through Strategies & Activities

The actions of the plan

A major challenge: to address diverse needs and requirements of different types of population, while ensuring equality and equity.

Considerations: Goals & Strategies

Alignment between Policy Vision and PoA goals and objects

Britto, P. R., Yoshikawa, H., & Boller, K. (2011). Quality of early childhood development programs in global contexts: Rationale for investment, conceptual framework and implications for equity. Social Policy Report. Vol. 25, No. 2. Britto, P. R., Yoshikawa, H., & Boller, K. (2011). Quality of early childhood development programs in global contexts: Rationale for investment, conceptual framework and implications for equity. Social Policy Report. Vol. 25, No. 2.

PART 3: GOVERNANCE

What is Governance?• Process of allocating responsibility for ECD services within and across levels of

government and between public and private sectors (Britto, et al., 2013)– Horizontal – across sectors at the same level (Homsi & Hussein, 2013)– Vertical --Decentralization across levels (UNDP, 2010)– Public and private partnerships across sectors (Woodhead et. al., 2008)

• Functions, include: design and development, implementation, monitoring and inspection, supervision, and coordination (Kaufmann, Kraay & Mastruzzi, 2004; UNESCO, 2012)

• Situated within larger political, public policy, cultural and economic contexts (Yoshikawa & Currie, in press)– Environmental conditions – distribution of political power, prevailing market

structures, cultural and community norms, etc. (Bermanm et al., 2011)– Capabilities: Capacity of knowledge; Capacity of practice (Hommel, 2013)

• System = Supply side + Demand side (World Bank, 2004)

Results from a Global Study of ECD Governance

Illustrative Example of Result: Peru

Local Level Governance Achieving Quality

Capacity of Knowledge

Capacity of Practice

Take Aways…..•QUALITY for scaled up programmes, has to be considered not only at the

setting level, but also at the system level

•The process from policy to PLAN OF ACTION is best routed through a feasibility study

•GOVERNANCE: Evidence-based strategies are necessary but insufficient conditions for scaling up because services are strengthened by strengthening systems

•Additional food for thought: governance of finance consists of: costing; resource allocation; & distribution. The optimum formula should contextually determined

AcknowledgementsCollaborators:Hirokazu Yoshikawa, Kimberly Boller, Liliana A. Ponguta, Maria Reyes, Ana Maria Nieto,Jan van Ravens, Richard Seder, Roland Dimaya, Soojin Oh, Adrian Cerezo, N. Shemrah Fallon, Michael McCarthy,

Country Partners: UNICEF (e.g., Cambodia – Natalia Mufel); NGOs (e.g., Uganda – Ruth Musoke, Private Sector Foundation); Local universities (e.g., Peru - Ruth Cespedes, Univerisdad Antonio Ruiz de Montoya); and Individual Consultants (e.g., Kenya – Oscar Kedenge)

International scholars and practitioners who participated and contributed papers to the New York University Abu Dhabi Institute’s conference “Beyond Child Indicators: A Framework to Assess and Evaluate the Quality of Early Childhood Services and Programs in Global Contexts” (April 2010)

Funder: Bernard van Leer Foundation, Netherlands; New York UniversityResearch Partner: Innocenti Research Center, Italy