FTI as an overarching initiative
for bilateral support to education

FASID – Tokyo
August 10, 2007
Ronald Siebes
Co-Chair of the FTI Steering Committee

Dutch Education policy since 1990
 Until 1990 policy mostly focussed onhigher education
 Change triggered by Jomtien – 1990
 Implementation of education policy
takes shape 23 countries; 46 activities; € 8.6 mlnbudget2

Strong political and public
support Second half of the nineteen's: steadytrend towards priority for EFA
 Importance of parliament and civil society Policy note 2000: basic education asimportant driver for development
 EFA Conference Dakar and MDG’s
 15% financial target: direct answer to thepromises made in Dakar and Monterrey
 Post-secondary: separate stream; still tiedto Dutch providers but under review
3Increased support basic
education
Expenditures and estimatedexpenditures in million EURO800,0
700,0600,0500,0400,0300,0200,0100,00,0
1992

1997

2000

2001

2002

2003

Years

2004

2005

2006

2007
4

Guiding principles BE Policy
 EFA and MDG goals
 Countries’ responsibility for soundeducation policy and implementation
 Sector policy part of national PRS Strong policy dialogue with all actors
 Harmonization and alignment
 Predictability and sustainable financing
 Untying of aid
 Focus on results

5Policy in practice 15 education partner countries
 Education advisors at Embassy
 Support: multilaterals (UNICEF postconflict/ECD); FTI Catalytic Fund/EPDF;
Silent Partnerships and NGO’s
 Policy development HQ (Linking global- local)
 Consultants on issues like PFM; HIV/AIDS Complementarity with Dutch NGO’s Modalities: GBS, SBS, Pooled Funding,
projects
6

Financial channels (€ mln)
BilateralPartners countries
Silent Partnerships
EFA/FTI catalytic Fund
Macro support

MultilateralPrivate
OtherTotal% of ODA

2005

2007

244.8

555.2

142.6
11.0
46.2
45.0

276.6
80.0
150.0
48.6

62.5
53.0
15.7
376.0
(8.9%)

54.5
52.9
16.6
679.2

(14.9%)
7

Dutch basic education policyand FTI
 FTI provides the overall architecture tosupport EFA/MDG’s:
Sound sector policies in education
Adequate and sustainable domestic
financing for education
More efficient aid for education
Sustained increases in aid foreducation
Increased accountability for sectorresults
8

Strengths of FTI
 Learning by doing Global ambition to achieve goals at countrylevel Education on the international agenda (G8;Development Committee; Paris Agenda; etc.)
 Align processes at the country level –country led process
 FTI Framework provides a guide for policy
reform and dialogue Pursue an agenda of continuous reform –importance of Joint Annual Reviews
9Strengths of FTI (cont.) Addresses policy, finance, capacity and data
 Better integration education plans into broader
national planning processes
 Links increased financing to country performanceand efficiency
 Puts into practice harmonization and alignment
 Catalytic Fund: combine greater predictability
and incentives with performance Inclusive dialogue: more than the usual suspects
10

FTI challenges
 MDG versus EFA versus a balanced sector
approach A more explicit focus on quality of education andnot only access Strengthen the country level processes in supportof local process itself (planning, appraisalmonitoring) and of sound allocation decisions at
global level (CF) More consistency in donor harmonization andalignment: practice what we preach Ensure participation of all actors in the dialogue
11

FTI challenges (cont.) Strengthening capacity development within acontext of donors withdrawing from sector
dialogue (role multilateral, South-Southcooperation, TA pools)
 Quantity and quality of donor support
 Predictable and long-term financing: classrooms
do not teach, teachers do Expansion toward large countries/federal states Fragile states/post-conflict countries
 Governance FTI: light but effective (not aninternational bureaucracy
12Future of FTI - WWJAS
 International compact which provides a menu offlexible, coordinated responses to country
specific contexts and evolving reform agenda’s
 A compact beyond bilateral interest
 Responses towards challenges regarding policy,capacity, data and finance Involving all low-income countries
 Involving all actors (partner countries, multi- andbilateral agencies, civil society, private sector)
 Covering the entire education sector
13