The mission was carried out to organize and conduct a sub-regional Workshop for National Coordinators for the EFA 2000 Assessment for Central and Eastern European countries, 3-5 May 1999, at UNESCO-CEPES in Bucharest, Romania.

20 Central and Eastern European countries had been invited to send governmental appointed National Coordinators. The workshop had 16 participants from 14 countries out of which 13 were National Coordinators. Gender ratio was 50/50.

The goal of the workshop was to brief National Coordinators on the EFA 2000 Assessment with special concern for the Country EFA Report, determination of the need, structure and framework for technical assistance to facilitate the process, and for familiarizing/competence in data requirements, sources, spreadsheets etc.

The expected outcomes of the workshop were an understanding of EFA 2000 Assessment process and the requirements for Country EFA Reports based on the material developed in the EFA Forum (General Guidelines, Technical Guidelines with Excel spreadsheets, and Suggested Outline for Country EFA Report ); a Central and Eastern European consensus on the way forward to complete the EFA 2000 Assessment (With special attention to Case Studies ); familiarizing the countries with the core EFA indicators, data requirements, sources, spreadsheets etc; determination of the extent and nature of technical assistance needed by individual countries and clusters of countries; identification of internal and external resource mobilization; development of outline for regional structure(Special concern taken to establishment of sub/regional networks), with particular emphasis on regional report and regional meeting, including sharing of data sources; and strengthening commitment to the monitoring and evaluation process for EFA 2000 and beyond.

The Opening Ceremony was chaired by Mrs. Stamenka Uvalic-Trumbic of UNESCO CEPES, which hosted the workshop. The key-note speaker for the workshop was Ms Dakmara Georgescu, Counselor to the Minister of Education, Romania. She emphasized the changes the Romanian educational system was going through, and in particular the change from group-focused to individual-focused education under the planning and implementation phases. Following her, the Country Directors of EFA Forum's five convenors was invited to make a statement at the opening ceremony. Particular mention should be made of the presence of the Country Director and Regional Representative Ms Elin Ranneberg Nilsen from UNFPA. All the principal partner agencies welcomed the workshop as an important step for the process of the Assessment in CEE. Ms Sandi, from the World Bank, Bucharest, stressed the notion of cost-effectiveness in educational programs, and all agencies voiced strong interest and wish for collaboration under their existing programs. Mention was made of the importance of regional and sub-regional involvement from all five agencies. UNDP (Bratislava), UNICEF (Geneva and Florence), and UNESCO (Bucharest) have regional offices for the whole region, and UNFPA (Bucharest) and the World Bank is either represented sub-regionally or have structures in their headquarters, to meet requests for facilitating the Assessment's various functions. It was a spirit of congeniality which was carried forward through the presence of all agencies throughout the workshop. The representatives from the five agencies were requested to carry back to their regional offices and to their headquarters a message of gratitude from the EFA Forum for showing a keen interest in the Assessment in CEE.

Each participant was invited to take the floor to present the situation in his or her home country with regard to education but in particular the Assessment. It became obvious that the participants came from structures of great diversity and have wide-ranging backgrounds and levels of responsibility. Some had been working since last autumn and had most of the necessary infrastructure in place, as well as being quite advanced with the data collection, such as Turkey. Some participants informed the workshop that they were appointed as National Coordinator just prior to the workshop, but were confident that appropriate information would be accessible somewhere in the system, such as Belarus. Some are still affected by the changes in the Balkans all through the last seven years, such as Bosnia/Herzegovina and Macedonia (Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia). Some believed they had all the necessary information back home, but had not had time to check, such as the Czech Republic. And some requested immediate assistance because of their severe conditions and constraints.

Before lunch the first day a general presentation of the EFA 2000 Assessment was given. Explanations were made of the various elements of Country EFA Report, Case Studies on Literacy and Nonformal Education, Thematic Studies at a global level (which includes national case studies in some cases), and Special Surveys of Monitoring Learning Achievements and Conditions of Teaching and Learning. Thereafter the Country EFA Report was subject for presentation and discussion before the day concluded with a general presentation of the first parts of the 18 indicators. The 18 indicators drew a significant amount of attention and queries in order to clarify country differences and common definitions to ensure optimal output and correct use of the technical specifications and spreadsheets. The major part of the second day was devoted to detailed explanations of the 18 core EFA indicators and presentation of the spreadsheets. This part concluded with a demonstration by Turkey of the completed spreadsheets with disaggregated data from some 80 provinces/departments. Throughout the day and into the third day, individual consultations were held with each country participant on issues of data availability and quality, based on the EFA country profiles prepared by UIS.

The last part of the second day involved a presentation of mapping systems that can be added to the Country EFA Reports, through a model from UNICEF, and a brief discussion on the Country EFA Report itself. Finally the participants were requested to prepare a tentative national action plan until the next day's first session.

On the third and final day, the country participants presented their national EFA assessment action plans. In general, the expected outcomes of the Assessment process pointed towards the use of the EFA Assessment, and in particular the Country EFA Report, as a vehicle for formulating policy advice to the governments in the transitional period most CEE countries find themselves in. The oral presentations showed again the differences between the countries in terms of preparation for the EFA 2000 Assessment. Most of the National Coordinators nevertheless pointed out that the information needed to compile the indicators and country report existed in each country, but they will have to contact and mobilize the co-operation of the national statistics offices as well as relevant ministries and agencies in supplying the information. Some of them requested the EFA Forum to take action in sensitizing their policy makers to the need for political and resources support to the EFA assessment exercise.

Through the last part of the day the participants debated in two groups the regional strategy for the Assessment. Three items was strongly emphasized:(1) Visits from the EFA Forum and other technical experts to the Ministry of Education and the national EFA assessment groups to ensure cooperation and offer assistance in the process of the Country EFA Report; (2) Mid-term workshop (possibly in late July) for draft presentations of the Country EFA reports; and (3) Networking between the National Coordinators. It was also pointed out that a mobile task force to assist in the writing process would not be in need as all the participants expressed confidence that their countries have the information and expertise required for carrying out the assessment. Individually, the participants welcomed involvement from the UN agencies in their respective countries, both as negotiators with the ministries and as providers of technical assistance. The need to foresee support to hiring consultants was particularly stressed, a matter also discussed with the UN agencies present at the workshop in Bucharest. The idea to release a specialist from his or her duties under a fixed term consultant contract, to specifically assist the National Coordinator in the compilation of the Country EFA Report, was an element which both National Coordinators and UN agencies in principle agreed upon. The Regional Conference was discussed, and the participants agreed that if output was to be a declaration, which most considered as a requirement to achieve their individual countries' goals, the Conference should be of Ministerial level, or at least Deputies to the Minister. Late November 1999 was proposed as a suitable time. Topics were discussed for case studies on Literacy and Nonformal Education. Those suggested included: small rural community schools in Belarus; the education of minorities such as the Romani people in Romania; small rural island schools in Turkey; and community schools using distance education delivery systems in Turkey.

In a final evaluation session with written evaluation, participants welcomed the workshop as a highly needed initiative, even if in a slightly late stage. They indicated that as a result of this, there is a better chance of work being done, and voiced concern for a follow-up to the progress made at the workshop. Criticism, apart from late timing, came to lack of information on the UN agencies' programs in each country.

The closing ceremony was again chaired by UNESCO CEPES, and promises were made by all the involved UN agencies to report back to their regional offices and their headquarters on the spirit of the workshop and the requests from National Coordinators for cooperation in each country.

After the workshop UNESCO CEPES and the three representatives from UNESCO Paris and EFA Forum had a meeting where UNESCO CEPES requested information as to how CEPES could be involved in the process regionally. Already it seems that CEPES has a strong hand in assisting the Romanian government in the Assessment with particular concerns for the Country EFA Report. CEPES also expressed interest in assisting in selecting a writer of the EFA regional synthesis report, and serving as a hotline center in providing technical assistance for the production of Country EFA Reports. It was agreed that the Director of CEPES, Ms Lesley Wilson, would come back to the EFA Forum with a letter of interest.