Sanja Bojanić, MBA

Head of Democratic Governance cluster

UNDP Montenegro

*

*

1. The context

2. The process

3. Key results

4. Challenges and Lessons Learnt

5. The content – ex. of Education Sector

*

2009 Progress Report: “The national action plan against

organized crime and corruption needs to be compiled on the

basis of risk assessments and to include priorities for action.”

2010 Progress Report: “There is no satisfactory risk

assessment.”

AC strategy 2010-2014 – Special risk areas:

privatization process, public procurement, urban

planning, local governance, education and health

*

Significant time constraints shaped the process

DACI initiated prep work and consultations: UNDP, EUD

and EC (March 2011 – June 2011)

BRC assisted with the design of the overall

approach, shared with EC:

meaningfulness, feasibility, consensus (March 2011)

There is a wealth of data available / no clearly

established connection between such studies and AC policy

process

A team of four consultants was engaged to carry out the

task, in close cooperation with DACI

* Desk research (May 2011)

* Bilateral consultations with stakeholders (May 2011)

* Validation workshop – 1st draft (14-15 June 2011)

* 2nd Draft Risk analysis shared with the EC and Government

(27 June 2011)

* 3rd draft prepared

* Government adoption (21 July)

*

*Update of the AC Action Plan

*Evaluation framework for the national AC

strategy adopted

*Methodology to be applied to other sectors

(e.g. judiciary, police, tax, customs, tourism)

*Capacity of DACI to conduct risk analysis

improved

*

*Time constraints

*Issue of capacities

*Scope of the exercise

*Content of the final report

*

*Allow sufficient time for “defining” and

implementation of the task/exercise

*CAPACITY to CONDUCT the assessment and

IMPLEMENT recommendations to be taken into

account

*It is a tool, a methodology that needs to be

well matched with the context/needs so initial

“DEFINING” stage is critical

*CONTENT not fixed, can be adjusted

*

*Provides data for informed policy making (national and sectoral strategies)

*Provides more inputs to identify priorities, design countermeasures, indicators and measure progress

*Can lead to defining an Evaluation framework leading to more objectivity, more efficiency, efficacy, sustainability

* Increases capacity and understanding of the issues across the board through consultations

Evidence-based policy making cycle

CORRUPTION RISK ASSESSMENT

Preconditions for risk occurrences

Assessment of risk occurrences

FORMULATING STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES AND MEASURES

National and sectoral strategies + Action Plans (w indicators )

EVALUATING IMPACT OF THE STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES

At the end of the strategic cycle, evaluate and reassess risks

IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING

*

Assessment of PRECONDITIONS for risk occurrence in subject areas

1. Legal Framework + R

2. Institutional Framework + R

3. Strategic Framework + R

4. Implementation of Legal and Inst’l framework + R

5. Human Resources Policy + R

6. Relations towards the existing researches + R

Risk OCCURENCE assessment (High, medium or low intensity)

Recommendations

*

*L - Ensure the protection of persons employed in the

education system wishing to report suspicions of corruption.

* I - Make the work of the Council for Higher Education

transparent as to the accreditation and reaccreditation of

higher education institutions.

*S - Along with defining clear key performance indicators

arising from the sectoral Action Plan for the fight against

corruption in education, ensure an efficient mechanism of

permanent monitoring of the implementation of measures

and their periodic evaluation.

*

*Impl - Establish a registry of teachers engaged in

additional activities, in accordance with the law and

secondary legislation.

*HR - Introduce modes of prior verifications during the

admission of candidates for teaching assistants in order

to avoid nepotism and cronyism, and during the working

engagement avoid possibility of direct supervision by a

relative.

*R - Introduce a system of monitoring the implementation

of recommendations identified in the researches.

*

H – Election of principals in education institutions, engaging academic and teaching staff, sitting for exams

M – Management’s role in enrolment, records on additional work of teachers (giving private lessons, referring students to private lessons)

L – Procedure for leasing school premises (classrooms, sports halls), accreditation

*Establish a centralized database of all candidates for admission in education institutions, with data essential for scoring and make the process of scoring and ranking of candidates transparent.

* Introduce a register for additional work of teachers (with data about the teacher and students) and provide a quality mechanism for application and reporting on violations of rules on additional work.

*Set quotas and control excessive admission of part-time students.

*THANK YOU!