JOBA’s Annual Survey of Technical and Vocational Education … · 2020. 10. 8. · 3.5 Participation in JOBA training funded by the Learning Fund _____ 13 3.6 JOBA Learning Fund

JOBA’s Annual Survey of Technical and Vocational Education Providers June 2020

Department for International Development (DFID) Programme Reference PO 7118

Green corner – Save a tree today!

Mott MacDonald is committed to integrating sustainability into our operational practices and culture. As a

world leading consultancy business we are always seeking to improve our own performance and reduce the

environmental impact of our business. Meanwhile, many of our staff are committed to living sustainably in

their personal lives – as an employee-owned company Mott MacDonald shares their concerns. We feel an

ethical obligation to reduce our emissions and resource use and have committed to reducing our per capita

carbon footprint by a minimum of 5% year on year.

We print our reports and client submissions using recycled, double-sided paper. Compared to printing single

sided on A4 virgin paper, double sided printing on recycled paper saves the equivalent of two trees, over a

ton of CO2 and a cubic metre of landfill space for every 100 reams. By choosing the greener path we have

been able to achieve efficiencies benefiting both Mott MacDonald and our customers.

We would like to share some of the principles of our own ‘Going Green’ initiative:

• When possible we scan rather than print and consider what really needs to be on paper

• We use electronic faxing when practicable

• We work on e-forms

• We use recycled paper when possible

• Reducing paper in the office creates a better working environment for our staff and our clients

We believe that you, as one of our esteemed clients, will share our concern to conserve precious

resources for the benefit of our planet and its inhabitants.

Issue and Revision Record

Revision Date Originator Checker Approver Description

0 17.06.20 Vannessa

Macaringue

Rosie Lugg John Shotton,

Project Principal

Submission to DFID

Contents Chapter Title Page

1. Introduction 2

2. Survey 1 – JOBA Survey to Public Training Providers Institutions 3

2.1 Implementation of national TVET reforms _________________________________________ 3

2.2 Monitoring employment rates of graduates ________________________________________ 5

2.3 Employer partnerships ________________________________________________________ 5

2.4 Employer satisfaction with graduates ____________________________________________ 6

2.5 Voice and accountability in the skills sector ________________________________________ 7

3. Survey 2 – JOBA Survey of Non-State Training Providers Institutions 10

3.1 Implementation of national TVET reforms ________________________________________ 10

3.2 Monitoring employment rates of graduates _______________________________________ 11

3.3 Employer partnerships _______________________________________________________ 12

3.4 Employer satisfaction ________________________________________________________ 13

3.5 Participation in JOBA training funded by the Learning Fund __________________________ 13

3.6 JOBA Learning Fund training contribution to quality improvements ____________________ 14

3.7 Voice and accountability in the skills sector _______________________________________ 16

List of Figures

Figure 1: Location of public training institutions that responded to the JOBA survey .................................... 3 Figure 2:Accreditation status of public institutions that responded to the JOBA survey ................................ 4 Figure 3: Implementation of new national qualifications by public training providers that responded to JOBA

survey ............................................................................................................................................................. 4 Figure 5: Implementation of SAGE by public providers that responded to JOBA survey. ............................. 5 Figure 6: Monitoring the graduates’ employability .......................................................................................... 5 Figure 7: Institutions and Employers Partnerships – purposes for partnerships ............................................ 6 Figure 8: Conducting employer satisfaction surveys ...................................................................................... 7 Figure 9: Public providers engagement with accountability structures and processes .................................. 9 Figure 10: Implementation of the ANEP qualifications by the non-state training providers ......................... 10 Figure 11: Implementation of SAGE by non-state training providers ........................................................... 11 Figure 12: Implementation of the Quality Management system by the non-state training providers ........... 11 Figure 13: Monitoring the graduates’ employability by non-state training providers .................................... 12 Figure 14: Institutions and Employers Partnerships – purposes for partnerships ........................................ 13 Figure 15: Institutions´ participation on JOBA trainings ............................................................................... 13 Figure 16: JOBA Learning Fund training that respondents benefited from .................................................. 14 Figure 17: To what extent the Learning Fund training helped the institution in getting accreditation or

certification (instructors) ............................................................................................................................... 15 Figure 18: Institutions Priorities for training funded by JOBA Learning Fund .............................................. 16 Figure 19: Non-state providers engagement with accountability structures and processes ........................ 18

1. Introduction

In this document we describe the result of the annual survey of training providers carried out by JOBA. This

year, our survey asked for their feedback on the reforms of Professional Education in Mozambique, as part

of JOBA’s logframe monitoring at impact level.These are two surveys that target two groups of providers,

namely public providers, on the one hand, and non-state providers, on the other hand. The survey of public

providers of vocational education only aimed at understanding their perspectives on the reforms taking place

in the vocational education sector. The survey of non-state providers included the same questions about the

reforms, but also aimed to understand whether JOBA interventions had helped to improve the quality of

training and alignment with the legal provisions imposed by the reforms. Both surveys used the online

platform, Survey Monkey. Surveys were sent to more than 200 providers in the databases provided by ANEP,

DINET and AMEPP. The surveys were launched at the beginning of February and ended at the end of March.

2. Survey 1 – JOBA Survey to Public Training

Providers Institutions

The main objective of this survey is to help JOBA to monitor changes in the effectiveness of the skills system

(JOBA Impact Indicator 2), and to track the improvements in the vocational education sector. The survey

was sent to 86 contacts, but only 15 responses were received from public providers, what means that only

12.9% responded the questionnaire. Under normal circumstances we would have continued to run the survey

and tried additional measures to elicit an improved response rate. However, in the context of the COVID

closures, we stayed with the original plan of running the survey for one month. The survey results show that

most public provider respondents to the survey are located in the north and centre of the country, with a

focus in Nampula and Tete (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Location of public training institutions that responded to the JOBA survey

2.1 Implementation of national TVET reforms

Out of the public institutions that responded to our survey, 66.67% of them are in process of getting their

accreditation from ANEP, and 20% are registered or migrating to registration (as presented in the graphics

below Figure 2).

Figure 2:Accreditation status of public institutions that responded to the JOBA survey

Only one (6.67%) of the institutions that responded to the survey is implementing new ANEP qualifications

in all their courses. 26.67% of institutions that are delivering trainings based on the classic model but also

are implementing the new qualifications in some courses. Only one institution that responded to the survey

(6.67%) isn’t implementing any new qualifications. All institutions that are delivering new qualifications are

implementing the SAGE system - School Administration and Management System. Thus, 86.67% of

institutions surveyed state that they are implementing the SAGE system (Figure 3)

Figure 3: Implementation of new national qualifications by public training providers that responded

to JOBA survey

Figure 4: Implementation of SAGE by public providers that responded to JOBA survey.

2.2 Monitoring employment rates of graduates

Regarding to monitoring the employability of graduates 57.14% of the institutions that responded the survey

said that they do not monitor whether their graduates get a job or not, but 42.86% said they are monitoring

their graduates’ employment. Those that do not monitor graduate employment mainly said they do not have

financial resources to do so (Figure 5).

Figure 5: Monitoring the graduates’ employability

2.3 Employer partnerships

For these institutions, the main purpose of partnerships with employers is to provide internships, which are

part of the curriculum for national qualifications. But we note that employer representation on the school

council is not ignored (Figure 7).

Figure 6: Institutions and Employers Partnerships – purposes for partnerships

2.4 Employer satisfaction with graduates

Our survey has shown that although public institutions recognize the importance of partnering with

employers, the number of institutions that do research on employers' satisfaction with graduates is still small

(Figure 8).

Figure 7: Conducting employer satisfaction surveys

2.5 Voice and accountability in the skills sector

In this survey, we asked providers about their active participation in the governance of the skills system, and

strategies for getting their voices heard. Amongst the small number that responded to our survey, the role of

the ANEP Provincial Representatives is clearly the mechanism used by most public institutions (Figure 9).

Figure 8: Public providers engagement with accountability structures and processes

3. Survey 2 – JOBA Survey of Non-State Training

Providers Institutions

Last year, we surveyed private providers that are members of AMEPP. However, this year we surveyed

members and non-members because all non-state providers are now eligible to attend training funded by

Window 2 of the Learning Fund. In addition to asking non-state providers about reforms in the skills system,

we also asked them about their involvement in activities funded by the Learning Fund. This survey is

therefore more extensive than the one we ran with public providers. The survey was sent to 142 contacts,

but only 19 responses were received, what means that only 26.98% responded the survey. Unlike the

response from public providers, for non-state institutions the largest number of responses came from

institutions located in the south, more specifically in Maputo City (31,68%), followed by Sofala (21,06%) and

Maputo Province (21,06%). This reflects the spread of non-state providers in Mozambique, the majority of

which are in the Southern half of the country.

3.1 Implementation of national TVET reforms

42.11% of the non-state institutions that responded to our survey are registered with ANEP, and 36.84% of

institutions are in the process of applying for accreditation from ANEP. Survey 2 found that 47.37 % non-

state providers that responded are delivering new qualifications in all their courses, and 41.11% are

implementing some courses as national qualifications in a CBT approach (Figure 10).

Figure 9: Implementation of the ANEP qualifications by the non-state training providers

For the case of non-state providers, the survey shows that 47.37% is implementing the SAGE and 52.63%

is not yet implementing SAGE (Figure 11).

But on the other hand, 84.21% claim they are implementing a QMS, and only 15.79% of the non-state

providers that responded to the survey are not implementing a QMS(Figure 12). The high proportion of

respondents that are implementing the QMS may be associated with the self-selection of respondents to the

survey [i.e. institutions that attended funded by the Learning Fund (particularly the QMS training) responded

more frequently to this survey, than non-state providers that did not attend training].

Figure 10: Implementation of SAGE by non-state training providers

Figure 11: Implementation of the Quality Management system by the non-state training providers

3.2 Monitoring employment rates of graduates

Our survey found that 50% of non-state providers that responded follow up with their graduates to find out if

they are employed. This is similar to the proportion of public providers that monitor graduate employment

(Figure 13).

Figure 12: Monitoring the graduates’ employability by non-state training providers

However, the reasons non-state providers gave for not following up on graduates’ employment rates was

different; 50% of providers said they do not follow up on their graduates because they do not know what

tools to use for that purpose. Furthermore, 94.12% of non-state providers expressed an interest in learning

what tools to use for monitoring graduates’ employment.

3.3 Employer partnerships

The main reason that non-state providers form partnerships with employers is to find internships for their

students. However, non-state providers also partner with employers for a range of other purposes such as:

training of trainers (Figure 14).

Figure 13: Institutions and Employers Partnerships – purposes for partnerships

3.4 Employer satisfaction

Most non-state providers that responded to our survey (61.11%) do not conduct employer satisfaction

surveys, but 38.89% do conduct surveys to find out about employers’ satisfaction with their graduates. The

main reasons given for not carrying out a survey were not knowing what tools to use (38.4%) and not having

resources (30.77%). Non-state providers are very interested in learning how to engage employers, with

100% of our respondents stating that they would like to learn how to do employer satisfaction surveys.

3.5 Participation in JOBA training funded by the Learning Fund

The survey found that 67.68% of respondents had already benefited from at least one training organized by

JOBA (Figure 15).

Figure 14: Institutions´ participation on JOBA trainings

Figure 13 reports on the different courses that respondents had attended. Although many had attended the

regional QMS training in Maputo, the survey responses included providers from most of the courses we ran

this year (Figure 16).

Figure 15: JOBA Learning Fund training that respondents benefited from

3.6 JOBA Learning Fund training contribution to quality improvements

JOBA’s consultation with non-state training providers during 2016-17 led to two priority goals for the Learning

Fund; CBT Induction Training and training on the QMS. These were urgent priorities for providers because

CBT certification of instructors, and QMS Compliance are requirements under the TVET Law.

In our survey of providers, we therefore wanted to find out if the training funded by the Learning Fund had

helped them to improve quality and/or helped them in their accreditation process with ANEP.

70% of respondents to the survey, who had attended a Learning Fund training, stated that the Learning Fund

training had influenced the development of their institution. We checked the survey responses to confirm

that all those that said they attended a JOBA funded training, also said that it had helped improve their

institution. 70% consider that training has directly helped in the certification and / or accreditation process of

the institution (Figure 17).

Figure 16: To what extent the Learning Fund training helped the institution in getting accreditation

or certification (instructors)

To confirm our priority activities for Learning Fund training this year, we asked respondents to rank the

priorities for training. Interest was shown across all areas, but more interest was shown in QMS training,

CBT training, and Competency-Based Assessment, and some interest in Employers Satisfaction Surveys,

and Graduates Follow-up – and least interest in Gender training or SAGE (Figure 18).

Figure 17: Institutions Priorities for training funded by JOBA Learning Fund

3.7 Voice and accountability in the skills sector

Non-state providers that responded to our survey have experience of a greater range of structures that

enable voice and strengthen accountability within the skills sector. Like public providers, most non-state

providers access consultation through the ANEP Provincial Representatives. However, they also have

experience of gaining access through other mechanisms, including the ANEP Board of Directors, ANEP’s

sectoral committees, and engagement with ANEP employees. This far greater access may reflect the

location of many respondents in Maputo province or city. It is also likely to reflect the role that ANEP plays

in bringing private providers into a national system of TVET supply. Unfortunately, AMEPP seems to be used

the least out of the mechanisms proposed (Figure 19).

Figure 18: Non-state providers engagement with accountability structures and processes

Respondents’ satisfaction with mechanisms for engaging with skills structures was spread equally across all

categories (33.33% is very satisfied, 33.33% is moderately satisfied and 33.33% is dissatisfied). Their

recommendations for improvements included:

• ANEP representatives to make the routing or processing of documents more flexible, to monitor

the IEPs on a full-time basis in order to guarantee the efficiency in the work of organizing the

requirements to answer the new qualifications

• There must be greater disclosure of the functioning of these mechanisms.

• Listening to Professional Education providers (sampling) in all processes related to decision

making regarding their interests.

• Financing to vocational education providers to enable them to manage their actions.

• More Training, SAGE System Update

• There should be greater interaction between AMEPP and non-state providers of Vocational

Education.

• Necessary equipment must be provided for effective teaching of competency standards

• Control the teaching content to guarantee teaching quality

Documents

JOBA’s Annual Survey of Technical and Vocational Education … · 2020. 10. 8. · 3.5 Participation in JOBA training funded by the Learning Fund _____ 13 3.6 JOBA Learning Fund