New Methodological Approaches to Review Governance and Financing Arrangements in Vocational Education and Training (VET) and Skill Systems: A Data Collection Tool (DCT) 4.0 for Facilitating Self-Assessment Processes

The European Training Foundation (ETF) is more than aware that effective -good multilevelgovernance arrangements in Vocational Education and Training (VET)-and Skill policies-is key for having sound skills in the labour market. The ETF developed new Data Collection tool 4.0 (DCT) to implement self-assessments working with partner countries (PCs) in governance and financing arrangements involving, at least, seven different categories of policy stakeholders (e.g. governmental actors-public servants-, social partners, private actors, key experts). This -innovativetool contains 65 indicators for self-assessing seven governanceand financingfunctions including institutional coordination mechanisms (e.g. strategic and legislative framework, management of public-private partnerships, VET providers network, evaluation, research and data analysis provision, councils/committee’s system etc.). The DCT 4.0 has been piloted in 5 ETF PCs (Albania, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Moldova and Uzbekistan). The results might inform further policy development driven by governance and financing arrangements/issues in ETF PCs (or perhaps, beyond). Further, this tool for policy analysis could inspire advisory processes focusing on how to support systemic reforms and/or carry out monitoring implementation-and/or policy review-, based on different types of governance and financing arrangements. The pilot experience developed in COVID 19 times, confirmed that online facilitation is a good way to get good results. However, the human touch factor is essential to facilitate such self-assessment in more impactful way as it could be embedded in real time into current policy dialogue strategies in the countries.


Introduction
Effective -good multilevel-governance arrangements in Vocational Education and Training (VET)and Skill policies-are key to support in developing and using people's skills in the labour market. To manage their complex interactions, effective governance needs to be multilevel and agile.
Multilevel governance involves creating a set of arrangements for making binding decisions that engage a multiplicity interdependent actors (public and private) at different levels of territorial aggregation through continuous negotiation, deliberation and implementation (Schmitter, Wiener, Diez, 2018). Agile governance enables policymakers to rapidly gather input from a variety of stakeholders to design cross-cutting policy solutions (World Economic Forum, 2019).
The recent COVID-19 crisis has highlighted the importance of having an adaptable, resilient VET & skills systems supported by strong-and smart-institutional leadership based on both on smart coordination of multiple stakeholders and agile approaches to help decision-making in skill policies indeed.
The European Training Foundation (ETF) is pioneering implementation of such approaches -for a decade -working together with its partner countries (PCs) and using, for example, Torino process as key recipient to look at VET governance and financing arrangements, as well as, focusing on specific policy analysis and advice in VET governance issues 3 . The ETF also works in partnerships with other European/ international organizations (e.g. Cedefop, ILO, OECD) sharing such approaches.
In this respect, the ETF implemented a project (2016 -2018) on VET Governance inventory. This tool is based on a widely acknowledged analytical framework-data collection tool (DCT)developed by the ETF for a baseline inventory of VET governance arrangements in its PCs 4 .
Lessons learned on this project informed on the need to move forward monitoring governance and financing arrangements in more structured -and regular-basis working with ETF PCs for having more accurate indications on the quality of institutional arrangements -settings-whilst promoting policy thinking to address implementation of systemic changes.
The way forward has been implemented through facilitation of self-assessments supported by new methodological framework (so-called Data Collection Tool 4.0). Such methodological tool has been piloted involving a variety of stakeholders and policy actors. (more than 100 stakeholders)-in five ETF PCs (Albania, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Moldova and Uzbekistan).

Goals, target group and data collection use
3 For more information on ETF Torino process and governance work please check: www.etf.europa.eu.
Considering previous background, the main goal of ETF VET governance inventory -DCT-4.0 is facilitating (self) assessments in ETF PCs focusing on governance and financing arrangement policy issues 5 . Such objective has been strategically managed to build expertise -and awareness-across stakeholders' communities in the five countries. Thus, analytical and advisory capacities are at heart of the self-assessments in order to promote further policy dialogue-using results/findings-for focusing on dialogue around needed reforms and modalities for implementing policies.
All this has been done engaging different categories of policy stakeholders to conduct country selfassessments. At least, a minimum of 7 different type of stakeholder's has been involved/engaged: • Key Ministry or Agency in charge of VET skills policies.
• Key Ministry participating and/or financing VET and/or Skill policy making.
• Key Employers organisation participating in VET and/or Skills policy making.
• Key representative of relevant national Trade Union organisation • Key representative of National and/or sectoral skill councils/committees.
• Key representative of Regional and/or local departments/bodies dealing with VET and/or Skills policy development.
• Key experts on VET & Skills working on and/or with leading institutions.
Other policy actors (e.g. VET providers, civil society representatives, policy advisors etc.) might be also involved in the self-assessments. This depends on institutional arrangements linked to constellation of policy actors within country contexts.
The collected data could be used to produce VET governance country profiles and research reports delivering conclusions and policy recommendations to support moving forward policy agendas in the countries and using governance and financing arrangements as drivers for systemic reforms.

Methodological approach
The methodological approach for analysing and assessing governance and financing arrangements working with country stakeholders distinguishes seven core functions to focus on: A. Formulation -and implementation-of overall policy framework-including strategic policy tools-. G. Management of Information Systems (MIS). This also includes Data and Statistical provision-In addition, the methodical framework presented below includes a set of indicators (see section H) addressing institutional-oriented coordination mechanisms (e.g. performance of VET/ skill councils, committees, agencies; inter-ministerial cooperation etc.), whilst proposing some other indicators to self-assessing roles/functions of sub-national level levels (regional/local).
Overall, the conceptual foundations linked to main functions and thematic domains/issues in the framework, has been translated into process indicators. From a policy research perspective, these can be explained as follows: • How different VET & skills coordination mechanisms (legislative, institutional, publicprivate/financial and knowledge oriented) (Galvin Arribas, 2016) are in place-or not-for making systems work in efficient and effective manner, whilst supporting relevant policy reforms.
• How strengthening dialogue, cooperation and coordination across all governmental stakeholders (ministries, agencies, public bodies, etc.) is being developed, in the policy making of VET & Skills policies within LLL perspective.
• How involvement of the right mix and balance of non-state stakeholders (social partners, NGOs, employers etc.) is effectively operating, in cooperation with public stakeholders to support VET & Skills policies for system development.
• How coordination of financing arrangements is aligned to support implementation of adequate and sustainable financial policy mechanisms (public and private) for funding VET & Skills policies and systems.
The matrix should be managed as a questionnaire. This has 65 process indicators for self-assessing effectiveness/efficiency of stakeholder's performance in the rulemaking processes. After each section, the framework also includes questions for collecting qualitative information from informants to support wrapping up scorings. The questionnaire should include a background section to classify sociodemographic data of informants.  C. Qualitative Assessment by interviewee ▪ Overall, do you think that the VET provider network functions effectively? Is VET network provision and composition supporting sustainable access to VET? Please, outline your reasons for the scores that you provided above. Assessment of the interviewer of the questions in this section: ▪ Were the question clear to the interviewee. ▪ Were there parts of section that the interviewee did not understand. ▪ Any specific changes that you would recommend to the questions in this section. (

D. Qualitative Assessment by interviewee ▪ Overall, do you think public VET and skills are well resourced? Are fiscal resources available and coordinated for matching the current needs in terms of financing of VET & Skills systems?
Please outline your reasons for the scores that you provided above. Assessment of the interviewer of the questions in this section: ▪ Were the question clear to the interviewee ▪ Were there parts of section that the interviewee did not understand ▪ Any specific changes that you would recommend to the questions in this section

G. Qualitative Assessment by interviewee
Overall, how far do you think that data is used in the planning and decision-making processes for VET and skills development? Please outline your reasons for the scores that you provided above. Assessment of the interviewer of the questions in this section: ▪ Were the question clear to the interviewee. ▪ Were there parts of section that the interviewee did not understand ▪ Any specific changes that you would recommend to the questions in this section (1)…(2)..

.(3)…(4)…(5)...(6)
A. Qualitative Assessment by interviewee ▪ Do you think there is scope for more capacity development actions to improve the performance of national council operations? Please outline your reasons for the scores that you provided above Assessment of the interviewer of the questions in this section: ▪ Were the question clear to the interviewee ▪ Were there parts of section that the interviewee did not understand ▪ Any specific changes that you would recommend to the questions in this section  B. Qualitative Assessment by interviewee ▪ Do you think there is scope for more capacity development actions to improve the performance of sector councils? Please outline your reasons for the scores that you provided above. Assessment of the interviewer of the questions in this section: ▪ Were the question clear to the interviewee ▪ Were there parts of section that the interviewee did not understand ▪ Any specific changes that you would recommend to the questions in this section J. Regional/ Subnational VET & Skills -Authorities (e.g.

Councils)
▪ (J.1) The Regional/local level is well represented and contributes to the role of VET & Skills socioeconomic and regional development. ▪ (J.2) The regional / local levels participate on formation and implementation of local partnerships with employers and other key actors. ▪ (J.3) Overall, regional/local levels should have more responsibilities in supporting national level on VET & Skills policies. ▪ (J.4) Regional/ local level cooperate with VET schools and this add value to performance of VET institutions. ▪ (J.5) The Regional Council (RC) composition (if this exists) operates under clear governance structure.
(1)…(2)...(3)…(4)…(5)... (6) C. Qualitative Assessment by interviewee ▪ Overall, do you think there is a good level of delegated policies and competences to regional and/or local authorities in the country? Please outline your reasons for the scores that you provided above Assessment of the interviewer of the questions in this section: ▪ Were the question clear to the interviewee ▪ Were there parts of section that the interviewee did not understand ▪ Any specific changes that you would recommend to the questions in this section K. National VET Agencies and/or other type of executive and supervisory bodies. (1)…(2)...(3)…(4)…(5)...(6) D. Qualitative Assessment by interviewee ▪ Do you think there is scope for more capacity development actions to improve the performance of national agency? Please outline your reasons for the scores that you provided above Assessment of the interviewer of the questions in this section: ▪ Were the question clear to the interviewee. ▪ Were there parts of section that the interviewee did not understand ▪ Any specific changes that you would recommend to the questions in this section

Conclusions
Overall, DCT 4.0 is a new tool for supporting self-assessments on VET and skills governance and financing among stakeholder's community in ETF PCs. The ETF methodology should be seeing as an innovative development which would need to be further discussed and disseminated involving countries and international community (organisations/partners, donors). Targeting participation of, at least, seven type of stakeholders is a core element for such innovative approach.
Following feedbacks received from informants on the use of the tool in 5 ETF PCs (Albania, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Moldova and Uzbekistan), the DCT 4.0 has been found extremely useful to monitor and assess gaps in governance and financing arrangements.
Policy makers, practitioners and research communities might benefit using and adapting tool to different contexts (fit for purpose). The tool might inspire further policy analysis, monitoring and dialogue (e.g. identify policy gaps, development of monitor strategic/evidence -based frameworks, challenging institutional performance/ policy roles etc.).
However, key element is to focus on data analysis options addressing different type of stakeholders. This is because highest levels of public servants (governmental actors) tend to be more optimistic self-assessing proposed indicators, whereas non -state stakeholders (e.g. social partners, employers) could hold more critical opinions on VET & Skills systemand policies-operations/governance arrangements. (1)…(2)..

.(3)…(4)…(5)...(6)
E. Qualitative Assessment by interviewee ▪ Overall, do you think there is scope for more cooperation and interaction among different ministries with responsibilities on VET & Skill policies? Please, outline your reasons for the scores that you provided above Assessment of the interviewer of the questions in this section ▪ Were the question clear to the interviewee ▪ Were there parts of section that the interviewee did not understand ▪ Any specific changes that you would recommend to the questions in this section vol. 1 | no. 2 | December 2020 187 Thus, facilitation processes of DCT 4.0 is crucial at this stage. In COVID 19 times, self-assessments were conducted successfully on-line. Nevertheless, on-site self-assessments (face to face bilaterally and/or focus groups) might build better ground to profit human touch as objectivity -and timelyfactors, as well as to promote strategically sound policy dialogue within implementation process of the methodological tool.