Provider responsibilities in relation to the post-2015 education goal

Policy context

The Muscat Agreement adopted in May 2014 provides a policy reference for the post-2015 education goal.

Application of the evidence to provider responsibilities in relation to the post-2015 education goal

In the context of post-2015 education goal, governing bodies should receive sufficient, reliable and timely information to oversee education quality, learner protection and material institutional risk.

Review of the policy position should follow a stated and reproducible method. In the context of post-2015 education goal, ownership requires authority to act, access to the necessary evidence and resources, and accountability for the result.

• Does that person have authority and resources?
• Which decisions require escalation?
• Who is accountable for the outcome?
• Who verifies completion?
• How is progress evidenced?

Controls relevant to provider responsibilities in relation to the post-2015 education goal

In examining provider responsibilities in relation to the post-2015 education goal, across the defined scope, a credible response should identify the applicable jurisdiction, the affected learners and providers, the authority responsible for implementation, and the evidence by which performance will be judged.

Risk assessment of implementation should give particular attention to governing bodies receiving activity data instead of outcome evidence, conflicts not identified, and management assurance accepted without testing. A provider should also consider material risks omitted from reporting and corrective action closed without verification.

Review criteria for provider responsibilities in relation to the post-2015 education goal

Assurance of the post-2015 education goal should draw on more than one form of evidence. Useful records include independent review records, governing-body papers and decisions, corrective-action verification, defined delegations and reserved decisions, and conflict declarations and controls.

Authorities and providers reviewing the measure should proceed in a defined sequence. A competent review of the measure should assign one accountable owner for the outcome, identify supporting roles, set decision and escalation points, and require periodic evidence of progress. In the context of post-2015 education goal, transfer of ownership should be explicit and should not interrupt the action record.

Oversight of post-2015 education goal should be based on an implementation map linking the public objective to domestic measures, provider controls and learner remedies.

Implications for provider responsibilities in relation to the post-2015 education goal

Proportionality in relation to the post-2015 education goal does not mean reduced protection for learners exposed to greater risk. Across the defined scope, providers remain responsible for identifying the requirements that apply to their own activities. The record for post-2015 education goal should identify the reason, approving authority, period of operation and date for reconsideration.

For post-2015 education goal, records relating to the issue should preserve both the conclusion and its limits.

Public reporting on the measure should distinguish established fact, analytical judgement and planned action. When examining post-2015 education goal, revision history should remain available where users have relied on the earlier conclusion.

Performance in relation to post-2015 education goal should be judged by outcomes and timely response to shortfalls, not by the volume of administrative activity.