Functional Review of the Ministry of Education, Science and ...

Annex 2: FRIDOM’s comments on the new organogram designed by the MEST
The FRIDOM’s comments on the new organogram based on its scheme provided with the MEST´s
remarks on the Draft Report are as follows:
1. The new organogram contains 3 groups of related units with three director generals (DGs) as
coordinators. Two of the groups are similar to those proposed by the report. They are the Preuniversity
education group and the Higher education and R&D group. The third group –
Administration group with the corresponding DG – was originally considered also by FRIDOM’s
team but in the end it was replaced, in accordance with common FRIDOM’s approach, by
Administration department and the DG for administration was omitted.
2. The departments of the Pre-university education group in the new organogram partly differ from
those proposed by the Report. The organogram keeps the two existing pre-university education
departments (for administration and for development) and adds a new department for VET. As the
report stresses, there are two basic approaches for organization of ministry in the area of preuniversity
education:
a. according to type of schools (primary / general secondary / vocational / special),
b. according to type of activities (administration / development / quality assurance /
standardization and testing).
The report proposed the use of “type-of-school” approach at the departmental level taking into
account that the MEST preferred to have a new department for VET. The new organogram
adopted a mixed approach having two departments defined according type of activities and the
third based on type of school approach. This organization seems to be less transparent than that
proposed by the report.
3. The Higher education and R&D group in the new organogram is at the MEST level identical with
the report’s proposal. But the organogram proposes 3 new agencies: Center for International
Cooperation in HE & Science and Technology, Centre of Innovation & Transfer of Technology and
National Academic Recognition & Information Center. The report prefers to make organizational
changes (including eventual introduction of further agencies) in the R&D area after elaboration of
a strategy in this area only.
4. The biggest differences between the new organogram and the report concern the support area.
The new organogram does not consider having an Administration department and keeps some of
the divisions of the Administration department proposed by the report as departments
(procurement, HR). Since the MEST’s remarks do not specify in details the tasks of the proposed
Information Office and Logistics Office, it is not possible to make a detailed comparison with the
report’s proposals when about IT support area and Planning and Analysis area. Avoiding
functions of planning and analysis (that seems the organogram does) should be considered as
serious mistake.
5. Looking at the new organogram it seems that the DG for central administration will play the role
that the report, according to the legislation, considered for the PS. In fact, in the FRIDOM’s
opinion, the functions like internal audit or budget and finances should be directly managed by
one of the very top representatives of the Ministry – i.e. by the Minister or by the PS.
6. The de-facto top role of the DG for administration in the new organogram is confirmed also by the
inclusion of the Inspection department, which should otherwise be in Pre-university education
group.
31