European Lifelong Guidance Policy Network Database, ELGPN Database

Name of the good/interesting practice/initiative/policy

Quality in Career Guidance – open process of coordination for quality development and its results

Country

Germany

I am proposing that this example will be published also in the KSLLL database

1. Background

What makes this an example of good/interesting practice/initiative/policy?

- The motivation of the initiative (What is the history/background of the policy?)

- Linkages with LLG policy priorities (Please add references to other national/EU policies or documents)

- Participants

According to the federal structure in Germany responsibilities for career guidance and counselling are split up between federal, regional and local authorities and the PES Federal Employment Agency (BA). There is also a large variety of training providers, non-profit organisations, private and semi-private institutions as well as private career counsellors, who offer guidance services. Since the abolishment of the state monopoly for career guidance and counselling (“Berufsberatung”) in 1998 which since 1927 was assigned to the PES the field of career guidance services became increasingly heterogeneous and intransparent. With the exception of the regulations for career guidance of the PES there are no common legal requirements for service provision, qualification of staff or quality standards in the guidance sector. This is why more and more professionals as well as representatives of users claim compulsory quality standards.
Beside the PES which still is the largest and most important provider for career guidance in Germany the Federal Ministry of Education and Research has launched initiatives and funding programmes under the “Lifelong Learning Programme 2007-2013” to improve guidance services (e.g. the “Local Learning”-Programme and the conception for a telephone service and an educational guidance portal,). Many regional governments (Länder) have also set up programmes for educational guidance. All these publicly funded initiatives could be supported by agreed quality standards for guidance services.
Further, European and international developments towards quality in career guidance, especially the EU Council Resolutions and the work in the ELGPN, influenced the growing discussions for a coherent strategy for quality development in Germany. The open method of coordination has been used in the European Union as a soft-law mechanism for policy development where no official regulations are in place. It has been used to manage bottom-up processes and therefore proved suitability for the process of quality development in Germany. The German National Guidance Forum (nfb), a network of actors and stakeholders in career guidance, has committed itself to further develop quality and professionalism of career guidance in Germany. With funding from the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (FMER) and in collaboration with the University of Heidelberg the nfb initiated and coordinates tan open process of coordination for the development of quality framework and instruments from October 2009 to January 2012.

Aims and targets

- Objectives of the initiative (What did the policy set out to achieve?)

- Target group

- Methods applied to reach the objective (technological and /or pedagogical)

Aims: The overall aim of the project is to initiate an open process of coordination among the most important actors and stakeholders in the field of career guidance, to agree on
o a common understanding of career guidance,
o a catalogue of indispensable quality criteria for career guidance delivery as base for developing standards,
o a competence profile for career guidance practitioners,
o a Quality Development Framework to support service providers in their quality management systems including a set of tools and guidelines for implementation and a pilot testing in 19 services,
o recommendations for a sustainable, long term implementation strategy for quality development and establishing standards.

Target groups: guidance professionals, service providers; policy makers, funding bodies and users

Methods: “Open process of coordination”:
o Two parallel task groups (ca. 15 members each representing experts from the various guidance sectors) worked on the items outlined above (“aims and targets”) with scientific support by researchers from Heidelberg University.
o An intermediate peer learning meeting in October 2010 with practitioners from various guidance sectors evaluated the process and the first results of both Working Groups before they continued working
o A high level Advisory Board representing policy makers and stakeholders on federal and regional level accompanied the project, evaluated results and gave advice for implementation in the various guidance sectors.
o The German National Guidance Forum as project coordinator disseminates information and results via website, newsletter, press releases, presentations at conferences etc.

2. Implementation

Strategy and actions (Please describe the approach adopted to make the reform work and any actions taken.)

- Level of implementation (national, regional etc.)

- Implementation (description)

The project developed quality criteria, a competence profile, and a Quality Development Framework in career guidance. A first piloting phase evaluated the usability, feasibility and acceptability of these commonly agreed criteria and of the Quality Development Framework. The experts in the working groups and the stakeholders in the Advisory Board also formulated recommendations for implementation. But the implementation itself – either the adoption or the adaptation to already existing standards and quality assurance systems is not a task of the project. This is up to the responsibility of the multiple actors and providers in the guidance field, i.e. policy makers in the federal, the regional and local governments, as well as the large number of service providers and funding institutions. In order to support the implementation and to further develop and validate the criteria, competence framework and the quality development framework through further testing and policy debates on standardization a second project has been initiated. This project “Quality in Guidance - Implementation strategies and scientific foundation” (02/2012 – 07/2014) will also look at the effects quality measures have to strengthen the evidence base.

Monitoring and evaluation

- What has been put in place for monitoring and evaluation?

- What actors are involved?

An evaluation of the outcomes has been part of the project and has accompanied the development process: The catalogue of quality criteria and the Quality Development Framework have been piloted in 19 guidance institutions. This piloting phase was supported and evaluated by the University of Heidelberg. A further evaluation looks at the open process of coordination as such and its impact on subsequent implementation. This evaluation - realized by the University of Heidelberg – showed evidence that the developed quality criteria and the instruments are valued tools for quality development processes.

3. Outcomes

Achievements (Please describe the main outcomes/results according to the following headings. Each option can be answered - up to 50 words)

- Specific results

- Cost effectiveness

- Budget

- Innovative aspects

The results of the project are presented to the public in January 2012 in a nationwide conference. and additionally in a number of publications. Preliminary results and the work in progress are described in a brochure (Qualitätsmerkmale guter Beratung – erste Ergebnisse aus dem offenen Koordinierungsprozess zur Qualitätsentwicklung”), a newsletter and the website have accompanied the process and provided transparency for the public. In January 2012 all the results will be dissiminated in a folder including short and long versions of the quality tools as well as in upcoming scientific publications and the website.

Specific results:
o a common understanding of career guidance and a definition of the field of guidance in education, career and employment
o a catalogue of quality criteria for career guidance delivery,
o a competence profile for career guidance practitioners,
o a Quality Development Framework to support service providers in their quality management systems including a set of tools and guidelines for implementation,
o recommendations for a sustainable, long term implementation strategy for quality standards and the Quality Development Framework.

Cost effectiveness: It is expected that the increase in service quality will require more investment in the service delivery (staff training etc.). On the other hand increased quality in service delivery will avoid the individual and societal costs of wrong career decisions, low skilled labour, mismatch in the labour market, unemployment benefits etc.
• The project has been funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research for 29 month (01.10. 2009 –31.01.2012) with a grant.

Innovative aspects:
o For the first time a catalogue of commonly agreed quality criteria for career guidance and counselling is available in Germany
o The catalogue of 19 common quality criteria is applicable for all kinds of career development interventions and in all sub-fields (though certain adaptations may be necessary). The criteria are operationalized through indicators refering to the 3 actors responsible for the quality of CG: Practitioners, Organisations/providers, Policy makers and are assembled on 5 levels following a theoretic systemic context model
o The competence profile and the quality criteria are based on scientific research and follow the systemic context model of career guidance (developed at the University of Heidelberg).
o The competence profile defines the competences of guidance practitioners and thereby helps to strengthen the profession.
o The quality development framework supports the implementation of the quality criteria
as part of a coherent quality strategy for CG providers: it is applicable in all kinds of CG providers, adaptable to other already existing QM strategies and includes a compendium of materials with tools and guidelines for implementation.
o The open process of coordination initiated by an NGO (nfb) and funded by the Federal Government is in itself an innovative initiative combining strategic (policy) development and civil society needs. It was able to create a movement for quality in the field and initiated a respective ongoing professional debate.

Success factors (What key success factors have led to or prevented success?)

- Lessons learnt

- Unintended impacts (Have there been any unintended impacts? Positive or negative?)

- A large number of actors and stakeholders from different and relevant guidance sectors whose expertise is accepted by the field of guidance in education, career and employment participated. .
- Strong commitment and motivation and engagement for the common aim of enhancing quality and professionalism of guidance in Germany which led to a kind of movement towards quality and professionalism among experts but also among providers and practitioners.
- A longer preparatory process in which key actors and stakeholders have been involved and which gave all players an opportunity to shape the process. This also ensured legitimization of the project partners and the process itself.
- Constant consultation and communication with different actors and stakeholders created a culture of openness to deal with resentments and fears.
- Scientific foundation of process and results and evaluation of the outcomes fosters legitimization and validation.

Unintended impacts:
- More networking and closer ties in the career guidance community which led to a movement for strengthening quality and professionalism in the field and to an ongoing dialogue about quality and professionalism in career guidance.

Strengths and weaknesses

- What areas of the policy can we learn lessons from?

- Are there still challenges ahead?

Strengths refer to the strong need expressed by professionals and users as well as by government officials to establish commonly agreed quality criteria in career guidance. By now some providers and practitioners associations have set up their own standards and their own accreditation system with the consequence of some confusion and missing transparency on the various certificates and accreditations that exist.
(see success factors above)

Weaknesses: The project is not be able to alter the diverse responsibilities for career guidance and counselling in Germany or legislation in this field. Thus a joint procedure to establish commonly agreed standards will rely on the voluntary self commitment of service providers or funding authorities, as well as stakeholders.
The quality criteria are only descriptive and do not include any standardizations which would have certain reliability. This will need further development through continuous consensus-oriented negotiation. The Quality Development Framework and particularly the competence profile are prototypical and need further piloting, validation and development.

4. Additional narrative description of the policy/practice/initiative

The project has of course manifold roots, but a strong link to the European Lisbon Process and its follow-up activities on Lifelong Learning Strategies and Lifelong Guidance, in particular the two EU Council Resolutions on Lifelong Guidance (2004 and 2008) and the work of the European Commission’s Expert Group Lifelong Guidance as well as the foundation of and successful cooperation in the ELGPN. The previous OECD/World Bank/EU-Studies on Career Guidance and Public Policy (2001 – 2004) contributed much to the increasing awareness of the important role career guidance systems and services have to play in achieving major policy goals in education, employment, and labour market as well as in social inclusion.
The Federal Ministry of Education and Research started already in 2000 with the programme “Learning Regions” (2001 – 2007) funding regional networks for learning and work including also career guidance activities. In 2006 the Minister established a high level expert group to design recommendations for innovative lifelong learning strategies (“Innovationskreis Weiterbildung”). Results of this exert group (www.bmbf.bund.de) recommended a follow-up programme to the “Learning Regions” (“Local Learning”), the development of a telephone service and a guidance online portal to enhance transparency and better access to guidance, a funding programme with grants (“Bildungspraemie”) for further training of employed persons, and improvements in the quality of educational guidance services.
According to their responsibilities in educational and labour market policies several of the German Federal States (Laender) developed a variety of regional initiatives and funding programmes to establish Lifelong Learning Strategies and skills improvement programmes within their territories, which are complementary to the funding of the Federal Government (e.g. consulting and funding for SME who want to skill up their staff, further training for employed persons or for persons with no entitlement to unemployment benefits – always including some guidance activities for the beneficiaries).
The issue of quality standards for guidance delivery and staff qualification is crucial to all these publicly funded programmes. The project presented here is a result of the joint venture of an NGO activity in the field of career guidance and counselling (German National Guidance Forum – nfb) and manifold policy interventions on national and regional level to enhance Lifelong Learning.
Project Course:
After an initial phase in which the experts for the working groups and the stakeholders for the advisory board were found the groups started discussing the scientifically based drafts presented by the University of Heidelberg. Before the development of the criteria, the competence profile and the Quality Development Framework the experts agreed on a common definition of career guidance and of quality in career guidance. They also defined the field (guidance in education, career and employment) to which the results would apply. On the basis of this the criteria, competence profile and the Quality Development Framework could be developed. The results from the piloting and from the consultations with the wider career guidance community were used for the further debates in the working groups. And, the results were reflected in the Advisory Council. At last recommendations for implementations were discussed and agreed upon in the working groups and within a final common workshop with the piloting institutions.
Results:
The quality criteria provide a framework for orientation for what is good career guidance . In this they are supported by the competence profile and the QDF.
All the 19 quality criteria are operationalised through indicators referring to the 3 actors responsible for guidance in education, career and employment: practitioners, organizations and policy makers. The criteria are organized on 5 levels following the systemic context model. Overarching are the basic criteria which are basic for career guidance as a professional and communicative service. The quality criteria from a process perspective refer to those aspects which are evidently elements for the design of career guidance as an interactive process. The quality criteria from a consellor perspective describe the necessity for competences and continuous professional development. And quality criteria from the organizational perspective name the needs for a professional environment. The quality criteria from the societal context describe the relevant societal aims and focus on what needs to be reflected in the career guidance process to contribute to these aims.
The competence profile for guidance practitioners aims to strengthen professionalism in the field via the consensus on the necessary competences of guidance practitioners. It is set up parallel to the quality criteria with 20 competences which are in itself clearly defined. There are again basic competences, competences for the counseling process, competences and knowledge concerning the client, competences for professional self-reflection of the guidance practitioner, competences to act within the organization and competences and knowledge on the societal context.
The Quality Development Framework (QDF) supports the implementation of the quality criteria and the competences and increases transparency for a coherent quality strategy of a career guidance provider. It connects the criteria to quality management and evaluation and thus supports sustainable quality development. It is flexible as it may be applied in different career guidance institutions and can be adapted to existing quality management systems. Generally, the QDF follows a basic action circle with commitment to this quality process, an analysis of the status against the quality criteria, planning and implementation of measures and a further analysis of the outcomes.
With these results the open process of coordination has been successful in developing quality criteria, a competence profile and a QDF for career guidance in such a heterogeneous context as it is found in Germany. However, to date the criteria, competence profile and the QDF remain to be prototypical and need further development, implementation and validation. The criteria must become standards which will need another negotiation process. At the same time the criteria and competences and the QDF need to be continuously implemented in order to reach a dynamic, flexible, transparent and non-bureaucratic quality model.

Additional information

Name of contact

Karen Schober; Dr. Bernhard Jenschke

Role (in policy initiative)

President and Vice President of German National Guidance Forum in Education, Career and Employment ( nfb)

Organization name

National Guidance Forum in Education, Career and Employment (Nationales Forum Beratung in Bildung, Beruf und Beschäftigung e.V., nfb)

Address

Nationales Forum Beratung in Bildung, Beruf und Beschäftigung e.V., Kurfürstenstr. 131, 10785 Berlin, Germany

Phone

+493025793741

Fax

+4930263980999

E-mail

bernhard@jenschke.de; info@forum-beratung.de

Website address

http://www.forum-beratung.de; http://www.beratungsqualitaet.net

Documents and publications

- Nationales Forum Beratung; Forschungsgruppe Beratungsqualität am Institut für Bildungswissenschaft der Universität Heidelberg (2011). Qualitätsmerkmale guter Beratung – erste Ergebnisse aus dem Offenen Koordinierungsprozess zur Qualitätsentwicklung“. Bielefeld, Berlin, wbv.
- Nationales Forum Beratung; Forschungsgruppe Beratungsqualität am Institut für Bildungswissenschaft der Universität Heidelberg (2012). Ergebnisse des Offenen Koordinierungsprozesses zur Qualitätsentwicklung 2009–2011. Bielefeld, Berlin, wbv.
- Nationales Forum Beratung; Forschungsgruppe Beratungsqualität am Institut für Bildungswissenschaft der Universität Heidelberg (2012). Kompetenzprofil für Beratende. Ergebnis des Offenen Koordinierungsprozesses zur Qualitätsentwicklung 2009–2011. Bielefeld, Berlin, wbv.

Attached files

Links

http://www.beratungsqualitaet.net

This information was provided/updated by:

Karen Schober; Dr. Bernhard Jenschke

No comments by users.

good practice, initiative, interesting practice, policy, benchmark, best practice, career guidance services, career counselling, career guidance, co-operation, co-ordination, collaboration, competences, consultation, context, development, effectiveness, ELGPN, evaluation, criteria, evaluation data, guideline, evaluation method, Germany, practitioner, provision, lifelong guidance, national standard development, open method of coordination, profession, professional field, professional service, professionality, quality, quality assurance, quality assurance system, quality evaluation, vocational guidance

Name of the good/interesting practice/initiative/policy

Greek model system for quality assurance in guidance services

Country

GREECE

I am proposing that this example will be published also in the KSLLL database

1. Background

What makes this an example of good/interesting practice/initiative/policy?

- The motivation of the initiative (What is the history/background of the policy?)

- Linkages with LLG policy priorities (Please add references to other national/EU policies or documents)

- Participants

This is the first system for quality assurance of guidance services in Greece aiming at the initial and continuous evaluation of public and private guidance services of both the education and employment sector. It was developed by EKEP (National Center for Vocational Orientation), National Euroguidance Center, executive body of System 6 of ESSEEKA “System of Counseling, Vocational Guidance and Connection with the Labour Market” (Law 3191/2003) and member of ELGPN network. The Greek model system for quality assurance in guidance services is a top-down model based on the British matrix standard and consists of 6 groups of benchmarks: 1. Leadership 2. Organizing – planning 3. Guidance practitioners – human resources 4. Client satisfaction 5. Delivery of services 6. Premises and equipment
Leadership group connects with the Policy development level, Organizing – planning, Guidance practitioners- human resources and Premises and Equipment connect with the organizational level, while Client satisfaction and Delivery of Services consist the Practice level. The system coincides fully with the theory of the quality circle of Deming et al.
• The motivation of the initiative
The diversity of guidance services in Greece, both public and private and the absence of a legal framework as far as the requirements that these services should fulfill, made necessary the creation of a system for quality assurance of guidance services in Greece.

• Linkages with LLG policy priorities
The Resolution of the Education Council on “Strengthening Policies, Systems and Practices in the field of Guidance throughout life in Europe” (May 2004) identified 3 priorities among them:
1. Developing high quality, broadly accessible guidance provision
2. Improving quality assurance mechanisms for guidance provision
Also the 2008 EU Council Resolution on better integrating lifelong guidance into lifelong learning strategies invited the Member States within their respective competences to develop the quality assurance of guidance provision.

• Participants
The participants of the initiative were: EKEP, IEKEP (the company that developed the system), the Greek Ministry of Education, Lifelong Learning & Religious Affairs – Directorate of Vocational Guidance and Educational Activities (SEPED) and the Greek Manpower Employment Organization (OAED), the official public authority responsible for the provision of Counselling and Vocational Guidance services in the employment sector which operates the Centres for Promotion to Employment (KPAs), that provide vocational guidance services to the unemployed at local level.

Aims and targets

- Objectives of the initiative (What did the policy set out to achieve?)

- Target group

- Methods applied to reach the objective (technological and /or pedagogical)

• Objectives of the initiative
1. Set common quality standards in guidance provision in both public and private sector in Greece.
2. Develop know-how in quality assurance for guidance services in Greece
3. Create the necessary legal framework for monitoring and evaluation of Guidance services
4. Raise the quality of guidance provision in Greece for the sake of its citizens and protect them from low quality uncertified guidance services

• Target group
1. Public guidance services of
all levels of the education sector (primary –secondary and tertiary)
all types of VET sector (initial and continuous)
Employment sector
2. Private guidance services
3. Local government services

• Methods applied to reach the objective
1. Bibliographical research.
2. Development of benchmarks, quality indicators and documents of proof by a scientific committee of guidance counsellors
3. Pilot application in public guidance services of Greece
4. Gathering feedback from the services themselves
5. Revision of benchmarks and indicators
6. Consultation with ministries and responsible bodies (e.g. national guidance forum) (future action)

2. Implementation

Strategy and actions (Please describe the approach adopted to make the reform work and any actions taken.)

- Level of implementation (national, regional etc.)

- Implementation (description)

Firstly EKEP conducted a study “International systems for quality assurance in Guidance services” which: 1. referred to the most important international quality management systems like ISO 9000etc 2. described the most well known quality assurance systems for career guidance like the Matrix quality standard for information advice and guidance services and the Canadian Blueprint for life/work Designs 3. presented the systems developed for the quality assurance of various public sector services in Greece e.g. the system for the evaluation of the continuous education and training centers of the Ministry of Employment. The fourth part of the study proposed a model system suitable for quality assurance in guidance services of Greece. The system describes the values, the quality indicators and the documents of proof according to the theory of the quality circle. All indicators produce indications for quality development. The values produce indicators, the indicators produce indications and the indications produce Evidence or measuring tools according to the theory.
The next phase was Pilot application in public guidance services e.g. the University of Piraeus Career Office, a Counseling and Guidance Center (KESYP) of Piraeus and a Centre for Promotion to Employment (KPA). The aim of pilot application was to inform the services about the system for quality assurance and to get their feedback concerning the values and quality indicators of the system.

• Level of implementation
National

• Implementation
The procedure for initial evaluation or continuous monitoring of a guidance service is the following:
1. The service submits a portfolio which contains all the elements that prove the implementation of t he quality system.
2. A team of external evaluators visits the service and conducts the evaluation on the spot following a specific written form
3. The evaluators are asking to see specific evidence and documentation which proves the observance of each criterion
4. A quality certificate of conformity is awarded to each service reaching the desired marking
5. Data of certified services are entered in a special register
6. An electronic platform supports the whole procedure from applications to results of each evaluation

Monitoring and evaluation

- What has been put in place for monitoring and evaluation?

- What actors are involved?

There was a Pilot application phase aiming at gathering feedback from services themselves. Actors involved were public guidance services of the education and employment sector (KESYPs, KPAs and Career Offices). This phase is still continuing. EKEP plans to have further consultations with ministries and responsible bodies (e.g. national guidance forum)

3. Outcomes

Achievements (Please describe the main outcomes/results according to the following headings. Each option can be answered - up to 50 words)

- Specific results

- Cost effectiveness

- Budget

- Innovative aspects

• Specific results
The first system for quality assurance of guidance services in Greece

• Cost effectiveness
The cost effectiveness is high since raising the quality of guidance provision in Greece will ultimately result in lower unemployment rates, higher mobility of citizens, better access to information and career opportunities

• Budget
The project was co financed by the Ministry of Education and the European Social Fund program). The overall budget was 40.000 Euros.

• Innovative aspects
The system includes values like: “The Service investigates client satisfaction by the services provided and the staff and makes use of the findings” and uses a mechanism for making use of client feedback. The mechanism which includes client satisfaction surveys, follow up activities, etc. researches citizens’ expectations and the level of their satisfaction by the services and the staff. The description of the mechanism includes the methodology used and the way the Service is making use of clients’ feedback for improving its services.

Success factors (What key success factors have led to or prevented success?)

- Lessons learnt

- Unintended impacts (Have there been any unintended impacts? Positive or negative?)

• Lessons learnt

Unintended impacts
Evaluation is a delicate matter. Sometimes services were suspicious of the system. They thought that they are being criticized and were afraid that the evaluation will reveal drawbacks and negative points of their functioning.

Strengths and weaknesses

- What areas of the policy can we learn lessons from?

- Are there still challenges ahead?

Receiving feedback from guidance services at the development phase of the quality assurance system is a major strength of the system.

4. Additional narrative description of the policy/practice/initiative

Additional information

Name of contact

Dimitrios Gaitanis PhD

Role (in policy initiative)

Member of the scientific committee that developed the system. Author of the English translation and the english revised version.

Organization name

EKEP

Address

1 Parasiou & 99 Aharnon street

Phone

+30 210 8233669

Fax

+30 210 8233772

E-mail

dmitrogaitanis@hotmail.com, info@ekep.gr

Website address

www.ekep.gr

Documents and publications

Attached files

Links

http://www.ekep.gr/library/ekdoseis/odigoi/Diethni_Sys_Poiotitas.pdf

This information was provided/updated by:

Dimitrios Gaitanis PhD

No comments by users.

ELGPN, good practice, initiative, interesting practice, policy, assessment, career guidance services, competence assessment, customer satisfaction, evaluation, criteria, guideline, outcome, evidence-based, practice, Greece, guidance in schools, process, provision, system, human resource management, quality assurance, quality assurance system, quality evaluation, registers, quality, evidence-based policy

Subject of the Policy document

European guidelines for validating non-formal and informal learning

Reference data

Adopted/Released by Cedefop

Year of adoption 2009

Reference number Catalogue number: TI-78-09-692-EN-C, Number of publication: 4054 EN

Available at http:// http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/EN/publications/5059.aspx

Available in English at http:// http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/EN/Files/4054_en.pdf

1. Additional narrative description of the reference to Lifelong Guidance

The document describes the role of the counsellors in the validation process (p. 67).

Attached files

This information was provided/updated by:

Outi Ruusuvirta

No comments by users.

policy, access, adult education, advisory services, assessment, career counselling, career management skills, Cedefop, informal learning, non-formal learning, quality assurance, validation of informal learning, validation of non-formal learning, guideline, quality assurance and evidence-base

Subject of the Policy document

National Lifelong Guidance Council 2008-2012_HU

Reference data

Adopted/Released by

Year of adoption 2007

Reference number

Available at http://

Available in English at http://

1. Additional narrative description of the reference to Lifelong Guidance

The National Lifelong Guidance Council of Hungary was established in 2007, with the following main aims:
- to coordinate the ongoing works and developments of the Hungarian stakeholders and sectors (employment, public, higher, vocational education, social sectors)
- to harmonise the Hungarian LLG related developments with the EU priorities and goals,
- to participate in the works of the European Lifelong Guidance Policy Network (ELGPN),
- to supervise the EU funded development of the Hungarian Lifelong Guidance system, led by the National Employment Office.

Attached files

This information was provided/updated by:

Viktória Benei

No comments by users.

policy, consultation, cross-sectoral co-operation, guidance system, recommendation, National level, Hungary, guideline, co-operation and co-ordination, schools, VET, higher education, adult education, employment, social inclusion