The aim of the National EFA Coordinators Meeting was as follows:

1. To share the information regarding the progress in forming a National EFA Forum in each country and in putting in place mechanisms for the development of a National EFA Plan;
2. To identify needs, concerns and priorities of countries and ways in which the SRF can respond;
3. To seek inputs from the countries to the TOR of the SRF;
4. To establish criteria for selection of the SRF participants, specifically the country representatives and mechanism to involve them; and
5. To discuss the mandate, operational work plan, work modalities, concrete activities and funding of the SRF.

Participants in the meeting included the National EFA Coordinators or his/her representatives in East and Southeast Asia (Cambodia, DPR Korea, Indonesia, Japan, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Rep. of Korea, Thailand and Viet Nam), representatives of international and regional organizations (ESCAP, SEAMEO, UNDP, UNESCO, and UNICEF), and bilateral agencies (JICA and Netherlands). National EFA Coordinator of Papua New Guinea and representative of Mongolia also attended. China did not attend this meeting due to the late nomination of its representative. List of participants is attached (Appendix. II).

See Appendix. I.

1. A high level of political commitment to the follow-up work to the Dakar Framework for Action was reported by all Member States. The country reports also reflect an overwhelming message of national ownership, direction and national responsibility of pursuing EFA efforts.
2. Member States have given serious consideration to the establishment of a recognized body that will pursue the aims, fulfill the functions and perform the tasks associated with the commitments made in Dakar in April 2000.
3. Most countries have not yet formed National EFA Forums and formulation of National EFA Plan is underway in many countries. It was suggested that a National EFA Forum will be entrusted with the important task of encouraging, supporting, organizing and strengthening the partnership between government, civil society and the international community because the responsibility for pursuing the goal of EFA is not the government's alone, but should also involve the whole of society in order to benefit the whole of society.
4. A number of countries have revised and improved their EFA data and EFA 2000 Assessment reports. They will use the revised and updated data and the experience gained in the last decade as a starting point for their follow-up to the Dakar Framework for Action.
5. Many participants stressed the need for National EFA Plan to be linked/integrated with/in the National Education Development Plan, while recognizing that National EFA Plan should be elaborated against the 18 indicators of 6 dimensions as required in the Dakar Framework for Action. In this regard, a number of countries expressed their intention of integrating their EFA plans with their national education sector plan.
6. Some countries have reported their intention or action taken for the National EFA Forum to establish close links with government authorities, networks, institutions, mass organizations and commitments that are active at the provincial/prefecture/county levels and municipal or district levels.
7. Most countries have highlighted the need for national plans to be realistic and the importance of setting intermediate goals.
8. All countries expressed their intention to adopt a broad participatory approach to the development and implementation of their EFA plans.
9. The need for clarity in defining some EFA terms (e.g. life skills) and the need to develop measurable indicators for measuring the attainment of objectives such as attitudinal change were highlighted.
10. Most countries emphasized the importance of obtaining technical and financial assistance to the development and implementation of their national EFA Plans.
11. The role of the SRF as a clearing house and facilitator of exchange of information among the countries was particularly emphasized.

(Note: Member States were encouraged to set their own guidelines on the preparation of the National Plans of Action. The Country Guidelines prepared by UNESCO were explained and a summary provided to all participants in the hope that it would serve as a useful starting point for the planning exercise.)

1. Need to broaden stakeholders participation
2. Financial constraints within and outside of the government. Resource mobilization
3. Human capacity limitation
4. Locational constraints
5. Limited capacity of the community to plan and implement EFA activities
6. Lack of widespread knowledge about EFA Goals. Need for advocacy and sharing of EFA knowledge
7. Inadequate/weak monitoring system, i.e. public sector data, vertical integration – national to local
8. Inadequate data assessment and management system
9. Weak horizontal linkages among agencies (inter-ministry), difficulty of involving other Ministries in the formulation and implementation of the EFA Plan
10. Lack of convergence at the local levels of programs and projects as a result of various international commitments
11. Lack of unified (standard) indicators, i.e. ECCD
12. Inadequate standard indicators and operational definition of life skills
13. Apparent decline of overseas development assistance. "Donor fatigue"
14. Natural calamities
15. Regional political/economic realities

1. Providing support for the establishment and operation of the National EFA Forum;
2. Supporting country level reviews, up-dating or formulating of EFA national plans through harmonized technical cooperation;
3. Capacity building for implementation and monitoring of EFA plans;
4. Sharing information among members of the forum and harmonizing programming and formulation of projects;
5. Monitoring of and technical assistance to the member countries’ data collection and analysis in cooperation with UNESCO Institute for Statistics;
6. Helping identify and mobilize resources for common priority initiatives
7. Providing technical and secretarial support to, and serving as the regional focus for the other three SRFs, as needed.

1. It was suggested that membership of the SRF would maintain present composition, i.e. country focal points/representatives, five conveners (UNDP, UNESCO, UNFPA, UNICEF and the World Bank) plus ADB, ESCAP, FAO, SEAMEO, Japan, JICA, Netherlands and, on a volunteer basis, other donors. ILO, UNAIDS, UNDCP, WHO and other regional advisory and special bodies such as APEC and ASEAN will be approached and included if they have a strong education concern. As Chinese EFA Coordinator was unable to attend the meeting, inquiry should be made to the Chinese National Commission for UNESCO about its interest in SRF membership. Final membership composition should be decided after the consultation with all parties foreseen in the Dakar Framework for Action.
2. Participation of NGOs would be too broad and difficult to streamline; therefore, it will be appropriate for country representative to represent NGOs’ views at the level of the SRF.
3. International NGOs and private sector representatives would be invited on an ad hoc basis for specific issues

1. As far as possible informal, using information technology (Internet)
2. Cooperation at country level through catalytic, sub-regional projects to support country-specific action planning processes
3. EFA Coordinators to be invited once a year to report on progress and express country needs in terms of SRF-supported ongoing operational activities
4. Regular monitoring and major reporting of progress every five years.
5. Members of former RTAG (five conveners plus ADB and ESCAP) will continue to meet regularly as a standing working group to follow up EFA activities.
6. The SRF will report to Member States and to the inter-agency working group on what it is doing.
7. The SRF will provide venue for continuing dialogue and discussion of EFA related activities and to share EFA experience and challenges.
8. The SRF Secretariat will serve as the clearing house for all information concerning EFA activities in this sub-region and provide the SRF members with strong support, i.e. coordination, corresponding and communicating.

1. The SRF will ask APEC, ASEAN, ILO, UNAIDS, UNDCP and WHO whether they are interested in being a member of the SRF.
2. The SRF Secretariat will make a list which includes contact information (telephone, fax and e-mail) of all focal points/representatives of the SRF members and distribute it to all SRF members.
3. Drafting of catalytic sub-regional projects to support countries’ action planning process.
4. An agency-based thematic working group will be meeting at UNESCO PROAP in early December to make decisions based on proposals and statements made by National EFA Coordinators.

Mr. Nat Bun Roeun (National EFA Coordinator)

E-mail: formini.pasec@bigpong.com.kh

Mr. Kim Chang Min (National EFA Coordinator)

E-mail: ryo.wa@nier.go.jp

E-mail: hirofumi.miyamoto@mofa.go.jp

E-mail: naito@loxinfo.co.th

E-mail: gyomu1@jicathai.or.th

Mr. Khamhoung Sacklokham

E-mail: khamhoungs@hotmail.com,

kamhoung@laotel.com

Ms. Sahara Ahmad

E-mail: abdhalim@bppdp.moe.gov.my

Mr. Erdenechimeg Dorjravdan

E-mail: erdenechimeg@med.pmis.gov.mn

Mr. U Moe Naing Aung

E-mail: mldevera@pacific.net.ph

E-mail: rsd-ops@fapenet.org

Mr. Han Zun-sang

E-mail: john@bubble.yonsei.ac.kr

C/o Ministry of Education

E-mail: duangtip@winning.com

E-mail: nqchi@hn.vnn.vn

E-mail: s.pellegrom@ban.minbuza.nl

Ms. Nanda Krairiksh

E-mail: Krairiksh.unescap@un.org

E-mail: jonsson.unescap@un.org

Ms. Nora N. Quetulio

E-mail: nora@seameo.org

Ms. Parichart Siwaraksa
Programme Manager
UNDP
The United Nations Building
Rajadamnern Nok Avenue
Bangkok 10200, Thailand

Tel: (66-2) 288-1853
Fax: (66-2) 280-1414
E-mail: parichart.siwaraksa@undp.org

Mr. Jim Irvine

E-mail: jirvine@unicef.org

E-mail: f.ossella@tiscalinet.it

Mr. Zhou Nanzhao

E-mail: n.zhou@unesco-proap.org

E-mail: a.hakeem@unesco-proap.org

E-mail: d.altner@unesco-proap.org

E-mail: k.oyasu@unesco-proap.org

Mr. Toshiyuki Matsumoto

E-mail: SRF@unesco-proap.org