International short-term consultant on International good practice in the financing of tertiary education (TVET and Higher education)

TERMS OF REFERENCE

 For International short-term consultant on International good practice in the financing of tertiary education (TVET and Higher education)

Grant facility for project preparation (GFPP) – Uzbekistan Student Loan Program

I. Background

The Government of the Republic of Uzbekistan is implementing comprehensive reforms aimed at expanding equitable access to higher education and strengthening the effectiveness, sustainability, and inclusiveness of student financing mechanisms. As higher education participation continues to increase, ensuring adequate, equitable, and effective financing has become a key priority to support equal educational opportunities and long-term sector development.

To support these reforms, the Grant Facility for Project Preparation (GFPP) represents a strategic investment of US$2 million, financed by the World Bank, to support the preparation and implementation readiness of the Student Loan Program in Uzbekistan. The GFPP finances analytical studies, institutional capacity building, implementation support, and policy development to establish a sustainable and efficient student financing system. The facility supports comprehensive analytical work to assess the current student financing landscape, conduct stakeholder consultations, evaluate international good practices, and develop evidence-based policy recommendations. It also strengthens implementation capacity through the recruitment of specialized Project Implementation Unit (PIU) staff and fiduciary experts, while supporting national and international training programs for representatives of the Ministry of Economy and Finance (MEF), the Ministry of Education and Science (MoES), and other relevant stakeholders.

These reforms take place in a context of rapid expansion. Gross enrolment in higher education rose from 9 percent to 21 percent between 2016 and 2022, the number of HEIs grew from 70 to 194, and the Government aims to reach 50 percent enrolment by 2030. Admission is still largely managed through centrally set quotas of places, which are increased every year.2 Public spending on tertiary education has risen more than fivefold in five years to about 0.89 percent of GDP, close to the OECD average. However, the financing model continues to rely heavily on households: around 68 percent of public higher education institutions’ (HEIs’) revenues come from tuition fees; free (state-funded) places, held by about 17 percent of students, are allocated on admission test scores and benefit mostly students from middle- and higher-income families; and government funding to HEIs is based on enrolment alone, so it does not reward labour market outcomes, curricular innovation or industry links.1 The regional “dual-track” model of budget-funded and fee-paying places, combined with centralised quotas that may not correspond to demand for specific programmes, has been found to create an incentive for institutions to retain fee-paying students at the expense of academic standards.2 World Bank analysis has pointed to a package of system-level financing reforms, including a transparent funding formula that combines enrolment with performance on strategic indicators, competitive grants, diversification of institutional revenues and reform of student financial aid. These reforms depend on greater institutional financial and academic autonomy and on reliable data on graduate outcomes.1

The Government recognizes the importance of evidence-based analysis to inform future reforms of the financing of tertiary education, covering both technical and vocational education and training (TVET) and higher education (HE). It also places high value on learning from good practice in relevant and comparable international cases, so that design choices for Uzbekistan are informed by what other systems have done, what results they achieved, and under which conditions.

II. International good practice and strategic choices in tertiary education (TVET and HE) financing

Financing systems are not neutral. How public and private resources are allocated to institutions and students – for example through negotiated or input-based budgets, enrolment-based or formula funding, performance-based funding, competitive and grant-based funding, or cost-sharing with students and employers – and the legal and institutional framework that governs these flows shape what is incentivised in the system. Over time, these choices influence which models of TVET and HE emerge (for example, broad mass access versus a more differentiated system with centres of excellence; demand-led versus centrally steered provision; the balance and pathways between TVET and HE), and which outcomes the system tends to produce in terms of access and equity, completion, quality, labour market relevance, research, and the sustainability and predictability of public spending.

International experience shows that similar arrangements can lead to very different results depending on their design, on how they are combined, and on the institutional context in which they operate (e.g., system governance, institutional autonomy, quality assurance and data systems). A related question for Uzbekistan is how to manage the number and distribution of places. Several countries have moved away from centrally set quotas for students entering TVET and HE, and the experience of these transitions, including the financial incentives and changes in funding allocation that made them possible, is directly relevant. A structured review of selected international cases will help the Government consider which options, or combination of options, best fit Uzbekistan’s strategic intentions for the sector, and what adaptations would be required.

III. Objectives

The objective of this consultancy is to support the Ministry of Economy and Finance (MEF) and the PIU, in coordination with the MoES and other relevant stakeholders, by carrying out research on international good practice in the financing of tertiary education (TVET and HE). Specifically, the consultant will:

1. review and analyse the general design of TVET and HE financing systems in a selection of relevant and comparable countries, including their institutional and legal frameworks;
2. show how different financing arrangements link to different strategic visions for the sector, what they incentivise, and what impact they have had on the sector, including their benefits and risks;
3. review countries’ experiences with admission quotas for students entering TVET and HE, and the steps governments took to phase them out, with particular attention to the finance-related aspects of this transition (e.g., use of financial incentives, or changes in how funds are allocated and managed in the sector); and
4. assess the extent to which these arrangements are a good fit for, or would need to be adapted to, the Uzbek context and the Government’s strategic intentions.

IV. Scope of Work and Deliverables

Working with the MEF and the PIU, the consultant will carry out the following tasks:

1. Review of the current financing system in Uzbekistan. Carry out an initial review of how TVET and HE are currently financed in Uzbekistan, including the main sources and flows of funds, the allocation of state-funded and fee-paying places, and the related legal and institutional framework. The review will draw on available documents and data and on discussions with the MEF, the PIU, the MoES and other relevant stakeholders, and will provide the baseline against which international experience is assessed.
2. Methodology and analytical approach. Define the overall methodology of the research, including the approach to case selection, desk research, data analysis and interviews, and an initial framework for comparing financing systems. The framework will be kept broad at the outset and refined as the exploratory research and the review of the Uzbek system identify the most relevant dimensions and questions.
3. Long-list of cases. Through desk research, identify and briefly profile a long-list of countries with relevant experience, based on criteria agreed with the MEF and the PIU (e.g., comparability with Uzbekistan, recent reform of the financing system, experience in phasing out admission quotas, strength of the TVET system).
4. Selection of cases. Present the long-list to the MEF, the PIU, the MoES and other relevant stakeholders and agree on a short-list of cases (indicatively 6–7) for in-depth review.
5. National consultations. Subject to confirmation, undertake a mission to Tashkent in mid-November 2026 to consult and interview national stakeholders (e.g., MEF, MoES, PIU, TVET and HE institutions), in order to deepen the understanding of the current financing system and the quota system and to discuss reform priorities.
6. In-depth review and interviews. Carry out further research on the selected cases and lead in-depth interviews, with the support of the research assistant, with stakeholders and staff of the relevant ministries, agencies, funding bodies and/or institutions, to verify and complement information collected online.
7. Analysis of admission quotas. Review the experience of selected countries in setting and phasing out quotas for students entering TVET and HE, including the sequencing of reforms and the role of financing instruments and fund-management arrangements in the transition.
8. Analysis and recommendations. For each case and across cases, analyse design, legal and institutional arrangements, implementation, costs, impact on the sector, benefits and risks, and preconditions. Assess the fit of each option with the Uzbek context and identify the adaptations, sequencing and preconditions that a transition would require.
9. Coordination of research. Coordinate and quality-assure the research process, including guiding and supervising a research assistant: allocating research tasks, specifying the data to be collected from available databases and the analyses to be run, developing common templates for case profiles and interview notes, managing sources, and collating and synthesising the evidence collected into an evidence matrix that underpins the report.
10. Reporting and dissemination. Prepare the deliverables below, incorporate comments from the MEF, the PIU and other relevant stakeholders, and present findings as agreed with the MEF and the PIU.

Deliverables: (1) Inception note with an initial overview of the current financing system in Uzbekistan, the methodology and initial analytical framework, work plan and long-list of cases; (2) Preliminary draft report; (3) Revised draft report, including an executive summary and a summary presentation (PPT). The report will be in English, of approximately 40-50 pages plus annexes with case profiles.

The indicative timetable is as follows:

Intermediary steps (e.g., structure of the report, interview guide and list of interviewees) and the related timeline will be agreed with the MEF and the PIU.

V. Timeline, estimated efforts, and reporting arrangement

The consultancy will run from 16 November 2026 to 31 December 2026, for an estimated 30 working days, or 35 working days if the mission to Tashkent takes place. The consultancy is financed under the GFPP.

The consultant will report to the social department  at the MEF and work closely with the PIU, the MoES and other relevant stakeholders. The consultant will be supported by a research assistant, who will work under the consultant’s guidance.

VI. Qualifications Required

• Graduate degree (PhD preferred) in education policy, economics, public policy, social science or other relevant field
• At least 12 years of relevant professional experience in education policy and reform, including in tertiary education and TVET
• Excellent knowledge and understanding of international tertiary education policy and governance, including the legal and institutional frameworks of TVET and HE, and a good understanding of system-level financing arrangements and their links with governance
• Proven experience of comparative and international policy analysis, including institutional and governance analysis, case study research and stakeholder interviews
• Experience of coordinating research and supervising research staff
• Experience of working with government counterparts and international organisations on education sector reform
• Knowledge of tertiary education in Central Asia, including Uzbekistan, and in other transition economies
• Strong communication skills and excellent written and oral English
• Motivated, proactive, and committed personality
• Good IT skills, including Microsoft Word, Excel and PowerPoint

Expressions of interest must be delivered in a written form in English or Russian languages to the address below (in person, or by mail, or by e-mail) by November 13, 2026.

Uzbekistan, 100017, Tashkent, Niyozbek yo'li, 1

Tel:(+99897) 447-86-11

E-mail: gfppp181956@gmail.com

Web site: https://www.imv.uz/

Abdurashid Abdurakhmanov

References

1 Bhatta, S.D., V. Babakhodjaeva, M. Kalbfuss, K. McDonall, and M.M. Ferreyra (2024). Advancing Higher Education for Economic Transformation in Uzbekistan. Policy Note. Washington, DC: World Bank.

2 Ambasz, D., D. Nikolaev, S. Malinovskiy, A. Olszak-Olszewski, P. Zavalina, and J. Botero Álvarez (2023). Towards Higher Education Excellence in Central Asia: A Roadmap for Improving the Quality of Education and Research through Regional Integration. Washington, DC: World Bank.