Reclaiming Glory: How NIEPA Can Regain its Leadership in Educational Planning

The Background

The National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration (NIEPA) has historically been a cornerstone of educational planning and administration in India. NIEPA emerged when the  Government of India recognized the need for a specialized institution to support its ambitious educational expansion, equity, and efficiency agenda in the post-independence era. NIEPA was conceived as a training and research institute that addresses these gaps. Established in 1962 as the apex body under the UNESCO initiative for educational planning, NIEPA played a pivotal role in shaping India’s education policies and frameworks, particularly in school education and the trajectory of educational planning in India. NIEPA is senior to the internationally acclaimed UNESCO’s International Institute for Educational Planning (IIEP, Paris).

From its significant contributions during the formulation of NEP 1986 and the District Primary Education Programme (DPEP) era to its support for capacity building and the development of data-driven methodologies, NIEPA was a leader in its domain. However, in recent years, the institution has declined its relevance and influence, especially in education planning.

This article examines NIEPA’s trajectory, diminished role, and actionable strategies to restore its stature in educational planning. However, the present note is confined to issues concerning educational planning only. It is also a fact that apart from issues about educational planning, NIEPA has diversified to several areas, such as EMIS, School Leadership, higher education, and a host of programs, such as LEAP and other centrally sponsored schemes in the recent past. However, issues concerning educational planning are considered the bread-and-butter for the institute and used to be its prime domain area.

Strengthening Educational Planning in India: The Role of Department of Educational Planning, NIEPA

Emergence as a think tank of the Ministry of Education

Over more than six decades, NIEPA emerged as a think tank of the Ministry of Education, and with the support of UNESCO/IIEP-Paris, it has contributed to significant education reforms and programs. NIEPA has made noteworthy contributions in several areas, not just educational planning. A few of its considerable contributions are briefly summarised below:

1. Leadership in Policy Formulation: NIEPA played a critical role in the formulation of the National Education Policy (NEP) 1986. Its faculty were deeply involved in data analysis (documented as Challenges of Education), policy discussions, and presentations to the Prime Minister and other stakeholders.
2. Pioneering Planning Methodologies: NIEPA developed robust planning frameworks for state and district education plans, especially during the DPEP era. These methodologies became the foundation for decentralized planning in India’s education sector.
3. Educational Planning and Policy Research: NIEPA pioneered research in educational planning methodologies, including scenario building, enrolment projections, decentralized planning, micro-planning, and school mapping, which helped optimize resource allocation and increase access to education in underserved areas. NIEPA has an acclaimed international reputation for its pioneer research in financing education.
4. Capacity Building: The institute trained generations of educational administrators (District Education Officers, Senior Education Administrators, etc.), policymakers, and planners, equipping them with the skills to address India’s complex educational challenges. The three-month Diploma in Educational Planning and Administration (DEPA), launched in 1982, was one of the innovative programs through which thousands of practitioners were trained.
5. Development of EMIS: NIEPA established the Educational Management Information System (EMIS), which later evolved into the Unified District Information System for Education (UDISE). This data system became a critical tool for nationwide school education planning and monitoring and earned the status of Official Statistics in 2012-13. NIEPA nurtured DISE/UDISE from 1994 to 2018, which is now transferred to the Ministry of Education and renamed UDISEPlus. The present UDISEPlus is based on the platform designed, developed, and nurtured by NIEPA over twenty-five years and has a solid foundation.
6. Liberalization of Data: NIEPA liberalized easy access to its unit-wide school database in a user-friendly format through which thousands of data users, including scholars and researchers from across the World, downloaded data from a dedicated portal designed for downloading data. At that point, all information on NIEPA’s server was practically made available to data users.
7. Data and Policy Analysis: NIEPA became a hub for data-driven decision-making, contributing significantly to the preparation of district and state education plans, particularly under the District Primary Education Programme (DPEP) and, later, the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA). NIEPA Faculty was pivotal in framing planning methodology implemented in 272 districts across 18 states covered under DPEP. Its faculty single-handedly undertook the capacity building of the state and district-level officers in planning methodology across the Country when Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan was launched in 2000-01.
8. Robust Data Dissemination: NIEPA adopted a robust dissemination policy and ensured its set of publications exclusively based on UDISE data reached data users through various modes. The then Human Resource Minister launched the NIEPA’s award-winning School Report Cards Portal in November 2006. It was unique in displaying individual school-specific records of over one million schools.
9. Focus on Equity and Inclusion: The institute actively promoted research on gender disparities, access for marginalized communities, and inclusive education policies, aligning its work with India’s broader goals of social justice.
10. NIEPA’s focused Library and Digital Document Centre is unique, having a rich collection of thousands of state-specific reports and publications concerning educational planning and administration.

Challenges and the Waning Relevance of NIEPA in Education Planning

Despite its historical significance, NIEPA’s relevance in contemporary educational planning has been increasingly scrutinized. Several factors have contributed to this apparent decline in its influence in the educational planning domain:

1. Fragmented Policy Landscape: The educational ecosystem in India has become more fragmented with the proliferation of private players, NGOs, and international agencies. NIEPA’s influence in shaping National Education Policy (NEP 2020) has diminished in this competitive environment. Compared to the 1986 National Policy on Education, its faculty’s involvement in the recent formulation of NEP 2020 was negligible.
2. Bureaucratic Stagnation: NIEPA has struggled to innovate and adapt to rapidly evolving educational challenges and technological advancements. Its structure has hindered its ability to respond swiftly to emerging challenges in the education sector, such as technology integration in education planning.
3. Diminishing Field-Level Engagement: While NIEPA once excelled in grassroots-level interventions like micro-planning, its current focus has shifted toward theoretical research, often disconnected from the realities of field implementation and requirements of nationwide Ministry of Education-led Centrally Sponsored Programmes, such as Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and Samagra Shiksha.
4. Competition from Other Institutions: Other government institutes, such as the NITI Aayog academic and research organizations, think tanks, international organizations, NGOs, private organizations, and even state-level institutes, have increasingly dominated the roles that NIEPA once dominated.
5. NIEPA in Advisory Role: NIEPA needs to critically examine why its advisory role with the Ministry of Education has diminished, particularly in areas that traditionally fall within its core expertise and mandate, i.e., educational planning. NIEPA’s limited involvement in the recent vital educational initiatives is evident across major national programs and frameworks, including the Performance Grading Index (PGI), School Education Quality Index (SEQI), Permanent Education/Enrolment Number (PEN), Academic and Administrative Progress Assessment and Review (AAPAR), the transformation of UDISE to UDISE Plus, School Database Management Information System (SDMIS), and PM SHREE (PM Schools for Rising India Excellence) – all of which have been developed and implemented with minimal engagement from NIEPA’s faculty, despite falling within the institute’s domain expertise.
6. Limited Engagement in District Plans: A significant gap in NIEPA’s role is its limited involvement in core educational planning processes, particularly in the development of Samagra Shiksha’s (and previously Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan) planning methodology and the formulation of annual school education plans – areas where the institute should naturally be partnering with the Ministry of Education.
7. Diminishing Collaboration with IIEP: NIEPA was a close partner of the research programs of IIEP-Paris. Through the academic arrangement between the two institutions, the collaboration has become occasional once almost all faculty were trained at IIEP-Paris and underwent a rigorous Advanced Training Programme (ATP) in Educational Planning and Management.
8. Lack of Rigorous In-house Training: NIEPA has significantly departed from its earlier practice of comprehensive in-house training for faculty members. Previously, faculty members joined at entry-level positions and underwent rigorous institutional training before assuming teaching & research responsibilities. This approach is discontinued, as most faculty members are directly recruited to faculty positions without the benefit of this foundational training period. In the past, each faculty member was mentored by a senior faculty member.
9. Longitudinal Research and Scenario Building: NIEPA faculty were actively engaged in undertaking longitudinal studies, enrolment projections, and scenario-building exercises during the 1980s, but such types of activities have not been seen in the recent past. There was a provision to share research findings once a week, which was long discontinued but was considered a forum to exchange views, discuss research proposals, and share conclusions; the institute Director used to chair such colloquiums regularly.
10. Discontinuation of School Report Cards & Raw Data: Both NIEPA portals (schoolreportcards.in & udise.in) are no longer functional, preventing users from accessing UDISE data from 2005-06 to 2017-18.

2. Shifts and Decline in NIEPA’s Role

Despite its achievements, NIEPA’s role in educational planning has diminished over the years due to several factors, a few of which are described below briefly:

A. Shift in Focus to Higher Education

The establishment of the Centre for Policy Research in Higher Education (CPRHE) marked a strategic shift in NIEPA’s focus from school education to higher education.

• This diversion of resources and attention diluted its core mandate of supporting school education planning.
• The emphasis on higher education research left a gap in its contributions to flagship school education programs like Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) and Samagra Shiksha.

B. Limited Engagement in Flagship Programs

At one point, NIEPA’s reluctance to actively participate in centrally sponsored programs like SSA and later Samagra Shiksha significantly reduced its influence.

• Despite its expertise, NIEPA did not adapt its planning methodologies to the integrated nature of Samagra Shiksha, missing an opportunity to remain relevant in the new educational landscape.

C. Inability to Adapt to Technological Advancements

One of the most critical factors in NIEPA’s diminishing role in planning is that it failed to modernize its approaches:

• Outdated Planning Methods: NIEPA has continued to rely on traditional, manual approaches, neglecting the potential of technology to streamline and enhance planning processes.
• No Digital Solutions: Unlike other institutions, NIEPA did not develop software or tools for district and state-level officers to aid educational planning. Instead, it is aggressively engaged in the capacity-building of higher education institutions towards using online platforms, which was never its focus of activities.
• Closure of EMIS Department: Once a leader in educational data systems, NIEPA’s EMIS department is now defunct, marking its retreat from this critical area.

D. Loss of UDISE and Publications

The transfer of UDISE to the Ministry of Education in 2018 marked a turning point:

• No Efforts to Regain Access: NIEPA did not attempt to negotiate access to UDISE data, which would have allowed it to continue its series of UDISE-based publications, such as analytical reports and district and state report cards.
• Discontinuation of Publications: The cessation of these publications has further eroded NIEPA’s role as a knowledge hub for educational planning.

E. Decline in Capacity Building

One of the critical shifts contributing to NIEPA’s declining relevance in educational planning has been its change in focus from capacity-building programs to academic degree offerings. Historically, NIEPA was renowned for its rigorous training programs tailored to the needs of district education officers, education administrators, and planners, emphasizing planning methodologies, data analysis, and evidence-based decision-making. These programs were instrumental in building a cadre of professionals capable of formulating robust district and state education plans, particularly during the DPEP and SSA eras. However, over time, NIEPA diverted its resources and attention towards academic pursuits, such as the introduction of MPhil and PhD programs and, more recently, an MAED in Education. While these initiatives may have strengthened NIEPA’s profile as an academic institution, they have come at the expense of its foundational role in providing hands-on support and training to practitioners in the education system. This shift has reduced its direct engagement with state and district-level stakeholders and diminished its impact on the ground, where its expertise in planning is most urgently needed.

3. Consequences of Decline

The decline in NIEPA’s role has had far-reaching implications:

1. Reduced Relevance: NIEPA is no longer viewed as India’s leading educational planning institution. Undoubtedly, it is still an apex educational planning institution in the Country. However, its role in educational planning, especially in formulating annual district and state plans under the Government of India’s flagship program, the Samagra Shiksha, is not visible.
2. Erosion of Credibility: Its inability to innovate and contribute meaningfully to modern programs has diminished its standing among policymakers and stakeholders.
3. Weakened Support for States and Districts: The lack of updated tools, methodologies, and training programs in educational planning has left state and district planners without the adequate support they once relied on from NIEPA.
4. Missed Opportunities: NIEPA’s disengagement from UDISE+ and flagship programs like Samagra Shiksha represents a missed opportunity to contribute to transformative educational reforms.

4. Revitalizing NIEPA’s Role: The Way Forward

To restore its prominence and relevance, NIEPA must undertake a comprehensive revitalization strategy:

A. Refocus on School Education

• Re-establish school education planning as a core area of its mandate.
• Strengthen engagement with the Ministry of Education and Technical Support Groups (TSG) to contribute to programs like Samagra Shiksha. Unless the planning methodology, if any of NIEPA, is synced with the procedure followed by the Technical Support Group of Samagra Shiksha, NIEPA cannot play the pivotal role that it played over the decades.

B. Embrace Technological Innovation

• Develop Digital Tools: Create user-friendly applications and software to support evidence-based planning at the district and state levels.
• Modernize EMIS: Revive the EMIS Department and work collaboratively with the Ministry of Education to enhance UDISE+.

C. Reintroduce UDISE-Based Publications

• Negotiate access to UDISE+ data to resume the publication of district, state, and school report cards.
• These publications will re-establish NIEPA’s authority as a leader in educational data analysis.
• NIEPA must ensure that its portals udise.in and schoolreportcards.in containing rich UDISE raw data from 2002-03 to 2017-18, more than 130+ publications must always be available. In recent times, it has been observed to be down often. These are the only portals where UDISE data for 2005-06 to 2017-18 is available.

D. Update Planning Methodologies

• Develop new frameworks for integrated planning that align with the objectives of Samagra Shiksha.
• Incorporate emerging priorities such as digital education, climate resilience, and inclusive education.

E. Revitalize Capacity-Building Programs

• Redesign training programs to focus on modern planning methodologies and the use of technology in decision-making.
• Offer specialized programs for district and state education officers on education planning focussed on data analysis, monitoring, and policy implementation.

F. Strengthen Partnerships and Advocacy

• Collaborate with national and international organizations to leverage best practices and technological advancements.
• Advocate for NIEPA’s active involvement in developing and implementing national education programs.

Looking Ahead: Revitalizing NIEPA’s Role

NIEPA must undergo a paradigm shift in its approach to regain its relevance in educational planning. Some recommendations for its revitalization include:

• Technological Integration: NIEPA should spearhead research using artificial intelligence, big data, and other technological tools for educational planning and administration.
• Greater Collaboration: Partnering with private organizations, international bodies, and grassroots NGOs can help NIEPA bridge the gap between policy and practice; it cannot afford to work in isolation.
• Focus on Emerging Challenges: Issues like climate change education, skilling for the gig economy, and digital literacy should be prominently in NIEPA’s research and advocacy.

Decentralization of Functions: Establishing regional branches could enable NIEPA to engage more effectively with local educational challenges. It must be a top priority to revitalize SIEMAT and make it functional. An annual meeting of SIEMAT functionaries by NIEPA over the last couple of years has not helped it to make the SIEMATs functional and play the role of NIEPA at the state level. The present NIEPA leadership can influence the Ministry of Education to initiate steps towards this goal.

5. Concluding Observations

NIEPA (National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration) is a testament to India’s commitment to systematic educational planning, yet it finds itself at a critical crossroads. While its historical contributions to shaping India’s educational landscape are significant, particularly during the formulation of education policy in 1986 and the District Primary Education Programme (DPEP), recent years have gradually eroded its influence and effectiveness, especially in educational planning.

The institute’s declining impact can be attributed to several interconnected factors: reluctance to embrace technological innovations, adherence to outdated methodologies, and insufficient adaptation to emerging educational challenges. This stagnation occurred when India’s education sector underwent an unprecedented transformation, demanding dynamic and forward-thinking institutional leadership. The institute was leaderless for a reasonably long period, during which most of the institute’s activities remained at a standstill.

However, NIEPA’s revitalization in educational planning remains both possible and crucial. By refocusing its expertise on core areas of school education, incorporating modern technological tools in educational planning, and fostering innovative research methodologies, the institute can regain its position as the premier think tank of the Ministry of Education. Key to this transformation would be:

1. Modernizing research approaches while maintaining rigorous academic standards.
2. Strengthening partnerships with state-level educational institutions
3. Developing data-driven decision-making frameworks
4. Building capacity for implementing NEP 2020 initiatives

A rejuvenated NIEPA, aligned with contemporary educational needs and equipped with modern tools, could once again catalyse evidence-based policymaking in Indian education. This transformation would serve the institute’s mandate and significantly contribute to achieving India’s educational aspirations in an increasingly complex and dynamic environment.

Education for All in India