The confrontation between me and my colleagues about the baseness of what they miss about the correct evaluation of the PMI TVET institution who wants to open without proper rule and regulation they need new TVET but my stand was as follows

1. ቀቀ-1/02/06
ለለለ/ለ/ለ/ለ/ለ/ለ/ለለ ለለለ
ቀ.ቀ
ለለለለ- ቀPMI Computer and Language Training Institution ቀቀቀቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ
ቀ/ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ (ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀ/01/02/06)
ቀቀቀ ቀ/ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀ/ቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀ1500.00 ቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ (ቀ) ቀቀ ቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀ -20/12/05 ቀቀቀ
ቀ20 ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀ/ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀ/ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀ ቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ (ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ (ቀ) ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ
ቀ) ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ-
1. ቀቀቀ ቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ /ቀቀቀቀቀቀ/ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ-
1.1. Curriculumቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ
1.1.1. ቀFederal Negarit Gazeta -Proclamation 391/2004-
Vocational Education of the Federal Democratic Republic Of
Ethiopia Art. 35/1/b ቀቀቀ ቀቀ ቀቀ.ቀ. ቀቀቀ ቀ/ቀ/ቀ/ቀ ቀቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ 10/ቀ ቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ- ቀቀቀ ቀቀ Computer

2. ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀ/ቀ/ቀ/ቀ ቀቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ Curriculum ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ
1.1.2. ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀ38-42 ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ Curriculum ቀቀቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ:-
A. When Curriculum is prepared it should
includeቀ-
- Introductory (preface part).
It should include outcome-based TVET system
the requirements from the world of work are
analyzed and documented-taking into account
international benchmarking-as occupational
standards (OS)-quality driven TVET-Delivery.
The department you want to
provide.
- The TVET-program Design, program title,
description it include necessary knowledge,
skill and attitude of the learner to the
standard required by the OS. The contents
of this program are in line with the
occupational standard (OS)
- Course Description (it might include all
mission/Vision/Goal or part of them, about
the Course)
- Course Objective, and Expected Outcome
- Topics (or highlights of the whole course)
- Course Code by considering ( entire TVET-program
learning Outcomes)
- Credit Hours, duration of the TVET-programme
subject level eg. I or II,
version and year based on the descriptors
elaborated on the Ethiopian TVET
Qualification Framework (ETQF)
- Target Groups according to TVET agency most
of hared skill streams suggested that “any
citizen who meet the entry requirements
under this items and capable of

3. participating in the learning activities is
entitled to take part in the programme.
- Enrollment requirements (Criteria’s) which
receive their students. The programme
requirements or directives of the ministry
of Education. Other requirements,
 Ability to speak, read and understand
English
 Computer literate.
- Mode of delivery the characteristic as
formal programme and informal ones. The
formal programme on middle level technical
skills. The mode of delivery is co-operative
training. The TVET-institution
and identified companies have forged an
agreement to co-operate with regarded to
implementation of this programme. The time
spent by the trainees in the industry will
give the enough exposure to the actual
world of work and enable them to get
hands-on experience. the co-operative
approach will be supported with lecture-discussion,
simulation and actual
practice. These modalities will be
utilized before the trainees are exposed
to the industry environment.
- Detailed Session/Lesson/ Plan and annual
plan including teaching methods by
considering 80 present of practical
session i.e.
- TVET-programme structure it should be
planed by using tables it includes unit of
competency, module code and title.
Learning outcomes and hours the title
takes
- Institutional Assessments
(Unit of Competency, Occupational
Standards) evaluation should be project
based, practical, theoretical etc… the
specific learning outcomes are stated in
the modules. In assessing them, verifiable

4. and observable indicators and standards
shall be used. The formative assessment is
incorporated in the learning modules and
form part of the learning process.
Formative evaluation provides the trainee
with feedback regarding success or failure
in attaining learning outcomes.
Summative Evaluation the other form of
evaluation is given when all the modules in
the unit of competence have been
accomplished. It determines the extent to
which competence have been achieved. And,
the result of this assessment decision
shall be expressed in the term ‘competent
or not yet competent. The techniques or
tools for obtaining information about
trainees’ achievement included oral or
written test, demonstration and on-site
observation.
- TVET trainers profile, it included the
trainers conducting this particular TVET
programme are at least C level and have
satisfactory practical experiences or
equivalent qualifications.
Other requirements
 Have attended relevant training
and seminars
- Resources & Materials requirement
(including Library, TTLM, textbooks &
references books) should be stated, and
other class related activities (eg. lab,
workshop, field trips/works/… should be
clearly mentioned)
- And other related issues…
1.2. ለለለለለለ ለለለለለ ለለለለለለ
1.2.1. ቀቀቀቀቀ proposal ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀ language main
course provision is irrelevant to TVET, (which they are
still conducting the language training in their existing
Institution currently, without the official accreditation
for the course. And, in addition to that they have
presented the “Language” as a main course in their proposal

5. now (as the Title- PMI Computer and Language Training
Institution, is written).
1.2.2. But, since the government proclamation Art.
391/2004/ section 3/ no-18, stated that- Language should be
provided as a rather Common Course. ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ
ቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ TVET ቀቀ ቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ
1.2.3. ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ 9/ቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ -
ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ (legislation), ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ
1.2.4. ቀቀ/ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀ/ ቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ (TTLM), ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ
1.2.5. Cooperative Training (ቀቀቀቀ 10/ቀ) Partners should
be pre-planned, and a mutually signed “Memorandum of
Understanding” with them, had to be prepared, but, this was
not presented. Apprenticeship cooperative training with
your partner should be maintain before starting your work ቀ
practical memorandum of understanding signature with
organization should be pre-planned but not yet prepared
1.2.6. ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ 9/ቀቀ ቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ
1.2.7. ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ
1.2.8. General Problems related to the project format
and formalities:-
- Preliminary section it includes cover
pages, table of contents,
- Executive summary/Abstract not clearly
presented
 Description of the venture (an
undertaking risk.)

6.  Industry analysis
 Development and production
 Marketing plan
 Institutional and financial plan
- Clear Description of the institution
Mission statement, Vision, Objective and
Goals, institutional equipment are not
included. Background of entrepreneurs also
not presented.
- Socio –Economic impact and Outcomes
(estimations) are not specified. (including
additional involvement/contributions/ in
community development activities, were not
proposed- if any)
- Feasibility, Market, Cost benefit analysis
studies were not clearly and satisfactorily
included, as Budget break down is not
presented, while funding sources or
partners were not clarified (if any) where
some of them not mentioned at all.
- Limitation, Risks and risk management
mechanisms should be proposed.
- Board, Management Structure and team
background, authority and job description
&responsibility, with their respective
benefits &remuneration of each section (if
possible with table) is not included. Human
resource management strategy is not
mentioned.
- Financial plan, financial statements,
financial resources, financial strategy,
Auditing, Taxation, and follow up reporting
days, and responsible body for such
activities should be stated.
- Assessment of risk and contingencies, if
failure to join cooperative training
services promised, unforeseen events, new
technologies, contingency plan is not
mention it.
- Scheduling and milestone ( a stone showing
the distance to a particular place or an

7. object or feature easily seen from a
distance)
- Appendixes, it includes letters, market
research, price list from different
suppliers, and lease of contracts…
- Totally from project initiation up to
phase out not yet prepared very well
1.3. ቀ Project Implementation ቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ-
1.3.1. Each trainer’s daily/or detailed annual/ Session
plan with Unit of Competency & Occupational Standard and
other related issues included, were not satisfactorily
stated/ presented.
1.3.2. In addition to that, the institution’s workshop
machineries’ are not fully functional, mentioned yet.
1.4. But, nevertheless, I’m not saying that the institution has
rejected all our points to them, for one of the amendments
they have made is that they have accepted our comment - on
their Lab found in proximity to the outside main road,
which, creates disturbance and sound pollution for the
trainees, and they have now changed its location away from
the road and is close to the staff offices and class rooms
areas now, which we appreciated them for their quick action
on that specific correction alone, too, but, the lab still
doesn’t function, as I mentioned in 1.3.2. Section.
1.5. Conclusion:-
 Totally, from my assessment, the project fails to meet
most of the crucial and basic requirements, for a
sound project proposal, starting from the initiation
part up to its end section, over all.
 And, I recommend that, the proposal and all related
Programs should be re-done, considering addressing all
the above mentioned, & (ቀቀቀቀ /ቀቀቀቀቀቀ/ ቀቀቀቀቀቀቀ ቀቀቀ
ቀቀቀቀቀ), thoroughly and diligently. In order to be a
qualified applicant for the accreditation. (And, I
hope, they will abide with all the expected
requirements and rules of our office).

8. ቀ) What I had been facing during my duty, (especially
concerning, this particular proposal, and my assessment,
quality audit, and challenges on the proposal, to the
institution), are as follows:-
1. Concerning w/ro Enatethun’s working issues &
responsibilities:-
a) Though, w/ro Enatethun is a “Quality Audit
Inspection Head” now, with a long time work
experience, in other related educational areas, and
though its known that the accreditation giving process
seek transparency and accountability, but, there are
some unclear work processes which I’ve observed under
her leadership, such as:- a) there is no recorded
“Minute” documentation for the “Quality Audit
officers” check list, who are sent for an official
field inspection (to the institutes).
b) After the inspection, and after the applicants,
were awarded with the accreditation, again, I observed
that, she does not have a mutual follow up agreement,
signed memorandum, documentation “Minute”.
c) Her, (or the management body’s) task dissemination
for Ato. G/Medihin, doesn’t seem logical and well
thought to me, as for example, it’s assumed to be
given a responsibility to Ato. G/Medihin to order our
(mine &him) team field visit, which, he does it
without pre-planned schedule, and instead, make the
call suddenly, with his own decision only, and even
not take my ideas about the task as well. In addition
to that, he doesn’t share some work and applicant’s
related information entirely to me too, and also don’t
seem to be interested that much to work as a team with
me, too.
2. About my efforts- to mitigate anticipated problems,
on the work:-
2.1. Despite, I tried to create a team work, and
sharing resources for the betterment of our
activities (such as:- sharing the Agency’s

9. guide lines to my colleagues, and secondly- by
preparing work related issues by myself i.e. manuals
and project plans preparation and quality
audit, and lists of TVET departments and
government asserted job market demand and
supply and all sector occupation lists and
other information and document, which I
prepared by myself, and willfully sharing it
with them, as much as I can, and I will keep
contributing all I can to share all I have for
any one, who asked me , still, too. Yet, like I
mentioned above, the two colleagues (I
mentioned their names above) have been trying
to tackle my challenge on the proposal, by
telling me to shorten my points (mentioned
above). Creating, a problem for our office to
achieve its goal of maintaining a good quality
TVET institution, in our sub-city.
3. In addition to Ato G/mdehin’s, w/ro Enatethun also
similarly tried to hinder me from forwarding my
proposal critics points to the applicants, by
telling me to shorten it again, yet, I proceeded to
make my points as much as I can then too.
4. In addition to my oral presentations, while I also
gave a written lists of the points to the applicant,
(and while he gladly went out to photo copy it…),
but, then, they, stopped him and told him to return
it to me, (which, hurts my feeling, besides, its
broader problem for the country’s development
endeavors, by creating quality educational system in
both government and private institutions, following
government policies and legislations…)
5. And, right after that, they told him to just go
ahead and pay for the accreditation formalities on
Wednesday (on 6/02/2006), while, I still disagree on
the validity of the proposal.
6. Conclusion-

10. a) Therefore, since all I said above, and other
related problems are creating obstacles for me to
do my task carefully and seriously, and I wanted
to speak that out, to the relevant upper body,
this way now.
b) Secondly, regarding the PMI Computer and Language
Training Institution proposal, since I still
don’t agree on the decision given by Ato
G/mdehin’s & w/ro Enatethun, about the proceeding
of the project with accreditation, until it meets
the Agency’s rules and regulations and the
proclamations concerning validity of TVET
institution. Therefore, I respectfully request,
that, the Institution should not get the
accreditation, at this point now, and should take
the critics given and should make the amendments
and apply again, then.
c) Finally, I recommend that, the TVET agency and
all related bodies concerning TVET, may give
consistent trainings on Capacity Building on this
work’s issues, Team Work spirit, and rule of law,
and similar issues as fast as possible, and also
capacitating us/the office/ to be able to train
the institutions, which are functioning already
and applying for the future as well.
Respectfully yours!
Berhanu Tadesse.
Quality Audit expert.