In recent years, Bulgaria has prioritised expanding access and quality in early childhood education and care (ECEC), introducing reforms such as free ECEC for all families, compulsory attendance from age 4, and a National Quality Framework. While enrolment among 3-5-year-olds is rising, it remains low for children under 3, for whom no standardised enrolment data exist - partly reflecting challenges of the split governance structure of ECEC between nurseries and kindergartens. This chapter examines how Bulgaria can draw on OECD experience to advance its commitment to expand and integrate ECEC for children from birth to age 7. It highlights strategies to strengthen cross-sector co-ordination, build capacity at regional and system levels, and support ongoing quality improvement through a monitoring system, curriculum frameworks and ECEC workforce development. It also considers how to better engage families and promote culturally responsive and alternative models to improve equity for vulnerable children excluded from ECEC.
Education and Skills in Bulgaria
Abstract
In recent years, Bulgaria has put a strong focus on developing the quality of early childhood education and care (ECEC) and equitably expanding access. Specific reforms include making ECEC free for all families, making ECEC compulsory from age 4 and developing a National Quality Framework (NQF) with associated indicators for monitoring. These developments are in the context of the government’s ambitious goals to expand the ECEC sector and achieve better integration of services for children from birth to age 7 (entry into primary school) and their families.
Nonetheless, the split governance structure for the ECEC system poses challenges to implementing this holistic vision. In particular, there are no system-wide mechanisms for monitoring quality or sharing data across ministries on the different types of settings and the children they serve. There are also significant information gaps, particularly on ECEC services for children under age 3. For this reason, the data in this chapter reflect mainly information on the kindergarten sector, which serves children from age 3, and shares much of its structure and oversight with the schooling sector (described in Chapter 4).
This chapter highlights how Bulgaria can learn from OECD countries to build on its strong commitment and recent policy reforms aimed at promoting equal access to quality ECEC services. It focuses on strategies for strengthening co-ordination across sectors and levels of governance as well as policies to support monitoring and ongoing quality improvement. It also provides avenues to implement the NQF, including through curriculum frameworks and ECEC workforce development, and considers policies to engage with families to promote equity and address longstanding divides that result in vulnerable children foregoing ECEC participation.
Section I: Provides an overview of Bulgaria’s early childhood education and care sector, focusing on international comparison of its policies.
Section II: Compares the sector’s performance with OECD benchmarks on international indicators.
Section III: Provides recommendations on how Bulgaria can learn from OECD policies and practices to further improve early childhood education and care.
Governance and structure
Responsibilities for early childhood education and care are split across ministries at the national level
ECEC responsibilities in Bulgaria are divided between the Ministry of Health (which oversees nurseries for children from birth to three years) and the Ministry of Education and Science (which oversees kindergartens for children from three years until entry to primary school at age 7). In addition, several independent bodies under the Council of Ministers (e.g. the National Inspectorate of Education and the State Agency for Child Protection) have specific regulatory functions for the ECEC sector, and the Ministries of Finance and of Labour and Social Policy also have connected roles.
Many OECD countries have split ECEC systems with a structure similar to Bulgaria’s, although there are a wide range of models of ECEC governance. Growing attention to issues of ECEC quality, children’s transitions across programmes, as well as potential inefficiencies of split systems have prompted some countries to move towards more integrated systems (Bennett and Kaga, 2010[1]; OECD, 2025[2]). Bulgaria’s main priority for the sector reflects this trend and aims to create an integrated early childhood development (ECD) system, covering ages 0 to 7 (Council of Ministers of the Republic of Bulgaria, 2023[3]). In 2022, legislation was proposed to create a unified ECEC system that would have formally brought nurseries under the authority of the Ministry of Education. While this law failed to gain enough support in Parliament, other efforts to improve co-ordination across the sector are underway. In particular, a permanent Interdepartmental Working Group for Planning and Co-ordination of Early Childhood Policies was established in 2023. This represents a positive development as it can help unify the ad hoc mechanisms Bulgarian government bodies previously relied on to co-ordinate the sector, although its composition will need to be updated to reflect changes in government. Similarly, the Bulgarian government established its first Annual Plan to Promote Early Childhood Development in 2024, which aims to improve co-ordination and enhance services across key early childhood areas (e.g. health and nutrition, education and care). As an annual plan, this document will also need ongoing updates.
ECEC is predominantly public and centre-based
ECEC in Bulgaria is mainly public, with a small private sector, representing only about 7% of kindergartens in the country. Private kindergartens are typically managed by non-governmental organisations or by parents. Nurseries for children under age 3 are established by and receive all their funding from local and national governments, which also provide oversight. Age-integrated centres1 also exist (see Table 3.1). All regulated ECEC settings in Bulgaria are centre-based. However, the Ministry of Labour runs a programme for “Parents in employment” that provides targeted training for adults who take responsibility for a small group (i.e. three or four) of children (OECD, 2023[4]). The predominance of public provision of ECEC in Bulgaria contrasts to a growing number of OECD countries that rely on a greater share of private providers, particularly for the sector serving children under age 3, to expand ECEC provision (OECD, 2025[2]).
Notes: Kindergarten enrolment in Bulgaria can start from the age of 2 under certain conditions.
Parents can also request annual approval to independently organise their child’s early education. In these cases, a kindergarten or school monitors progress at the start and end of the school year.
Source: Eurydice (2023[5]), Organisation of centre-based ECEC, National Education Systems: Bulgaria, https://eurydice.eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-education-systems/bulgaria/organisation-centre-based-ecec (accessed on 20 December 2024).
ECEC is compulsory from age 4 in Bulgaria
Bulgaria made kindergarten compulsory for 4-year-olds starting in 2023-24 (see amendment to Article 8 of the Preschool and School Education Act of 18 September 2020). This change aims to improve equity by raising participation among children from ethnic minority, language minority and socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds. It also aims to help Bulgaria achieve European targets for increasing ECEC enrolment for children from age 3 (European Union, 2022[6]; OECD, 2021[7]). Although Bulgaria is not alone in extending compulsory education to younger ages, it is still among a relatively small number of OECD countries where compulsory education begins at age four or below (see Figure 3.2).
Starting age of compulsory education
Note: Countries are ranked in ascending order by the starting age of compulsory education.
Source: OECD (2024[8]), Education at a Glance 2024: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c00cad36-en.
ECEC governance and oversight is decentralised
As in most countries, municipalities and regional authorities have an important role in the governance of ECEC in Bulgaria. Each of Bulgaria’s 28 regions has a Regional Health Inspectorate (RHI) and a Regional Education Department (RED). This level of administration is intended to work closely with individual ECEC settings, assuring that minimum quality standards are met, recommending strategies to improve practices at the setting level, and offering ongoing professional development activities that align with local needs. However, regional authorities indicate a limited capacity to achieve these goals, with job vacancies for key posts often going unfilled due to a lack of suitable applicants, related in part to salaries being lower than for teaching staff. Municipalities also have a key role in management of ECEC, both for nurseries and for kindergartens, resulting in variability in the physical resources (e.g. outdoor play areas), professional development opportunities for staff and access to ECEC places for families depending on municipal resources and priorities.
Bulgaria’s decentralised governance context creates a strong need for co-ordination across levels of government (i.e. vertical co-ordination), in addition to the strong need for co-ordination across line ministries (i.e. horizontal co-ordination). Vertical co-ordination ensures that national regulations and priorities are clearly communicated to regional and municipal levels, and conversely, that information on implementation and management from these lower levels of government are continuously informing national policies and planning. Bulgaria is developing its horizontal co-ordination with the new Interdepartmental Working Group for Planning and Co-ordination of Early Childhood Policies. Formal mechanisms for inter-sectoral work do not currently exist at lower levels of governance. Similarly, there are no formal structures to support vertical co-ordination and regular stakeholder engagement in policy and planning efforts.
Funding of ECEC
Per child expenditures on ECEC are low, despite increasing investments and average expenditures as a proportion of GDP
Bulgaria’s spending on kindergarten as a percentage of GDP is similar to the OECD average for comparable ECEC provision (see Figure 3.3). In addition, total expenditure on pre-primary education increased slightly in Bulgaria from 2015 to 2021, reflecting the country’s priority to expand access to kindergarten (see Figure 3.4). This, together with an overall decline in the population of pre-primary aged children, has contributed to a meaningful rise in Bulgaria’s total expenditure per child.
Despite the positive trend, per child expenditures for this age group are still low compared to OECD and European averages (see Figure 3.4), reflecting the reality of Bulgaria’s wider economic circumstances (see Chapter 2). Furthermore, data are not available on Bulgaria’s investments in nurseries for children under age 3. Continued investments in the kindergarten sector – and ECEC sector more broadly – will be needed to continue expanding ECEC to reach Bulgaria’s goal of having a place for every child, while simultaneously maintaining and enhancing the quality of provision for children in the full ECEC range.
Expenditure on all children aged 3 to 5 enrolled in ECE and primary education as a percentage of GDP, 2021
Note: Ranked in descending order of percentage of GDP expenditure on children aged 3 to 5 enrolled in ECE and primary education. The OECD‑EU average includes the 25 countries that are members or accession countries of both the EU and the OECD (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, and Sweden).
Source: OECD (2024[8]), Education at a Glance 2024: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c00cad36-en.
Note: In Panel A, countries are ranked in descending order of average annual change in total expenditure on pre-primary education per child between 2015 and 2021. In Panel B, countries are ranked in descending order of annual expenditure per child in all early childhood education.
Source: OECD (2025[2]), Reducing Inequalities by Investing in Early Childhood Education and Care, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b78f8b25-en.
Public ECEC is free for families
Since 2022, all public ECEC in Bulgaria is completely free for families. Municipalities and ECEC providers cannot charge parents any fees, including for meals. This change responds to findings from a randomised control trial showing that fully removing the cost of participation was the best mechanism for increasing both kindergarten enrolment and early academic outcomes among children from disadvantaged backgrounds in Bulgaria (de Laat and Huillery, 2019[9]).
Given the relatively low cost to the Bulgarian government of eliminating fees for families, this was adopted as a universal strategy, for both nurseries and kindergartens. The national government increased funding to municipalities to compensate for this change. While providing subsidies for participation in ECEC for socio-economically disadvantaged families is common across the OECD, the provision of universal free ECEC, particularly for children under age 3, is not (OECD, 2024[8]). Since it can be challenging to effectively target ECEC subsidies (OECD, 2020[10]), Bulgaria’s universal approach is likely to be an important lever for supporting equitable participation in ECEC. Nonetheless, as the system expands and develops, ongoing attention will be needed to ensure the funding model is sustainable.
While there is no guarantee of free ECEC outside of the public system, the national government also has several mechanisms to provide financial support to families who have applied for but are not granted an ECEC place (e.g. because of shortages in public supply). In such cases, funds can be used to access other forms of early education for children, including to cover some of the costs for private kindergartens or to engage in specific activities (e.g. individualised early learning services). Parents must demonstrate that the funds are used to provide for their children’s education. Some parents in Bulgaria use this funding to form parent co-operatives, which may even hire qualified pedagogical specialists to provide ECEC services outside of the public system. As these types of provision are not formally regulated, data are lacking on their prevalence and the extent to which families engage with qualified professionals.
Resourcing of ECEC is shared between national and local governments
As with the governance of the ECEC system, financial responsibilities for both kindergartens and nurseries are also shared between the national government and municipalities. The national government determines staff salaries and allocates funding to municipalities, who hire ECEC leaders and staff and have responsibility for managing the physical infrastructure. Municipalities can retain full budgetary control of ECEC settings, or delegate this responsibility to the settings themselves, which happens in over 58% of public kindergartens. However, as staff salaries are the largest component of ECEC expenditures, there tends to be limited discretion in what municipalities and settings can do with their allocations from national ECEC funds. Municipalities are free to allocate additional funding to the ECEC system, and likewise even ECEC settings can seek out additional funding sources (e.g. independent grants). For these reasons, tracking the resourcing of ECEC settings is complex and there is not currently a data system in place or national authority with responsibility for full oversight of ECEC investments.
Funding allocations are adapted to support ECEC participation among vulnerable groups
Overall funding for kindergartens is determined by the number of children in the setting, although minimum funding is assured for small kindergartens in rural areas. Additional allocations are given to support ECEC participation among vulnerable groups. This includes additional renumeration for staff who are involved in inclusion and retention in kindergarten of children from disadvantaged backgrounds, recognising that enrolling children is not enough if their families do not bring them regularly to participate. Related funds are available to hire educational mediators, social workers and teacher’s assistants, who can offer support for kindergarten staff who are working with children from disadvantaged backgrounds, as well as engage in community outreach efforts to raise awareness of the availability and benefits of kindergarten. Kindergartens can also receive funding to support their work with non-Bulgarian speaking children. This type of targeted funding can be beneficial for improving equity, although quality standards and capacity-building for municipalities and settings are critical to ensuring these additional investments meet their goals (OECD, 2025[2]).
ECEC workforce
Children’s teachers in kindergartens and medical staff in nurseries hold professional qualifications
The ECEC workforce is different in nurseries and kindergartens, although both require some staff to hold tertiary qualifications (i.e. ISCED level 6, or above). In nurseries, core practitioners have bachelor’s degrees in a medical field (e.g. nursing). In kindergartens, the core practitioners are known as “children’s teachers” or “pedagogues” and have at least a bachelor’s degree in pre-school pedagogy. In nurseries, pedagogues also work alongside nurses, although in smaller numbers. Core practitioners in both nurseries and kindergartens are supported by assistants, who must complete secondary schooling (ISCED level 3) but are not required to undergo specific or specialised training to work in ECEC settings. This represents a missed opportunity as the quality of children’s experience in ECEC is shaped by their interactions with all members of workforce, not only core practitioners (i.e. nurses or teachers, in the case of Bulgaria).
The mix of professional and assistant staff in ECEC settings in Bulgaria is broadly consistent with the approach in many other OECD countries (OECD, 2022[11]). However, many OECD countries face challenges around staff shortages and achieving the best balance of training profiles for their ECEC workforce (Shuey and Jamet, 2023[12]; OECD, 2021[7]). Bulgaria is actively addressing such challenges through recent changes that allow nurseries to appoint one “educator” (i.e. an ISCED level 6 qualified teacher) in place of a medical professional to work directly with children. This policy not only aims to address Bulgaria’s national shortage of nurses but also to help develop a more integrated ECD system. The Bulgarian government is also considering a new training programme (envisioned as an ISCED 6 qualification) that would prepare specialists to work across the domains of health and education to help offer a more holistic ECEC experience for children ages 0 to 7.
Ongoing professional development is limited by regional shortages of ECEC experts and local capacity, as well as who it reaches
In Bulgaria, ongoing professional development for kindergarten staff is regulated and managed in the same way as for schools (see Chapter 4). Kindergarten leaders are responsible for assessing their staff's professional development needs and identifying relevant training. Leaders themselves can also participate in national professional development. However, given the training system is shared with school principals, kindergarten leaders may lack guidance on training topics specific to ECEC (Ministry of Education and Science of Bulgaria, 2022[13]).
Training for kindergarten teachers is offered by municipalities, REDs, the National Centre for Professional Development of Pedagogical Specialists or outside, non-governmental providers. While many OECD countries use a range of providers to support the training needs of ECEC staff, Bulgaria faces two key challenges with this approach. First, smaller municipalities often struggle to fund and administer training, creating disparities in the availability of ECEC training offers. Second, the capacity and specific expertise in ECEC of REDs to successfully co-ordinate and oversee professional development activities is often limited. As a result, there appear to be training shortages in many areas, particularly for assistants. This problem extends to the nursery sector as well. For instance, 85% of nursery staff indicated a lack of training on cross-sector collaboration and 64% reported not having professional development around working with marginalised groups (Ministry of Education and Science of Bulgaria, 2022[13]).
Bulgaria recently made significant investments in its teaching workforce
Salaries for kindergarten teachers and leaders are set nationally and are the same for teachers at all levels of school education. They are also comparable to teachers’ salaries elsewhere in the Eastern European region (see Figure 3.5). In line with significant investments in teachers across levels of schooling (see Chapters 2 and 4), salaries grew substantially for kindergarten teachers and leaders in Bulgaria between 2014 and 2020 (Hulpia et al., 2024[14]). However, these increases have created limited room for salary growth within the profession, which may have implications for teacher retention in the long run.
Pre-primary teachers’ statutory salaries based on the most prevalent qualifications at different points in teachers’ careers, 2023
Note: Countries are ranked in descending order of starting salary.
Source: OECD (2024[8]), Education at a Glance 2024: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c00cad36-en.
There is currently no shortage of kindergarten teachers in Bulgaria, and the attractive salaries may support continued interest in entering the sector. Salary data are not available for the staff working in nurseries, nor for assistants working in kindergartens; however, assistant salaries are described as low, particularly given the cost of living in urban areas where the demand for kindergarten places outstrips supply. There are also widely recognised shortages of qualified nurses across the country and anecdotal evidence for a shortage of assistants as well (Government of Bulgaria, 2024[15]).
The long-run attractiveness of working in the ECEC sector is important to consider alongside the age profiles of current staff. In Bulgaria, kindergarten teachers are older than the workforce on average across the OECD (OECD, 2024[8]). In addition, although the ECEC workforce is predominantly female across OECD countries, with only 4% of pre-primary teachers being male, the situation is even more extreme in Bulgaria where less than 1% of kindergarten teachers are male (OECD, 2024[8]). This deep gender divide in the sector may contribute to challenges for future recruitment as large segments of the current workforce approach retirement age.
Monitoring and quality assurance practices
Current monitoring and quality assurance functions are fragmented
The National Inspectorate of Education (NIE) is expected to monitor kindergartens in accordance with the same regulations as the schooling sector (see Chapter 4). However, as Bulgaria is developing new indicators for monitoring in alignment with the new National Quality Framework (NQF), kindergartens have not received official monitoring visits in the last few years. Furthermore, the NIE does not currently have enough inspectors to ensure regular monitoring of all kindergartens and schools under its responsibility. Prior to the NIE’s establishment in 2018, REDs were primarily responsible for the monitoring and quality assurance of kindergartens. The role of REDs has since officially shifted to one of supporting quality improvement and sharing of good practices. Yet, the division of responsibilities across the NIE and REDs is not always clear in practice and REDs currently have limited capacity and experience to effectively serve their quality improvement role.
Nurseries are only monitored by the Ministry of Health, which focuses primarily on compliance with hygiene and space standards. The Ministry of Health similarly inspects kindergartens to ensure compliance with these standards. The NIE and REDs do not have authority to monitor (or support) nurseries, although NIE can inspect age-integrated settings. It is not unusual for OECD countries to focus monitoring efforts on different aspects of ECEC quality, particularly in split systems. Yet, there is growing recognition of the importance of and commitment to monitoring process quality (i.e. the quality of children’s interactions in their ECEC settings, particularly with staff) for all age groups and types of services (OECD, 2022[16]). Currently, it is not clear who in Bulgaria will take responsibility for this type of monitoring in nurseries when the new indicators related to the NQF become available.
The State Agency for Child Protection in Bulgaria also monitors and evaluates compliance with child protection policies, which cover all ECEC settings. Dividing responsibilities for monitoring and quality improvement can be effective, although clear articulation of roles is critical as is ensuring that numerous inspection visits do not become an undue burden on ECEC settings.
Significant reforms are underway to develop indicators for monitoring ECEC
Between 2020 and 2022, the NQF for ECEC was developed with technical support from the European Commission. The NQF aligns with the European Union Quality Framework for ECEC systems and covers all ECEC settings in Bulgaria, for the full 0 to 7 age range (Ministry of Education and Science of Bulgaria, 2022[17]). A set of national, system-level indicators was developed to measure quality in each of the five dimensions of the NQF (Ministry of Education and Science of Bulgaria, 2022[18]): access; workforce; educational content; monitoring and evaluation; governance and financing.
To date, specific targets for each of the indicators have not been set, nor are data available to fully establish a baseline for where Bulgaria stands on the indicators at a national level. Likewise, data and data systems do not currently exist to track these indicators at regional, municipal or ECEC setting levels. Countries are at different stages of developing their ECEC data systems and this is a major priority area for many (OECD, 2023[19]). The lack of infrastructure in Bulgaria to collect and integrate data on the proposed national indicators will need to be addressed to move towards the envisioned system-level national quality monitoring.
Positively, Bulgaria is working to develop core indicators of setting-level ECEC quality for the entire sector, serving children from birth to age 7. The project is being supported with technical assistance from the European Commission and conducted in co-operation with Portugal. The project aims to develop a comprehensive system for monitoring and evaluation across the full Bulgarian ECEC system. A toolkit is also planned, to support implementation of monitoring and evaluation at different levels of the system. Simultaneously, Bulgaria is also working to develop a classroom observation tool for use in kindergarten classrooms.
The scope of these reform initiatives is both wide and ambitious, and it is notable that Bulgaria is leveraging support from key international partners as well as local stakeholders to develop a new monitoring and evaluation system from the NQF. Ultimately, the NQF and associated monitoring indicators are expected to be implemented for both nurseries and kindergartens, creating a unified approach to quality monitoring at the full ECEC system. Significant commitment, co-ordination and resources will be necessary to fully implement this vision for the entire ECEC sector (Ministry of Education and Science of Bulgaria, 2022[17]).
A national screening tool for three-year-olds can help plan for demands on the ECEC sector
Bulgaria has recently developed a screening tool to help teachers identify the needs of children entering kindergarten. The tool was developed in co-operation with the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences (see Chapter 5) and UNICEF and is currently being scaled by training two or three staff per kindergarten to implement the screening. The results can be used to request more funding for specialist positions within kindergartens and to provide tailored supports to enrolled children. Although this approach helps familiarise kindergartens with the individual needs of incoming children, attention will be needed to ensure the possibility of additional funding does not place pressure on teachers to over-identify children’s potential vulnerabilities with the screening tool.
If carefully implemented, collecting this type of data on child development at the national level can be highly valuable for planning purposes, to inform future needs in the schooling sector, as well as to efficiently allocate resources across regions and municipalities. Nonetheless, including this type of data on individual children is not the norm across ECEC data systems in OECD countries (see Figure 3.6). One reason many countries do not systematically collect this type of data is that children’s early development is exceptionally rapid. This means that indicators of early outcomes must be clearly understood as a snapshot of potential strengths and areas for support, rather than as part of an individual’s academic record, for instance. In Bulgaria, however, there are currently no mechanisms in place to systematically aggregate or make use of children’s screening data beyond individual ECEC settings. In fact, data are not available on rates of participation in the screening, limiting the potential to draw benefits from the data and manage the risks of early assessment of children’s outcomes.
Percentage of countries and jurisdictions reporting the following elements and functionalities in their early childhood education and care data system, 2022
Note: Data included here are from the 37 countries and jurisdictions that participated in the OECD’s “Early Childhood Education and Care in a Digital World” 2022 policy survey. Responses from jurisdictions are weighted so that each country equals one. Items are sorted in descending order of the share of countries selecting each option.
Source: OECD (2023[19]), Empowering Young Children in the Digital Age, Starting Strong, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5096 7622-en.
Curriculum frameworks and pedagogy in ECEC
The kindergarten curriculum offers continuity with primary school but there is no curriculum for settings for children under age 3
Bulgaria’s State Educational Standard for Preschool Education (SESPE) sets the overall goals and content of the kindergarten curriculum, which kindergartens have autonomy to implement. The curriculum standards are broad and emphasise the importance of time for free play and continuity with the learning content for the first stage of primary education. Consistent with this latter goal, the kindergarten curriculum covers traditional learning areas: Bulgarian Language and Literature, Mathematics, Environment, Art, Music, Construction and Technology, and Physical Education. This blend of including traditional learning areas along with broad concepts or principles and values is common among curricula for children in similar age group settings across the OECD (see Figure 3.7).
Percentage of curriculum frameworks covering children aged 3 to 5/primary school entry with goals expressed in the following ways, 2019
Note: Data included here are from the 26 countries that participated in the OECD’s “Quality beyond Regulations” 2019 policy survey. In countries with multiple curriculum frameworks reported at the sub-national level, when goals are expressed in the same way across sub-national jurisdictions, only the name of the country is shown. When pedagogical approaches are specified in different ways, the name of the jurisdiction is also indicated.
Source: OECD (2021[7]), Starting Strong VI: Supporting Meaningful Interactions in Early Childhood Education and Care, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f47a06ae-en.
While Bulgaria’s kindergarten curriculum can help smooth children’s transitions into primary education, there is no curriculum for children under age 3. This reflects the strong health orientation of the nursery system and a view from this sector that education does not begin before kindergarten. Advances in neuroscience highlight the learning children are doing before age 3 and there is a growing recognition across OECD countries of the role curricula have to support the quality of ECEC that children experience (OECD, 2021[7]; OECD, 2025[2]). Although the content may differ from curricula for pre-primary aged children, having a curriculum in place for ECEC settings that serve children under age 3 is common in OECD countries (see Table 3.2). Curricula that are age-integrated or focused on children under age 3 tend to have less focus on specific learning areas and instead include broad concepts, principles and values. Expressing curricular goals in these broader ways can be well adapted to the goals of ECEC for very young children.
Curriculum frameworks’ coverage across age groups and settings, 2019
Note: Data included here are drawn from the countries that participated in the OECD’s “Quality beyond Regulations” 2019 policy survey. Broader coverage across age groups and settings is highlighted in dark blue, while specific coverage is shown in light blue.
Source: OECD (2021[7]), Starting Strong VI: Supporting Meaningful Interactions in Early Childhood Education and Care, Starting Strong, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f47a06ae-en.
Family and community engagement
Family engagement is viewed as a core aspect of quality for kindergartens but is intentionally limited in settings for children under age 3
Bulgarian kindergartens emphasise active involvement and collaboration with parents, recognising them as essential partners alongside children themselves, teachers, principals, and other pedagogical specialists. The form of co-operation is determined locally, partly to accommodate the schedules of working parents. Bulgaria also has national initiatives to support parent engagement, such as a programme inviting parents to read stories to their child’s kindergarten class and a practice of sharing portfolios documenting children’s achievements with parents at the end of kindergarten. In contrast, the model employed in settings for children under age 3 emphasises that parents give the state responsibility for the care and upbringing of their children during the hours when the children attend ECEC. Staff from these settings communicate actively with parents about children’s health and well-being during pick-up and drop-off times, but parents are typically not permitted in the settings outside of these brief windows and broader engagement is limited.
The inclusion of a strong role for families in kindergartens but not in nurseries runs somewhat counter to overall trends in OECD countries. Nearly all OECD and partner countries report that curriculum frameworks for settings for children under age 3 and age-integrated settings for children ages 0 to 5 include families as a core component of children’s ECEC experience. Only slightly more than half of these countries included families in pre-primary curricula (OECD, 2021[20]). Bulgaria’s new NQF includes collaboration with parents as a central aspect of the state quality standards for ECEC programmes for children ages 0 to 7 (Ministry of Education and Science of Bulgaria, 2022[18]). As the Ministry of Education and Science works with their national partners as well as municipalities and ECEC settings to implement the NQF, they envision that practices in place across nurseries and kindergartens to engage with families will start to converge. Family engagement with ECEC is an important aspect of supporting young children’s development, learning and well-being, including encouraging regular attendance and sustaining the benefits of ECEC into primary school and beyond (OECD, 2025[2]).
Outreach to families is a core strategy for implementing the European Child Guarantee
Bulgaria is one of seven countries participating in the pilot phase of the European Commission’s Child Guarantee initiative, which aims to prevent and combat social exclusion by guaranteeing children receive a core set of services, including ECEC, education, healthcare, healthy nutrition and adequate housing (European Commission, 2024[21]). Programmes launched in 10 municipalities in Bulgaria as part of developing the National Action Plan for implementing the European Child Guarantee emphasised inter-sectoral approaches to reaching families. The programmes included home visiting, early childhood interventions for young children with disabilities and developmental difficulties, inclusive pre-primary education and integrated child protection and family support (UNICEF, 2022[22]). In addition, the Nurse Family Partnership, an evidence-based home visiting programme, has recently shown positive impacts in Bulgaria (de Laat, Kraus and Van der Harst, 2023[23]).
Main reform priorities
Strong reforms to expand ECEC access and define quality are a basis for ambitious future goals to enhance the quality and coherence of the ECEC system
Bulgaria has achieved key reforms in recent years to expand access to ECEC. As of 2022, ECEC is completely free to families for children of all ages (including all food and extended day programmes), and beginning with the 2023-2024 school year, kindergarten is compulsory from age 4 (instead of age 5). These reforms are designed to improve equity in access to ECEC services and are coupled with investments in building a National Quality Framework that covers all ECEC settings, for the full 0 to 7 age range. The Ministry of Education and Science is increasingly turning its focus to improving cross‑ministerial coordination to implement the new National Quality Framework and developing associated indicators that can shape monitoring and quality assurance protocols. These activities are laid out in Bulgaria’s sectoral Action Plan (see Table 3.3). There is much in place to build on, such as the pilot phase of the European Commission’s Child Guarantee initiative, which also supported intersectoral work. The challenge ahead is how to strengthen the government’s steering of the sector, so that pilots such as these can be taken to scale and the work of different ministries is better coordinated to support the needs of children throughout their early years.
Source: Council of Ministers of the Republic of Bulgaria (2023[3]), Decision Adopting an Action Plan until 2024 for the Strategic Framework for the Development of Education, Training, and Learning in the Republic of Bulgaria (2021-2030), https://www.gov.bg/bg/prestsentar/zasedaniya-na-ms/dneven-red-na-zasedanie-na-ministerskiya-savet-na-22-03-2023-g (accessed on 23 December 2024).
Access and participation
Participation in ECEC among children ages 3 and older is growing although targets have not yet been met
Bulgaria experienced an upward trend in enrolment rates for kindergarten-aged children across the decade prior to 2022, the most recent year available in OECD data (see Figure 3.8). Although enrolment is now around 85% for this age group, these data were collected before recent measures to remove fees and lower the age of compulsory education had come into effect, which are expected to further improve access and increase participation. More recent data suggest that participation among children ages 3 and older may be around 89% for the 2023-2024 academic year, putting Bulgaria much closer to meeting the current European target of 96% participation for this age group (European Commission, 2024[24]; European Union, 2022[6]).
Note: In Panel A, countries are ranked by the enrolment rate 5-year-olds.
Source: OECD (2024[8]), Education at a Glance 2024: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c00cad36-en.
Limited system capacity and extended parental leave policies limit participation in ECEC for children under age 3
National data indicate that nearly 10% of 1-year-olds and 44% of 2-year-olds were enrolled in nurseries in 2023. An additional 15% of 2-year-olds were enrolled in kindergartens in 2023. Nearly no children are enrolled in ECEC before age 1 (Ministry of Education and Science of Bulgaria, unpublished[25]). This level of enrolment is below the European ECEC participation target of 45% for the entire population of children under age 3. In Bulgaria, a culture of taking care of children at home suppresses demand for ECEC for children under age 3, as do parental leave policies. Mothers are entitled to approximately one year of paid leave and a second year of leave is available (OECD Family Database, 2023[26]). Recent changes now allow fathers to take two months of paid parental leave before children turn 8 (OECD, 2025[27]).
The nursery sector in Bulgaria does not have sufficient places to accommodate all children under the age of 3. Limited access to nursery places with strong quality regulations for children in this age group discourage mothers with lower education from joining the workforce (Leseman and Slot, 2025[28]; OECD, 2023[4]). Expanding access to high-quality ECEC in Bulgaria could therefore help support these families and promote greater workforce participation among mothers from lower socio-economic backgrounds.
Structural quality and children’s learning and development outcomes
Group sizes can be large in nurseries but are similar to other OECD countries for kindergartens
In Bulgarian nurseries, the maximum group size differs depending on the ages of children: infant groups cannot exceed eight children, whereas mixed age groups cannot exceed 16 children. However, this number can be increased to 20 in areas where there is a continuous shortage of places in nurseries, and municipalities have discretion to further expand group sizes in response to local demand. Across OECD countries, group sizes for this age group tend to be smaller, reflecting research on the importance of fostering warm and responsive interactions between adults and children (Dalgaard et al., 2022[29]; OECD, 2018[30]). OECD countries often put a greater emphasis on the ratio of children to adults (e.g. setting the maximum number of children per staff member), rather than overall group size. In Bulgaria, the ratio of children at ages 1 or 2 to adults in nurseries is seven to one (European Commission/ EACEA/ Eurydice, 2025[31]); however, when municipalities expand the size of nursery groups to meet local demand, it is not clear whether these ratios are consistently respected.
In kindergartens in Bulgaria, group sizes can be up to 23 children, although exceptions can be made to increase this number. As of 2021, the ratio of children to staff (including both teachers and assistants/aides) in Bulgaria was 11, which is slightly below the OECD and European averages. Larger group sizes can present challenges for the inclusion of children with special educational needs in kindergarten classes, even in the context of good ratios of children to staff (UNICEF, 2022[32]). Currently, each kindergarten group in Bulgaria can accept up to three children with chronic diseases or special educational needs; however, exceptions can be made in cases where there are no other alternatives in the municipality for more children with special educational needs. This could become a challenge in the future as Bulgaria faces a growing population of children with special educational needs (UNICEF, 2022[32]).
ECEC participation and socio-economic status are associated with better academic outcomes
In Bulgaria, participation in two years or more of ECEC is associated with stronger performance in the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) mathematics assessment, compared to students who had participated in less than two years of ECEC or who had not participated at all (see Figure 3.9). The score-point difference in mathematics performance is nearly twice as large for these two groups before accounting for family and school socio-economic status compared to after, indicating that socio-economic status has a strong role to play in student performance (see Chapter 4). This pattern reflects the differences in participation in ECEC based on families’ socio-economic status in Bulgaria, with the most disadvantaged children not accessing ECEC for as long as their more advantaged peers, or at all. Importantly, these findings overall highlight the value of participation ECEC in Bulgaria to support students’ future academic success and the need to continue making access more equitable so that these benefits accrue fairly across society.
Score-point difference in mathematics for students who attended more than two years of ECEC, relative to students who attended two years or less or did not attend ECEC, after accounting for socio-economic status
Note: Countries are ranked in descending order of score-point difference in mathematics performance for students with more than two years of ECEC, relative to students who had not attended, after accounting for socio-economic status. The change in mathematics performance after accounting for socio-economic status for Latvia and Slovenia is not statistically significant.
Source: OECD (2023[33]), PISA 2022 Database, https://www.oecd.org/pisa/data/ (accessed on 8 November 2024).
Equity
Family background is linked with inclusion in the ECEC system
Bulgaria does not collect data on individuals’ ethnic background, making it difficult to quantify the extent to which there are gaps across groups in ECEC participation across vulnerable groups. However, data from several studies show the participation of Roma children in kindergarten is lower than among other ethnic groups (UNICEF, 2022[32]; Romani Early Years Network, n.d.[34]; Volen, 2016[35]). Roma children also face a higher risk than other groups of living in poverty and having low-educated parents, as family socio-economic status intersects with ethnic background in Bulgaria (see Chapter 2). Minority ethnic status often also means minority language in Bulgaria, which is also identified as a barrier to ECEC participation for families (UNICEF, 2022[32]). Whereas speaking a minority language was historically viewed as a deficit for children in ECEC, the value of growing up with bilingual or multilingual capacities is now increasingly recognised. Migration and shifting demographics have made providing ECEC for multilingual children increasingly common across OECD countries (OECD, 2025[2]). Bulgaria recognises these challenges and is actively working to improve inclusion of children of different ethnic, language and socio-economic backgrounds in the ECEC system (for example, see Section I, Family and community engagement).
Kindergarten enrolment rates are uneven across the country and the location of available places does not always align with demand
Participation in kindergarten is uneven across Bulgaria with only 71.7% of age-eligible children participating in ECEC in Sliven, compared with 95.0% in Smolyan. Across countries, it is not unusual to have this type of regional disparity in ECEC participation when overall participation is below 90% (OECD, 2024[8]). To address this situation, the national budget for kindergartens in Bulgaria uses a regional coefficient system to allocate funding more equitably based on geographic and demographic characteristics of municipalities (see Chapter 2 for further details). Nonetheless, while regional socio‑economic disparities partially contribute to differences in ECEC participation in Bulgaria, other factors, such as demand from families and local expectations, also play a role.
There is some misalignment between the locations of kindergartens and where families with young children live, mainly in the larger cities, like Sofia. However, overall, Bulgaria’s supply of kindergarten spots exceeds demand in most areas. Still, because children in Bulgaria are not guaranteed a spot in ECEC until age 4, families with younger children must apply for places through their municipalities. Municipalities set their own admission criteria and most consider factors like residency, parental employment or education, if the child has experience in a nursery setting or has siblings in the same establishment, as well as social criteria such as loss of a parent, parental disability, or families with three or more children. Responses from online surveys and interviews with ECEC experts in Bulgaria suggest that this municipal discretion in allocating ECEC places can create barriers for migrant families and for children with special educational needs in accessing ECEC, particularly in areas where supply is more limited (UNICEF, 2022[32]).
Good governance: Strengthening government capacity to steer the ECEC sector as a whole
Bulgaria has made developing its ECEC system a central component of recent reforms, focusing on both quality improvements and equitable access for all children. However, implementing many of the changes and achieving the vision of having an integrated ECEC system for children from birth to age 7 (entry into primary school) will require stronger co-ordination across sectors (Council of Ministers of the Republic of Bulgaria, 2023[3]). Due to the historic divisions and split governance for nurseries and kindergartens, Bulgaria faces many logistical and cultural challenges for unifying these sectors. Recent setbacks in trying to formally integrate sectors under one Ministry have reaffirmed the split nature of the Bulgarian ECEC system, solidifying the need for stronger co-ordination across levels of ECEC governance (i.e. national, regional and local). The recommendations and examples below draw on OECD evidence and experience to provide policy insights on how Bulgaria might address these governance challenges to realise stated goals around quality and equity in the ECEC system, including through developing data systems and governance capacity to support co-ordination.
Recommendation 3.1: Strengthen co-ordination across the nursery and kindergarten sectors
One of Bulgaria’s main reform priorities is to create a high-quality early childhood development (ECD) system that covers ages 0 to 7 (Council of Ministers of the Republic of Bulgaria, 2023[3]). Concern about inefficiencies and inequalities in split ECEC systems has prompted several OECD countries (e.g. Israel, Italy, Korea) to move towards more integrated systems in recent years, although many OECD countries still retain split systems with similar structures to Bulgaria’s. With the right policies, split systems can enable co-ordination across sectors while supporting the distinctions in ECEC services needed for children of different ages. For example, policies that promote close alignment of ECEC for children under age 3 with the healthcare sector can be desirable if this encourages strong co-ordination with pre-natal, health and broader parenting and family services (OECD, 2025[2]). Articulating clear goals for co‑ordination across policy areas, including health, education, economic (e.g. labour market) and social welfare can help Bulgaria align the current ECEC sectors with the vision for quality provision set out in the National Quality Framework and identify clear steps for building a stronger ECD system.
Developing a shared vision for early childhood
Bulgaria’s recently developed National Quality Framework (NQF) for ECEC provides a vision for what high-quality ECEC looks like for children from birth to age 7, based on the European Quality Framework (European Union, 2019[36]). However, the country lacks a formal strategy for implementing the NQF and the NQF Action Plan (Ministry of Education and Science of Bulgaria, 2022[17]) highlights the importance of creating a legislative basis to formalise the role of the NQF across all types of ECEC settings. A legal framework for recognising the NQF as a shared vision of quality for ECEC would also need to be supported by a clear articulation of the roles of different government bodies in supporting its implementation. Such a legal framework and strategy around implementing the NQF could bring together related action plans from the European Child Guarantee pilot project and the Council of Ministers, both of which also have an intersectoral focus.
Bulgaria developed its first Annual Plan for the Promotion of Early Childhood Development in 2024. Other OECD countries, like Australia and Ireland, have developed longer-term national strategies around early childhood to guide co-ordination efforts across multiple ministries (see Box 3.2). These 10-year strategies recognise that families’ needs are multi-faceted during the early childhood period and governments must work across traditional sectors to support children’s development and well-being, regardless of whether ECEC services are under the governance of one or multiple ministries. The top‑down nature of these strategies provides important structure for mandating and supporting co-ordination goals at the highest level of government. However, opportunities for input from local actors are considered essential to ensure the strategies are relevant for all stakeholders. This process of engaging stakeholders, from children and parents to ECEC staff and local and regional government officials, is a key factor in supporting success of intersectoral co-ordination (OECD, 2025[2]). For Bulgaria, such engagement processes will be particularly important to gain buy-in for a national vision from staff and leaders working in nurseries, who otherwise may not view their work and expertise as fully reflected in early childhood initiatives led from the Ministry of Education.
Australia launched its 10-year national Early Years Strategy 2024-2034 in May 2024 to shape how the Australian Government prioritises young children’s well-being and delivers strong outcomes for them by creating a more integrated, holistic approach to the early years. The priority focus areas are to: value the early years; empower parents, caregivers and families; support and work with communities; and strengthen accountability and co-ordination (Australian Government (Department of Social Services), 2024[37]). The Commonwealth Minister for Social Services and Minister for Early Childhood Education jointly lead implementation of the strategy, in collaboration with other relevant ministers and a senior-level cross-Commonwealth steering committee. A Parents and Carers Reference Group (PCRG) has also been established to inform implementation of the strategy, with a goal of putting the voices of families and children at the centre of policy, programs and services that affect them.
In Ireland, First 5 is a 10-year strategy (2019-2028), published in 2018. The strategy focuses on improving systems and supports in the first five years of a child’s life, recognising that no single measure can address the full range of child and family needs in this period of the life course (Government of Ireland, 2019[38]). The First 5 strategy has a built-in process for review and updates every three years; it is intended to be a living strategy that develops and adapts to the context. The oversight and accountability of First 5 rests with the Cabinet Committee on Social Policy and Public Services, which is comprised of ministers from numerous departments, while national leadership for implementation lies with the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth. The goals for this strategy include strong and supportive families and communities; optimum physical health and mental health; positive play-based early learning; and an effective early childhood system.
Source: OECD (2025[2]), Reducing Inequalities by Investing in Early Childhood Education and Care, Starting Strong, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b78f8b25-en.
Defining and formalising the role of inter-sectoral governance bodies
Bulgaria can leverage the new Interdepartmental Working Group for Planning and Co-ordination of Early Childhood Policies to create formal structures for working across sectors and levels of governance in their split ECEC system. This high-level political leadership is needed to steer co-ordinated efforts, and membership in the group will need to be updated to reflect new governments. Personnel with specific types of technical expertise as well as co-ordination among staff working directly with children and families will be needed to support this group moving forward.
In Korea, longstanding interest in integrating ECEC systems across the Ministry of Health and Welfare and the Ministry of Education has led to the creation of several types of working groups (see Box 3.3). Like Bulgaria, Korea faces challenges around ensuring different types of ECEC services and levels of governance agree with a shared vision for integrated ECEC services, as well as logistical obstacles in unifying the distinct funding mechanisms and devolved levels of governance for different parts of the ECEC sector. Bulgaria can learn from the strategies employed in Korea to develop its own official government bodies to support co-ordinated ECEC services at all levels of the system. Notably, Korea is deploying existing government staff from both the health and education sectors to work together to achieve the government’s vision for an integrated ECEC system.
In order for these government bodies to be successful, Bulgaria will also need to invest in developing expertise among the government officials assigned to work in these different capacities. This would require hiring more qualified staff with knowledge of the early childhood sector to work in both national and regional levels of government, as well as providing opportunities for existing civil servants to develop deeper knowledge of this policy area (see also Recommendation 1.3 below). Capacity-building efforts will be needed across relevant ministries (i.e. Education, Health and Social Policy) and the value of co‑ordinated work will need to be clearly communicated so that it becomes an official method of working, rather than an additional task.
Korea explicitly recognises the need for consensus-building among stakeholders to achieve the government’s vision for a unified ECEC system for children from birth to primary school, as well as strong co-ordination with primary school education. To achieve this vision and integrate ECEC settings that exist under the Ministry of Health and Welfare and the Ministry of Education, a Committee on Consolidation of ECEC was established in 2023. The Committee is chaired by the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Education, to provide strategic guidance and high-level support across the government. The Committee also includes five additional political members from other relevant ministries and 19 non-political members, representing various stakeholder groups (e.g. teacher unions, researchers, local authorities, parents).
Under the Committee, a taskforce was created to handle administrative aspects of moving forward the agenda developed by the Committee. This taskforce includes 30 members from regional government, local governments, and research centres. It is headed by a representative from the Ministry of Health and Welfare, with support from a director from the Ministry of Education, to ensure balanced consideration of the perspectives from both of these ministries. Gathering input from stakeholders on planned reforms is a core aspect of the work assigned to this taskforce.
In addition, the taskforce oversees four advisory groups that provide expertise on core areas of policy reform. The areas focused on by these groups are: (1) funding and planning; (2) alignment of standards for facilities; (3) linking curriculum standards, and (4) reforming teacher qualification and initial teacher training systems.
Source: Ministry of Education of Korea (2023[39]) Press release on Consolidation of Early Childhood Education and Care to Provide Safe and Responsible Public Education and Childcare Service from Birth, https://english.moe.go.kr/boardCnts/viewRenewal.do?boardID=265 &boardSeq=93891&lev=0&searchType=null&statusYN=W&page=1&s=english&m=0201&opType=N (accessed on 17 December 2024).
Expanding age-integrated settings
Bulgaria’s age-integrated ECEC settings allow nurseries that serve children from the age of 10 months to be in the same location as kindergartens. These settings are under shared oversight from the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Education. Further developing this model can allow more children to access ECEC before they are 3 years old and, to some extent, make use of excess capacity in some kindergarten settings. This would support Bulgaria in moving towards the national goal of providing a place for every child in a more integrated ECD system (Council of Ministers of the Republic of Bulgaria, 2023[3]). Staff and leaders in existing age-integrated settings can be an important source of information for the Bulgarian government in its efforts to better co-ordinate across sectors: These age-integrated settings are working on-the-ground in a co-ordinated manner, with insights to both the challenges and benefits of this approach in their local contexts. Building on the experiences of these settings can create opportunities to allow the education and health sectors to learn from one another to support children’s health, well-being, development and learning from birth until primary school.
Recommendation 3.2: Develop data systems to facilitate management, funding and planning
Bulgaria has limited national data on the ECEC sector, particularly on the experiences of children in nurseries. There are also limited national statistics on child poverty and social exclusion, underscoring the recognised need for data systems that enable sharing of information across government institutions and local authorities (Government of Bulgaria, 2024[15]). Developing data systems to describe and track progress towards the Child Guarantee and national goals for an ECD system will be important to assess the success of the many strategies Bulgaria is currently implementing and can also enable better planning for the sector’s future needs. Linking these data systems to results from monitoring and quality assurance will also be key, along with building capacity within the government to effectively use new data systems for analysis and planning.
Developing data systems that enable different parts of the government to interact and share information effectively
Bulgaria needs investments in data infrastructure to improve data collection, sharing and use. Bulgaria is not alone in this, and there is much that can be learned from efforts elsewhere to better collect and use data across ministries (OECD, 2023[19]). A large majority of the countries that responded to the OECD’s 2022 ECEC in a Digital World Policy Survey indicated having data systems in place that maintain longitudinal information about their ECEC sector and facilitate analysis and reporting for ECEC authorities. Bulgaria can work towards this type of system by developing logic models that articulate which data are needed and by whom to deliver the desired outcomes (OECD, 2025[2]). These logic models can reflect the indicators developed to accompany the NQF, the overall goals of the envisioned ECD system and the shared vision for early childhood that is recommended to be developed across sectors (see Recommendation 3.1 above).
There are other ways in which Bulgaria can strengthen its ECEC data systems, both horizontally (across the different ministries involved in the ECEC system), and vertically (across levels of governance). Aggregating and using information collected at child-, setting-, and regional-levels, can help plan for future needs in ECEC and in the education system more broadly. As mentioned, Bulgaria is one of only a small group of OECD and partner countries that collects data on individual children’s developmental outcomes (see Figure 3.6). However, clear protocols on data protection and sharing are needed to aggregate this type of data at municipal and regional levels so it can be used effectively for planning in the national context.
Although the split responsibilities for the ECEC sector in Bulgaria can create challenges for developing a common data system, data sharing agreements have allowed other OECD countries to overcome similar hurdles. For example, in Slovenia, the Ministry of Education is responsible for collecting most information about the country’s ECEC system, but financial information about ECEC settings is maintained separately by the Ministry of Finance. In addition, determining families’ eligibility for subsidised ECEC fees requires data maintained by the Ministry of Labour, Family and Social Affairs. The government draws across these various data sources to provide programme oversight and to plan for ongoing needs in the sector (OECD, 2023[19]).
Linking monitoring data with information systems on management, funding and planning
As for other levels of education, following through with the Ministry of Education’s plans to develop a comprehensive Education Management Information System (EMIS) will be a critical support for monitoring ECEC quality, as well as broader system accountability efforts. Data elements for inclusion in such a system can include reports from health inspections, adherence to NQF monitoring indicators, child enrolment information, number of staff and their qualifications, funding allocations and even results from the screening tool for 3-year-olds. Developing a data dashboard linked to the EMIS would facilitate evidence-informed decision making at all levels of governance (see Chapter 4 and Recommendation 3.3 below).
A data dashboard would also support data sharing across the different types of inspections (e.g. health, education) that take place in individual ECEC settings. This would enable the NIE, the Ministry of Health and other relevant bodies to easily share information and be fully informed of existing strengths and weaknesses with programmes when conducting new monitoring. Such data sharing can lower the burden on individual settings, and on inspectors involved in the monitoring process by keeping them informed in a timely manner of findings from their counterparts in other parts of the oversight system. Ultimately, this type of shared information system can facilitate planning for future monitoring needs: the timing of inspections can be tailored to the risks of a particular setting failing to meet quality standards in one or more areas. This type of risk-based planning for inspections can help monitoring efforts be proportionate and focused where they can have the greatest impact (OECD, 2022[40]). Thorough self‑evaluation processes and a review of self-evaluation results during each monitoring visit can also make this targeted approach to inspection more effective (see also Chapter 4 and Recommendation 3.2 below). Data can also be readily available to support regions, municipalities, nurseries and kindergartens in their local improvement efforts (OECD, 2022[16]).
Planning and allocating funding to scale-up successful pilot programmes
A systematic mapping of pilot and small-scale programmes that are underway throughout the country would allow Bulgaria to track the presence of complementary or overlapping initiatives. Such a mapping could also support identifying where research is underway to evaluate the success of these smaller scale programmes. Where evaluation is not occurring, the Bulgarian government and relevant partners may wish to develop this component of pilot programmes so that promising practices can be considered for scale-up, along with necessary funding. Investing in data systems to better track pilot programmes would enable a clearer picture of ECEC and other early childhood expenditures from different sources (e.g. project-specific funds, EU investments). Responsibility for this type of research and evaluation monitoring may be relevant for the new Institute for Education Science (see Chapter 4).
Building up government capacity to use information for analysis and planning
More capacity is needed in the Ministry of Education, or through partnerships such as with the new National Institute for Education Science, to effectively use the data that are already collected and develop the needed systems to expand data collection. Strengthening capacity within the Bulgarian government to effectively use data for management and planning would also support the country to move towards specific ECEC goals in the context of finite resources for the sector.
For example, a data-driven approach to policymaking could help Bulgaria progressively increase per child ECEC expenditures to move closer to the OECD average. Although the country has successfully implemented free ECEC services, enrolment targets have not yet been met and capacity in nurseries is below what will be needed to ensure all children can access an ECEC place. As the system expands, additional investments will be needed to keep pace with growing enrolment and to ensure that offering free ECEC remains financially viable for the country. Bulgaria can learn from countries such as Norway, where some ECEC is completely free for certain groups of children and parent fees are strictly controlled for all other groups, allowing families with adequate means to contribute to financing the ECEC system (Eurydice, 2024[41]). Government capacity to effectively track the alignment between supply and demand for ECEC services will become an increasingly important element of allocating funds and planning for budget increases to support the growing sector.
Recommendation 3.3: Bolster the capacity of regional authorities to support ongoing growth and quality improvement in the sector
Bulgaria has made important reforms in recent years around the processes of quality assurance and improvement in the schooling and ECEC sector. These include establishing the inspectorate (NIE), refocusing the role of regional authorities (REDs) on supporting institutions, and planning for an integrated EMIS (see Chapter 4). Yet, these changes take time to fully implement and the ways of working between REDs and the Ministry of Education are still being developed. In the ECEC space specifically, more attention is needed to the ways in which REDs and Regional Health Inspectorates are resourced and supported by the national government to carry out their work with municipalities, nurseries and kindergartens. Articulating the roles of regional authorities, as well as recruiting and training staff to effectively carry out their work will be important to support future growth and quality improvements in the sector.
Articulating the roles of regional government staff
With the establishment of the NIE, REDs are expected to play a stronger role in quality improvement rather than monitoring regulatory compliance in kindergartens. However, the NIE is not currently conducting inspections in kindergartens due to a shortage of inspectors and the ongoing development of monitoring indicators. As such, the different roles and responsibilities have not yet been clearly defined between the NIE and REDs. Clearly articulating the roles of both of these groups within the context of what is practically achievable in the short-term is necessary. Developing a transition plan to identify interim monitoring strategies, relying on the experience REDs have in this capacity, can facilitate the co-ordinated work that will be needed across the NIE, REDs and Regional Health Inspectorates to eventually implement new monitoring procedures related to the NQF.
Regional staff are at the front lines of interacting with ECEC settings and also receive complaints from families when these arise, placing them in a key position to address compliance with regulations and general quality assurance concerns. While the NIE is developing its monitoring protocols for the ECEC sector, recognition of the central role of REDs (as well as co-ordination with Regional Health Inspectorates) in the ongoing monitoring of ECEC quality can be explicit. When the NIE is prepared to resume its intended role as the main authority with responsibility for ensuring compliance with ECEC regulations, then the role of REDs can be redefined for the sector. This process will require strong co‑ordination with the health sector as system-level monitoring with the NQF is implemented, to ensure nurseries are fully included in the new monitoring processes (see also Recommendation 2.1 below). Ongoing attention to overlap between the functions across these different authorities and strong co‑ordination among them will be needed in the long-term, as is the case in Luxembourg (see Box 3.4).
In 2017, Luxembourg established a team of regional officers to provide external improvement support for ECEC settings in their non-formal sector (i.e. programmes for children who have not yet entered the school-based pre-primary programme as well as out-of-school-time programmes). Each officer provides support for around 40 settings. This team was established within the National Youth Service to complement the role of existing inspectors in a separate administrative unit, the Department for Children. Inspectors from the Department for Children focus on monitoring and ensuring compliance with regulatory requirements, whereas the role of the regional officers is to support quality improvement.
Luxembourg is giving ongoing attention to make the distinction clear between the roles and functions of the regional officers and the inspectors from the Department for Children, as well as to ensure relevant training for the regional officers to achieve their improvement-focused mission. When co-ordination across these functions is good, the separation of compliance inspections and support for improvement is a strength of the monitoring system in Luxembourg: Duplication of effort is minimised across the two agencies and regional officers have a clear mandate to engage in strategies to enhance process quality in ECEC settings, conducting observations in the settings during their multiple visits per year with each of their assigned ECEC settings.
Source: OECD (2022[40]), Strengthening Early Childhood Education and Care in Luxembourg: A Focus on Non-formal Education, OECD Publishing Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/04780b15-en; OECD (2022[16]), Quality assurance and improvement in the early education and care sector, OECD Education Policy Perspectives, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/774688bf-en.
Recruiting and training staff to work in regional governance
In Bulgaria, REDs are limited by a shortage of personnel and expertise to undertake the full range of their work. A workforce strategy is needed to address these shortages and ensure all ECEC settings provide good quality for children. REDs need capacity within their team to actively support ECEC leaders and staff, particularly as the ECEC sector expands and implementation of the NQF begins. This may involve improving salaries to make career opportunities in regional governance more appealing. It may also involve building on existing initiatives to strengthen current capacities. For example, Bulgaria could expand the pilot project on quality inclusive kindergarten education initiated through the European Child Guarantee. As part of this project, Regional Centres for supporting the Process of Inclusive Education (RSCPIE) were able to hire new specialists, as well as train existing staff on functional needs assessments, providing methodological support to kindergartens and promoting the exchange of knowledge and practice across kindergartens (UNICEF, 2023[42]). Opportunities for shared professional development with Regional Health Inspectorates personnel can further support co-ordination across these areas of governance, while also enhancing the investments made in developing and delivering training programmes.
Quality of programmes and outcomes: Supporting implementation of the new National Quality Framework for Early Childhood Education and Care in Bulgaria
The new NQF is closely aligned with the European Quality Framework and the country is leveraging support from key international partners and local stakeholders to translate this new vision for quality into monitoring practices. Implementing a system for quality assurance and improvement in ECEC is a vital next step of this work. Additional steps are also needed to effectively embed the NQF in kindergartens and nurseries, bringing the NQF closer to children’s experiences in ECEC. These strategies can include creating links with curricula and training the ECEC workforce on this national vision for quality. Given that the NQF is based on a shared vision for the whole ECEC sector and range of services, explicit strategies will be needed to implement the NQF consistently in settings under the different ministries and regional authorities that are responsible for ECEC.
Recommendation 3.4: Implement a monitoring system for quality assurance and improvement
Bulgaria is currently developing indicators for monitoring ECEC quality, to align with the recently developed NQF. In the meantime, national monitoring of kindergartens is on hold, although this is also due to a shortage of inspectors to undertake regular monitoring (see Chapter 4) and the scope of quality monitoring in nurseries is limited. A strong system for monitoring and quality assurance is critical for ensuring ECEC programmes not only meet minimum standards around health and safety, but also that they provide the conditions to support the high-quality interactions between children, staff and materials (i.e. process quality) that are needed to promote children’s development, learning and well-being (OECD, 2022[16]). Moreover, quality assurance and improvement systems facilitate governments’ ability to ensure good quality ECEC is equitably distributed and available to all children, in both nurseries and kindergartens.
Aligning monitoring indicators with the National Quality Framework
The NQF is a strength of the Bulgarian system in that it provides a coherent vision of process quality for the entire ECEC sector, including both nurseries and kindergartens. Bulgaria should continue its current work of developing monitoring indicators that are aligned with the NQF, as this can help motivate ECEC settings to engage with the NQF and adapt their practices to its vision for quality. In other countries (e.g. Ireland, Luxembourg) (OECD, 2022[16]), monitoring process quality has been implemented incrementally for different age groups or segments of the ECEC sector; Bulgaria is well-positioned to establish quality arrangements that cover the full sector. Nonetheless, it will be important in Bulgaria that the nursery sector continues to be involved in developing and piloting monitoring indicators and that partners in the Ministry of Health are actively engaged in this process.
Monitoring process quality cannot occur successfully if done in isolation from monitoring of health and safety standards, which are the purview of the Ministry of Health. Stakeholders in both the education and health sectors need to see that their work and expertise are reflected in monitoring indicators to support their use across all types of ECEC settings in Bulgaria. This fact is recognised in the NQF, which in its statements on high-quality governance and funding calls for: “Stakeholders who have a clear and shared understanding of their role and responsibilities and a willingness to co-operate with partner organisations” (Ministry of Education and Science of Bulgaria, 2022[18]). Bringing together knowledge on ECEC quality from across the education and health sectors can only serve to strengthen programmes and systems in Bulgaria.
Allocating funding for monitoring and quality improvement
Bulgaria will need a well-resourced Inspectorate to ensure that monitoring of the NQF indicators is implemented as intended. Currently, ECEC settings in Bulgaria do not receive any monitoring related to process quality. The NIE needs more inspectors to conduct its work in schools, so adding ECEC settings when the new NQF monitoring indicators are finalised will further impede the NIE’s ability to provide monitoring in an effective and timely manner. In addition, resources will be needed to train existing inspectors on the new indicators for ECEC and link monitoring results with other information systems (see Recommendation 3.2 above). Bulgaria can consider developing capacity in other government bodies, such as the State Agency for Child Protection, to support the monitoring functions of NIE for ECEC. By training staff from other agencies to support the monitoring functions of NIE, Bulgaria may be able to expand ECEC inspection capacity more efficiently, while also reducing burden on ECEC settings who must interact with these different agencies in any case.
Sustained and adequate funding will facilitate the appropriate delegation of responsibilities for quality improvement across levels of governance, allowing technical assistance to settings be more effectively targeted. With increased investment in the capacity of REDs and as part of the clarification of their role in the ECEC system (see Recommendation 3.3 above), it will be possible for regions to focus on quality improvement, including training ECEC providers to conduct effective self-assessments. In this way, REDs can work with the NIE to develop a risk-based approach to ECEC monitoring, as well as support ECEC settings to conduct meaningful self-evaluations on a regular basis (see Chapter 4). Quality self‑assessments are becoming increasingly common in ECEC systems, such as in Finland, where the government has placed a statutory duty on providers to self-evaluate and provides training and tools to do so through its national quality agency, the Finnish Education Evaluation Centre (OECD, 2022[16]). Scotland (United Kingdom) also supports ECEC settings to engage in quality self-assessments (see Box 3.5).
Scotland (UK) has two inspectorates with complementary roles for monitoring quality in the ECEC sector. The Care Inspectorate undertakes a statutory programme of regulatory inspections covering all registered ECEC provision, while Education Scotland undertakes a programme of education-focused inspections. Both inspectorates have been taking co-ordinated action to promote self-evaluation and improvement planning in the sector.
Building on previous editions of self-evaluation guidance provided for ECEC settings, in 2017 Education Scotland published How Good is our Learning and Childcare?, a self-evaluation resource which sits within a well-established family of guides produced for schools and other sectors of education. Education Scotland also has a range of more specific improvement resources and practice exemplars for ECEC settings on its website, for example the Early Learning Play Pedagogy Toolkit.
In 2019, the Care Inspectorate published Self-evaluation for Improvement - Your Guide, which provides guidance on how settings can develop systematic processes for assessing their performance against the recently revised National Standards for Early Learning and Care Providers. Guidance is provided on how to turn the outcomes of self-evaluation into an effective programme of action to generate improvement; and additional ‘bite-size’ videos on using the guidance have been made available online.
Source: OECD (2021[43]), Strengthening Early Childhood Education and Care in Ireland: Review on Sector Quality, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/72fab7d1-en.
Recommendation 3.5: Create curricular alignment across ECEC sectors to communicate national quality goals to all ECEC staff
Bulgaria does not have a curriculum framework for nurseries. Curriculum frameworks are important policy documents that define the goals and approaches ECEC staff should use to foster young children’s learning, development and well-being. They are thus an important driver of process quality in ECEC, which takes a comprehensive view of children’s development, including promotion of health and well‑being alongside opportunities for cognitive, social and emotional learning (OECD, 2021[7]). Across OECD countries, there is not a single approach to curriculum development for children before primary school: Some countries use separate curriculum frameworks for different age groups (e.g. ages 0 to 3 and from age 3 to primary school), whereas others have a unified framework for the entire range. In the former approach, consideration is needed to ensure the two frameworks are broadly aligned to support children’s transitions through the ECEC system. In the latter approach the framework needs to be adapted to children’s developmental needs and various ages. In both cases, strong links are needed with quality frameworks so that curricula become a tool to implement a high-level vision for quality in ECEC.
Developing a curriculum framework for settings serving children ages 0-3
Bulgaria is among a small number of OECD countries that do not have a curriculum framework in place for children under age 3 (OECD, 2021[7]). Developing a curriculum framework for nurseries in Bulgaria would support these settings to connect with the vision for ECEC quality put forward in the NQF. Given the country’s goal for a unified ECD system, Bulgaria could also consider developing an integrated curriculum framework that covers children from birth to age 7, in-line with European best practice recommendations (Hulpia et al., 2024[14]). However, in the context of the existing challenges around co‑ordination between the education and health sectors, this approach risks facing limited buy-in from key stakeholders in one or both sectors. In addition, the current curriculum framework for kindergartens is well-aligned with the curriculum framework for primary school, supporting children at this point of transition.
Developing a separate curriculum framework for nurseries in Bulgaria can support quality ECEC for children under age 3, as is the case in Flanders (Belgium) (see Box 3.6). It will be important for a new curriculum framework for nurseries in Bulgaria to align closely with the kindergarten curriculum, to support coherence and smooth transitions as children move through this split system. Having a curriculum framework for nurseries that is aligned with the NQF will provide a clear legal basis for implementing the NQF in these settings and support coherence with practices in kindergartens. A curriculum framework aligned with the NQF will also provide a strong basis for monitoring quality in nurseries.
The national curriculum framework for ECEC in Australia covers all children from birth to age 5 (entry to primary school) and is compulsory for all settings under Australia’s National Quality Framework. The curriculum recognises the importance of play and children’s agency. It has broad goals and aims to support children’s interactions with peers, adults and space and materials, for which it provides specific guidance for ECEC staff. It is accompanied by guidelines that aim to support settings, parents and community groups and agencies in its implementation. ECEC staff can flexibly implement the curriculum and are encouraged to explore new ideas to meet the needs of every child and their diverse cultural backgrounds.
In Flanders (Belgium), there is a split system for ECEC provision, with pre-primary education beginning at age 3. The pedagogical framework for babies and toddlers (Pedagogisch Raamwerk voor de Kinderopvang van Baby’s en Peuters) was developed in response to a call to define (and measure) quality ECEC for this young age group. The pedagogical framework describes four areas of experience identified as critical for offering every child rich opportunities for holistic development: “Me and the Other”, for developing positive identities in interactions with peers and adults; “Body and Movement”, for developing gross and fine motor skills; “Communication and Expression”, for creative self-expression both verbally and non-verbally; and “Exploration of the World”, for developing a logical understanding of the both the physical and social worlds. The framework also aims to provide a firm pedagogical basis for practice in interactions with both young children and their families in centre-based and home-based childcare settings.
Source: OECD (2025[2]), Reducing Inequalities by Investing in Early Childhood Education and Care, Starting Strong, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b78f8b25-en.
Creating clear links between the National Quality Framework and kindergarten curriculum
In addition to developing a curriculum framework for nurseries in Bulgaria that is aligned with the NQF, it is equally important to create clear links between the kindergarten curriculum (SESPE) and the NQF, as other OECD countries are doing (like Australia, see Box 3.6). This will support kindergarten staff to understand how to implement in practice the vision of quality put forward in the NQF and also reduce the burden that would be placed on kindergarten staff and leaders from having separate reference frameworks. It would therefore result in more coherent guidance for implementing the NQF and contribute to the development and promotion of clearer, shared expectations for the sector (Ministry of Education and Science of Bulgaria, 2022[17]).
Linking the NQF with the kindergarten curriculum has the additional benefit of proactively connecting the monitoring indicators that are under development for the NQF to staff practices through the curriculum. Broad alignment across these different components of assuring quality would streamline and strengthen each aspect. This would also embed a commitment to quality at the level of individual kindergartens, which is understood to be a stronger mechanism than inspection alone for quality development. Self‑assessment of quality also becomes more possible when quality expectations are clearly tied to the daily work of ECEC staff, such as through the curriculum (see also Chapter 4, Recommendation 3.2 below).
Recommendation 3.6: Develop the ECEC workforce to effectively meet new quality standards and goals
The ECEC workforce is central to ensuring children experience the high-quality interactions that drive long-term positive effects of ECEC. Overall, in Bulgaria, the primary professionals who work with children are well-educated, either as nurses (in nurseries) or as teachers (in kindergartens). However, specific training is needed to update the knowledge of these professionals, as well as that of assistants in ECEC settings, in order for them to understand and implement the NQF and any associated changes (e.g. through curricula or monitoring). In addition, Bulgaria will need to continue recruiting and training new ECEC staff to meet expansion goals and replace the aging workforce as a large segment of kindergarten teachers move towards retirement age. Bulgaria is currently considering creating a new degree programme (ISCED level 6) to qualify staff to work with children across the full ECEC age range (0 to 7 years), which would combine training in health and education and pedagogy. This is a positive development that is consistent with the goal of establishing an integrated ECD system. It would provide a strong compliment to the training profiles already in place to prepare staff for work in nurseries and kindergartens.
Enhancing professional development opportunities
Ongoing professional development opportunities are essential for ECEC staff and leaders to understand and implement the NQF, including how this should be used to complement the national curriculum and its relevance for local contexts. Access to these types of trainings can be made available through REDs, drawing on the network of experts and stakeholders who have helped developed and pilot the NQF. In addition to trainings specifically focused on the NQF, aspects of quality included in the NQF can begin to be embedded in the existing offer of professional development activities, to reduce the risk that the new vision for quality is perceived as an additional or separate task placed on staff. Luxembourg takes a similar approach: ECEC settings have discretion in the professional development activities they seek out for staff, but all activities are required to be consistent with the national curriculum framework and follow priorities defined by the Ministry of Education (OECD, 2022[40]).
While all staff will need access to training on implementing the NQF, there is a clear need for training that is available and accessible to assistants in kindergartens as well as to all staff working in nurseries. Across the OECD, fewer assistants than teachers in ECEC receive support to participate in professional development; however, this is not the case everywhere and with the reforms to support quality in ECEC, Bulgaria has an opportunity to expand access to ongoing staff training. Several countries engage directly with stakeholders (e.g. assistants, teachers, universities and other training providers) to develop their systems for ongoing professional development and plan for new training opportunities (OECD, 2021[7]).
Developing new initial training programmes and entry ways to the ECEC profession
In addition to establishing a new ISCED level 6 qualification for ECEC staff, Bulgaria could develop a specialised training programme for assistants in nurseries and kindergartens. Children interact with assistants throughout their days in ECEC settings, making this a critical segment of the workforce for implementing quality strategies that will reach children. Qualifications for assistants could be offered through short-cycle tertiary programmes, with flexible admission routes for adults who are not making a direct transfer from upper secondary education. Recognising and validating relevant skills gained by existing assistants or by candidates from outside of the ECEC sector can provide pathways for upskilling the current workforce as well as attracting candidates with training in other fields.
It is a strength of the Bulgarian system that some staff at all levels of ECEC are required to have ISCED level 6 qualifications. However, as the country moves towards an integrated ECD system, the medical qualifications of the professional staff working in nurseries may not be sufficiently aligned with the goals laid out in the NQF. New and revised training programmes may be needed to ensure that training programmes for nurses who will work in ECEC include specific modules on the NQF’s broad view of the role of ECEC for supporting child development. Bulgaria could learn from France, where there is also an important role for ISCED level 6 qualified paediatric nurses to work in ECEC settings for children under age 3. Students studying for this degree split their time between a number of core curricular areas, including the social and family environment and illness and medico-socio-educational prevention. In addition, they must complete practical placements in three different types of settings: ECEC centres, hospitals, and community clinics for mothers and infants (Rayna, 2024[44]).
Equality of opportunity and access: Engaging with families to promote equity
By eliminating all ECEC fees for families and making ECEC compulsory from age 4, Bulgaria has taken important steps to improve equity in access to ECEC. Nonetheless, participation in kindergarten has been compulsory from age 5 since 2010, yet full enrolment has not been reached for this age group and children from Roma backgrounds, in particular, are underrepresented in ECEC (UNICEF, 2022[32]). Ongoing attention will be needed as the new policies to facilitate ECEC access take hold, to ensure that the sector is expanding in an equitable way. This can include opportunities for family and community engagement to better reach groups such as Roma that are historically disconnected from the ECEC system. As plans to expand the availability of nursery places take shape, Bulgaria will need to learn from the challenges in other countries, given that access to and enrolment in ECEC for children under age 3 is particularly likely to reproduce existing social inequalities. Bulgaria can expand the choices families have for ECEC for this young age group, aiming to align the supply of services with the types of ECEC families in Bulgaria would prefer to use.
Recommendation 3.7: Ensure that ECEC is culturally responsive and offers opportunities for family and community engagement
Ethnic minority (particularly Roma) children in Bulgaria are especially likely to be at risk of poverty and social exclusion (Vajsova and Nenova, 2023[45]), as well as to have weaker early development and health outcomes (de Laat, Kraus and Van der Harst, 2023[23]). High-quality ECEC services are well-positioned to support these vulnerable young children, and the removal of fees for ECEC is one important mechanism to support their access to ECEC (de Laat and Huillery, 2019[9]). However, on its own, removal of fees will not be sufficient to fully close enrolment gaps in Bulgaria, just as it has not been sufficient in other OECD countries (OECD, 2025[2]; World Bank, 2020[46]). Experts in Bulgaria indicate a primary barrier for reaching many vulnerable groups is unwillingness among parents to use ECEC (UNICEF, 2022[32]). As such, focus and investments on strategies to engage with families with young children, particularly those who do not speak Bulgarian at home, will be a critical next step for Bulgaria’s envisioned growth of the ECEC sector.
Increasing outreach to families through intersectoral co-ordination
One strength of split ECEC systems is their ability to reach families through different sectors and programmes. Bulgaria can take advantage of this in its system, to use preventive health services as a platform for raising awareness among families of the benefits and accessibility of ECEC. Good steps in this direction have begun through the pilot programmes as part of the European Child Guarantee: These pilot programmes all offer promising directions for strategies that can be implemented more widely, with an emphasis on outreach to families who may not seek services on their own.
Across OECD countries, families from socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds are more likely to face information gaps in understanding ECEC systems, which contributes to lower uptake of these services, even when the services are free and widely available (OECD, 2025[2]). Building trust with families, particularly those who are from ethnic or language minorities, will be an important strategy for Bulgaria to pursue to address gaps in ECEC participation. In other countries, strategies to accomplish this goal are varied and include the '1000 premiers jours' (First 1,000 Days) programme in France and Stadtteilmütter (District Mothers) in Germany. Through the First 1,000 Days initiative, parents receive a 'welcome to parenthood' bag at the maternity ward. The bag contains essential items for the baby's first few months and includes references to online resources to promote healthy behaviours and information about available support services, including ECEC options. The District Mothers initiative trains mothers from diverse communities to support fellow parents in accessing essential services for their children.
Encouraging early language development and multilingualism
In Bulgaria, supporting and encouraging families to learn with their children both in Bulgarian and in their home languages will be an important strategy to build trust in the ECEC system among families who may not feel culturally connected to the current programmes. Parents also can be key resources for ECEC settings, sharing their own linguistic knowledge with staff and children. Language learning is a fundamental task of early childhood that enables children to grow socially in their connections to others and provides a foundation for learning in all other areas, from literacy to numeracy and science and beyond. Language inclusion is an important element of quality ECEC and consistent with Bulgaria’s NQF. Ongoing training for ECEC staff is a critical component of embedding support for multilingualism in early childhood programmes, as is integrating this content into the curriculum frameworks. Opportunities for staff to learn about supporting multilingualism in teams, rather than only through individual professional development, may be especially useful (OECD, 2025[2]). Luxembourg is a multilingual country and has developed many strategies to facilitate language learning for both staff and children, including required professional development modules for all ECEC staff on this topic.
Recommendation 3.8: Explore alternative models of ECEC provision for children under age 3 to increase demand for these services
Parents in Bulgaria have very little choice regarding the type of ECEC and the country has no mechanism for assessing parents’ needs or preferences (Ministry of Education and Science of Bulgaria, 2022[17]). The homogeneity of the ECEC offer is in contrast to many other countries, where ECEC programmes have often developed in a piecemeal fashion to address evolving needs and priorities. As Bulgaria looks to expand the ECEC sector for children under age 3, it can learn from the challenges of highly fragmented ECEC systems in other OECD countries. Bulgaria can aim to develop its ECEC sector in an inclusive, bottom-up manner, to offer a range of high-quality services that meet families’ diverse needs.
Engaging parents and children together
The participation rates in ECEC for children under age 3 in Bulgaria are related to the extended maternity leave and the expectation that families mainly take care of their very young children at home. However, the enrolment rates may also reflect a misalignment between the services offered for this age group and families’ preferences and needs: Offering families and communities opportunities to engage with and develop ECEC settings responsive to their needs can promote use of these services. Programmes that engage children and parents together (e.g. through community-based centres or programmes) can be especially valuable for supporting social inclusion of low-income, ethnic minority and otherwise vulnerable families. Such programmes are available in different OECD systems and aim to help familiarise families with the concept of ECEC and reconcile preferences for parental (or family) care for young children with the benefits of ECEC access (see Box 3.7).
In Hamburg (Germany), parent-child centres, known as Eltern-Kind-Zentren (EKiZ), are located in socio-economically disadvantaged neighbourhoods and offer support services for families with children under the age of 3. These centres serve as hubs for both children and their parents, providing many of the benefits of ECEC in a setting that allows for joint participation, facilitating children’s transitions into ECEC-like settings.
In New Zealand, a variety of parent/whānau-led services, which are community-based programmes, offer support for parents, whānau (extended family group) or caregivers to run community-based groups for children before they enter primary school. These programmes aim to respond to the diversity of cultures and ensure that the needs and values of all families and communities are integrated into the early learning experiences of young children.
Early Years Scotland (United Kingdom) offers Stay, Play, and Learn sessions to young children and their parents/carers. Parents might take part in activities alongside their children or use the time for other activities offered by Early Years Scotland. Activities offered for adults can vary from English or yoga lessons to counselling on finding a job or accommodation. The aim of the Stay, Play and Learn sessions is to strengthen children’s and parents’ confidence, attachments, interactions, and shared learning and to improve the home learning environment, as well as children’s transitions into nurseries and schools. The sessions also help socialise children who may not have started nursery/school and promote families’ integration into the community. These sessions are run by qualified early years practitioners and are offered in community centres, churches, nurseries, schools, as well as prisons.
The “petits pas, apprendre en jouant” (“small steps, learn by playing”) programme in Switzerland is based on two elements. The first is home visits, which take place once or twice a week and where children and their parents/carers take part in developmental play activities. The second is group meetings, which take place every two weeks and focus on strengthening parents’ social networking and parenting skills. The programme is targeted at families from disadvantaged backgrounds. The individuals organising the home visits and group meetings are not early years experts, and often have a similar background as the family to help build trust.
Source: OECD (2025[2]), Reducing Inequalities by Investing in Early Childhood Education and Care, Starting Strong, OECD Publishing, Paris, 10.1787/b78f8b25-en; Early Years Scotland (n.d.[47]), Stay, Play and Learn, https://earlyyearsscotland.org/children-and-families/stay-play-learn/ (accessed on 12 February 2025); Petits:pas (n.d.[48]), Apprendre en jouant dès la petite enfance, https://www.a-primo.ch/fr/offres/petits-pas/qu-est-ce-que-petits-pas (accessed on 12 February 2025); COFACE (2023[49]), Report of the European Observatory on Family Policy: Towards a greater family policy integration across Europe, https://coface-eu.org/report-of-the-european-observatory-on-family-policy-towards-greater-family-policy-integration-across-europe/ (accessed on 12 February 2025).
Developing alternative models of ECEC for children under age 3
In addition to developing programmes for parents and young children together, Bulgaria can consider many more options for offering parents a choice in the type of ECEC for their children before kindergarten. More options for ECEC in children’s earliest years would further support parental employment, particularly among mothers. With women at higher risk of poverty than men and women who are single parents being more than twice as likely to face poverty and social exclusion compared to mothers who have a partner (Vajsova and Nenova, 2023[45]), Bulgaria will need to consider the earning potential and career trajectories of mothers in order to address social inequalities for children.
In addition to expanding age-integrated settings (see Recommendation 3.1 above), giving more parents the option of these settings for their children under age 3, Bulgaria can consider developing a sector of home-based ECEC. Home-based ECEC is often appealing to parents of young children as it more closely resembles a family environment. It is also a good option in more rural or remote areas where there are relatively few families, creating challenges for making centre-based facilities viable. Paradoxically, home-based settings can also alleviate shortages of ECEC in urban areas, where demand is high and real estate prices can be prohibitive for opening enough ECEC centres.
If Bulgaria aims to develop a home-based ECEC sector, for instance by expanding the “Parents in employment” programme or formalising the possibility for parents to independently organise their children’s early education in home-based settings, it will be imperative to establish clear quality standards and monitoring specifically tailored to these types of settings. The quality standards should align with the NQF, as well as with health and safety regulations, but will need to be adapted to the situation of a single staff person working alone in a small setting or home. Home-based ECEC provision is common across the OECD and countries have many strategies to promote and regulate quality in this sector. For example, in Luxembourg, although only 4% of all ECEC places are in home-based settings, national quality assurance arrangements, such as registration, regulation, inspection and quality assurance, exist for all types of ECEC provision, including both centre-based and home-based provision (OECD, 2022[40]). Bulgaria would do well to ensure that home-based providers are qualified and that settings are fully registered and inspected before opening.
Finally, although private ECEC provision is currently a very small share of the sector in Bulgaria, it is a growing force in other OECD countries and has been critical in expanding the supply of ECEC, particularly for children under age 3, in many places. Private ECEC provision has the potential to lead to high costs for families, thereby exacerbating challenges around equitable access, and possibly lower quality for children (OECD, 2025[2]). However, these potential concerns can be mitigated through careful policy and regulation, for instance by investing public resources to make enrolment in private ECEC feasible for lower income families. Austria, Germany and Norway all combine high levels of ECEC enrolment in private settings with high public investments. Strategies to support equitable access in the context of private provision include capping fees charged by private settings, providing targeted subsidies directly to families and allocating additional funds to settings serving high proportions of children from disadvantaged backgrounds. Not-for-profit private ECEC provision can also help avoid many of the challenges associated with for-profit providers, which is why Canada is funding expansion in their not-for-profit private ECEC sector. Still, strong standards and regulations, regular monitoring and support for quality improvement are all important components of comprehensive policies for mixed provision of ECEC in public and private settings. For these different policy levers to function well together, strong government capacity is needed to co-ordinate across these different areas, as well as across different levels of governance. It will therefore be important for Bulgaria to further develop these types of governance capacities before promoting expansion of the private sector for ECEC.
References
[37] Australian Government (Department of Social Services) (2024), Early Years Strategy 2024-2034, https://www.dss.gov.au/early-years-strategy/resource/early-years-strategy-2024-2034 (accessed on 10 December 2024).
[1] Bennett, J. and Y. Kaga (2010), “The integration of early childhood systems within education”, International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy, Vol. 4/1, pp. 35-43.
[49] COFACE (2023), “Report of the European Observatory on Family Policy: Towards greater family policy integration across Europe”, Families Europe, https://coface-eu.org/report-of-the-european-observatory-on-family-policy-towards-greater-family-policy-integration-across-europe/ (accessed on 12 February 2025).
[3] Council of Ministers of the Republic of Bulgaria (2023), “Decision Adopting an Action Plan until 2024 for the Strategic Framework for the Development of Education, Training, and Learning in the Republic of Bulgaria (2021-2030)”, Agenda of the meeting of the Council of Ministers on 22.03.2023, https://www.gov.bg/bg/prestsentar/zasedaniya-na-ms/dneven-red-na-zasedanie-na-ministerskiya-savet-na-22-03-2023-g (accessed on 23 December 2024).
[29] Dalgaard, N. et al. (2022), “Adult/child ratio and group size in early childhood education or care to promote the development of children aged 0–5 years: A systematic review”, Campbell Systematic Reviews, Vol. 18/2, https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1239.
[9] de Laat, J. and E. Huillery (2019), Supporting disadvantaged children to enter kindergarten: Second (medium-term) follow-up study, World Bank Group, http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/712061576601314408/Supporting-Disadvantaged-Children-to-Enter-Kindergarten-Second-Medium-Term-Follow-Up-Study (accessed on 17 January 2025).
[23] de Laat, J., H. Kraus and A. Van der Harst (2023), Supporting first-time vulnerable mothers and their infants and toddlers: Evaluation study of the Nurse Family Partnership program Bulgaria, Trust for Social Achievement, https://socialachievement.org/web/files/richeditor/dokumenti/NFP%20Evaluation%20Report%20-%20July%202023.pdf (accessed on 17 January 2025).
[47] Early Years Scotland (n.d.), Stay, Plan and Learn, https://earlyyearsscotland.org/children-and-families/stay-play-learn/ (accessed on 12 February 2025).
[24] European Commission (2024), Education and Training Monitor 2024 - Bulgaria, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2766/058373 (accessed on 5 November 2024).
[21] European Commission (2024), “European Child Guarantee”, Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion, https://employment-social-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies-and-activities/social-protection-social-inclusion/addressing-poverty-and-supporting-social-inclusion/investing-children/european-child-guarantee_en (accessed on 3 January 2025).
[31] European Commission/ EACEA/ Eurydice (2025), Key data on early childhood education and care in Europe - 2025, https://eurydice.eacea.ec.europa.eu/publications/key-data-early-childhood-education-and-care-europe-2025 (accessed on 4 February 2025).
[6] European Union (2022), Council Recommendation of 8 December 2022 on early childhood education and care: the Barcelona targets for 2030 2022/C 484/01, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32022H1220%2801%29 (accessed on 19 December 2024).
[36] European Union (2019), “Council Recommendation of 22 May 2019 on High-Quality Early Childhood Education and Care Systems (2019/C 189/02)”, Official Journal of the European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32019H0605(01) (accessed on 4 February 2025).
[41] Eurydice (2024), “Early childhood education and care: Access”, National Education Systems: Norway, https://eurydice.eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-education-systems/norway/access (accessed on 5 February 2025).
[5] Eurydice (2023), “Organisation of centre-based ECEC”, National Educational Systems - Bulgaria, https://eurydice.eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-education-systems/bulgaria/organisation-centre-based-ecec (accessed on 20 December 2024).
[15] Government of Bulgaria (2024), Report on the Implementation of the Council Recommendation (EU) 2021/1004 Establishing a European Child Guarantee (2030), https://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=27662&langId=en (accessed on 5 November 2024).
[38] Government of Ireland (2019), First 5: A Whole-of-Governmnet Strategy for Babies, Young Children and their Families 2019-2028, https://www.gov.ie (accessed on 8 September 2021).
[14] Hulpia, H. et al. (2024), Quality in early childhood education and care (ECEC): State of play in the EU Member States based on the European Quality Framework, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, https://doi.org/10.2766/932337 (accessed on 4 February 2025).
[28] Leseman, P. and P. Slot (2025), Strong early childhood education and care systems for the future: A conceptual framework for thematic analyses, https://doi.org/10.1787/67d0a97f-en.
[13] Ministry of Education and Science of Bulgaria (2022), Analytical report on the quality of early childhood education and care in Bulgaria. Introducing a national framework for quality in early childhood education and care (REFORM/SC2020/059).
[17] Ministry of Education and Science of Bulgaria (2022), D11. Action Plan.
[18] Ministry of Education and Science of Bulgaria (2022), D9. National Quality Framework.
[25] Ministry of Education and Science of Bulgaria (unpublished), The share of children in creches from 2021 to 2023, by age and gender.
[39] Ministry of Education of Korea (2023), Press release on Consolidation of Early Childhood Education and Care to Provide Safe and Responsible Public Education and Childcare Service from Birth, https://english.moe.go.kr/boardCnts/viewRenewal.do?boardID=265&boardSeq=93891&lev=0&searchType=null&statusYN=W&page=1&s=english&m=0201&opType=N (accessed on 17 December 2024).
[27] OECD (2025), OECD Reviews of Labour Market and Social Policies: Bulgaria 2025, https://doi.org/10.1787/81e7cac7-en.
[2] OECD (2025), Reducing Inequalities by Investing in Early Childhood Education and Care, Starting Strong, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b78f8b25-en.
[8] OECD (2024), Education at a Glance 2024: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c00cad36-en.
[19] OECD (2023), Empowering Young Children in the Digital Age, Starting Strong, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/50967622-en.
[4] OECD (2023), OECD Economic Surveys: Bulgaria 2023, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5ca812a4-en.
[33] OECD (2023), PISA 2022 Database, https://www.oecd.org/pisa/data/ (accessed on 8 November 2024).
[16] OECD (2022), “Quality assurance and improvement in the early education and care sector”, OECD Education Policy Perspectives, No. 55, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/774688bf-en.
[11] OECD (2022), Staff teams in early childhhood education and care centres, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/2b913691-en.
[40] OECD (2022), Strengthening Early Childhood Education and Care in Luxembourg: A Focus on Non-formal Education, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/04780b15-en.
[7] OECD (2021), Starting Strong VI: Supporting Meaningful Interactions in Early Childhood Education and Care, Starting Strong, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f47a06ae-en.
[20] OECD (2021), Starting Strong: Mapping quality in Early Childhood Education and Care, https://quality-ecec.oecd.org/ (accessed on 3 January 2025).
[43] OECD (2021), Strengthening Early Childhood Education and Care in Ireland: Review on Sector Quality, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/72fab7d1-en.
[10] OECD (2020), Is Childcare Affordable?, OECD, Paris, https://coilink.org/20.500.12592/9b8p8z.
[30] OECD (2018), Engaging Young Children: Lessons from Research about Quality in Early Childhood Education and Care, Starting Strong, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264085145-en.
[26] OECD Family Database (2023), Family leave entitlements, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/oecd-family-database.html (accessed on 3 January 2025).
[48] Petits: pas (n.d.), Apprendre en jouant dès la petite enfance, https://www.a-primo.ch/fr/offres/petits-pas/sites-de-petits-pas (accessed on 12 February 2025).
[34] Romani Early Years Network (n.d.), Reyn Bulgaria, https://www.reyn.eu/reynnationalnetworks/reyn-bulgaria/ (accessed on 6 January 2025).
[44] Schreyer, P. (ed.) (2024), France - ECEC Workforce Profile, Munich State Institute for Early Childhood Research and Media Literacy., http://www.seepro.eu/Complete-Publication2024.pdf.
[12] Shuey, E. and S. Jamet (2023), “Composition of staff teams in early childhood education and care centres in nine countries”, International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy, Vol. 18/1, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40723-023-00121-8.
[42] UNICEF (2023), The Child Guarantee: Breaking the cycle of disadvantage: Phase III of the preparatory action for a Child Guarantee, https://www.unicef.org/eca/media/28086/file/The%20child%20guarantee:%20Breaking%20the%20cycle%20of%20disadvantage.pdf (accessed on 17 January 2025).
[22] UNICEF (2022), The Child Guarantee: Breaking the cycle of disadvantage - Phase III of the preparatory action for a child guarantee, https://www.unicef.org/eca/media/24926/file/Programmatic%20Update%20on%20Phase%20III%20of%20the%20European%20Child%20Guarantee%20(Nov%202022).pdf (accessed on 6 January 2024).
[32] UNICEF (2022), Un/Equal Childhood: Deep Dive in Child Poverty and Social Exclusion in Bulgaria, https://www.unicef.org/bulgaria/media/12976/file/Unequal%20Childhood%20Deep%20Dive%20Analysis%20EN%20.pdf (accessed on 6 January 2025).
[45] Vajsova, L. and G. Nenova (2023), Risk Factors for Children and Young Mothers in Bulgaria, Trust for Social Achievement.
[35] Volen, E. (2016), Toward an Equal Start: Closing the Early Learning Gap for Roma Children in Eastern Europe: Evidence from a Randomized Evaluation in Bulgaria, https://www.worldbank.org/en/programs/sief-trust-fund/brief/closing-the-early-learning-gap-for-roma-children-in-eastern-europe (accessed on 6 January 2025).
[46] World Bank (2020), Pillar 2: Support for Building an Evidence-Based Approach for the National Strategic Framework in Education 2030 Early Childhood Education and Care, General Education, and Inclusion: Situation Analysis and Policy Direction Recommendations, https://www.eufunds.bg/sites/default/files/uploads/opseig/docs/2021-08/EN_ECEC_GE_June_22.pdf (accessed on 4 February 2025).
← 1. Age-integrated centres refer to kindergartens with nursery groups.