Citizens’ Assessment of the School Capitation Grant Scheme

Nana Opare-Djan, Deputy Director, M&E Division, NDPC

EVIDENCE-BASED POLICY-MAKING AND IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMME

ERINVALE ESTATE HOTEL & SPA, SOMERSET WESTTuesday, October 25, 2016

Outline

Background Study Objectives Methodology Findings Recommendations

Outline extended1) Brief description of the work2) How the policy process was initiated3) A summary of the assessment of how the

department uses evidence4) An overview of the stakeholders and different

motivations/interests were at play5) An overview of the types of evidence used6) Details of some of the challenges7) Lessons for public sector officials working on

evidence-based processes

School Capitation Grant (CG) Implementation Progress -

Description Piloted in 2004 and scaled up in 2005 nationwide

Mechanism to lessen the burden of paying school levies and to realize the long-term policy objective of increasing equitable access to, and participation in education at all levels

Several concerns have been raised over the years about; increasing enrolment levels and the effect on infrastructure, personnel, and teaching material (World Bank, 2011).

Also concerns over the quality of education obtained by pupils (World Bank, 2011).

2 key challenges 1. Number of levies and fees charged at the basic school level.

The result of a study undertaken by the Ghana Education Service (GES) in 2004 showed that 76 different types of levies, fees and charges existed in schools.

2. This was further corroborated by the result of a study by UNICEF which showed that about 40% of children between 6 and 11 years of school going age remained out of school as of 2003 largely due to the inability of parents to pay levies imposed by the schools (UNICEF, 2007).

Objectives of Study Study sought to answer the question:

►Whether the CG policy achieved its goal of increasing access to and participation in education at the basic level? and also to obtain feedback from citizens about the extent to which they perceive the CG policy to meet its objectives. Specific objectives :►Whether the CG had eliminated the payment of special levies, fees and charges in public basic schools?

►Whether the CG improved enrolment and retention in public basic schools?

►Whether the CG improved equitable access to education?

►To what extent is CG sustainable under the current arrangement?

Methodology Nationally representative survey of 2,165 households

440 schools (Across the whole country)

20 Community-based FGDs (2 in each region; average of 15 members per group)

10 FGDs with Teachers (1 in each region; average of 10 members per group)

10 In-depth Interviews with Heads of basic schools. 10 In-depth Interviews with directors of education (and

other officers where present)

Key findings

1. Impact on the payment of school fees and levies

CG has eliminated the payment of official tuition fees in public basic schools.

However, a number of levies still exist:

Examination fees, Extra-classesPTA leviesCollectionSports and culture, Computer (ICT) fees, Capital development leviesUtility bills (water and electricity)

Presentation titlePage 10

Figure 1: Percentage of schools that charged various levies by urban and rural areas (2013/14)

Presentation titlePage 11

Figure 2: Proportion of households who paid and those who did not pay levies (2013/14)

Presentation titlePage 12

Figure 3: Average per capita amount paid as levies in public Primary by region (GHC) for the academic year 2013/2014

Presentation titlePage 13

Figure 4: Per capita amount paid as levies in public Primary schools by locality and socioeconomic status (GHC) for the

academic year (2013/2014)

Presentation titlePage 14

• On average, special levies and fees per capita paid by parents are 6 and a half times the CG per child in a primary school

Figure 5: Per capita CG as a proportion of amount paid as levies per child in Primary school by region - 2013/14 (%)

2. Impact on School attendance and enrolment

Attendance

Community members note that children of school-going age are no more seen loitering about during school hours.

To them, it is an indication of improvement in enrolment and school attendance.

They however noted that, due to difficulties some parents face in terms of inability to pay levies pupils absent from school and many others being denied participation in terminal examinations

Table 1: Reasons for child absenteeism (%)

Presentation titlePage 17

Figure 6: Households with at least a child absenting from school for at least a day

Presentation titlePage 18

Enrolment Figure 7: Enrolment Rates for Boys and Girls in Primary schools (%)

Presentation titlePage 19

Figure 8: Enrolment Rates for Boys and Girls in JHS (%)

3. Impact on quality education Households: 50+% (urban & rural) think the CG has had no

impact on the quality of education.

40% households says it has had a positive impact

70% schools positive impact of CG as it contributes about 40% of school’s total expenditures

Concerns about class size: 32% and 25% head-teachers in rural and urban areas respectively think the CG has had a negative impact on management of class sizes.

Presentation titlePage 21

Figure 9: Pupil-Teacher Ratio in public basic schools in Ghana

Presentation titlePage 22

4. Management of the capitation grant

• The process is far from this orderly process

A head-teacher fills about 10 different forms Call meetings with teachers and SMC a number of times Travel to the district office a number of times and to the bank to check

balance

“……this is not good because it affects teaching and learning” (Interview with a Head-teacher of a JHS). Head-teachers have a number of concerns:

Inconsistencies in the vetting process of the SPIP creating considerable frustrations.

No clarity on what proportion of the grant should be spent on what item or activity

(Box 1: Interview with a head-teacher of a three stream basic school)

Presentation titlePage 24

Absence of an implementation manual to guide – head-teachers, staff, and SMC members

Delays: across the country, the grant is on the average about a year behind all schools’ SPIPs

Antedated receipts are not accepted in discharging grant money received for passed terms

High transaction cost of assessing the money – reducing the effective amount drawn by schools

◦ The amount is woefully inadequate for a school’s activities (considering the number of other levies paid, and timing of release)

Coping strategies:

Head-teachers adopt two main coping strategies essentially to get the schools running whilst waiting for the capitation grant money, avoid receipts being rejected and also to minimise the high transaction cost:

Rely on PTA support and also levies to run schools.

Make purchases from these resources but ask for receipts to be signed undated. Such receipts are then later dated to account for the expenditure of the capitation grant money.

Some head-teachers, especially those in rural schools, leave the money in their school account to accumulate for about two or three tranches and then go for it as a lump sum.

Presentation titlePage 27

Figure 10: Parents' perception of the relevance of the capitation grant, by type of locality of residence (%)

5. Relevance of the policy and the counterfactual

Presentation titlePage 28

 What can be done additionally to improve the quality of basic school education Figure 11: Head-teachers’ suggestions how to improve the quality of basic education

Presentation titlePage 29

 How to improve access to basic school education

Figure 12: Head-teachers’ suggestions to help more pupils to have access to basic education (%)

Conclusion There are considerable positives to the scheme.

However, citizens are not satisfied with the implementation.

They are concerned that, they are still made to pay some levies such as examination fees, extra-classes, collection, and sports and culture levies.

Recommendations The continuous relevance of the policy depends largely on timely release of grant amount to the schools.

At the governmental level, the MoE & the GES must:

Find a way of facilitating a quicker release of the grant to the schools at the beginning of the school academic year.Parents and heads of schools make two appeals; 1) an increase of the amount, and 2) the use of a base amount given to all schools according to need in addition to the grant per a child

Policy recommendations at the low level:

Find a way to reduce the transaction cost associated with accessing the money.

Let the Capitation grant utilization manuals get down to the school level and not remain only with the accountants or circuit supervisors.

There must be a way of vetting and accepting antedated receipts bearing in mind that whilst head-teachers are waiting for the grant the schools have to be ran.

Thank you