Teertha Dhakal National Planning Commission Secretariat Nepal

1. Transfer of school management to communities in NepalA participatory management approach for improving results Teertha Dhakal National Planning Commission Secretariat Nepal

2. Discussion outline • Context • Management transfer • Intermediate results • Issues • Lessons learnt/ Replicability

3. Context • Nepal made some achievements in improving educational results in the last decade • Primary school NER has reached around 87% in 2006, • gender disparity in edu. has been reduced • However, there are various issues in educational outcomes • low quality in public schools, • disparities in educational achievements across social groups • low ownership of communities in the management of schools, resulting in lack of accountability of schools to local people • These problems of school effectiveness are associated with mgmt factor

4. Communities and school mgmt. • Though communities had been involved in the management of education in Nepal, in 1971 GoN nationalized all community schools which is heralded an era of state intervention in the school system • However, after the nationalization process performances of these schools further deteriorated, • The GON then realized that the nationalization of community schools was a policy mistake, • Thus, it is in 2002 when the GoN decided to transfer mgmt. of public schools to communities and so far over 2500 schools have already been transferred to communities

5. Role of School Mgmt. Committees (SMCs) • School management committees comprising parents, teachers, village education committee members are authorized to • recruit teachers • Involve in preparing school improvement plans • undertake management and supervision of schools • decide how to spend the funds provided as school grants; and • evaluate the performance of teachers.

6. Intermediate results achieved • SMCs and parents have become pro-active in reforming their schoolsthat has contributed to • improve transparency and accountability in school functioning (NPC 2006). • have better physical facilities compared to their peers since the parents also involve in raising funds • level of awareness and ownership at the local level has increased • teachers’ absenteeism has been reduced and • teaching learning has gained momentum due to regular local monitoring and supervision (TRSE, 2006) • Learning achievements measured in terms of mean scores on specifically designed tests was found generally better in community transferred schools than control group (public) schools (New Era Ltd., 2006).

7. Issues • This reform initiative in public schooling system has been the centre of criticisms as well • There is pressure from teachers and their unions to stop the programme • The capacity of the community to manage the schools needs to be built consistently • Due to these and also due to political instability, the programme slowed down and hence despite the PRSP target of transferring 8000 schools, by July 2007 the achievement was only 2500.

8. Where is MfDR in this initiative? Result based practices have been adopted in different stages • It is mandatory that these schools have to prepare School Improvement Plans (SIPs) on a participatory basis to improve their performances • Budget grants to these schools are tied up with SIPs and also with implementation performances • In addition to the Education MIS, that provides data for some pre-identified result indicators, there are provisions of independent review/evaluation as a part of M&E in this programme Hence, it has tried to internalize the MfDR principles in planning, budgeting and monitoring processes, which all have been contributing to the achievement of the results.

9. Lessons learnt (replicability?) • Management transfer to communities and results orientation have helped to improve educational results of public schools in Nepal • However, in order to sustain it, commitment and support of every stakeholder is important • This may be replicated (?) with • marginal funding increment, and • incorporation of the basic features of MfDR in different stages of the programme cycle

10. Thank you