March, 2010 Institute of Social and Policy Sciences (I-SAPS) Islamabad

1. Public Expenditure Tracking in Pakistan’s Education Sector March, 2010Institute of Social and Policy Sciences (I-SAPS)Islamabad

2. Objectives of the Presentation The objectives of presentation are to: • Share key inferences of education budget tracking and service delivery survey • Identify areas for increasing transparency and accountability • Generate debate on linkages between education data, policy and budgets

3. Objective of the Assessment The objectives were to: • Identify major issues in budgetary allocations and disbursements at district and school level; • Identify the issues at the service delivery level; and • Assess the satisfaction of beneficiaries of education services.

4. Framework of Analysis & Methodology Education Policies Budget Tracking & Service Delivery Education Data Education Budget • Enrollment and success rate of students • Available and filled-in teaching posts • Missing Facilities • School Councils • Beneficiary satisfaction • Current • Salary • Non-salary • Development • School Councils • National Education Policy • Provincial Reform Frameworks • MTDF • Enrolment • Number of Schools • Teaching Staff • Missing Facilities Methodology • Review of Budget Books • Service Delivery Survey • Beneficiary Assessment Survey 4

5. Setting the Context: Some Data • Looking at the 5-9 years age group • 66% are enrolled, • 30% make it to the 5th grade • 10% go on to middle school • 6.7% go on to secondary school • 0.6% go on to higher secondary • Girls on average obtain 1.3 years of formal schooling while the average for boys is 3.8 years • Nearly 50% of all girls never attend school (22% for boys) Source: NEMIS, 2000 to 2005

6. Setting the Context: Missing Facilities • 16.8% of all public primary schools are shelter-less • 39% have no drinking water • 62% have no electricity • 49% have no toilets • 46% have no boundary walls • Dismal performance on learning objectives Source: NEC 2005

7. Setting the Context: Student Achievement

8. Expenditure on Education as % of GDP

9. Education in Punjab: Setting the Context In Punjab province NER at primary level has decreased 1% from 62% during 2006-07 to 61% in 2007-08 . The size of education budget in the Punjab has been cut to the tune of Rs.5.2 billion that is 10 percent reduction in 2009-10 . 9

10. District Rawalpindi: Case Study

11. District Education Profile: Rawalpindi • Literacy Rate rate 75% • Primary Enrollment 43% public and 57% private sector • Boys enrollment in private sector is higher than girls enrolment, whereas more girls are enrolled in public sector schools

12. District Education Profile (Conti) • Middle Level Enrollment is 51% Less than the Primary Level • There are 2,418 pubic schools, out of which 49% schools are for male and 51% schools are for female students. • There are 13,355 teachers out of which male teachers are 51% and female teachers constitute 49%.

13. Missing Facilities in Rawalpindi • 31% schools do not have electricity. • 21% schools are without boundary walls. • 25% schools do not have toilet blocks. • 24% schools are without drinking water facility. • Gender disaggregated data indicates that 53% girls’ schools and 47% boys’ school do not have drinking water facility • Data reveals most daunting picture for primary schools, as out of total schools without basic facilities in district Rawalpindi 83% are primary schools.

14. District Budget Tracking

15. Budget Tracking Output Level: District Budget Profile -39% • The development budget has been reduced from 14% to 7% of the total education budget in FY 2009-10. • The development budget in 2009-10 decreased 39% than previous year’s allocations.

16. Current Budget Primary 3% 4% 4% 4% • Despite 4% spending in girls schools during past 2 years the non-salary share has been decreased to 3%. • Medium Term Development Framework (MTDF) suggests 12 % non salary cost of the total current budget

17. Development Budget Elementary Education 136.21 (-31%) • In FY 2009-10, 31% of the development budget of elementary education has been allocated to boys’ schools and 69% has been allocated to girls’ schools.

18. District Budget for School Councils 12.31(-4%) 5.58 (-3%) • Despite the fact that 99% schools in Rawalpindi and Murree tehsils possess school councils the budget allocated at district level has been reduced by 4% and 3%, respectively. • The reduction in SC funds in 2009-10 indicates that either fewer school councils would receive funds during current year or SCs might receive less amount than they received last year.

19. School Council Fund Transfer Timeframe • Schools Reported: • According to the funds transfer list prepared and signed by the EDO and DDOs, the majority of schools were transferred funds during May 2009, which is the last quarter of fiscal year. This is because SCs received last year’s share of funds quite late and considered it to be fund for 2008-09.

20. Amount Transferred • Total Amount Transferred: -16% • 33% schools (selected for SDS) reported to have received SC funds whereas district government data shows funds transfer to 50% schools. • Out of the schools who received funds 35% reported to have received less than the amount transferred in official district records.

21. School Councils: Key Inferences • Service Delivery Survey: • Around 29% SCs are not chaired by the head teachers. • 13% SCs have members in even numbers. • Around 29% of the SCs have never monitored teachers attendance. • 30% SCs never utilized their funds around 81% SCs never employed temporary teachers • Beneficiary Assessment: • 38% of the parents did not know that school councils receive funds from government . • More than 60% parents reported that school councils did not help improve the health facilities and sports equipment. • Almost 50% of the parents said that the school councils have not helped improve the hygiene and sanitation facilities.

22. SDS & BAS Key Finding other than SC Service Delivery Survey: • 48% female teachers posted out of their neighborhoods, which is against the commitment made by the Punjab government. • The percentage of students who passed primary examinations fell by 6% in Rawalpindi • Government data informs that 22% of the select 40 schools are without boundary walls whereas the SDS findings inform it is 29%. • Beneficiary Assessment: • Around 61% of the parents said that school structure/ building is available but it is not sufficient, whereas 53% of the parents have same views about school furniture.

23. Some Key Inferences • Missing Links between Data, Policy and Budgets • Issues in Budget Transfer from District to Schools • Lack of Gender Responsive and Need-based Budgeting • Discrepancies in Provincial Data and School Records • Declining Trend in Enrollment and Success Rates • SCs not all Performing Functions Effectively • Issues of Transparency and Accountability

24. Agenda for Future • Taking the Study as Baseline Track Budget for Next 3-4 years (detailed tracking to find-out leakage and misuse) • Disseminate Results & Leverage Public Demand for Need Based Budgeting • Advocacy for Allocating Budgets in Concurrence with the Data and Policy Targets (Non-salary at least 12% of current budget) • Demand Articulation for Transparency • Building Capacity of Local Partners for Budget Tracking

25. Thank You