1 / 21

Assessing Frontline Service Delivery in Education

Assessing Frontline Service Delivery in Education. Ritva Reinikka World Bank - DECRG HD week 2002. Motivation and Context. Public spending traditionally analyzed from efficiency and equity viewpoint using budget allocations data Government performance becoming more of an issue

baraiza
Download Presentation

Assessing Frontline Service Delivery in Education

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Assessing Frontline Service Delivery in Education Ritva Reinikka World Bank - DECRG HD week 2002

  2. Motivation and Context • Public spending traditionally analyzed from efficiency and equity viewpoint using budget allocations data • Government performance becoming more of an issue • Relationship between public spending and outcomes ambiguous at best • Large literature on growth and education and health outcomes

  3. Identification Problem • Budget allocations poor predictors of services beneficiaries receive when institutions are weak • Problem of identification • Household survey evidence shows that when measured by actual output education or credit, services important for poverty reduction • The “black box” of service delivery

  4. From this: ? Real outcomes • Improved learning • Better health status • Welfare • distribution • risk Government expenditure The question is how to get this:

  5. Public providers Real outcomes • Learning • Health status • Welfare • distribution • risk Government expenditure Household behavior Private providers services Things are not that easy

  6. Provision of Services • Financing and provision are two key aspects of service delivery • Until now financing been given most attention • Provision becoming more of an issue (WDR 2003/04) • Different types of providers • Government • Non-profits • Private for profit

  7. Provider surveys • Public expenditure tracking surveys (PETS) • Information on actual spending is scarce • Follow money through different tiers of government down to frontline facilities using sample survey techniques • Interviews and data collection from records • Quantitative service delivery surveys (QSDS) • Frontline service providers/facilities in basic services • Inspired by micro-level household and firm surveys • Cover different type of providers (by ownership) • Triangulation of data

  8. Uses of provider surveys • PETS/QSDS can be combined • With each other • Downstream with household surveys • Upstream with public officials surveys • Diagnostic tool • Stylized facts of service provision • Quantify “moral hazard” (asymmetric information) • Capacity building when a collaborative effort

  9. Policy research • Primary data for empirical research • Applies know microeconomic approaches to evaluation of public spending • Design of incentives • Decentralization • Voice, asymmetric information • Accountability and oversight • Participation of users and partnership with others

  10. Uganda PETS • Aggregate spending kept in check since 1992 (cash budgeting) and allocations improved in the late-1990s • Little information on actual spending & service delivery • Only a perception survey of households • Diagnostic objective initially but panel also allowed research • Hypothesis: primary enrollment stagnant despite a large increase in public spending • No accounting information available on frontline service delivery units

  11. Uganda PETS: school survey • Survey of 250 schools to collect detailed quantitative data from school records • Not possible to do on all spending items, sectors, or tiers of government • Aggregated salary data available at the center • Little data at the local government level and not forthcoming from officials • Schools kept relatively good records

  12. Uganda school survey • Only 13% of non-wage expenditure reached the schools in 1991-95 on average • Variation between schools • Statistical analysis shows that leakage depends on school characteristics (size, income, share of qualified teachers) • PTA primary source of school funding • Enrollment increased much more than indicated by national statistics (60% in 5 years) • Health facility survey also carried out but didn’t work

  13. Uganda PETS findings • Responsibility for primary education delegated to districts • Decentralization initially worsened leakage • Poor oversight by central government • Allocation of resources based on relative bargaining power rather than efficiency and equity considerations

  14. Impact • Power of systematic information vs. anecdotes • Information on transfers of funds to local governments regularly published in national media since 1996 • Posters at schools to inform citizens about school-level funding from central government • Publicity also signals central government oversight • In 2000 and 2001 PETS carried out locally • 80-90% of non-wage spending reaches schools but delays • Tracking surveys expanded to other basic services

  15. Tanzania PETS • Accounting firm (1999), and NGO and research institute have implemented (2001) as part of PER • Track pro-poor expenditures in priority sectors at all levels • Combinations of documents, records, facility visits, interviews • In 2001, for example, survey of 5 districts, 4 primary schools and 4 clinics in each districts (small sample)

  16. Tanzania PETS Findings • Non-wage leakage 57% in education 41% in health (1999) • Larger delays in rural areas and non-wage recurrent (rather than salaries) • Priority to council departments rather than service facilities • Cash budgeting and aggregated records undermine transparency • Information asymmetry, e.g. local administration versus parents

  17. Ghana PETS • Primary and secondary school and health facility pilot surveys • Recall method instead of records (not preferable) • Central government and district level • 80% of salary and 50% of non-salary expenditures reached primary schools • Only 20% of public health spending reached districts

  18. Honduras PETS • Moral hazard and frontline health education workers • Ghost workers • 2% in health;3-5% in education • Absenteeism • 27% in health; 14% in education • Job migration • 5% in health

  19. Follow-up • Cannot be overemphasized • Uganda followed up immediately producing a huge improvement • Tanzania initiated information dissemination and is beginning a public awareness campaign • In Ghana little follow-up • In Honduras little follow-up

  20. Pilot Round of QSDS • Education • Laos: household survey link • Papua New Guinea • Uganda: information and voice • Zambia: household survey link

  21. Lessons from provider surveys • Can be used to study different problems in service delivery • Diagnostics of leakage in Africa • Staff behavior in Honduran social services • Ghost, absenteeism, job capture by employees • Rigorous sampling, pre-testing required • Qualitative approach yields hypotheses, quantitative surveys diagnosis and analysis

More Related