Slide1 l.jpg
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 26

The Impacts of Proposed Education Minimum Service Standards on a Sample of Districts in Indonesia Stephen Dunn January 13, 2005 PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 119 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

The Impacts of Proposed Education Minimum Service Standards on a Sample of Districts in Indonesia Stephen Dunn January 13, 2005. Overview. “Snapshot” of Indonesia and Districts “Pre-History” of Decentralization in Indonesia The Era of Decentralization

Download Presentation

The Impacts of Proposed Education Minimum Service Standards on a Sample of Districts in Indonesia Stephen Dunn January 13, 2005

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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Slide1 l.jpg

The Impacts of Proposed Education Minimum Service Standards on a Sample of Districts in Indonesia

Stephen Dunn

January 13, 2005


Overview l.jpg

Overview

  • “Snapshot” of Indonesia and Districts

  • “Pre-History” of Decentralization in Indonesia

  • The Era of Decentralization

  • Motivation for Minimum Service Standards

  • Overview of Proposed Minimum Service Standards

  • Study and Results

  • Conclusions, Issues, Looking Forward


Snapshot of indonesia l.jpg

Snapshot of Indonesia

  • Population 214.5 million (WB, 2003)

  • 14,000 islands

  • 3,000 miles east-to-west

  • 43% urban (WB, 2002)

  • Life expectancy at birth 66.7 Years, (WB, 2002)

  • GDP per capita $971 (WB, 2003)

  • Poverty Headcount Index 16% (WB, 2002)


Snapshot of districts l.jpg

Snapshot of Districts

  • 420 Districts

  • District Populations from <25,000 to Over 4 Million

  • Environments from “Metro” to isolated, agricultural

  • Poverty Headcount Index from >90% to <2% (SUSENAS, 2002)

  • Annual Per Capita Own-Source Revenues from nearly Rp 1 million to below Rp 5,000 (WB, 2001)


Snapshot of district education l.jpg

Snapshot of District Education

  • Primary NER:91% for lowest-income districts 91% for highest-income districts

  • Sen. Sec. NER:18% for lowest-income districts 62% for highest-income districts

    (WB, 2002)

  • Per-Student APBD Education Expenditure Range: minimum < Rp 50,000 maximum > Rp 300,000

    (author’s data)


Pre history of decentralization in indonesia l.jpg

“Pre-History” of Decentralization in Indonesia

  • Prior to 1999 Laws, Highly Centralized Government

  • Low Control of Own-Resources

  • Deconcentrated Sectoral Offices in Districts

  • Limited District Autonomy

  • Little Scope for Local Choice in Service Delivery


The era of decentralization overview l.jpg

The Era of DecentralizationOverview

  • Motivations for Decentralization

  • Decentralization to District Level

  • Laws 22, 25 of 1999 and “Big Bang” in 2001

  • Assets Transferred to Districts

  • Local Planning and Budgeting

  • New Revenue Streams: DAU and DAK

  • Share of Sub-National Spending Doubled


The era of decentralization finance and management of education l.jpg

The Era of DecentralizationFinance and Management of Education

  • Education managed at district and school level

  • DAU is primary source of district funds

  • Education competes for district resources with other sectors

  • There are numerous other funding streams

  • Large amount of district autonomy, emerging school autonomy


Motivation for education minimum service standards l.jpg

Motivation forEducation Minimum Service Standards

  • Education is a national concern

  • Desire to increase equity across districts

  • Indonesia has low achievement relative to peers

  • Political-Economic Aspects


Overview of proposed education minimum service standards l.jpg

Overview of ProposedEducation Minimum Service Standards

SPM cover:

  • formal education (grades 1-12)

  • equivalent out-of-school education

  • pre-school

  • sports

  • “youth participation” / “social participation”

  • special education

  • teacher/school development and management


Overview of proposed education minimum service standards11 l.jpg

Overview of ProposedEducation Minimum Service Standards

  • Large number of SPM (297)

  • Some SPM are conflicting or internally inconsistent

  • “Education” SPM cover many non-education areas

  • Districts do not collect much of the data needed


Perform study overview l.jpg

PERFORM StudyOverview

  • Goal: understand expenditure implications of SPM

  • Team: PERFORM staff, MOF, RTI

  • SPM focus: formal education (grades 1-12)

  • * Districts: 15 districts from 10 provinces

  • * Model: policy options projection model

  • * Results: projections from 2002-2017, “lower bound”


Perform study districts l.jpg

PERFORM StudyDistricts


Perform study policy options projection model l.jpg

PERFORM Studypolicy options projection model

  • User can set policy/functional parameters (SPM) and examine impacts

  • A “what if?” model to examine policy impacts

  • Single district focus, output for 15 districts

  • District base data

  • Projections over 2002-2017

  • Results for many variables/indicators


Results overview l.jpg

ResultsOverview

  • Interpretation of Results

  • Total Expenditure

  • Expenditure by Level

  • Expenditure by Type

  • Enrollment Indicators, Teachers, Classrooms, Books, Teacher and Classroom Upgrading


Results expenditure l.jpg

ResultsExpenditure

  • Proposed SPM result in a 54% increase in district expenditure on education by the year 2007 (“lower bound” estimate of SPM impact)

  • Expenditure impact varies significantly across districts

  • Within districts, expenditure impact varies dramatically for different levels of education


Results expenditure17 l.jpg

ResultsExpenditure


Results total education expenditure kab batang l.jpg

ResultsTotal Education Expenditure: Kab. Batang


Results sd mi expenditure kab batang l.jpg

ResultsSD/MI Expenditure: Kab. Batang


Results sma ma expenditure kab batang l.jpg

ResultsSMA/MA Expenditure: Kab. Batang


Results sd mi enrollment kab batang l.jpg

ResultsSD/MI Enrollment: Kab. Batang


Results sma ma enrollment kab batang l.jpg

ResultsSMA/MA Enrollment: Kab. Batang


Results sd mi and sma ma teacher demand kab batang l.jpg

ResultsSD/MI and SMA/MA Teacher Demand: Kab. Batang


Conclusions l.jpg

Conclusions

  • If implemented, the proposed SPM would result in large expenditure increases for many districts

  • Achievement of SPM would require substantial level-specific actions/changes for each district

  • Time as well as money will be required


Issues questions l.jpg

Issues/Questions

  • Are the proposed SPM Affordable?

  • Are the SPM really “minimum service standards”?

  • Should all districts be subject to the same SPM?

  • Should SPM apply to all of education or to particular aspects?

  • What about empowerment of schools, school committees, and district education boards?

  • Why are the enrollment SPM not met?

  • How to finance SPM?

  • How to hold districts accountable for meeting SPM?


Looking forward l.jpg

Looking Forward

  • Before promulgation, more analysis: financial and educationist perspectives

  • Definition of obligatory functions within education

  • Tsunami Impacts? focus, spending priorities, timeframe


  • Login