Case Study of Per Student Financing: Macedonia Session 11 Education Policy Reform Course Kiev, March 26, 2008 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Case Study of Per Student Financing: Macedonia Session 11 Education Policy Reform Course Kiev, March 26, 2008 PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 776587-NDUxO



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Case Study of Per Student Financing: Macedonia Session 11 Education Policy Reform Course Kiev, March 26, 2008

Description:

Case Study of Per Student Financing: Macedonia Session 11 Education Policy ... of education 3 Principles of per student financing were defined in the ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:21
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 22
Provided by: JanH53
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Case Study of Per Student Financing: Macedonia Session 11 Education Policy Reform Course Kiev, March 26, 2008


1
Case Study of Per Student Financing
MacedoniaSession 11Education Policy Reform
CourseKiev, March 26, 2008
  • Jan Herczynski

2
Structure of the presentation
  • Political decentralization Ohrid agreements
  • Phases of fiscal decentralization
  • Education decentralization strategy
  • Allocation formulas
  • Impact on municipalities

3
Political decentralization
  • Ohrid agreements of 2001 defined decentralization
    as an instrument to preserve unity of the country
    and accomodate ethnic tensions
  • Significant powers promised to municipalities
  • Altogether, 31 laws have been adapted by
    Macedonian parliament to implement
    decentralization

4
Political decentralization 2
  • Main laws
  • Law on Local Governments (defined which sectors
    will de decentralized)
  • Law on Financing of Local Governments (defined
    new financial mechanism and phases of fiscal
    decentralization)
  • Law on Territorial Organization (consolidated 123
    municipalities into 83)

5
Fiscal decentralization
  • Phases of fiscal decentralization
  • First Phase transfer of properties, of
    management responsibilities, and of financial
    responsibility for maintenance of institutions
  • Second Phase transfer of responsibility for
    employment and for salaries

6
Fiscal decentralization 2
  • Types of grants for two phases
  • First Phase categorical grants for the financing
    of specific programs, without the salaries,
  • Second Phase block grants for the financing of
    sectors, including the salaries

7
Fiscal decentralization 3
  • During Phase 1 fragmentation of public finance
  • Maintenance expenditures from local budgets,
    using the categorical grants,
  • Salaries directly from the central budget,
  • Fragmentation is temporary but lasts from July
    2005 until now

8
Fiscal decentralization 4
  • First Phase started on July 1, 2005
  • Selected 42 out of 83 municipalities begun Second
    Phase on September 1, 2007
  • 9 more municipalities entered Second Phase on
    Janury 1, 2008
  • It is expected that all municipalities will enter
    the Second Phase in 2009 or 2010

9
Decentralization of education
  • In 2005 Ministry of Education adopted an
    Education Decentralization Strategy, for the
    First Phase of fiscal decentralization
  • The strategy discussed a number of functions not
    specified in decentralization laws (student
    transportation, dormitories)
  • On the basis of the strategy laws on primary and
    secondary education were ammended

10
Decentralization of education 2
  • Student transportation was decentralized
    immediately to local governments in 2005
  • Decentralization of dormitories was delayed until
    2007
  • Transfer of ownership of school properties is a
    long process and is still not completed

11
Decentralization of education 3
  • Principles of per student financing were defined
    in the education laws
  • The responsibility for defining the allocation
    formula rests with the Ministry of Education
  • Allocation formula is adopted each year by the
    Government of Macedonia

12
Decentralization of education 4
  • Important part of decentralization is the
    transfer of responsibilities for appointment of
    school directors
  • The ammended laws define specific professional
    selection procedure
  • Mayor of municipality must appoint the selected
    candidate
  • Depoliticized appointment process

13
Allocation formulas
  • It was legally necessary to have separate
    allocation formulas for primary and secondary
    schools
  • In 2005 and 2006 a separate formula for student
    transportation,
  • Since September 2007 also separate formulas for
    the categorical and block grants

14
Education grants 2
July 2005 to December 2006 Categorical grant for primary Categorical for secondary Categorical grant for student transport
January to August 2007 Categorical grant for primary Categorical grant for secondary
Since September 2007 Categorical grant for primary Categorical grant for secondary Block grant for primary Block grant for secondary
15
Allocation formulas 3
  • Allocation formulas for education grants were
    developed by Ministry of Education
  • It was decided to use population density as the
    main criterion of allocation
  • Since this is not a characteristics of local
    education systems, initially there was opposition
    to this idea

16
Allocation formulas 4
  • Twice allocation formulas were used for
    incomplete fiscal year (in 2005 and 2007)
  • The Ministry decided it is not possible to use a
    per student formula in this situation
  • Instead, allocation proportional to historical
    costs was used

17
Allocation formulas 5
  • Categorical grants for primary education
  • Lump sum for all municipalities
  • Additional weights for students in sparcely
    populated municipalities
  • below 25 pers./sq. km. 0.6
  • 25 to 40 pers./sq. km. 0.4
  • 40 to 70 pers./sq. km. 0.2

18
Allocation formulas 6
  • Block grants for primary education
  • Lump sum for all municipalities
  • Additional weights for population density
  • below 20 pers./sq. km. 1.4
  • 20 to 35 pers./sq. km. 0.8
  • 35 to 70 pers./sq. km. 0.6
  • Weight 1 for special needs students, 0.2 for
    subject teaching

19
Allocation formulas 7
  • Categorical grants for secondary education
  • Weight if population density is less 40 per. per
    sq. km. 0.1
  • Weight for general academic schools 1
  • Block grants for secondary education
  • Lump sum for all relevant municipalities
  • Weight for general academic schools 0.1

20
Allocation formulas 8
  • Block grants for secondary education
  • Lump sum for all relevant municipalities
  • Weight for general academic schools 0.1

21
Impact on municipalities
  • Local education strategies
  • New budgeting procedures for schools
  • Review and reorganization of student
    transportation
  • Network planning and consolidation
  • Functional reorganization of municipal education
    departments
About PowerShow.com