SMERU’s POLICY IMPACT ON

SCHOOL OPERATIONAL

ASSISTANCE (BOS) PROGRAM

Nuning Akhmadi

The SMERU Research Institute

Presented at CEPA Symposium

Colombo, 26 –30 November 2007

1

SMERU Research Institute

An independent institution for research and policy studies, providing accurate and timely information and objective analysis on various socio-economic, poverty, decentralization and vulnerability issues considered most urgent and relevant for the welfare of the people of Indonesia

SMERU adopts both quantitative and qualitative research methods.

2

Outline of Presentation

I. Background of BOS

II. SMERU’s Research: Objectives &

Methodology

III. Findings & Recommendations

IV. Policy Impacts

V. Challenges

VI. Lessons learnt

3

I. BACKGROUND (1)

School Operational Assistance (BOS)

• One of the programs to reduce the impact of increased fuel price, started in July 2005

• Distributed to and managed by schools

• Size of budget allocation based on number of students

- target : 39.6 million students

- budget: Rp5,1136 trillion (Jul – Dec, 2005)

• Administered by the Ministry of Education

4

Background (2)

Objectives:

• Provide assistance to schools so that students

don’t have to pay tuition fees

• Help schools maintaining the quality of

education

• Support universal education (9 year-compulsory

basic education program)

5

II. SMERU’S RESEARCHObjectives:

To evaluate the implementation of BOS

To provide input towards program improvement

and future program planning

Methodology:

Qualitative approach, in-depth interviews

Timeline: Feb – March 2005

Study area: 10 districts/cities in 5 provinces

(Purposive:urban/rural, dispersed, relatively small

and large BOS funds)6

Locations of Field Research

Kab. Taputl:1 SDNegeri1 SDSwasta1 MINegeri

1 SMPNegeri1 SMPSwasta

Kota PematangSiantar:1 SDNegeri

1 SDSwasta(nonpenerima)1 MISwasta1 MTs Negeri1 MTs Swasta

Kab. Taputl:1 SDNegeri1 SDSwasta1 MINegeri

1 SMPNegeri1 SMPSwasta

Kota PematangSiantar:1 SDNegeri

1 SDSwasta(nonpenerima)1 MISwasta1 MTs Negeri1 MTs Swasta

Kab. Malang:1 MINegeri

1 SMPNegeri

1 SMPSwasta1 Salafiyah

Kota Pasuruan:1 SDNegeri

1 SDSwasta1 MISwasta1 MTs Negeri

Kab. Malang:1 MINegeri

1 SMPNegeri

1 SMPSwasta1 Salafiyah

Kota Pasuruan:1 SDNegeri

1 SDSwasta1 MISwasta1 MTs Negeri

Kab. Lebak:1 SDNegeri

2 SDSwasta(1nonpenerima)1 MISwasta1 MTs Negeri2Salafiyah

Kota Cilegon:1 SDNegeri1 SDSwasta

(nonpenerima)1 MINegeri

1 SMPNegeri1 SMPSwasta1MTs Swasta

Kab. Lebak:1 SDNegeri

2 SDSwasta(1nonpenerima)1 MISwasta1 MTs Negeri2Salafiyah

Kota Cilegon:1 SDNegeri1 SDSwasta

(nonpenerima)1 MINegeri

1 SMPNegeri1 SMPSwasta1MTs Swasta

Kota Mataram:

1 SD Negeri

1 SD Swasta

1 SMP Negeri

1 MTs Swasta

Kab. Lombok Tengah:

1 SD Negeri

1 MI Swasta

1 SMP Negeri

1 Salafiyah

Kota Mataram:

1 SD Negeri

1 SD Swasta

1 SMP Negeri

1 MTs Swasta

Kab. Lombok Tengah:

1 SD Negeri

1 MI Swasta

1 SMP Negeri

1 Salafiyah

Kota Manado:1 SD Negeri1 SD Swasta

1 SMP Negeri1 SMP Swasta

Kab. Minut :1 SD Negeri

2 SD Swasta1 SMP Negeri

Kota Manado:1 SD Negeri1 SD Swasta

1 SMP Negeri1 SMP Swasta

Kab. Minut :1 SD Negeri

2 SD Swasta1 SMP Negeri

III. FINDINGS &

RECOMMENDATIONS

• Program achievement and impact indication

• Level of satisfaction with program

implementation

• Data collection and allocation of funds

• Program campaigning

• Channeling and disbursement of funds

8

Findings &

Recommendation (2)

• Utilization of funds

• Reporting, monitoring and evaluation

• Handling of complaints and problems

• Institutional affairs.

9

IV. SMERU’S

POLICY IMPACT (1)

• Ministry of Education conducted similar

evaluation in wider sample areas

• Development and dissemination of new

program guidelines

• Improvement in budget allocation system,

and flexibility for provincial and district

authority to reallocate funds

• Flexibility for schools re: use of funds

10

SMERU’s Policy Impact (2)

• Better program socialization/campaign

• Improvement in disbursement/distribution of funds

• Higher priority/free tuition for poor students; less tuition fee for non poor students.

• Improved school transparency and accountability

• Regular semestral reports by schools

11

SMERU’s Policy Impact (3)

• Establishment of internal (BOS management

Team) and external (NGOs, public entity)

monitoring and evaluation

• Wider public announcement via mass media,

school committees, informal socialization

(village meeting, religious activities, etc)

• Establishment of Complaint Units, toll-free

number

12

SMERU’s Policy Impact (4)

• Improved selection of competent Working Unit

members

• More flexible structure of BOS team,

depending on the competence of Working

Units

• Mechanism from deconcentration budget to

special funds allocation for education is being

explored.

13

V. CHALLENGES (1)

• Making policymakers begin to understand the

value of evidence-based research

• Understanding the political dimensions of specific

policy changes

• Building institutional bridges to improve

communication and effective interaction between

researchers and policymakers, and to strengthen

the integration of policy and evidence.

14

Challenges (2)

• Amplifying research findings and policy

recommendations through publications, policy

briefs, newsletters, website and links, and other

channels/networking

• Establishing convening network to develop

systematic and sustainable linkages between

researchers, national planning board, related high

level policymakers and practitioners

15

Challenges (3)

• Improving public debate to encourage people to

address problems with new perspectives

• Facilitating linkages and cooperation among

CSOs, enhancing capacity and promoting public

accountability

• Providing easy and free access to all SMERU’s

publications, reports, working papers, and NGO

Database through SMERU website:

www.smeru.or.id.

16

VI. LESSONS LEARNT (1)• Openness of policymakers to accept and accommodate

input from outside is crucial

• Political will from policymakers is essential to have

research findings getting translated into actual policy

change

• Translating/linking research and policy is a not so easy

undertaking,

• Strong evidence and the urgency of the issues/policy/

program may speed up the political process towards the

adoption of research findings and recommendations.

17

Lessons Learnt (2)

• Determining policy options and selecting research

findings that have practical application

• Monitoring and evaluating the policy impact of

SMERU’s findings and recommendations is a

continued challenge.

• Policy impact on decision making is often

restricted by its voluntary nature.

18

19

Lessons Learnt (3)

• Institutional integrity, objectivity, capacity, and

research quality are paramount.

• The policy capacity of the executive,

legislative, researchers as well as other

stakeholders need to be strengthened.

• Direct participation in policy making is more

effective as it offers the opportunity to

convince policy makers and provide direct

inputs for policy.

ON-GOING RESEARCH (1)

1. The Mechanism and Uses of the Specific

Allocation Fund (DAK) in Indonesian

Decentralization Financing

2. Chronic Poverty and Household Dynamics:

The Case of Indonesia

3. Independent Evaluation of Rice Subsidy for

the Poor

20

On-going Research (2)

4. Vision Indonesia 2030: Policy Dimension on

Subsidy, Social Protection System, Income

Distribution Improvement, and Poverty Reduction

5. Vision Indonesia 2030: Policy Dimension on

Labor Market Reform and Productivity

Improvement

6. Study on Strengthening the Poverty Reduction

Capacity of Local Governments through

Participatory Poverty Assessment (PPA) in

Kabupaten Nias and Kabupaten Nias Selatan 21

On-going Research (3)

7. Qualitative Baseline Study for the Conditional

Cash Transfer (CCT) Programs

8. High Maternal Mortality Rates in Indonesia:

Causes and Solutions

9. The Correlates of Poverty in Large and Small

Areas: Evidence from Indonesian Poverty

Map Data

22

FUTURE

RESEARCH PLAN (1)

1. Promoting the Implementation of the

Community-Based Monitoring System (CBMS)

2. Improving the Policy and Regulatory

Environment for Business in NTT

3. Analysis of the Targeting and Effects of Special-

Area Subsidies and Allowances for Primary

School Teachers

23

Future

Research Plan (2)

5. Better Education through Reformed

Management and Universal Teacher

Upgrading (BERMUTU)

6. Improving Local Governance in Indonesia to

Accelerate Economic Growth: The Case of

the Agricultural Sector

24

Thank You