Upload
dominic-green
View
219
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
FELIPE BARRERA-OSORIOILYSE ZABLE
WORLD BANKMARCH 31 , 2010
A Characterization of the Private Segment of Kenya’s
Educational Sector
Public-Private Partnerships (PPP)
Several governments around the world are adopting novel strategies to reach the Millennium Development Goals Governments are forming alliances with the private sector in primary
education Initiatives like PPPs require a dynamic private sector
The private sector is an important player in education Private providers, by having a more flexible, are more effective in
providing education The separation of roles between the finance role—lead by the
government—and the provision role—lead by the private—can increase efficiency
Contract can serve as a vehicle of quality assurance by introducing clauses of specific delivery of quality of education
A pragmatic view states that the government alone cannot archive universal education, and that the private sector is an important player de facto that can help, especially reaching low-income households
The objective of the study
This study presents a description of the private sector in education in Kenya Presents new data that allows the characterization of
private institutions in Kenya’s education sectorWe make use of a survey collected for the impact
evaluation of Kenya’s Private School Support Program (KPSSP) and a follow-up case study KPSSP aims to provide local currency financing and
advisory services to private K-12 institutions On December 7, 2006, IFC signed a risk-sharing agreement
with K-Rep Bank (K-Rep) of up to 120 million Kenyan shillings ($1.7 million equivalent) on loans extended to eligible private schools in Kenya.
Characteristics of the sample of schools
Baseline survey: Information for 142 schools between September and
November 2007 in Nyeri (19.2% of the sample); Nukuru (16.9%); Mombassa (24.6%), and Nairobi (39.2%)
The sample includes 798 teachers, and 8,863 students 68% are primary, 28% secondary, and 4% both primary and
secondary Sample of schools was chosen from a list of private providers
Follow up case study: Made between June and July 2009 35 schools from the original list Schools that were able to get a loan through the program;
schools that were in the process of applying; and schools that did not apply for the loan.
Characteristics of private schoolsSchools Characteristics
Mean Std. Dev Obs. Infrastructure
Classrooms 10.61 (5.56) 142
Sports fields 1.19 (1.43) 142
Toilets 12.25 (10.33) 142
Desks 235.82 (842.24) 142
Computers (students) 75.94 (838.69) 142
Library books 1077.49 (3169.09) 142 Human factor
Administrative Personnel 18.27 (13.50) 142
Teachers 15.73 (10.05) 142
Students, 2005 147.2 (157.89) 132
Students, 2006 162.79 (164.00) 135
Repeaters, 2005 2.26 (8.65) 135
Repeaters, 2006 5.17 (29.56) 132
Dropouts, 2005 8.79 (12.52) 132
Dropouts, 2006 9.56 (12.18) 133 Administrative capacity
Computers for Account 0.36 (0.48) 142
Computers for Payroll 0.44 (0.50) 142
Computers for Payments 0.38 (0.49) 142
Computers for Stud. Records 0.39 (0.49) 142
Computers for Exam records 0.37 (0.49) 142
Board 0.57 (0.50) 142
Strategic Plan 0.85 (0.36) 142
Staff manual 0.72 (0.45) 142
PTA 0.47 (0.50) 142
01
00
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
200
6
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 9002005
Number of students
Characteristics of teachersTeachers'' characteristics
Mean
Std. Dev Obs.
Teachers characteristics
Age 30.56 (7.45) 785
Male 0.36
794
Secondary certificate 0.13 (0.33) 794
Teacher's college certif. 0.56 (0.50) 794
Teacher's college diploma 0.08 (0.28) 794
Post graduate diploma 0.04 (0.19) 794
University degree 0.18 (0.39) 794
Masters graduate 0.01 (0.11) 794
Year of experience 6.06 (5.97) 770 Time allocation
Number of lessons (week) 27.34 (7.68) 749
Marking (% of time) 0.13 (0.09) 775
Teaching (% of time) 0.49 (0.19) 781
Preparing class (% of time) 0.14 (0.09) 773
Discipline (% of time) 0.05 (0.07) 548
Meeting with parents (% of time) 0.05 (0.07) 430
Administrative task (% of time) 0.08 (0.09) 426
In teachers meetings (% of time) 0.05 (0.06) 587
Meeting with students (% of time) 0.07 (0.09) 647 Classrooms
Homework, every lesson 0.3 (0.46) 798
Homework, every day 0.68 (0.47) 798
Number of students, last lesson 89.05 (238.47) 798
Absenteeism of teacher 0.28 (0.78) 798
Late arrival of teacher 0.32 (0.85) 798
Characteristics of studentsStudent characteristics
Mean
Std. Dev Obs.
Student characteristics
Gender (female) 0.51 (0.5) 8863
Age 12.6 (2.57) 8207
Work for pay 0.03 (0.17) 8863
If yes, hours per week 12.3 (15.72) 182
Number of people in household 6.03 (2.19) 8104
Mother employment
Self-employed 0.37 (0.48) 8067
Employee 0.37 (0.48) 8067
At home 0.27 (0.44) 8067
Father employment
Self-employed 0.34 (0.47) 7272
Employee 0.61 (0.49) 7272
At home 0.05 (0.22) 7272
Household characteristics
Household has:
Television 0.84 (0.37) 8863
Refrigerator 0.46 (0.5) 8863
Radio/stereo 0.91 (0.28) 8863
Computer 0.28 (0.45) 8863
Car 0.43 (0.5) 8863
Bedrooms 0.95 (0.22) 8863
Asset index (1) 0.65 (0.25) 8863
Tap water 0.81 (0.39) 8863
Sewer 0.61 (0.49) 8863
Cooking fuel 0.6 (0.49) 8863
If missed school, number of days in past two weeks 2.94 (2.27) 1949
Hours homework per week 5.87 (5.63) 6983
Ever repeated class 0.39 (0.49) 8863
Mark in math 64.54 (19.87) 8010
Mark in English 66.11 (16.42) 7993
(*) Asset index is equal to total number of assets in the household divided by 6
0 5 10 15 20
Primary
Average fees Transport
Lunch Tutoring
Boarding
0 5 10 15 20
Secondary
Average fees Transport
Lunch Tutoring
Boarding
1000 KSHAverage fees per term
Schools’ average fees per term were around 18,800 KSH ($284) and 18,200 KSH (US$275) per term for primary and secondary
0 .1 .2 .3 .4
Activities, last Math class
Copy from blackboard Working independently
Working in group Free timeTalking with friend Solving problems on blackboardTaking exam
Active learning is the critical factor to induce gains in achievement. Copy from blackboard and “independent work” account for more than 50% of the time spend in the class.
0.2
.4.6
.8
Fra
ction
0 2 4 6 8 10Number of days
Math teacher
0.2
.4.6
.8
Fra
ction
0 2 4 6 8 10Number of days
English teacher
Students answersAbsentism of teachers
30% of students reported math teacher missed at least one day of school in the past week (40% for English)
Sustainability of Schools
The sustainability of schools depends on the stream of students, which in turn, determines the flow of revenues The majority of the demand for these schools comes from nearby
householdsYear of creation can be a strong indicator of the viability
of the schoolThese schools are observing a huge demandLiquidity constrains are binding for private schools
80% of schools indicated that they would access a bank loan at prevailing interest rates if they could, to be used predominantly for physical expansion and, secondarily, purchasing computers and other educational materials.
Own savings and net revenues were the predominant options for financing non-recurrent expenditures
There is a positive relationship between number of students and year of creation
020
040
060
080
010
00N
umbe
r stu
dent
s, 2
006
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010Starting year
Starting year of the school
0.0
5.1
.15
.2.2
5F
ract
ion
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200
Application for enrollment
There is demand for the schools…
010
000
2000
030
000
4000
0C
ost,
2005
0 10000 20000 30000 40000Revenues, 2005
1000 KSH0
1000
020
000
3000
040
000
Cos
t, 20
06
0 10000 20000 30000 40000Revenues, 2006
1000 KSH
Revenues versus costs
….and they are either breaking even or making profits
0.0
5.1
.15
.2F
ract
ion
0 20 40 60 80 100
On time
0.0
5.1
.15
.2F
ract
ion
0 20 40 60 80 100
At end of term
Fee % unable to collect
Schools have difficulties in collecting fees. More than 50% of schools were not able to collect an average of around 15% of fees by the end of the term
Own savings and net revenues were mainoptions for financing non-recurrent expenditures
0 .1 .2 .3 .4
Options for finance of non-recurrent expenditures
Net revenues Existing bank loanInformal money lender Own savings
Director loans Sell share holdingsDonations OverdraftChurch funding School fees
0 .2 .4 .6 .8
Potential uses of loan
Expand exis. facil Repair / Modern.Train teachers BusComputers / Others mater.
Loan to be used predominantly for physical expansion and purchasing computers and other educational materials
Administrative capacity
Schools reported employing 18 administrative staff This number seems high given that the average school
size is 140-160 students.The majority of schools do not utilize
computerized systems for accounting, payroll, tuition, and student and exam records
Critical decision-making is distributed across different people
The use of computers is low
0.2
.4.6
De
nsi
ty
No YesAccounts
0.2
.4.6
De
nsi
ty
No YesPayroll
0.2
.4.6
De
nsi
ty
No YesTuition payment
0.2
.4.6
De
nsi
ty
No YesStud. records
0.2
.4.6
De
nsi
ty
No YesExam records
Use of computerized systems
Three main messages
The private education sector in Africa is growing fast, even more than the public counterpart
The quality of private schools diverges enormously
The private sector is reaching low-income populations, filling a vacuum that the government is leaving behind.
Some policy implications
The study presents a mixed view of private institutions in Kenya’s education sector. They are schools with fairy high level of infrastructure, with young qualified teachers. They are schools with an “adequate” and growing number of students enrolled from
middle- to low-income populations. However, they are schools that face serious administrative challenges (they do not
have systematic book-keeping or audited financial statements) These schools are hiring young teachers, with low experience and the
minimum level of education required for the profession Young teachers are open to new challenges However, the schools are reaching very difficult populations: need experience teachers
The KPSSP is proposing the establishment of a Local School Development Provider, which can provide educational services for the private sector If the government is interested in PPPs, and the private sector is reaching low-income
households, there are reasons for public intervention. If the private sector is sorely for-profit, reaching well-off populations, an institution
that provides technical and administrative support for schools should be financed by private funds.