COMMUNITY SUPPORT GRANTS MANAGEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION CENTRES IN MAGUTUNI, THARAKA-NITHI COUNTY, KENYA

0
471

ABSTRACT

The Government of Kenya recognizes the importance of Early Childhood Development, as one of the most important levers for accelerating the attainment of Education for All (EFA) and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). There has been tremendous effort by the Government of Kenya (GOK) and collaborating partners to improve the welfare of the Kenyan child through various funding programmes, for instance, community support grants. However, these efforts have been fragmented and with little impact especially on management and implementation process. In realization, an effective ECD programme enhances a country’s social economic growth and political stability, the Government, through the Sessional Paper No. 1 of 2005, A Policy Framework on funding Education, Training and Research are recommended. This study investigated into management and implementation of community support grants in ECE centres in Magutuni location, Tharaka Nithi County. Kenya, it examined methods and sources of CSG funding, established the management of CSG, find out challenges facing management and implementation of CSG, it also suggested mitigation measures to the identified challenges. The study is based on the theory advanced by Henry Fayol. The findings will be used address the identified gaps on the government mode of funding and management of ECE within the study location and in the country as a whole. The study target population of 911, which has been narrowed down to a sample size of 141 through random sampling. The questioners were used as research instrument for collecting data in study. The instruments were pre-tested in Eight ECE centers that were not included in the actual study to check its reliability and validity. Eight School managers participated, 10 teachers, 20 parents, one DICECE officer and one DEO. Thus, the obtained data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. The study finds out that; bursaries from the government are the main source of government community grants, the decision on how to use the grant was made by the school management committee, the challenges that are faced in management and implementation of community support grants were; there is a delay in disbursement of the funds, corruption and misuse of funds, diversion of the  funds to primary school and inattendance of parents to discussion on how the funds will be used. The study concluded that little funds were allocated to ECE centres and it was managed poorly. The study recommended that; the CSG should be channelled to ECE centres using the proper means of allocation to avoid funds diversion and funds should be adequate. The District Education Officer and the DICECE officer should enhance measures that will ensure all funds are well managed and implemented.

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUTION AND CONTEXTUALIZATION OF THE STUDY

  1.             Introduction

This section presents the background information, statement of the problem, objectives, research questions, significance of the study, limitations and delimitations of the study, it also focuses on assumptions, theoretical and conceptual framework, and operational definition of terms.

            Background to the Study

Essentially, there are two sources of funding for ECCE: public and private (Kamerman, 2000). Public government funding can be a major source of funds for ECCE, particularly for low income families who cannot afford to make large private contributions. Within the public sector, funding may come from central/national or state/local government or both. At the national level funding may be come from Education, Health, and Social Services Departments, depending on the extent to which ECCE provision includes developmental as well as educational services.

National governments may have more political strength to collect revenues; regional governments may be relied on more to organize delivery of programs, accommodating local conditions. Private funds for ECCE are expenditures by households directly on the education of their own children. In some countries, private funding supplements the public funding to raise the full amount of ECCE to a desired level (typically, families will pay for more hours or longer days than are publicly funded); or, even where programs are free at point of

enrolment, parents may be expected to contribute for some extra services. In other cases, family incomes may be the only way for families to choose different types of early education.

Other private sources may also be available to fund ECCE. These include donations by independent entities, such as churches, charities, or companies. Private groups may offer funds only for some inputs (e.g. facilities or capacity building) or for a restricted time period (e.g. capital grants). Private funding also comes from loans or grants by supranational agencies, such as the World Bank. (During the 1990s, the World Bank committed funds in many countries, totalling $770 million for freestanding ECCE projects and $600 million for integrated projects).

Public and private funding sources are interdependent (Scrivner and Wolfe, 2003). In some countries public funding is only available for those with low incomes or in deprived areas; wealthier families must make larger private contributions. Given high demand for ECCE in countries where female labour force participation rates are high, families are likely to make private efforts even where public funding is scarce. Moreover, private cost-sharing (i.e. families paying some amount towards the provision of ECCE) is often essential to ensure that public funds are deployed efficiently according to need. (Where ECCE is free, it will be over-used). In some cases, public funds are used to establish a functioning pre-school market (e.g. with inspections and codes of registration for providers); families then choose and pay within the framework of a regulated market.

Globally, the challenge of providing adequate education facility in primary schools is huge (World Bank, 2003) as cited by Bonner et al. (2003). To meet Education for All (EFA) target and Universal access to primary education worldwide, an estimated number of about 10

million classrooms need to be built at a cost of US $ 30 billion. In United States of America (USA), school facilities in the seventeenth century were one-room structures with limited furnishings functioning primarily as shelter (O’Neill, 2000). As towns grew, additional rooms were added for additional space with little regard for modernizing the schools. The nineteenth century ushered in such advances as chalkboards, gas lighting and central heating. By the twentieth century, arrangement of buildings and classrooms allowed for active student participation. In1940’s, it is noted that there was an increase in class size as well as attention to characteristics such as increased student access and natural lighting according to O’Neill (2002).

In recent time, the mean age of a school building in the USA is given as forty-two years, with 28 percent of school buildings built before 1950. Many of the building materials, furnishings, and equipment will not last half that long and will require constant upkeep, maintenance, and inevitable replacement to deter building obsolescence. The cost of maintaining public schools and facilities is enormous. According to government accountability office and American society for civil engineers, school districts have been under spending on maintenance and repair for many years. Most district schools do not have resources to address the maintenance. According to BEST (2005), it is the responsibility of each state to ensure that every child has access to a quality education. In many states, the courts have determined that school facilities that provide educational settings suited to the state’s determined curriculum are a significant part of this responsibility. However, school facility management and construction have traditionally been entirely the responsibility of the school district.

Many states particularly those who have increased funding to local school districts have put in place policies, procedures and technical assistance to ensure that their public school

facilities are educationally adequate. To meet this goal, each state should know the condition of their school facilities, the elements and determining factors in meeting the state’s educational curriculum outcomes. The state should measure these factors against one another to determine each facility’s education adequacy. It should then ensure that facilities that do not meet these standards are brought up to an acceptable level. Those that do not have financial resources to bring their school facilities up to state standards are given assistance to ensure that the facilities meet the state standards.

In New Zealand, the ECE policies have been underpinned by the government’s vision that all children have the opportunity to participate in high-quality ECE. Funding regulatory policies seek to balance a range of ECE-related goals while facilitating diversity and quality of ECE sector in order to meet their needs (Munford, 2007).

In Bolivia’s, Integrated Child Development Project, Parents pay a flat monthly fee equivalent to US$2.50 (in 1993 prices) for the first child and a decreasing fee for each additional child enrolled. Families and communities can also make contributions in-kind; such as construction are involved in management of ECE centres (Child Fund org, 2013).

In Chile, according to SIDA (2000), the Ministry of Education under took a programme to improve the quality of primary schools in disadvantaged areas of the country. Approximately 10 percent of the country’s existing primary schools (1200) took part in the programme at a cost of just under $ 17 million US dollars. The programme provided for the improvement of learning environment, including improvement of infrastructure and provision of classrooms, libraries and learning materials among others. The evaluation of the programme found significance improved achievement among participating schools as compared to their prior

performance and performance of schools outside of these programme. The results indicated that focusing on key quality dimensions within a learning system can have an important impact on the students’ skills and as a result the life chances.

In Vietnam, communities with social economic difficulties as well as mountain and island communities are given high priority and childcare fees are not levied. Establishments of public early childhood education facilities concentrated mainly in communities which are facing difficulties whereas the non public facilities and privatisation of public facilities is carried out in urban and economically developed areas.

In South Africa, facilities maintenance is also beginning to be recognized (Xaba, 2012). First, with its prescription as a school governance function in the Schools Act and, secondly, with the recent proclamation of the Schedule for the National Policy for an Equitable Provision of an Enabling School Physical Teaching and Learning Environment of the Republic of South Africa (2008). It also states that if well maintained and managed, school facilities provide conducive environments that translate into quality education. If well maintained and utilized, they can also realize substantial efficiency gains by deepening national and sector values of school-community relationships and community ownership of schools. On maintenance policies, Xaba (2012) found that schools did not have specific policies on facilities maintenance. The study also indicated that there were poor systems for facilities maintenance inspection in South Africa. Inspections were mostly conducted in an ad hoc manner and only when equipment broke down or became damaged would an inspection of facilities related to that object be conducted.

In Botswana the Ministry of Education has been assigned the task of providing an enabling environment through preschool grants to NGOS and Community Based Organizations (CBOs) for infrastructural development. In addition to this the MOE is charged with the responsibility of developing teaching and learning materials that should guide the operation of all preschool education (Republic of Botswana, 2003)

In Ghana, poverty and lack of access to good nutrition are major barriers preventing many parents from sending their children to pre-school which resulted in widespread neglect, malnutrition and abuse of many children. As a national strategy, the government of Ghana introduced the capitation grant policy to provide free meals to children in schools to improve the nutritional needs of disadvantaged children. By the beginning of March 2008 the government of Ghana, in collaboration of The New Partnership of Africa’s Development (NAPAD) secretariat had spent US $ 21.82 million on school feeding programme, (SFP). It  is reported that by May 2008, 477714 children in 978 schools across Ghana were benefiting from SFP. This led to an average increase of 40% in primary school enrolment in 2007 (Kwadwo-Agyei, 2008).Egypt engages in promoting ECE education by use of standard quality assurance tools in pre-school education programmes in three governorates. These standards are; developing ECE curricula, support in development of ECE structures and funding programs (Hart and Schulmam, 2002).

In Sub-Saharan Africa and poor countries in Asia, classrooms are typically overcrowded, main buildings and other facilities are inadequate, sites are poorly planned and there is little maintenance (MOE, 2010). The approaches required to make sustainable progress for effective maintenance cost are clear, but challenges to implement remain wanting. Educational programs should include policies that address the condition, improvement and

maintenance of school infrastructure. According to MOE (2010) School construction strategies for universal education in Africa indicate that a school must have appropriate, sufficient and secure buildings. The document states that the design of classroom must be comfortable, accessible, flexible, and adaptable to provide sufficient space to ensure children’s dignity, health and wellbeing are catered for. This means that, the classroom environment should attract learners and therefore more attendance to school. Schools with well maintained permanent building and adequate playgrounds perform better than those  with inadequate facilities (Okeno, 2011). Well designed and maintained school facilities also have an indirect impact on teaching and learning process (BEST, 2005).