We understand the question to refer to the Primary Education Development
Programme (PEDP2) in Bangladesh. We have located a paper (attached)
prepared by consultants for the development partners involved in PEPD2,
that outlines a strategy to reduce the risks to proper financial management,
transparency and accountability within this programme, and we provide
the summary of its findings here. We have also consulted the TI-Bangladesh
chapter for information on corruption and education in Bangladesh
and record their input here. There are of course other civil society
organisations working on anti-corruption issues in Bangladesh, although
TI-Bangladesh is a particularly strong organisation.
This is the report of a consultancy mission to Bangladesh in September
2003 supported by the development partners (DPs) that are involved
in the GoB's Second Primary Education Development Programme (PEDP
2). The purpose of the mission was to progress preparation of
a strategy over PEDP 2 to reduce the risks to proper financial management,
transparency and accountability.
The report considers the policy commitments and actions included
in PEDP 2 that are explicitly intended to reduce the risk of mismanagement
and leakage, alongside some country-wide developments, such as the
2003 procurement regulations and guidelines, that will be incorporated
into PEDP 2 procedures. The study concludes that PEDP 2 has incorporatedsignificant mechanisms and structures to reduce the risk of mismanagement
and leakage. These include the provision for external performance
and financial auditing, capacity building, and support for increased
delegation of financial and managerial responsibility to field level
offices and schools. The latter is to be driven by the outcomes
of and Organisational Analysis in the first 9 months of PEDP 2.
The study recognises the potential of the support modality: "pooled
funding" of development support to a coherent programme
approach, with joint monitoring, should simplify the financial administration
of PEDP 2 and bring more resources to monitoring and audit functions.
However, the report identifies risks to the effectiveness
of these measures, including the urgency of establishing an effective
Finance and Procurement Division in DPE, the need for coordination
with other actions, including the Organisational Analysis, FMRP
and the ADB's proposed multi-sector Anti-Corruption TA. Other areas
in which it is suggested that PEDP 2 might strengthen the accountability
and transparency framework around new actions include those concerning
the creation of a new primary education cadre, stipends programme
and block grants to schools.
The study assesses the risk, and its potential impact, in other
activities of PEDP 2, including: procurement of civil works, procurement
of textbooks and human-resource management. The issue of school-fees
is considered, as a risk both to equitable access and the transparency
of school financing.
Wherever possible the study has identified ways to reduce the
risks in each of these areas. These include: technical improvement
to control procedures (e.g. regulations, guidelines/manuals and
computerisation); capacity-building; pro-active approaches to increasing
accountability, transparency and redress; and external audits, supervision
and quality assurance, including random-testing, of textbooks and
other procured items.
The report emphasises the importance of measures to improve
transparency across the implementation of PEDP 2 and suggests
a pro-active strategy whereby all documentation is considered public,
and made available physically or electronically to interested parties.
Section 3 considers how these options might be developed, prioritised
and built into an over-arching risk-reduction strategy for PEDP
2. Critical dependencies on other PEDP 2 actions, such as the Organisational
Analysis, and on cooperation with other agencies of projects have
been identified to the extent possible.
The report suggests processes for planning and producing the strategy
on the basis of stakeholder consultation and more detailed fact-finding.
It also suggests the need for a proactive approach to information
dissemination and awareness-raising about the strategy. An indicative
timeline for planning the risk-reduction strategy over the first
9 months of PEDP 2 is included.
Main Recommendations:
Take a pro-active approach to increasing transparency and information
to support public accountability, at all levels.
Increase use of mass media to generate awareness about
the organisation and financing of the primary education system,
the regulations concerning the stipend programme, the charging of
school fees and the transparency of school finances.
12. Develop procedures and regulations to improve the objectivity
of staff appointments, promotions and transfers, including open
marking and an appeals procedure.
Consider more radical approaches to textbook procurement that
could undermine the stranglehold exerted by the printers' cartel,
and technical steps to allow better stock control of textbooks.
Assist LGED to become actively involved in risk-reduction, using
its information base, outreach and authority to improve its own
procedures for identification of malpractice and enforcement of
regulations.
15. Prioritise a review of stipend programme after one or two years
to confirm its proper use of funds.
Consider options by which school "fees" may be legitimised
in some circumstances, with a social safety net, so as to ensure
such funds are properly accountable.
Look beyond the SMCs for school level accountability, by improving
formal inspection of accounts and involving community and Union
Parishad in accountability.
Explicitly address risk-reduction measures through the Organisational
Analysis and identify the areas in the TORS. Planning requires active
coordination with OA on accountability and lines of communications
in the delegation of responsibility to the field level offices of
DPE.
Actively coordinate with FMRP, on procedures for the FPD.
Consider recruitment of specialist, independent consultants to
help identify the technical steps forward in HR management, textbooks,
civil works and use of mass media for awareness raising.
One important point, not mentioned in the report, is the monitoring
role played by civil society organisations (CSOs). To illustrate this,
we provide information, in part II, on kinds of monitoring activities
carried out by TI chapters. (There are of course other CSOs but we
were able to consult with TI national chapters in the time available
for this response.)
Part II: Corruption in the education sector and the role of CSOs
TI-Bangladesh has been focusing on addressing the issue of corruption
in education at the service recipients' end through Citizen's Report
Cards on the quality of service and extent of corruption at the
local level. Report Cards are a measure of content and quality of public
service, and the nature, process and implications of corruption at local
levels. These are produced in collaboration with local level watchdog
bodies known as Committees of Concerned Citizens (CCCs). Report
cards are usually on institutions that affect citizens' lives directly,
such as education, health, local government, etc. The Report Cards are
used as instruments in demanding accountability and transparency in
public service-providing institutions like schools and in transforming
such institutions into "islands of integrity".
All reports are in local language but the Executive Director (Iftekhar
Zaman) of TI-Bangladesh would be happy to be contacted for further
details. His email address is edtib@ti-bangladesh.org TI-Bangladesh
has recently announced that they will publish more than a dozen diagnostic
reports on widespread corruption in various vital service-delivering
organisations between June and December 2006, in an effort to get
the ills healed before the next polls.
By way of illustration of the other kinds of activities CSOs could
carry out, it is worth considering the activity ofPoder Ciudadano
(PC), TI's national chapter in Argentina who, in 2003, was
asked by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MEST)
to assist in the procurement process of more than three million
textbooks. The textbooks were to be distributed to all provinces,
benefiting almost two million students. The request was due to complaints
about the selection process in the initial phase of the textbook purchase.
An agreement was subsequently signed between MEST and PC to introduce
transparency measures, including open debates about terms of reference,
conflict of interest guidelines and the signature of an Integrity
Pact. For more information see a report on this activity in the TI
publication Stealing
the Future (2005), which also documents other civil society anti-corruption
initiatives in the education sector.
