2004年-世界发展银行全球_Russian_Federation_-_Per_Capita_Financing_of_Education___Experience_and_Issues_32页_433kb

Summary: Per Capita Financing of Education in the Russian Federation

Core Content

This policy note evaluates the implementation of per capita financing schemes for general education in the Russian Federation, focusing on the principle of "money follows the student." It highlights the challenges and lessons learned from the pilot regions and considers implications for broader policy reform.

Main Issues and Findings

1. Resource Mobilization and Efficiency

• The traditional budget allocation process is non-transparent, unpredictable, and inefficient, leading to poor resource use.
• The 2003 law on subventions defines minimum educational standards and assigns responsibilities between federal and regional levels, marking a key step toward improving resource allocation.
• The per capita financing system aims to increase transparency and efficiency by basing allocations on student numbers and other relevant factors.

2. School Autonomy and Financial Management

• School directors are expected to manage block grants, open school bank accounts, and use funds flexibly, including from non-state sources.
• Accountability is ensured through Boards of Trustees at the school, municipal, and republican levels.
• However, financial autonomy is still constrained by the Treasury system, which requires prior approval and limits flexibility.

3. Regional Implementation

• Samara Oblast: The first to implement per capita financing for pre-schools and vocational schools in 1998. Early evidence shows a reduction in the number of schools and classes, and improved pupil-to-teacher ratios. However, school directors lack necessary budget-planning skills.
• Chuvash Republic: Implemented per capita financing for general schools since 2001. Schools are legal entities, and the system includes both teaching and maintenance funding. Only a minority of schools have full autonomy.
• Yaroslavl Oblast: Implemented the system in 2003 with a formula incorporating five adjustment coefficients for different school needs. All schools are legal entities, and the system is more transparent and flexible.

4. Challenges with the Treasury System

• The introduction of Treasury control over regional budgets threatens school financial autonomy due to excessive line items and prior approval requirements.
• Despite this, some regions (like Chuvash Republic and Yaroslavl) have adapted the system, allowing schools to operate with reasonable autonomy.
• The Budget Code requires all budget transactions to be conducted through a single budget account, which restricts the use of extra-budgetary funds and limits flexibility.

5. International Experience

• International examples suggest that centralized treasury control and school autonomy can coexist with proper regulation.
• The report recommends aligning per capita financing with national and international standards, and streamlining budget classifications.

Key Points

• Per Capita Financing Benefits:

  • Increases transparency and predictability.
  • Encourages efficient resource use and accountability.
  • Allows schools to respond to student needs more effectively.

• Implementation Constraints:

  • Lack of budget-planning and accounting skills among stakeholders.
  • Inconsistent regional approaches to adjustment coefficients.
  • Conflicts between the Education Law and the Budget Code regarding financial autonomy.

• Policy Implications:

  • The new law on subventions is essential but must be implemented and monitored closely.
  • Schools need clear guidelines on their financial responsibilities and autonomy.
  • Training for school directors, accountants, and local authorities is critical.
  • National guidelines for Treasury control and budget classifications should be developed to support the system.

Promising Policy Options

1. Local Compromises: Develop agreements between education and finance departments at the regional level to improve flexibility and reduce bureaucratic hurdles.
2. School-Based Management: Transition schools into legal entities with operational autonomy, similar to the English model, but within a regulated framework.
3. National Guidelines: Establish national standards for regional Treasury control practices to ensure consistency and support the implementation of per capita financing.

Conclusion

The per capita financing system in Russia has the potential to improve efficiency and equity in education, but its success depends on overcoming institutional and regulatory barriers. While pilot regions show some positive outcomes, the system remains constrained by the existing Treasury control mechanisms and the lack of capacity among local stakeholders. A long-term solution requires national coordination, capacity building, and a clear legal framework that supports both financial autonomy and fiscal responsibility.