Funding of home economics education for the success for the universal basic eduction.

Introduction:

Obioma (2006), observed that the culture of globalization has given to new social and economic polices and priorities.

Two goal clusters have become prominent in the global reform context. These are the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) and the Education-for-all (EFA) Goals. The MDG’s are: Eradication of extreme poverty and hunger; Achievement of universal Primary Education; etc

The EFA goals interlock with the MDG’s and also drive the direction in education development globally.

Nigeria as a signatory to both the MDG’s and EFA goals adopted the National Economic Empowerment and Development strategy (NEEDS) as a reform measure in 2004. the critical elements were summarized as Value re-orientation; Poverty Eradication; Job creation and employment generation; Empowering people through Education.

Therefore the implications for Home Economics Education in the NEEDS context are Improvement of quality and Acquisition of entrepreneurial skills.

According to Ingawa (2002), Our education system unfortunately is aimed at preparing the child for secondary schools, because in all practical purposes both in structure and content, emphasis is placed on literacy and numeracy at the expense of life skills. Unfriendly school environment, poor infrastructure and facilities add to low enrollment. The increasing unemployment has led to negative perceptions of the relevance and value of education provision, lowering the quality of learning out come and skills acquisition. To ensure successful implementation of the UBE program, Home Economics Education should be funded.

The centrality of the Home Economics Education sector therefore places a burden on each and every Home Economist to see that the program succeeds. If the matter is funding, our commitment is to provide the fund, monitor its use and ensure effectiveness and efficiency.

I hereby expose suggestions for improving on the funding of Home Economics Education for the success of UBE Scheme. I will in my presentation be guided to attempted answers to the following:

1. What are funds used for in the Home Economics Education Sector?
2. Where do the funds come from?
3. What is the volume of funds available for Home Economics Education?
4. What have been the consequences of inadequate funding of Home Economics Education?
5. What are the constraints to inadequate funding of Home Economics Education.
6. What strategies may be adopted to improve Home Economics Education funding in Nigeria.

I WHAT ARE THE FUNDS USED FOR IN HOME ECONOMICS EDUCATION BY UBE SCHEME

One of the key resources required by every organisation (or institution) for effective performance is finance. This is especially so when the task to the implemented is an innovation (Bassey, 2000).

The Universal Basic Education (UBE) is a new Educational program proposed by the Federal Government of Nigeria for the Primary School System and the junior secondary level. The program is to the free and compulsory to all children of school age. The first thing that occurs to an ordinary person when Educationists (Homec) talk about funds for Education it goes into various capital and recurrent expenditure besides salaries. Some of the areas of expenditure include infrastructure, equipment, instructional/teaching materials, resources for learning, personnel to implement education program – teachers and support staff. Infrastructure refers to buildings, housing, classrooms, laboratories, workshops, administrative blocks with appropriate furniture and workbenches. Equipment includes Home Economics Laboratory/Workshop equipped for various forms of practicals, consumable and non-consumable materials for skills development, etc. learning resources-include well-equipped library with Home Economics textbooks and current Home Economics journals.

Personnel cost refer to emoluments for teaching and non-teaching Home Economics staff. To meet the basic needs in Home Economics Education much fund is required for the hundreds of secondary/technical schools and numerous Primary Schools, not easily quantifiable.

II WHERE DO THE FUNDS COME FROM?
The Education decree No. 7 of 1992 stipulates that all companies operating in Nigeria with a minimum of 100 employees are required to contribute 2.0 percent of their pre-tax earnings to the Education Tax Fund for the purpose of funding Education (Okeke 2005, UBE 2004).

Federal intervention in UBE will be funded through:
(i) Not less than 20% of the Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF) of the Federal Government;
(ii) Funds/contributions in form of Federal Government Guaranteed credits;
(iii) Local/international donor grants;
(iv) The federal intervention fund to states will be used for the purpose of broadening access improving quality and ensuring equity in basic education, but not for teachers’ emoluments and overload costs. The components are as follows:
1. Substantial party of the CRF will be disbursed to states as matching grants;
2. Part of it will be disbursed to states for special intervention to support
(a) Initiatives by states to correct educational imbalance up to 2010;
(b) Efforts by states to provide special education for the physically and mentally challenged;
(c) Efforts by states t o implement school feeding program.
(d) Disbursement of funds to states will be through SUBEBS, for renovation, construction, furnishing,
(3) Disbursement of grants to states will be dependent
on the provision of 50% counterpart funds by states.
(4) UBEC may withhold further disbursement to a state if it
is not satisfied that funds earlier disbursed had been
judiciously utilized.
(5) To access the funds, states shall:
6) Present acceptable annual implementations plans based
on EFA/MDGS and those projects and program that address their peculiar educational problems (UBEC, 2004).

Funds allocated by Federal Government to Education sectors are normally distributed to the various tiers of education-primary, secondary and tertiary. State Governments also fund Education. Their source is primarily their allocation from the federal account, their state VAT and state general revenue through local taxes, school levies etc. state fund mainly secondary level of Education and a significant part of tertiary Education which the State established themselves. Earlier than April 2002, they were not involved in funding Primary Education when funding meant for Primary Education was not channeled to states. But since April 2002, States control and fund primary education with funds sent specifically for primary Education through UBEC. Local Governments are also involved in funding Education at the primary school level. Local government revenues come from statutory allocations from Federal Account proceeds from VAT and internally generated funds.

Apart from Federal, State and Local Government funding education, there are other sources of funds.

Education Tax fund- This fund, which was instituted in 1998, stipulated that corporation and companies operating at a certain capacity level, registered in Nigeria contribute 2% of their annual assessable profit to the fund. The funds are normally given as grants to primary, secondary, tertiary levels at proportion of 20:30:50.

Multinational Companies such as shell. Texaco, chevron also make contribution funds as their social responsibility to their host communities.

In actual fact, host communities demand that companies operating in their areas fund capital projects such as constructing school blocks, health centers, etc. it is also the case that these multinational companies award generous and large scale scholarship to Nigerian students.

International development agencies such as World Bank, UNICEF, UNESCO, DFID, USAID patterning with Nigeria in development program provide funds and /or materials as financial contributions to education sector in Nigeria.

Community-based funding.. local communities contribute funds and material to establish and maintain educational institutions especially at the primary/secondary school level. The parent-teachers Association levies are added fund for Education.

Institution generated funds; Institution of learning do generate funds internally through endowments donations from philanthropist or organizations and from Economic/income generating ventures undertaken by them (Okeke, 2005).

Though I have mentioned these several sources through which the education sector is funded, I must emphasize that Home Economics education in the Primary and Junior secondary School level are funded by the students and parents of those students except for the payment of salaries. The Home Economic Education expenditure comes largely from government allocation (Salaries only). What is important is to find out the volume of fund provided by Government for Home Economics Education.

WHAT IS THE VOLUME OF FUNDS FOR HOME ECONOMIC/UBE
it has not been easy to have a reliable and comprehensive statistics of amount of funds coming from governments to education sector (Hincliffe 2002 in Okeke, 2005).

The Federal Executive Council approved the criteria for fund utilization of UBE intervention fund to the states and FCT as Pre-Primary Education (5%); primary Education (60%) and Junior Secondary level (35%).

The 2% of the CRF amount in 2005 and 2006 financial years:

(i) was N24,300 billion in 2005
(ii) N30,480 billion in 2006 and is to be
(iii) N35 billion in the 2007 budget.

The 2% CRF is disbursed to the states in the following proportions:
(1) 70% matching grant (i.e fund contributed both Federal and state government, on equal basis)
(2) 14% fund to address Educational Imbalance among and within states.
(3) 50% Funds for the Implementation of the home Crown school feeding and Health Programme (HGSF & HP)
(4) 50% incentive to stats for Good Performance
(5) 2% funds for the education of the physically and mentally challenged children.
(6) 2% Funds for monitoring of UBE Programmes.
(7) 2% implementation fund.
Nothing is allocated to Home Economics.

WHAT HAVE BEEN THE CONSEQUENCES OF INADEQUATE FUNDING OF HOME ECONOMICS EDUCATION

The consequences of this under funding of Home Economics Education sector are known to us and needs no emphasis –

But for purposes of appraising you of the realities, lets start with primary schools.

The declaration of Universal Free and Compulsory Basic Education with advocacy program for enrollment has naturally increased enrollment. The result is that there are insufficient classrooms or no classrooms for pupils, no desks, little or no instructional materials, laboratories, equipments, lack of learning resources such as playgrounds, inadequate number of teachers, many of whom are unqualified to teach, and finally teachers who are owed salaries.

The inadequate preparation of primary and Junior secondary school levels, inadequate learning/teaching facilities such as well equipped laboratories and workshops, dilapidated infrastructure where infrastructure exist, etc. results in huge waste of funds and efforts expended on these programmes at Universal Basic Education. The root of this evil is Funding of Home Economics Education.

Shoemaker (1982) in Ozumba 2007 told state presidents of Home Economics Association in a meeting that Home Economists must request fund for programs that meet the social economic needs of our time, each individual must do it in order for the voice of Home Economics to be heard in state and federal level”. Ruth Hoeflin (1982) also cited in Ozumba state that we need help from all of you to act as a public policy network in all the states…”

WHAT ARE THE CONSTRAINTS TO INADEQUATE FUNDING OF HOME ECONOMICS EDUCATION FOR UBE PROGRAMMME

Home Economics education in a sound economic investment for individuals, /families. Home Economic Education increase income, improves health and redresses fertility rates, it reduces poverty and supports the extension of knowledge.

The Universal Basic Education programme was launched in September 1999 by the Obasanjo administration; there are still constraints in its funding
(a) lack of adequate funding of the programme. Most of the
activities of the Universal Basic Education are grounded due to inadequate funds. At present, the commission is relying on the World Bank credit (PEP) to function most of its activities. What happens when it expires
(b) Lack of adequate publicity to project the image of the UBE program. The program has been stigmatized by some people as a ‘white elephant’ project of Obasanjo administration, which will not satisfy the yearning of Nigerians.
(c) Misunderstanding of the role of the Federal Government in the UBE by states and Local Governments.
(d) Endemic problem of lack of accurate, comprehensive and up to date statistics on expenditures is a constraint since such data is essential for realistic budgeting.
(e) There is total imbalance in the administrative cost of teaching and non-teaching education functionaries such that more funds than is required is sent on services of non-tutorial staff (Lab attendants – but non for Home Economics Department).
(f) Doubtful integrity of some of the managers of educational funds, when part of the money appropriated for education needs in misappropriated, mismanaged, inadequacy of funds sets in.
The financing of education in Nigeria has been accomplished through: school fees; grant-in-aid from the various governments; and levies by cultural unions and various forms of voluntary contributions by parents and guardians (Adesua, 1981 in Bassey 2000). In 1969 educational expenditure in Nigeria absorbed 5.0% of the gross National product of the nation. He observed that Federal Government expenditure on education rose from N20.19 million in 1967/68 session to N867.36 million in 1977/78 session.

It should be noted that though education receives the largest share of annual budgets, it still remains inadequately funded because of large numbers and high cost of equipment, Nigeria introduced the Universal Primary Education (UPE), the various State Governments and the Federal Government have consistently spent a percentage of their annual recurrent budgets on education (Ekezie, 1997 in Bassey, 2000).

In recognition of the enormous problem of inadequacy of educational funding in most States of the federation, the Federal Government promulgated the National Primary Education Commission Decree 31 1988. The Decree established the National Primary Education Fund which should be deducted directly from the Federal Government’s 65% contribution to the calculated cost or primary school teachers’ and non-teachers’ salaries. The balance of 35% to be raised is to be contributed on the basis and “demographically criteria for estimating the number of children of primary school age, and an educational planning, including the criterion of forty pupils per teacher in a class.” Also, the Fund was to be disbursed as follows: 20% to all educationally disadvantaged States; and 80% to all the States of the Federation and the federal Territory.

With the identification of these constraints or problems, we are in a better position to seek ways out by suggesting strategies that could work.

VI STRATEGIES THAT CAN BE ADOPTED TO IMPROVE THE FUNDING OF HOME ECONOMICS EDUCATION FOR UBE

Revenue from business venture. Individual primary and junior secondary schools should strive to generate income by engaging in one type of business venture or another depending on where the particular school is located. Home Economics teachers could be assigned to manager the school shop or canteen.

Funds from alumni association. Every institution has alumni student. The primary schools should form their own alumni associations where important old boys and/or girls have a common meeting point from time to time for one thing or another. Funds and assistance with flow to Home Economics Department at intervals.

Private sector contacts. Those primary and junior secondary schools that have successful private and public companies within their catchments area could made contacts with these firms for assistance as the need for these arise. Since these companies have a policy of assisting communities and institutions within their area of operation on a regular basis, the Home Economics Teachers should maintain a good public relations image with the community and the institutions for a free-flow of assistance to them.

Voluntary agency contributions and donations. Another important alternative source of revenue of the funding of Home Economics. Home Economics Teachers could gainfully exploit this opportunity to their best advantage.

Revenue form exhibitions: Home Economics Teachers might be able to organize, from time to time, exhibitions as a source of revenue.

Acrobatic displays and artistic shows. Another possible source of revenue to individual primary and junior secondary school is artistic shows and acrobatic displays. Home Economics Teachers, their staff and students gifted in this area could arrange presentations on a monthly basis. Fees charged should be minimal to attract number of people and increase profit at the end.

Sale of products of Home Economics Department. Sometimes some schools encourage their Home Economics Department to prepare and sell to staff and students assorted types of snacks at low price. This could generate a sizable level of revenue.

CONCLUSION

It has been observed that the constraints to quality of Home Economics Education generally in Nigeria and perhaps more relevant at the foundation level of education which is primary education that spills into Junior secondary school level of education, are:- Inadequate funding, Poor teacher training/teachers welfare, Lack of infrastructural facilities, laboratories, High cost of textbooks/shortage of instructional materials, Diminishing regard for the value of Home Economic Education, Social decadence and political instability.

If and when all the above constraints are addressed and completely removed, an enabling and school friendly environment may make teaching and leaning of Home Economics easier for the teachers and pupils for the successful implementation of the UBE.
Home Economics Education is a tool for improving the quality of life through poverty reduction, job and wealth creation.

REFERENCES

Ajayi, T. (2001). Effective Planning Strategies for UBE Programme.
UBE forum Vol. No 1pp. 23-33.

Anambra State of Nigeria. Strategies Economic Empowerment
Development Strategy. 2nd Ed.

Anikweze, C.M. (2001). The Potential Contributions of Colleges of
Education to the UBE programe. UBE Forum. Vol. No. 1 2001. pp. 47-54

Awosika, B.I. (2006). Status of Resources for Teaching Home
Economic in Secondary Schools in Ondo State. Proceedings of the 49th Annual Conferences of STAN. 372-375.