This study examined like the river carves a stone, a case study of State Governors refusal to pay counterpart fund for basic education in Nigeria. The study adopted an ex-port facto research design because it looked at past activities of the State Governors and relate them to the existing situation of basic education in Nigeria. A total of 66 participants who have adequate knowledge of government policies and implementations were employed for the study. A questionnaire was used as an instrument of data collection which was centered on issues of basic education funding in Nigeria. Expert validity and reliability analyses were done using content validity and split-half-reliability text techniques. The collated data were analyzed by percentage frequency distribution, means scores, and chi-square. The findings of this study highlight possible measures that seem to encourage the 36 States of Nigeria on adequate measures for funding basic education in Nigeria.
Table of Contents
Abstract........................................................................................................................ 1
Introduction.................................................................................................................. 2
Materials and Method.................................................................................................... 6
Demographic Variables................................................................................................. 7
Hypotheses Testing....................................................................................................... 9
Summary of Findings.................................................................................................. 10
Discussion.................................................................................................................. 11
Study Suggestions....................................................................................................... 13
Conclusion.................................................................................................................. 15
References.................................................................................................................. 16
Abstract
This study examined like the river carves a stone, a case study of State Governors refusal to pay counterpart fund for basic education in Nigeria. The study adopted an ex-port facto research design because it looked at past activities of the State Governors and relate them to the existing situation of basic education in Nigeria. A total of 66 participants who have adequate knowledge of government policies and implementations were employed for the study. A questionnaire was used as an instrument of data collection which was centered on issues of basic education funding in Nigeria. Expert validity and reliability analyses were done using content validity and split-half-reliability text techniques. The collated data were analyzed by percentage frequency distribution, means scores, and chi-square. The result shows no significant difference in the participants’ responses on the attitude of State Governors regarding UBEC funds in Nigeria. In addition, the participants affirmed that the UBEC measures of 50 percent counterpart funds, a detailed action plan, and 70 percent completion of previous UBE projects adopted by UBEC appear to be responsible for the State Governor's refusals to collect their allocations from UBEC in Nigeria. Based on these findings, one could reasonably conclude that as State Governors continue to neglect UBEC counterpart funds for basic education in Nigeria, the need for curiosity would continue to linger among concerned Nigerians. Hence, the findings of this study highlight possible measures that seem to encourage the 36 States of Nigeria on adequate measures for funding basic education in Nigeria.
Keywords: state, governors, refusal, pay, funds, basic, education, nigeria
Introduction
Basic education by law is compulsory for all children of school age in Nigeria. In public schools, it is provided free through the Universal Basic Education (UBE) which is backed by the legislation of Compulsory, Free, and Universal Basic Education Act of 2004. The Act incorporates pre-primary, primary, and junior secondary education to a 10-year basic education. One of the objectives of the UBE program is to provide compulsory, free, and universal basic education for every Nigerian child of school age to reduce the incidence of drop-out from formal schooling (Federal Republic of Nigeria, FRN, 2013).
To achieve this objective, the federal government of Nigeria declared public pre-primary, primary, and junior secondary schools in Nigeria free and compulsory as a fundamental right of all school-age pupils in Nigeria (FRN, 2013). According to the UBE Act, the sole responsibility of basic education is the State and Local government. However, the federal government of Nigeria intervenes in the funding of basic education through a consolidated revenue fund. All the generated income and revenue are paid into a consolidated account and 2 percent of that revenue is directed towards supporting States education. By the Act that established the consolidated revenue, for States to access the 2 percent of the consolidated revenue, they need to contribute 50 percent of the education project they want the federal government to fund. Then, the federal government provides an additional 50 percent which is called the matching grants (Universal Basic Education Commission, UBEC, 2004). The counterpart fund serves as the State's contribution to basic education development and the running of education projects in the States.
The UBE Act provides the 36 States and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) with intervention funds, which can be accessed upon meeting certain conditions. The controversies surrounding the funding of basic education in Nigeria seem to focus on the States providing the 50 percent counterpart funds to access the federal government matching grants, the presentation of a one-year action plan detailing how the funds will be utilized for the development of basic education in the fiscal year, the proposed action plan showing detailed breakdown of how the grant would be used as well as benefiting schools, project description, quantity, locations, unit costs, total cost, and duration for execution of the projects and a detailed 70 percent completion of the previous year projects must be provided before States can access the federal government matching grants from the UBEC (UBEC, 2004).
To access the funds, UBEC classifies states into high, moderate, and low-performing States. In disbursing the funds, UBEC will put the counterpart funds along with the matching grants and disburse to States if they meet the conditions. National Economic Council in 2014 made available N200 billion to States through UBEC that are unable to provide the 50 percent counterpart funds to encourage States to invest in basic education. Commercial banks would lend the money to States at single-digit interest rates. Despite this intervention, 2014 reports revealed that States like Ebony, Cross River, Abia, Benue, Enugu, Kogi, Nasarawa, Ogun, Oyo, and Plateau States top the list of uncollected UBEC intervention funds with over N2 billion yet to be accessed. Followed by States like Akwa-Ibom, Bayelsa, Borno, Delta, Edo, Ekiti, Imo, Kastina, Jigawa, Kebbi, Kwara, Lagos, Niger, Ondo, Osun, Rivers, Yobe, and FCT with over N1 billion uncollected. States like Anambra, Bauchi, Gombe, Kaduna, Kano, Katsina, Sokoto, Taraba, and Zamfara had done fairly well in accessing UBEC intervention funds as of 2014 (Wike, 2014).
Furthermore, in 2018 the sum of N71.3bn was deducted by the federal government from the Paris Club refund accruing to States. The N71.3bn was designated as a federal government matching grant and was made available to UBEC. The unwillingness of the state governors to pay their counterpart funds to access the federal government matching grants from UBEC led the federal government to deduct the sum of N71 billion from the State’s share of the Paris Club refund. In addition, grant waivers were also given to States who are unable to fulfill their 50 percent counterpart agreement (Edukugho, 2010). Despite this, June 2019 reports show that UBEC had fulfilled its obligation by releasing the sum of N142 billion to States for the implementation of basic education. But there are buck of money yet to be accessed by the States.
Based on this, UBEC and other relevant stakeholders accused State Governors of not fulfilling their side of the bargain and the diversion of UBEC funds to other projects. Idoko (2014) reported that some State Governors recorded poor utilization of the UBEC funds. This made the UBEC come up with adequate monitoring and supervision that seem to ensure UBEC funds are used for its purpose. This would lead one to a logical assumption that this UBEC measure appears to be the main reason why State Governors decided to abandon the UBEC funds. Similarly, Stakeholders accused State Governors of obtaining bank loans to secure UBEC matching grants making it difficult for them to utilize the funds accordingly after bank interest deductions.
In line with this accusation, the Nigeria Governor’s forum called for the amendment of Part III, section 41 of the UBEC Act of 2004 which mandated the States to pay 50 percent of counterpart funds for the State to qualify for the federal government matching grant to reduce the 20 million out-of-school children across the country and facilitate access to quality basic education for all.
When the federal government of Nigeria does not support basic education at the state level through consolidated revenue, it is no wonder that the question of inadequate funding of basic education could emerge. It seems logical to conclude that the State's contributions to the funding of basic education would encourage States to invest more in basic education. This means that States that pay counterpart funds to access federal government matching grants would have more money to fund basic education in their States than States that refused to access the UBEC funds. These concerns of experts, scholars, and stakeholders regarding the development of basic education in Nigeria and other major issues raise the question, “How do Nigerians perceive the attitude of State Governors regarding UBEC funds in Nigeria? What could be responsible for the State's refusals to collect their allocations from UBEC? In a bid to provide insight into the highlighted questions, this study explores state governor’s refusal to pay counterpart funds for basic education in Nigeria a case study.
Problem Statement
UBE has been implemented in 2004. However, the issues of funding the UBE remain major controversies in Nigeria. Experts, scholars, and key stakeholders have called for clarified, adjusted, and resolved funding and access to proper basic education in Nigeria.
Based on the above, this study seeks to answer the following questions:
1. How do Nigerians perceive the attitude of State Governors regarding UBEC funds in Nigeria?
2. What is responsible for the State governor’s refusals to collect their allocations from UBEC?
Study Hypotheses
1. Nigerians will significantly differ in their perception regarding State governors' attitude to pay counterpart funds for basic education in Nigeria.
2. UBEC measures will significantly responsible for State governor’s refusals to collect their allocations from UBEC.
Materials and Method
The study adopted an ex-post facto research design because it looked at past activities of the state governors and related them to the existing situation regarding basic education in Nigeria. It is explanatory as it merely explores state governors' refusals to pay counterpart funds for basic education in Nigeria without any manipulation of the independent variables. Because the independent variable cannot be manipulated or uttered, participants who are familiar with the activities of state government policies and implementation were employed. Based on this, the participants were former Special Assistants to the Edo State Governor, staff of the Edo State Ministry of Education, and basic school teachers. A total of 66 participants were employed for the study. The breakdown sample includes three former Senior Special Assistants and six former Special Assistants who worked with the Governor of Edo State between 2013-2016, 23 staff of the Ministry of Education, and 34 basic school teachers in Benin City, Edo State, Nigeria.
A questionnaire was used as an instrument for data collection which was centered on issues of basic education funding in Nigeria. Expert validity and reliability analyses were done using content validity and split-half-reliability text techniques. The questionnaire contains 29 items. The questionnaire checklist covered demographic variables of age, gender, qualification, and job experience. The participants’ responses were rated as Yes or No . Krosnick and Presser (2010) reported that the outcomes of Yes or No ratings tend to be very much related to agreed or disagreed responses. The content of the questionnaire was based on Nigeria's basic education and was distributed to 66 respondents. The collated data were analyzed using percentage frequency distribution, means scores, and chi-square. Percentage frequency distribution and mean scores were used to answer the research questions, while chi-square statistics was used to test the hypotheses formulated for the study.
Demographic Variables
Age Distribution
Age percentage frequency distribution of respondents that participated in the study includes. Aged 20-29 were 2 (3%), aged 31-39 were 26 (39.4%), aged 40-49 were 23 (34.8), and aged 50-59 were 15 (22.8%). The breakdown shows that the age range of the Senior Special Assistant and Special Assistants falls within the age range of 40 -59. The staffs of the ministry fall within 27-59. The basic school teachers fall within age 31-59. This analysis is further shown in Table 1 below:
Table 1: Participants Age Distribution
[This table is not part of this text sample.]
Source:Field Survey, 2024
Gender Distribution
Of the 66 participants who responded to the questions, 29 (43.9%) were male while 37 were female (56.1%). The breakdown shows that out of the three Senior Special Assistants who responded, two were male and one was female. Of the six Special Assistants, 4 were male and two were female. Of the staff of the Ministry of Education, 10 were male and 13 were female. Of the basic school teachers, 13 were male and 21 were female. The analysis is further summarized in Table 2 below:
Table 2: Participants Gender
[This table is not part of this text sample.]
Source:Field Survey, 2024
Qualification
The percentage frequency distribution for participant’s qualification include; NCE/Diploma, 9 (13.7%), Bachelor degrees 34 (51.5%), Masters degrees 21 (31.8%) while Doctoral degrees were 2 (3%). The breakdown revealed that two Senior Special Assistants hold a Master’s degree and one holds a Bachelor's degree. Two Special Assistants hold Masters degrees, three hold a Bachelor's degree, and one hold a diploma certificate. Of the staff of the ministry, 2 hold Doctoral degrees, 1 hold a Master's degree, 16 hold Bachelor's degrees, and 6 hold NCE certificates. Of the basic school teachers, 9 hold NCE certificates, 21 hold Bachelor's degrees, and 6 hold Master's degrees. This analysis is further shown in Table 3 below:
Table 3: Participants Qualification
[This table is not part of this text sample.]
Source:Field Survey, 2024
Participants Job Experience
The percentage frequency distribution of participants’ job experience includes. 0-5 job experiences were 9 (13.7%), 6-10 were 7 (10.6%), 11-15 were 15 (22.7%), 16-20 were 16 (24.2%), 21-25 were 17 (25.8%) and 26-30 were 2 (3%). The breakdown shows that the Senior Special Assistants and Special Assistants had executive arm of government experience of about 0-5 years. The staff of the ministry and basic school teachers that participated had 6-30 years of work, teaching, and administrative experience. This analysis is further summarized in Table 4 below:
Table 4: Participants Job Experience
[This table is not part of this text sample.]
Source:Field Survey, 2024
Hypotheses Testing
Chi-Square
To test the hypotheses chi-square statistic was employed. The hypotheses were tested as follows:
Hypothesis 1: Nigerians will significantly differ in their perception regarding State
Governors' attitudes toward paying counterpart funds for basic education in Nigeria.
Results connected with hypothesis 1 are presented in Table 5 below:
Table 5: State Governors Attitude
[This table is not part of this text sample.]
Note. ** Significant at the .05 level.
The result in Table 5 above shows the calculated X2of the State Governors' attitude regarding UBEC funds for basic education in Nigeria. The hypothesis was tested for a significant difference between the State Governor's attitudes and UBEC funds for basic education in Nigeria. Chi-square was applied to determine the significance of the relationship between the State Governors attitude and UBEC fund along with its x2-value. The chi-square (X2)was .036 and the x2-sig-value was .05. The result showed no significant difference between the State Governors attitude and UBEC fund at .05. Because the X2-value of (0.36) is less than .05, the alternate hypothesis is rejected and the null hypothesis is upheld. Since significant differences do not occur between the State Governors' attitude and UBEC fund, it is logical to conclude that the State Governors' attitude regarding UBEC is significantly responsible for the State's refusal to collect their allocations from UBEC in Nigeria since the responses of the participants were geared towards the direction.
Hypothesis 2: UBEC measures will be significantly responsible for the State's refusals to
collect their allocations from UBEC.
Results connected with hypothesis 2 are presented in Table 6 below:
Table 6: UBEC Measures
[This table is not part of this text sample.]
Note. ** Significant at the .05 level.
Table 6 above shows the calculated UBEC measures responsible for the State's refusals to collect their allocations from UBEC in Nigeria. The hypothesis was tested for significant differences between UBEC measures and state refusals. The Chi-square was employed to determine the significant difference between the UBEC measures and state refusals along with its x2-sig value. The chi-square (X2)was .029 and the p-value was .05. The result revealed that no significant difference existed between the UBEC measures and the State's refusals to collect their allocations from UBEC at .05. Because the X2-value of (0.29) is less than .05, the alternate hypothesis is rejected and the null hypothesis is accepted. Since significant differences do not occur between UBEC measures and state refusals, it is sensible to conclude that the measures adopted by UBEC appear to be responsible for the State Governor's refusal to collect their allocation from UBEC for basic education funds in Nigeria since the responses of the participants were aimed towards the direction.
Summary of Findings
1. States refusals to pay counterpart funds to collect matching grants from UBEC for basic education in Nigeria are highly identified. However, progress has been made by some State Governors to access the federal government matching grants from UBEC are also identified.
2. Senior Special Assistants and Special Assistants show a high degree of identification with the UBEC measures as factors responsible for the State's refusals to collect their allocations from UBEC leading to stacks of money in the UBEC waiting to be collected.
3. Staff of the Ministry of Education and basic school teachers showed a significantly higher agreement with the attitude of State Governors regarding UBEC funds in Nigeria.
4. As to the improvement of basic education, the State Governor’s involvement was identified. The way to encourage state governors is by providing detailed information regarding UBEC measures for basic education in the States.
Discussion
State Governor's Attitude to Pay Counterpart Fund for UBEC
Ihonvbere (2023) lamented why many states refuse to pay counterpart funds to collect their allocations from UBEC in Nigeria. The findings of this study support this claim. This would seem to corroborate with the view of Bobboyi (2020) who affirmed that previously there would be stacks of money in the commission waiting to be accessed by the States. The study aligned that the federal government matching grants would improve the quality of basic education in the States. Based on this, it is interesting that this finding learned that UBEC funds would be a significant predictor of the quality of basic education in 36 States of Nigeria. This would lead one to the reasonable assumption that the quality of basic education in the Nigerian States rests in the collaboration of the federal government rather than relying solely on States for the funding of basic education in Nigeria.
This means that the federal government which initiated the consolidated revenue account and provided the matching grants does so to improve the quality of basic education in the States. In my opinion, this is a logical finding. While this study recommends that the State's payment of counterpart funds to collect federal government matching grants could improve the quality of basic education in the States, basic education requires proper funding in Nigeria. It was encouraging that slight progress had been made by State Governors in accessing UBEC funds (Bobboyi, 2020).
UBEC Measures
This study confirmed UBEC measures as factors responsible for State Governor's refusals to pay counterpart funds for basic education in Nigeria. Improving the quality of basic education in Nigeria can be accomplished by providing adequate funding through consolidated revenue funds. For basic education to continue to grow across the 36 States of Nigeria, adequate and accessible funding must be provided and accessible to States. This will not occur if the state governors do not play their part in accessing the funds according to the UBE Act of 2004. The Act provided that the 36 States and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) with intervention funds, which can be accessed with 50 percent counterpart funds, a one-year action plan detailing how the funds will be utilized in the fiscal year, and a detailed 70 percent completion of the previous year projects (UBEC, 2004). In light of this, the claim that accessible funds can improve the quality of basic education in the States seems realistic if the States pay their counterpart funds to collect their allocation from UBEC.
In addition, this study suggests that UBEC measures regarding the implementation of basic education have the potential to improve the quality of basic education in the 36 States of Nigeria regardless of whether the States are classified into high, moderate, or low-performing States. This affirmed that State Governors can access UBEC funds irrespective of the amount of funds they provide. Based on this, the State Governors need to eliminate the perception that they must provide enough counterpart funds to access UBEC funds in Nigeria.
It is clear that the federal government matching grants offer States the chance to improve basic education at the state level, and these can take the shape of a consolidated revenue fund. The result is that federal government matching grants are a supportive measure to encourage 36 States of Nigeria to invest in basic education. The results of this study found that States were reluctant to pay counterpart funds to collect federal government matching grants from UBEC. This was evident from the views and opinions of the respondents who participated in this study. This result aligns with Ihonvbere’s lamentation of 2023 which affirmed many States refuse to pay counterpart funds to collect their allocations from UBEC in Nigeria (Ihonvbere, 2023). That no significant difference was found in the views and opinions of the respondents does not mean that a difference does not exist. It could be that the sampled coverage in the study may not be adequately aware of the State's approaches regarding the funding of basic education in their States.
Study Suggestions
Based on the research results, we proposed the following recommendations for basic education in the States:
1. Sequel to the findings of this study, the participants believe that basic education can effectively improve in the States. Basic education can be strengthened through adequate funding. Therefore, State Governors, educational administration, and school authorities should focus on these dimensions to identify the factors and coping strategies to have better access to basic education in the States.
2. Keep on reviewing the modalities for accessing the federal government matching grants for basic education in Nigeria. Based on this, State Governors could be more encouraged to access basic education funds from UBEC. Therefore, State Governors should actively respond to the modalities of the federal government. Besides, they should understand module-operands of the federal government regarding UBEC. The modalities of accessing the UBEC fund should provide short-, medium-, and long-term plans that satisfy different States' needs as well as program evaluation. However, the reviewed modalities should be well-prepared and implemented across States to achieve the goals and ideals of basic education.
3. The study found that counterpart funds still need to be encouraged, some other major issues remain unsolved under this circumstance, and most of the States need more supportive measures to overcome the financial deficits they are facing. Transparency and accountability in the implementation process are critical factors that would create a progressive involvement of State Governors rather than having the same cycle of uncollected funds from UBEC and repeating the same cycle of sitting on a barber’s chair with a lot of motion but no progress. Hence, the federal government should put more effort and focus on the implementation plans and then roll out more implementation plans to support and encourage States to easily access the UBEC funds.
4. The study found that the funding of basic education in States and Local government areas in Nigeria was low. A mutual communication channel between the States, local, and federal governments to reduce the disagreement on the UBEC policies and measures, legalized and make legislations regarding basic education funding. However, the funding gap needs to be filled by new policy measures that could lead to the success of basic education in Nigeria. Therefore, it is necessary to strengthen the State's capacity by sharing experiences, providing videos of basic school projects executed, proper coordination of the 36 States education commissioners, and adapting alternate funding for basic education in the States.
5. The study found that some State Governors have misleading perceptions regarding counterpart funding, this is one of the crucial barriers of basic education in Nigeria. State Governors tend to abandon funds from the consolidated revenue met for the development of basic education in the States. So it is necessary to clarify the misunderstanding among state governors, education commissioners, and UBEC.
6. The results from the study show that some funds are still not collected. The federal government needs to do more studies about the best ways to engage States on the core value and recognize the purposes of counterpart funds. Therefore, this measure should reveal itself through sensitization strategies and boost public enlightenment on the need and purposes of the UBEC funds. Based on the findings, counterpart funds can lead States to diversified education development, create a social learning community, and improve learning skills, and opportunities for students and teachers to be more engaged.
Conclusion
The government at various state levels seeks the best approach for funding basic education in states. The federal government could encourage the states to invest in basic education by providing subsidies and subvention so that the states can fully fund and provide quality basic education in their states. This study examined like the river carves a stone, a case study of States Governors refusal to pay counterpart fund for basic education in Nigeria. The study adopted an ex-port facto research design because it looked at past activities of the States and related it to the existing situation of basic education in Nigeria. A total of 66 participants who have adequate knowledge of government policies and implementations were employed for the study. A questionnaire was used as an instrument of data collection which was centered on issues of basic education funding in Nigeria. Expert validity and reliability analyses were done using content validity and split-half-reliability text techniques. The collated data were analyzed by percentage frequency distribution, means scores, and chi-square.
The result shows no significant difference in the participants’ responses on the attitude of State Governors regarding UBEC funds in Nigeria. In addition, the participants affirmed that the UBEC measures of 50 percent counterpart funds, a detailed action plan, and 70 percent completion of previous UBE projects adopted by UBEC appear to be responsible for the State Governor's refusals to collect their allocations from UBEC in Nigeria. Based on these findings, one could reasonably conclude that as State Governors continue to neglect UBEC counterpart funds for basic education in Nigeria, the need for curiosity would continue to linger among concerned Nigerians. Hence, the findings of this study highlight possible measures that seem to encourage the 36 States of Nigeria on adequate measures for funding basic education in Nigeria.
References
Bobboyi, H. (2020). Federal government disbursement of N142.6bn to fund primary education
in 4 years. Vanguard newspaper January 19, 2020. Retrieved www.vanguardngr.com
Edukugho, E. (2010). President Jonathan paves way for States to access N200bn UBEC fund
from CBN. Vanguard Newspapers3 rd January, 2024. Retrieved http://www.vanguardngrs.com
Federal Republic of Nigeria (2013). National Policy on Education. (6th Edition). Yaba, Lagos:
Nigeria: NERDC Press.
Idoko, C. (2014). When States abandoned UBE’s N44.9bn. Nigeria Tribune-Education Tribune.
Retrieved http://www.tribune.com.ng , October 25, 2914
Ihonvbere, O. J. (2023). Democracy, transformational leadership and sustainable development:
the rivers experience. Lecture delivered at the exit ceremony of the Governor of Rivers State, H.E. Nyesom Wike, Port Harcourt, Rivers State. 25 th May, 2023
Krosnick, J.A. & Presser, S. (2010) Question and questionnaire design, in Marsden, P.V. &
Wright, J.D. (eds) Handbook of Survey Research, 2nd edn. Howard House, UK: Emerald, pp. 263–313.
UBEC (2004). Standard action plan based on the UBE act 2004, Abuja. Universal Basic
Education Commission.
Wike, E.N. (2014). Education sector transformation. Comprehensive report, Abuja, Nigeria. june
6, 2014.