Project Reports

May 8, 2012

Cost Effectiveness And Benefit Cost Analysis Of Some Education Assistance Programmes In FCT, Nigeria

This study
conducts a Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Nigerias education sector with
emphasis on the relative effectiveness and efficiency of Home Grown School
Feeding & Health program and the Education Assistance program implemented
in public primary school in the FCT, Nigeria.

Download Label
March 13, 2018 - 4:00 am
application/pdf
1.04 MB
v.1.7 (stable)
Read →

Author:Eberechukwu Uneze &Ibrahim Tajudeen

Publication Date:August 2011

Document Size:41 pages


The Federal Government of Nigeria, in its effort to improve access to, and quality of primaryschool education, as a way of achieving the Millennium Developments Goals as well as ensuringEducation for All, introduced a series of programs in the education sector, including, but notlimited to the Home Grown School Feeding & Health program and the Education Assistanceprogram implemented in public primary school in the FCT, Nigeria. This report primarily conductsa Cost-Effectiveness analysis of Nigerias education sector with particular emphasis on the relativeeffectiveness and efficiency of HGSF&H and EA programs. However, it is complemented with aBenefit-Cost analysis. It proceeds with the analysis of the average cost of the education programs,and then moves on to the program CEA and the BCA. The cost per beneficiary shows that per pupilcost of HGSF&H program is approximately NGN8, 163 which is higher than the NGN5, 000 perpupil cost of EA program. This suggests that the EA program is more economical in reaching pupilsin FCT public primary school than the HGSF&H program that appears to be expensive.

The program CEA examines the relative cost and effectiveness of HGSF&H and EA programs.Following the challenges encountered in identifying a suitable effect measure and in accessingdata for estimating the effectiveness measure, the study used the probable impact of interventiondeveloped by Schiefelbein and Wolff (2007) as the effectiveness measure. Relying on thiseffectiveness measure, this study estimated the incremental unit costs of HGSF&H and EAprogram, and later derived their cost-effectiveness ratios. The analysis shows that the EA programis more cost-effective than the HGSF&H program. On the BCA, the findings show that, thoughboth programs are beneficial in monetary values, the EA program is more sustainable andbeneficial. This is evidenced by its high NPV and BenefitCost ratio.To determine the validity ofthe findings, a one-way (for CEA and BCA) and multi-way (for CEA only) sensitivity analyses – worstand best case scenarios were conducted. Overall, the results show that the EA program is moresuccessful, efficient and beneficial than the HGSF&H program.




Related

 

Africa Economic Update (Issue 3)

Available data shows that headline inflation rates increased and remained high in most countries in the region in February 2017. Specifically, inflation rate increased in Egypt (30.2), Burundi (20.9 percent), Kenya (10.28), and Ethiopia (8.5 percent), while it eased in Nigeria (17.78 percent), Ghana (13.2 percent), South Africa (6.3 percent), and Namibia (7.8 percent). Seychelles (-0.6 percent) remained in deflation while Sudan (32.86 percent) and Tunisia (4.6 percent) had unchanged inflation rates within the review period. Increased cost of food continued to plague the region as food component of inflation remained the major driver of inflation. Drought in East Africa continues to compound price pressure in the region. Inflation rates in Burundi6, Kenya and Ethiopia increased by 8, 3.29, and 2.4 percentage points respectively, signifying the three highest price increase in the review period

The Budget, Fiscal Policy And Service Delivery

The paper discusses the Macroeconomic impact of budget and its process and how to achieve an efficient and timely budget cycle.

Nigeria Economic Update (Issue 34)

Recently released report by the National Bureau of Statistics shows that Nigeria recorded remarkable Year-on-Year (YoY) and Quarter-over-Quarter (QoQ) increase in capital importation. Total capital importation stood at $1,792.3 million in 2017Q2, representing 72 percent YoY and 97 percent QoQ growths respectively. Disaggregated data points to portfolio investment as the dominant type of investment imported, with a value of $770.5 million, 43 percent of total capital importation. The increase in capital importation was driven by 145 percent QoQ surge in portfolio investment and a remarkable increase in capital imported through shares.