Cost-sharing as a Reinvestment Strategy in Ethiopian Higher Learning Institutes at Risk

Abstract

The purposes of this paper is to collect graduates’ opinion on cost-sharing, assess its implementation and identify the challenges and problems encountered in the implementation of cost – sharing program, and suggest some ways of solving the problems. To these ends, case study design was followed as a principal method of study. University stakeholders including Addis Ababa University and Adama University management and administrative bodies (offices of the registrar, student cost- sharing, finance, and human resource and personnel offices), 51 graduates of universities who came to term with their former universities on cost- shaming and working in different governmental and non governmental organizations in Arada Sub-city and Adama district administration; 2 municipalities, 2 zonal and 2 woreda finance offices; 10 human resource and personnel government offices; 2 branches of inland revenues and customs authorities; 5 government and private banks; 1 telecommunication office; and 3 private higher learning institutes were considered as respondents for this study. The study used Snowball sampling method to collect data from graduate respondents. The research instrument used to collect data included four types of unstructured questionnaires administered to the study participants. Interviews were also used to gather data particularly from the Federal Ministry of Education, Inland Revenues and Customs Authorities, and Finance and Economic Development. Items in the questionnaires were developed based on the powers, duties, responsibilities and obligations given to different stakeholders of higher learning institutes through the proclamation number 154/2008 on cost sharing by Council of Ministers ratified on 1 August, 2008 and published on Negarit Gazeta. The date collected were organized, analyzed and interpreted both quantitatively and qualitatively and the following results were found as the basic stumbling blocks and bottlenecks to the implantation of costsharing scheme; lack of specific policies, directives and implementation guidelines; negative perception, lack of awareness on the rationales of cost-sharing, lack of confidence and belief in the scheme and being negligent by the respondent graduates; frequent changes in a rarely available cost- sharing regulations; and lack of responsible independent organ that follows up and supervises the implementation. Moreover, the majority of the graduate respondents (76.50) have not yet started paying their graduate tax. Conversely insignificant percentages (2%) of them have passed through paying the recovery cost. 72% of them had negative perception about the program.