Skip navigation
st. Mary's University Institutional Repository St. Mary's University Institutional Repository

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/6965
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorGirmay, Fitsum-
dc.date.accessioned2022-06-01T07:26:16Z-
dc.date.available2022-06-01T07:26:16Z-
dc.date.issued2012-01-
dc.identifier.uri.-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/123456789/6965-
dc.description.abstractThe main purpose of the study is to analyze the advantage and limitation of centralized planning. Specifically the study focuses on identification of the process of decentralized planning studying the role of community participation in planning; evaluating the advantage and disadvantage of decentralized planning and evaluating the mechanism of private investor’s involvements. In addition the identification of limitation of decentralized planning and practical solution to ameliorate the existing problem of decentralization is treated. In order to achieve the objective of the study, the method employed were descriptive and evaluative studies. To obtain the required information for the study, both quantitative and qualitative research approaches were used. In this regard 9 government [public] and 25 private schools were targeted and assessed. To identify the advantage and disadvantage of decentralized planning 38 students 40 educators 10 parents and 7 investors were able to provide information. The data collection instruments include administration documents, PTSA discussion documents and FGD for all stakeholders. The main findings of the study revealed that decentralized planning has an advantage as well as limitations. The main cause for the limitation is that the community remained to be mere recipients of the benefits. Community at the grass root level is not being motivated to mobilize itself with the application of community based organization. In addition, investors, in particular, were not encouraged to play their role in educational development. The idea of community participation in school financing is essential; for government is not the only source of finance for educational development.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherST. MARY’S UNIVERSITYen_US
dc.titleAnalysis of strength and limitation of decentralized planning with reference to Lafto Wereda Educational Developmenten_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
Appears in Collections:RURAL DEVELOPMENT

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
thesis final main body-Mulu.docx173.42 kBMicrosoft Word XMLView/Open
Show simple item record


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.