Education in India

Indian and New Zealand sign Education Co-operation Agreement

According to a press release by the Press Information Bureau of the Government of India (dated April 19, 2005)

India and New Zealand have signed an Education Cooperation Arrangement (ECA), here today.  The ECA was signed by Shri Arjun Singh, Minister for Human Resource Development on behalf of India and Mr. Trevor Mallard, Minister of Education on behalf of New Zealand. The Education Cooperation Arrangement is in the form of an umbrella arrangement and provides focused attention  to collaboration in the Education Sector between the two countries.  The highlights of ECA are:

• Exchange of research materials, publications, educational literature, teaching aids, demonstration material and information;
• Organization of joint conference, exhibitions and seminars;
• Organization of joint research programmes and publications;
• Organization of training programmes for educational administrators and teachers;
• Exchange of academic and other administrative staff;
• Exchange of scholars, teachers, experts and students;
• Twinning arrangements between institutions of higher learning;
• Setting up of educational/training programmes between institutions of educational excellence in technical, vocational and higher education;
• Setting up of chairs on contemporary studies;
• Providing scholarships for further education in recognized institutions of higher learning;
• Providing mutual assistance in the fields of IT, computer, mathematics and science;
• Any other activity as agreed by both Governments

The two countries would also undertake the following activities:

• Exchange of information on education and training systems and policies in each country, including information relevant to interpretation and evaluation of qualifications;
• Dialogue between officials on matters relevant to this Arrangement, and
• Within the context of the respective education systems, facilitation of other forms of cooperation as may be mutually determined.

New Zealand is an interesting choice.  I hope one of the reporters in Delhi questions Mr. Arjun Singh on the rationale for such an agreement and the tangible benefits expected, apart from the general stuff about exchange of ideas, joint conferences etc.

The bit about interpretation and evaluation of qualifications seems to indicate that both countries believe there can be increasing movement of qualified professional between the two countries.

The speech by New Zealand's education minister at the time of signing the agreement throws some light on their intent in signing this agreement. Their primary aim seems to be to export education to India by increasing the number of Indian students going to New Zealand for education. Economic Times reports that "the international education industry is worth more than $2 billion a year to New Zealand. Education now earns New Zealand as much foreign exchange as wool, butter or cheese—New Zealand's traditional export commodities."

Here're some excerpts from the speech by New Zealand's education minister.

Some of the world's leading research institutions are here in India. I want our students and staff to be more aware of this and to consider India as a place to come for study and research. In turn, I believe we also have a great deal to offer you.

We're lowering the costs of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) study for top quality international postgraduate students. These international students who come to New Zealand to work with our leading researchers will be given domestic student status and will no longer be charged full-fees by the universities. Also from 1 January 2006 their dependent children will be treated the same as our domestic students in compulsory schooling.

Concurrently, my government is amending its student visa policies to make New Zealand a more attractive and secure place to study. These changes include increased opportunities for part-time employment, to help supplement students’ income, and to make post-degree work experience in New Zealand easier to obtain. These initiatives are a further development of a framework for international education government launched last year.

Last year there were 2405 students from India in our country and this year this number has increased to 2567. In 2000, this figure was only 251.  New Zealand is a safe, high quality, cost-effective destination for international students both at under-graduate and post-graduate level. New Zealand degrees are recognised worldwide and our graduates are welcomed for postgraduate studies at the top universities in North America and Europe. I would like to see the number of Indian students studying with New Zealand providers continue to increase and to see this increase accompanied by stronger institutional relationships and collaboration.

An alternative approach to tracking education spending

According to an editorial in the Business Standard (April 21, 2005), Indians are spending more on educating themselves.

The findings of media research firm TAM, that educational institutions were the single largest advertisers in the print media in 2004 (up from the sixth position in 2003), should come as no surprise, given how the sector appears to be booming. Data from the National Sample Survey, coincidentally also out around the same time as the TAM numbers, also reflect this surge in spending on education by the household sector.

While 1.2 per cent of the per capita consumption expenditure of individuals was on education in 1983,
this rose to 2.4 per cent in 1993, and
then to 2.8 per cent in 1999;
from there the figure rose dramatically to 4.4 per cent (in 2003 or 2004 presumably).

In urban areas, the rise has been even faster, from 2.1 per cent in 1983 to more than double that number in 1999 and then to 6.3 per cent in 2003—the rural areas saw per capita spending percentages rise from 0.8 per cent to 1.9 and 2.9 per cent for the same years.

With a significant rise in wage levels for each jump in the education level, even the not so well-off in the country are spending more to educate their children. Given the close correlation between education and GDP growth, this can only be good news for the country.

So what does this suggest? It may be time to consider an alternative way of looking at education spending. Rather than aiming for the much trumpeted goal of spending 6% of GDP on education by the Government, it may be better to track education spending in terms of the amount spent by households on education, as a percentage of overall household expenditure.

Maybe the politicians and the government should take notice and rethink their goal of spending 6% of GDP on education (when they simply don't have the money for it and are unlikely to be able to find the money) and rather look to incentivising households to spend more of their own household income on education.

For this to happen, the government will need to

• gradually begin to decrease government spending on provision of education and shift the onus onto the private sector. This will of course have to be very gradual process to provide time for the private sector supply to increase before the government begins to step out of provision itself.
  
• provide each household with tax credits, food coupons, or vouchers, or other such devices to incentivise them to spend more to get a better education for their children.
  
• incentivise the entry of good teachers into the education system (one way is to offer higher salaries comparable to other professions, but I must admit that at this point, I don't know how this could be done in a viable sustainable manner )
  
• incentivise private investment in education and increase the number and quality of education providers entering the fray, but with a rating model and institutional transparency in place to ensure quality levels are not only maintained but always spurred upwards, as a result of competition between providers and accountability to the consumers of education.
  
• unshackle the education providers from bureacracy and enable them to corporatise and raise funds for investing in the provision of education and run education as a goal-oriented activity with accountable objectives rather than as a spend-oriented activity based on an spending an agreed budget.
  
• encourage active dialogue between the education providers and the communities of potential employers (the industry associations in the manufacturing, IT, services and various other sectors) to ensure that the education process is geared to deliver students who are 'educated' in the real sense of the world, to be able to add value to their employers as soon as they enter the workforce. The lure of immediate employability would be a good incentive for higher household spending on education.

Rural per capita expenditure on education in India

Suhit Anantula quotes from an article in The Financial Express (September 14, 2004) by Onkar Goswami on a study, by him and his team at CERG Advisory, of vast amounts of rural household-level data from three rounds of National Sample Survey (NSS), and some evidence from the Census of India, 2001.

There's been a significant increase in the real per capita expenditure on education.

In 1993-94, the average per capita spend on education in rural India was Rs 128, or 1.5% of total expenditure (total expenditure being Rs. 8,533)

By 2001-02, it was Rs 245 or 2.5% of total spending, measured in constant prices (total expenditure being Rs. 9,800).

For the top 5% of rural households, the increase in real expenditure of education has been quite spectacular - from Rs 575 in 1993-94 to Rs 1,158 per person per year (in 2001-02).

Another study (pdf) on the impact of the cost of primary education in rural India on school attendance, provides some data.

This study uses a nationwide rural household level survey data collected by National Sample Survey Organization, India in its 52nd round on "Participation in Education". The survey was conducted between July 1995 - June 1996. For details on sampling design and other related issues see National Sample Survey Organization (1998). Since we concentrate on primary schooling, we look at children in the age group 5-12, covering 46,430 children. In addition to household-specific information, the survey provides us cost information for children who go to school. For those who do not go to school the reasons for not attending school were recorded. In the data set, 16 per cent of children are from scheduled tribe households, 19 per cent from scheduled caste households and the remaining are from other social groups.

In 1995-96, the average expenditure per student pursuing primary education in rural India in a government school for students going to local body schools, private aided schools and private unaided schools were Rs 223, Rs 622 and Rs. 911 respectively (National Sample Survey Organization 1998). Educational institutions are classified according to the type of management by which the institution is run. All schools run by the state, central government, public sector undertakings or autonomous organizations completely financed by the government are treated as government institutions. All institutions run by municipal corporations, municipal committees, notified area committees, zilla parishads, panchayat samitis, cantonment boards, etc. are treated as local body institutions. Private aided institutions are those, which are run by an individual or a private organization and receive a maintenance grant from a government or local body. Private unaided institutions are managed by an individual or a private organization and do not receive a maintenance grant either from a government or local body.

The average cost in case of scheduled caste and scheduled tribe households are Rs. 253.50 and Rs. 341.53, respectively. For other social groups (which includes other backward classes too) this figure is Rs. 357.39.

There exists considerable variation in the cost of education across the states of India.

Average Expenditure (Rs.) Per Student Pursuing Primary Education in Rural India in 1995-96, by State: Source: NSSO (1998)

1,863 Dadra & Nagar Haveli
1,523 Daman & Diu
1,210 Nagaland
   890 Punjab
  753 Meghalaya
  721 Jammu & Kashmir
  702 Delhi
  687 Haryana
  686 Sikkim
  658 Kerala
  639 Mizoram
  635 Chandigarh
  625 Manipur
  623 Andaman & Nicobar Islands
  550 Goa
  529 Pondicherry
  501 Himachal Pradesh
  483 Arunachal Pradesh
  456 Tripura
  320 Uttar Pradesh
  316 Rajasthan
  267 Tamil Nadu
  266 Maharashtra
  245 West Bengal
  234 Andhra Pradesh
  230 Bihar
  228 Lakshwadeep
  199 Assam
  199 Orissa
  193 Madhya Pradesh
  172 Gujarat
  132 Karnataka

Educational Institutions were the number one category in print advertising in 2004

A report in The Financial Express (April 18, 2005) provides some data which puts in perspective the advertising spends by educational institutions when compared to overall advertising spends in the country. The data has been compiled by TAM Media's Research division AdEx India.

Advertising in print media grew 14.7% in 2004 compared to TV ad growth of 13%. During January-December 2004, advertising spends across media were as follows.

Medium	Ad Spend	%
Print	Rs. 5,428 Crores	46%
Television	Rs. 4,838 Crores	41%
Outdoor	Rs. 826 Crores	7%
Cinema	Rs. 354 Crores	3%
Radio	Rs. 236 Crores	2%
Internet	Rs. 59 Crores	0.5%
Total	Rs. 11,600 Crores

According to Lintas Media estimates of 2004, among individual advertisers, Maruti Udyog tops the chart with an ad spend of Rs 135 crore in print media.  HLL spent Rs 460 crore on TV ads, and Rs 57 crore on print ads, as per the Lintas data. ITC, which spent Rs 76 crore in 2003, does not figure among the top 10 print advertisers in 2004 at all, mainly due to the anti-tobacco law in the country.

Among categories, educational institutions, in the number one slot in print media, spent Rs 209.7 crore in 2004 (which works out to 3.9% of the total print ad spend). In comparison, shampoos, TV’s number one advertiser, spent Rs 235 crore (which works out to 4.9% of the total adspend on TV), according to AdEx.

An editorial in the Business Standard (April 21, 2005) adds that educational institutions were sixth in the list of advertisers in print media in the calender year 2003 - so there's been a huge jump from sixth place to first place in just one year.

Exchange4media ( May 07, 2004) provides some more data for the first quarter of 2004 based on an analysis of Advertisers across the 450+ Newspapers and 200+ Magazines monitored by AdEx India monitors.

• Educational institutions rank 4th in the list of top categories advertising in newspapers with a 4.5% share of the newspaper ads. Only Corporate/Brand image (12.6%), Two wheelers(4.6%), Cars & Jeeps(4.6%) are ahead.
  
• Educational institutions don't figure at all in the list of top 10 categories advertising in magazines, with Airlines in tenth place at 1.8% share. Magazine advertising is very very small, compared to newspaper advertising by educational institutions
  
• No individual educational institution figures in the either the list of top 10 organisations or the list of top 10 brands, advertising on either newspapers or television. The total advertising by educational institutions evidently comprises of advertising by thousands of institutions spending a small amount each on advertising, with the total volume turning out to be a substantial amount, comparable to the spends by other categories like two wheelers and cars where just a handful of brands end up spending  huge amounts.

Considering that educational institutions were the top category in the whole year in term of ad spends in print and only fourth in the first quarter, it is also clear that educational advertising is seasonal and happens more in the period from April to August which is the typical admissions season.

 

Liberalise education - do away with the Education Raj

In an article in the Economic Times (April 18, 2005), Prof. Pankaj Jalote of IIT Kanpur writing in the context of the recent Supreme Court decision derecognising over 100 private universities in Chattisgarh, argues for liberalising higher education and doing away with the Education Raj.  Here is what he said.

On the face of it, this concern for the quality of education is well place. But experience has shown that quality can't be ensured by legislation or the government deciding who can produce quality goods or services. If that were true, we would have had high quality in the License Raj.

Quality comes, first and foremost , by the consumer of the good or service demanding it. And the consumer can demand when there are choices available to him, so that he can punish poor quality by switching. Hence, multiplicity of sources and abundance of supply are essential to ensure quality. To allow the consumer to take an informed decision, there has to be information available about the good or service. With information and competition, the consumer is smart enough to make good choices. This is particularly true in the area of higher education, where, by definition, the consumer is already quite well educated and ambitious.

The current set-up aims to control education quality by giving out licenses to those the government sees fit to provide education. When there are licenses, distrotions naturally come. Even the rules for university affiliation are like licenses, and are often cornered by people with political connections. However, there are no mechanisms to ensure that information on universities or colleges is available to students and their parents. So, we have a reversal from the desired situation - in supply, where the government shouldn't play an active role, it is very active; and in ensuring that sufficient information is available, where perhaps only the government can play the necessary role, it is doing little.

A parallel can be drawn with the industrial sector. Earlier, we had the license system where who can produce wha,t and how much, was decided by the government. That situation as we know, was neither conducive to quality nor efficiency. Later the rules were liberalised and industry was freed. The results are here for all to see. Now, pretty much anyone can start a public company, but the company has to disclose relevant data to the shareholders, regulatory bodies and stock exchanges.

We need a similar liberalisation in education and the field of higher education should be thrown open. To ensure that only serious long-term players enter, a minimum investment (say Rs. 50 crores) should be stipulated before anyone can start a university. However, once in existence, the university must be obligated to file with a regulatory body (or equivalent) all the information needed by students and their parents, who are the main purchasers of the service. This will include information about the fees and other finances, about infrastructure and investments in it, faculty and their qualifications, on  and off-campus placements and the like. Basically all the information needed to make an informed decision.

The regulator can then ensure that the information is available publicly. By making the information public, students themselves will become the watchdog to ensure that the information is correct. Just ensuring that this information is available publicly will be a great service to young education seekers, who otherwise rely on gossip and touts to inform them about the quality of universities and colleges.

One should not confuse regulation with accreditation. The regulation structure is being suggested to ensure that information is provided by institutes and that the rules of the game are followed. Accreditation on the other hand, is a "seal of approval". It is like the ISI stamp provided to a product, or the ISO certification given to a plant. So a university can be UGC or AICTE accredited or not - but the quality of education they provide is not dependent on that accreditation. Just like the ISI mark is not necessary to produce a good, accreditation is desirable, but should remain voluntary.

I completely agree with Prof. Jalote on the need to liberalise higher education. I had argued in an earlier post that the government should only look to be the regulator (like TRAI or IRDA) and set the broad guidelines for all educational institutions to follow and then let independent rating agencies (like CRISIL, ICRA and CARE) evaluate each educational institution and publicly announce its ratings of all institutions to enable students to make informed decisions in their choice of educational institutions.

Prof. Jalote's idea of making it mandatory for all institutions to file periodic reports with regulator is an excellent one. These reports along with the ratings by the agencies will help students to separate the wheat from the chaff and the chaff will then slowly begin to disappear all by itself.

Punjab Govt considers privatising primary education and opting for a voucher model for primary schooling

Outlook reports on Punjab chief minister Amarinder Singh's plans to privatise schools to overcome an alarming drop in school standards in Punjab. The scheme proposed by the government seems very much like a voucher scheme whereby the Rs. 700 per month that the Government currently spends to educate a child in a government school will be handed over to private schools who will then provide the education free to the children.

If chief minister Amarinder Singh has his way, Punjab will become the first state to hand over public education, even at the primary level, to private entrepreneurs. Though there are discordant voices even in the high-powered committee set up by the state government to work out the proposal, Amarinder is firm on going ahead. "A revamp of the education system with involvement of industrial houses and well-established private schools is being done. In the first phase, the government plans to hand over about 2,000 government schools to private hands," he has said. In all, Punjab has 19,000 government schools.

The need to 'revamp' schools came after some shocking findings in a government study. It was revealed that 30 per cent of children up to class V in Punjab's government schools couldn't read or write. Then, the latest World Bank report, Resuming Punjab's Prosperity, reveals
that on any given day 36 per cent of the government primary teachers are absent. This is well above the 25 per cent for the rest of India. In absenteeism, Punjab ranks third after Bihar and Jharkhand. Even when the teachers are present, only half (49.8 per cent) were found teaching. This is below the national average of 59.5 per cent.

It is in such a dismal scenario with the government unable to check errant teachers, who otherwise draw fat salaries, that the 'privatisation plan' has been mooted. Part of the problem was that there has been no institutional check on the teachers. There is also no accountability. The government says it can do little to rein in the teachers since they are politically organised. In fact, government school teachers represent a powerful lobby connected to senior politicians. It is this teacher-politician nexus which is being blamed for the decline of education in Punjab in recent years.

The government has come in for much criticism for wringing its hands helplessly and not admitting to its own management failure. Though Punjab finance secretary K.R. Lakhanpal rationalises it, saying it's not "privatisation but an alternative delivery system to provide better education", critics have called it a sellout. In fact, with the opposition raising a hue and cry over the proposed move, the government is at pains to explain that all this will not mean higher fees in government schools.

The government spends Rs 700 per child every month. It is being proposed that this money be handed over to the private management so that free elementary education up to class VII continues.

With the fall in teaching standards, only the very poor now send their children to government schools. In every Punjab village, there are at least three or four private schools which are hugely popular. According to the Punjab School Education Board, the number of requests for affiliation coming in from rural areas is at least one-and-a-half times more than from urban areas.

The Tribune reports that the private schools don't seem to be too keen to take up the running of Government schools, particularly to avoid a confrontation with government teachers.

Taking a very clear stand on the issue of government schools, representatives of the Management Committees of government-aided private schools today made it clear to the Punjab Government that they would not take over Government schools in any manner. But they were prepared to extend the cooperation required to improve the education delivery system in the state.

Talking to The Tribune on the phone from Ropar, Mr Mohan Lal, General Secretary of the Aided School Managements, in reference to the meeting called today by, Mr Harnam Dass Johar, Education Minister (Schools), at Mohali to discuss the issue of handing over government schools to private managements, said the meeting was held without circulating any blueprint or outlines of the scheme to managements.

“It appears this Government is building castles in the air”, he said. Can one expect a worthwhile discussion on any proposal or scheme without putting it before the invitees at the meeting in black and white? he asked.

Mr Mohan Lal said government schools should continue to function. Students belonging to poor sections of society would be hit hard if the government made any structural change in the management of these schools, he added. “It is the constitutional responsibility of the state government to provide cheap and best education to all and if the government closed its schools, then poor students will be hit hard”, he added.

The government should not treat education like business. It was a social responsibility which should be performed with utmost care and conviction by the government, said Mr Mohan Lal. “We will not enter into any confrontation with government school teachers and neither will we hit their interest in any manner”, he said.

He said that it was a pleasant surprise that the government had admitted that private aided schools were providing quality education. But the government had been treating such aided schools most shabbily. Grants to such schools were not released in time.

How is China dealing with the entry of foreign universities into the country?

World Education News & Reviews (July/August 2004) reports

The recent accession of China to the World Trade Organization and the increasingly favorable official view taken of in-country activity by foreign education institutions (new regulations came into force in September 2003), suggest a genuine opening up of the market.

From the Chinese perspective, the major benefits of foreign involvement are capacity, status, and innovation. China is rapidly becoming the most significant source of students studying abroad (sending over 63,000 students to the United States alone in 2002). However, like some other major source countries such as Malaysia and Singapore, China may come to view foreign-sourced, in-country provision as more cost-effective (in terms of reducing travel costs and stemming brain drain).

The third and most recent piece of legislation on transnational provision was released in March 2003 and offers clarification on the prior 1995 regulations. (Both the 1995 and 2003 regulations are available in English on the Ministry of Education website). Major features include the stipulation that

• foreign institutions must partner with Chinese institutions;
• partnerships must not seek profit as their objective;
• no less than half the members of the governing body of the institution must be Chinese citizens and the post of president or the equivalent must be a Chinese citizen residing in China;
• the basic language of instruction should be Chinese; and
• tuition fees may not be raised without approval.

The sustained proscription of foreign education institutions making a profit in China is in contrast to the 2002 law on domestic private higher education, which permits a "reasonable return."

It would appear that no Chinese private higher education institution has yet won approval to offer programs leading to foreign degrees, so the combination of a for-profit domestic provider and a foreign provider has yet to materialize, at least at degree level. Indeed, I am not aware of any foreign for-profit higher education institution currently operating independently in China at the bachelor’s degree level or above. Known examples of other foreign for-profit education activity include IT education firms such as India’s NITT and brokers such as CIBT. Canadian CIBT acts as a local partner for some U.S. for-profit institutions, such as Western International University (owned by the Apollo Group) and ITT Educational Services

The full text of the Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Chinese-Foreign Cooperation in Running Schools (promulgated by the State Council in March 2003) is available on the Chinese Ministry of Education web site. Apparently the State Council also promulgated in June 2004 a set of Implementation Measures for the Regulations on Chinese-Foreign Cooperation in Running Schools (2004), but I have not been able to find these online as yet.

Government sets up committee to recommend policy on entry of foreign universities into India

Education Ministers of 25 States deliberated for two days (January 10-11, 2005) in Bangalore and one of the issues discussed was the entry of foreign universities into India.

According to a report in The Hindu (January 12, 2005)

In a clear indication of the Government moving towards permitting foreign universities to set up their establishments in India, the Union Minister for Human Resource Development, Mr Arjun Singh, on Tuesday announced the setting up of a high level committee under the Chairmanship of the eminent scientist, Dr C. N. R. Rao. The Committee consisting of six members, including Dr Rao, has been asked to submit its recommendations by April 15. The decision comes in the wake of India having to take a decision on General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) sooner.

Apart from Dr Rao, the member committee will consist of Mr Bakul Dholakia, Director, IIM Ahmedabad, Mr H. P. Dikshit, Vice-Chancellor, Indira Gandhi National Open University, Mr C. P. Chandrasekhr of Jawaharlal, Nehru University, Delhi, Mr Ashok Misra, Director of IIT, Mumbai and Mr Mulchand Sharma, Director, National School of Law University, Bhopal.

The Government will await the committee's recommendation and discuss the draft proposal before moving towards a Central legislation. Addressing a press meet here at the end of the two-day Conference of State Ministers of Higher and Technical Education, Mr Singh said that based on the consensus arrived at during the conference, a draft Central legislation would be framed by Parliament to regulate the admission procedures to the professional courses in the States. Though he did not specify any time frame, Mr Singh however ruled out an Ordinance to tackle the contentious issue during the next academic session in May.

"I would prefer not to go through the Ordinance route. Parliament has to be kept informed about the issue," he said, adding that he hoped a draft Bill could be prepared before the academic session after consultation with all the States. However, on the setting up of private universities, no consensus was reached and while some States welcome it, others felt "we have already gone overboard."

Later, the education ministers of BJP-ruled States told reporters that though they welcomed the proposal to permit foreign universities, they had spelt out their conditions for supporting it. Mr Ghanshyam Tiwari, Rajasthan, who briefed reporters on behalf of the BJP-ruled States — Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat and Goa — said that the Government should allow foreign universities only on a 50:50 partnership with local institutions. Besides, the foreign investors should be permitted to retain only 20 per cent of the profits, while the remaining portion should be reinvested within the country. No repatriation of the capital should be allowed. Mr Tiwari added that such universities should be bound by the Indian regulatory bodies in education like the University Grants Commission and the All India Council of Technical Education.

The CNR Rao committee should be announcing its recommendations tomorrow.

The CPI (M) which is one of the influential constituents of the United Progressive Alliance, the current ruling coalition has expressed its views against  privatisation of education and the entry of foreign universities into India and argues for more Government funding of education through budgetary support.

But the Government simply does not have the money to cope with the looming funding crisis in higher education or achieving their  target of annual spending of 6% of GDP on education.

ICAI issues exposure draft of Guidance Note on Accounting by Schools

Business Standard (April 05, 2005) reports

Concerned over the lack of transparency and uniformity in the accounts prepared by various schools, the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) has issued a draft guidance note on ‘accounting by schools’ which will be applicable to all non-government schools.

“The government has come across a number of cases including some prominent schools in Delhi where schools have been diverting funds from one school to another or to other entities. The human resource development ministry had asked us to come up with the guidance note to tighten the accounting norms,” Kamlesh Vikamsey, president of ICAI, said.

The guidance note is expected to become mandatory from the next financial year. “A lot of money is flowing into the education system and, therefore, there is need to increase transparency and bring uniformity in financial reporting,” Vikamsey said.

The full text of the Exposure Draft of Guidance Note on Accounting by Schools (50 pages, pdf, 486kb) is available at the ICAI web site. The ICAI wants feedback on the draft.

Members and others are requested to send their comments on the Exposure Draft to

The Secretary, Research Committee,
The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India,
Post Box NO. 7100, Indraprastha Marg, New Delhi 110 002,

so as to reach not later than April 15, 2005. Comments can also be sent by email at tdte@icai.org